53percenter's Blog

A bus driver in France is facing disciplinary action from his employer after he took disciplinary action of his own against a 12-year-old boy who crossed in front of his bus and nearly caused a terrible accident.

But Fox News reported that a petition is being circulated in support of the driver — who slapped the boy across the face and chewed him out as a parent would do — that has already gained more than 300,000 signatures.

The incident reportedly occurred on Sept. 13 in Arcueil, a suburb south of Paris, during which the driver was forced to slam on his brakes after the young man ran across the street right in front of him toward a crowd of other students waiting at a bus stop.

The driver exited his bus, walked straight toward the pre-teen and slapped him hard across the face as the other students screamed and yelled, issuing a few choice words to the boy prior to getting back on his bus.

TRENDING: Report: GOP Rolls Out Its Own Demands in Fiery Counteroffer to Kavanaugh Accuser

The video of the incident was initially posted to Snapchat prior to being posted to other social media sites, and has been viewed on Facebook more than 1.2 million times.

The BBC reported that the driver told the boy to pay more attention to his surroundings to which the boy is reported to have replied, “Shut up, go on, move on,” which is believed to have prompted the slap.

The boy’s mother reportedly filed an official complaint against the driver and the incident caused the Paris transportation authority, known as the RATP, to launch an investigation and disciplinary proceedings against the driver.

The state-owned public transport company said in a statement that they condemned the driver’s actions because they violated the principles and values held by the company, though the company did note that the driver had expressed regret over his behavior, which he blamed on an emotional reaction to a tense situation.

Euronews reported that the petition in support of the driver was started by the driver’s fellow colleagues at RATP, and it asks that the company’s management refrain from firing the driver over the incident.

The petition noted that the driver was forced to “sharply hit the brakes and rough up customers inside” in direct response to the boy’s actions and claimed that the driver had scolded the boy “like any parent would have done,” only to receive insults in return.

The petition also described the driver as being known for kindness, “Olympic calm” and patience, who’d only reacted to the boy’s insults as he did out of overwhelming emotion after the exceptionally close call of the boy running in front of his bus.

A local authority in the region where the incident occurred, Valérie Pécresse, urged the disciplinary council to “be indulgent towards the Arcueil bus driver who was a victim of provocations and insults.”

“He should not have raised his hand on a schoolchild and regretted it, but he has mitigating circumstances,” said the president of the Ile-de-France region in a post to Twitter.

RELATED: Report: Afghan National Goes on Stabbing Rampage in Paris, Injures 7

This driver probably should have refrained from striking the young boy across the face, particularly in front of other students, and nobody is condoning his actions — for which he has apologized and expressed regret.

However, we can certainly empathize with the driver in that moment fraught with tension, after a boy ran in front of his bus and nearly caused a terrible accident. The boy’s decision to then provocatively insult the driver seems to have prompted a well-deserved scolding for his inconsiderate and dangerous behavior.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

By all accounts, Republican Senator Ted Cruz mopped the floor with democratic challenger Beto O’Rourke in a debate on Friday. The hipster doofus drunk-driving democrat however may have actually done himself in. He had the nerve to state that he fully supports the 2nd Amendment. That was a lie, but when you are a democrat, you never say you support gun rights as it turns off the base. O’Rourke might as well have said that he believes babies have a right to live or people should get to keep most of the money they earn.

Friday’s debate was actually pretty one-sided. Cruz scored point after point while O’Rourke was kind of standing there looking stupid. At one point Cruz accused O’Rourke of wanting to write the 2nd Amendment out of the Bill of Rights, which is 100% accurate. O’Rourke responded like this:

Cruz just forced Beto O’Rourke to say multiple times, “I fully support the Second Amendment.”

This is owning the libs. pic.twitter.com/Wmp20NLQWd

— Benny (@bennyjohnson) September 21, 2018

“Of course I support the 2nd Amendment,” said O’Rourke.

You can actually hear O’Rourke supporters in the crowd booing that their guy said he supports the right to keep and bear arms. Ted Cruz called O’Rourke out on this obvious lie and then the democrat doubled down on it.

“I fully support the 2nd Amendment,” O’Rourke said.

Fully support? The 2nd Amendment says: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. In order for O’Rourke to fully support that, he has to be against any kind of restriction or infringement on private gun ownership.

The thing is, he wants an assault weapons ban:

At SXSW, Beto O’Rourke says there’s no reason an AR-15 should be sold to civilians. “I have no idea how that polls and I should give a shit what the NRA” thinks about it.

— Michael Calderone (@mlcalderone) March 10, 2018

And here’s some more of O’Rourke’s “full” support for gun control from The Houston Chronicle:

During a pair campaign stops in Houston on Thursday, Democrat Beto O’Rourke jumped right into the middle of the gun regulation debate, saying he fully backs a call for universal background checks and a proposal to ban the sale of assault-style weapons.

“There is no reason that weapons of war should be sold to people in this country,” O’Rourke said.

Plus he is very proud of how shitty the NRA rates him on gun ownership rights:

Beto O’Rourke
Last NRA rating: F
Total NRA contributions: $0https://t.co/PGtWuzzZ2t

— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) February 25, 2018

There actually aren’t degrees of support for the 2nd Amendment. You either support it or you don’t. Beto O’Rourke wants to arbitrarily ban entire classes of weapons and despises the nation’s oldest civil rights organization that fights for gun rights. He doesn’t support the 2nd Amendment at all, let alone “fully.” He is however fully full of shit.

Follow Brian Anderson on Twitter

To say Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been accused, judged, and convicted in the court of public opinion is an understatement.  Rule of law be damned.  In fact, Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser and her enablers have obliterated any fairness or equity as these apply to the foundational legal belief mandating that everyone in society be considered innocent until proven guilty.  Senate Judiciary Committee members Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, both former prosecutors, have decreed that reasonable doubt does not apply in the case of the accuser’s claim of sexual assault.  Incredible as it may sound, her accusation doesn’t need to be proven, either.  In summation, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford simply made the accusation, therefore it must be true.

A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is not a court of law; however, respect for the rule of law is crucial to democracy, as it mandates that everyone is entitled to due process.  As tasked, the Judiciary Committee is convened to “advise and consent” regarding the president’s nominees to the Supreme Court.  Suffice it to say there are numerous steps in the committee’s process, before the nominee ever appears before the entire body of the judicial committee for questioning.  At the appointed hour, Judge Brett Kavanaugh dutifully appeared, answering numerous questions for several days.  And that’s when the pleasantries ended – cut to the chase!  Shortly after the close of testimony and several days prior to committee vote, Senator Dianne Feinstein entered into the record a letter she had received from California congresswoman Anna Eshoo, supposedly written by Dr. Ford, accusing nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago.

To date, committee chair Chuck Grassley has yet to see the letter.  As parsed by the media, the written accusation is vague and unsubstantiated (no police report was filed at the time of alleged assault), thus raising reasonable doubt as to the accuser’s truthfulness.

According to Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, there is no reason to doubt what Dr. Ford is claiming.  In their collective opinion, Judge Kavanaugh is guilty, and it’s now up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to determine if he is fit to serve on the Supreme Court, based on the accusation.  Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has also determined that it’s a cut and dried case, also based solely on the fact that Dr. Ford made the accusation and therefore must be believed.  Nothing is left to do other than to roll out the guillotine and execute the guilty party.

Thankfully, Chairman Grassley hasn’t lost his mind and will continue to oversee the next phase in this poorly scripted soap opera.  

In every U.S. court of law, the accused is granted the right to face his accuser.  The accused is also presumed innocent until proven guilty – which requires substantiated evidence and the testimony of eyewitnesses.  The burden falls to the accuser to provide evidence in order to prove the accusations, not the other way around.   It’s called due process.

It’s critical to understand that the long respected rule of law is being rewritten in order to validate Dr. Ford’s accusation, in addition to accommodating any future testimony on her part.  In plain speak, she wants her own set of rules in trade for her testimony. 

 Make no mistake: crafting this debacle began months ago and was set into motion just after Judge Kavanaugh’s formal questioning ended.  Senator Feinstein admitted publicly she’s been aware of Dr. Ford’s letter since July.  Not surprisingly, and days after the accuser’s revelation, Senator Feinstein also stated that she can’t attest that the information contained within the letter is truthful.  In other words; Senator Feinstein is attempting to establish plausible deniability.  Sorry, Senator, but it’s a little late for that – it was you who unleashed the maelstrom.

Unbelievably, the accusation itself has eclipsed any facts relevant to the alleged incident.  Judge Kavanaugh has eagerly agreed to another round of questions before the judicial committee.  Understandably, he wants to clear his name and salvage his reputation.  Whether or not Dr. Ford shows up to offer testimony is yet to be determined.

The overriding goal is to ensure that Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed to the Supreme Court, and by whatever method it takes.  Apparently, all it takes is an unproven accusation to undermine democracy.

To say Judge Brett Kavanaugh has been accused, judged, and convicted in the court of public opinion is an understatement.  Rule of law be damned.  In fact, Judge Kavanaugh’s accuser and her enablers have obliterated any fairness or equity as these apply to the foundational legal belief mandating that everyone in society be considered innocent until proven guilty.  Senate Judiciary Committee members Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, both former prosecutors, have decreed that reasonable doubt does not apply in the case of the accuser’s claim of sexual assault.  Incredible as it may sound, her accusation doesn’t need to be proven, either.  In summation, Dr. Christine Blasey Ford simply made the accusation, therefore it must be true.

A Senate Judiciary Committee hearing is not a court of law; however, respect for the rule of law is crucial to democracy, as it mandates that everyone is entitled to due process.  As tasked, the Judiciary Committee is convened to “advise and consent” regarding the president’s nominees to the Supreme Court.  Suffice it to say there are numerous steps in the committee’s process, before the nominee ever appears before the entire body of the judicial committee for questioning.  At the appointed hour, Judge Brett Kavanaugh dutifully appeared, answering numerous questions for several days.  And that’s when the pleasantries ended – cut to the chase!  Shortly after the close of testimony and several days prior to committee vote, Senator Dianne Feinstein entered into the record a letter she had received from California congresswoman Anna Eshoo, supposedly written by Dr. Ford, accusing nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexual assault 36 years ago.

To date, committee chair Chuck Grassley has yet to see the letter.  As parsed by the media, the written accusation is vague and unsubstantiated (no police report was filed at the time of alleged assault), thus raising reasonable doubt as to the accuser’s truthfulness.

According to Senators Kamala Harris and Amy Klobuchar, there is no reason to doubt what Dr. Ford is claiming.  In their collective opinion, Judge Kavanaugh is guilty, and it’s now up to the Senate Judiciary Committee to determine if he is fit to serve on the Supreme Court, based on the accusation.  Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has also determined that it’s a cut and dried case, also based solely on the fact that Dr. Ford made the accusation and therefore must be believed.  Nothing is left to do other than to roll out the guillotine and execute the guilty party.

Thankfully, Chairman Grassley hasn’t lost his mind and will continue to oversee the next phase in this poorly scripted soap opera.  

In every U.S. court of law, the accused is granted the right to face his accuser.  The accused is also presumed innocent until proven guilty – which requires substantiated evidence and the testimony of eyewitnesses.  The burden falls to the accuser to provide evidence in order to prove the accusations, not the other way around.   It’s called due process.

It’s critical to understand that the long respected rule of law is being rewritten in order to validate Dr. Ford’s accusation, in addition to accommodating any future testimony on her part.  In plain speak, she wants her own set of rules in trade for her testimony. 

 Make no mistake: crafting this debacle began months ago and was set into motion just after Judge Kavanaugh’s formal questioning ended.  Senator Feinstein admitted publicly she’s been aware of Dr. Ford’s letter since July.  Not surprisingly, and days after the accuser’s revelation, Senator Feinstein also stated that she can’t attest that the information contained within the letter is truthful.  In other words; Senator Feinstein is attempting to establish plausible deniability.  Sorry, Senator, but it’s a little late for that – it was you who unleashed the maelstrom.

Unbelievably, the accusation itself has eclipsed any facts relevant to the alleged incident.  Judge Kavanaugh has eagerly agreed to another round of questions before the judicial committee.  Understandably, he wants to clear his name and salvage his reputation.  Whether or not Dr. Ford shows up to offer testimony is yet to be determined.

The overriding goal is to ensure that Judge Kavanaugh is not confirmed to the Supreme Court, and by whatever method it takes.  Apparently, all it takes is an unproven accusation to undermine democracy.

A defining characteristic of the Deep State is this: when its members need to attack someone or some organization, they must expose themselves.  It has happened before, it is happening now, and it will happen again.

James O’Keefe, through his Project Veritas, is compiling video evidence of government employees using government databases, government offices, government communications, and the associated taxpayer funds to push a socialist-communist agenda and to thwart the will of the people by opposing the directives of their boss, the elected president of the United States.  These are people, government employees, who are literally taking your money and using it to defeat you.  

Recently, Mr. O’Keefe exposed a State Department employee bragging about working for democratic socialists and serving as an officer for a subversive organization while on duty at the State Department.  Did I say this has happened before?

In 1949, State Department employees asked Senator Joe McCarthy to obtain congressional oversight because there were, at the time, a shocking number of communist party members and activists on the payroll at the State Department.  As it turns out, other Executive Branch agencies were not immune to communist infiltration.

The Deep State went into overdrive.  Both houses of congress belonged to the GOP, so in order to wield any government power, the left had only the Executive Branch agencies to use, and McCarthy became a serious threat to that plan.  They went after Tail-Gunner Joe, hammer and tong, and they haven’t stopped.  In 1952, the White House went over to the GOP, but Eisenhower proved to be no help to Senator McCarthy.  Ike sat back and allowed McCarthy’s reputation to be destroyed, and communists continued to ride herd over his own federal agencies.  The Deep State went back underground, but it would surface again, leaving destroyed reputations in its wake.

Over the years, the names come and go, but the Deep State rolls on.  Now it’s Mueller, Comey, Strzok, Brennan.  Doubt about the political sympathies of these reprobates is vanishing like a ghost at the top of the staircase.  It remains to be seen if the members of this crew pay the price for their crimes.  No one is more able to throw the switch on them than Donald J. Trump.

So the issues and the players and even the rules may be slightly different, especially now in the internet age, but make no mistake about it: there are communists in the State Department, just as Joe McCarthy said there were.  There are communists in every other government agency.  When you think about it, where else would a subversive operate?  Where else could he do the most damage?

I call these people communists out of a concern for clarity, not for purposes of bombast or hyperbole.  It is one thing for an American to employ legal methods of activism toward bending his government’s policies toward his own sense of moral quality.  Attempting to overturn the will of the people and abolish the republican form of government mandated by the Constitution is a different kettle of fish.  These leftist criminals and their fellow travelers in the news media are a danger to Western civilization.

They may lose this time, but unless they are torn out, root and branch, they will go back to working undercover, paid by you and me, beating us over the head with bags of our own money.  And when they see an exigent circumstance, one that calls for the drastic measure of exposing themselves, they will be seen again.  Like whales that occasionally surface to blow, they can’t help themselves.

Willie Shields is a radio host, a paralegal, and the author of Exit 13A – A Control Tower Diary.  A “once and always” U.S. Marine and a former air traffic controller, Mr. Shields resides in Wilmington, Delaware.  He responds to email: WSHIELDS1775@VERIZON.NET , Twitter @WILLIEONRADIO.

A defining characteristic of the Deep State is this: when its members need to attack someone or some organization, they must expose themselves.  It has happened before, it is happening now, and it will happen again.

James O’Keefe, through his Project Veritas, is compiling video evidence of government employees using government databases, government offices, government communications, and the associated taxpayer funds to push a socialist-communist agenda and to thwart the will of the people by opposing the directives of their boss, the elected president of the United States.  These are people, government employees, who are literally taking your money and using it to defeat you.  

Recently, Mr. O’Keefe exposed a State Department employee bragging about working for democratic socialists and serving as an officer for a subversive organization while on duty at the State Department.  Did I say this has happened before?

In 1949, State Department employees asked Senator Joe McCarthy to obtain congressional oversight because there were, at the time, a shocking number of communist party members and activists on the payroll at the State Department.  As it turns out, other Executive Branch agencies were not immune to communist infiltration.

The Deep State went into overdrive.  Both houses of congress belonged to the GOP, so in order to wield any government power, the left had only the Executive Branch agencies to use, and McCarthy became a serious threat to that plan.  They went after Tail-Gunner Joe, hammer and tong, and they haven’t stopped.  In 1952, the White House went over to the GOP, but Eisenhower proved to be no help to Senator McCarthy.  Ike sat back and allowed McCarthy’s reputation to be destroyed, and communists continued to ride herd over his own federal agencies.  The Deep State went back underground, but it would surface again, leaving destroyed reputations in its wake.

Over the years, the names come and go, but the Deep State rolls on.  Now it’s Mueller, Comey, Strzok, Brennan.  Doubt about the political sympathies of these reprobates is vanishing like a ghost at the top of the staircase.  It remains to be seen if the members of this crew pay the price for their crimes.  No one is more able to throw the switch on them than Donald J. Trump.

So the issues and the players and even the rules may be slightly different, especially now in the internet age, but make no mistake about it: there are communists in the State Department, just as Joe McCarthy said there were.  There are communists in every other government agency.  When you think about it, where else would a subversive operate?  Where else could he do the most damage?

I call these people communists out of a concern for clarity, not for purposes of bombast or hyperbole.  It is one thing for an American to employ legal methods of activism toward bending his government’s policies toward his own sense of moral quality.  Attempting to overturn the will of the people and abolish the republican form of government mandated by the Constitution is a different kettle of fish.  These leftist criminals and their fellow travelers in the news media are a danger to Western civilization.

They may lose this time, but unless they are torn out, root and branch, they will go back to working undercover, paid by you and me, beating us over the head with bags of our own money.  And when they see an exigent circumstance, one that calls for the drastic measure of exposing themselves, they will be seen again.  Like whales that occasionally surface to blow, they can’t help themselves.

Willie Shields is a radio host, a paralegal, and the author of Exit 13A – A Control Tower Diary.  A “once and always” U.S. Marine and a former air traffic controller, Mr. Shields resides in Wilmington, Delaware.  He responds to email: WSHIELDS1775@VERIZON.NET , Twitter @WILLIEONRADIO.

Every morning for the past seven days I have awakened to the horror of the latest obscene Democrat attack on Brett Kavanaugh and the calculated leftist conviction that this 36-year-old accusation is true because all men, especially all white men, are gropers and abusers of women.  With every ridiculous excuse for why they believe this unbelievable allegation, they are attacking my masculinity.  They are attacking the masculinity of the loving, women-adoring people that most men are.  I have been married for 53 years to the love of my life; three great kids, nine fabulous grandchildren and countless friends and relatives.  At no time have I ever looked into the mirror and seen a vindictive sexist human being.  I am a conservative; I am also a college teacher, a musician and a friend to all the wonderful people that populate my life.

Being the father of a daughter and friend to many women who have experienced improper advances and yes, subtle and not so subtle molestations, I do understand how unpleasant, even horrific, these experiences can be.   As a man, I want to find each and every perpetrator and beat them to a pulp myself.  To me, that is my divine duty; women are precious to me and as a 74 year old big dude that is my charge.

However, when I listen to all the noise surrounding the Christine Blasey Ford accusations, I feel that I am being drawn into a Kafkaesque novella.  She has surrounded herself with hard core liberal partisans whose only goal is to delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation past the drop dead date and the entire proceeding runs out the calendar. These anti-men shriekers, Hirono, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Whitehouse, Durbin, Schumer, Joy Behar, and many others, have contempt for men, especially white men. They actually think we have no credibility or even the right to express or defend ourselves, unless we are doctrinaire Democrats.  Any accusation, spurious or not, is to be taken at face value.  I am appalled.  Slow-Joe Biden said this out loud; men should presumed guilty until proven innocent. He obviously lacks any familiarity with the Constitution.

I have two sons; both are fine, strong men, loving husbands and fathers.  How dare all the pusillanimous Democrats insult me and them and all the other wonderful men who populate my life.   We take our responsibility to protect our families very seriously and revel in the joy and privilege it affords us.  So does Kavanaugh.  That is indisputable.  

I truly hope that enough men and women who are observing this absurd, vicious kabuki theater realize that the only hope for our nation is to get out and vote to prevent the Democrats from destroying what is left of what America used to be. The future of every young man in our republic is at grave risk thanks to the power-mad grasping of the progressives who think nothing of devastating an individual man as a stand-in for all men.  Most men are decent, loving and non-toxic.

Women like Blasey Ford and her defenders, not one of whom in Congress has ever met or spoken to her, have done terrible damage to women and girls.  Two generations of women have been taught that men are their enemies, that children are an unnecessary burden, a contribution to overpopulation.  The have been taught to see men as predators when in fact they are natural protectors.  They are taught that they don’t need protectors but they often do.

Blasey Ford is playing the victim, the victim of a grope 36 years ago about which she apparently has no specific memories.  This entire, abhorrent plot and all of its attendant anti-male nonsense is a crime, a terrible crime against this nation.

Every morning for the past seven days I have awakened to the horror of the latest obscene Democrat attack on Brett Kavanaugh and the calculated leftist conviction that this 36-year-old accusation is true because all men, especially all white men, are gropers and abusers of women.  With every ridiculous excuse for why they believe this unbelievable allegation, they are attacking my masculinity.  They are attacking the masculinity of the loving, women-adoring people that most men are.  I have been married for 53 years to the love of my life; three great kids, nine fabulous grandchildren and countless friends and relatives.  At no time have I ever looked into the mirror and seen a vindictive sexist human being.  I am a conservative; I am also a college teacher, a musician and a friend to all the wonderful people that populate my life.

Being the father of a daughter and friend to many women who have experienced improper advances and yes, subtle and not so subtle molestations, I do understand how unpleasant, even horrific, these experiences can be.   As a man, I want to find each and every perpetrator and beat them to a pulp myself.  To me, that is my divine duty; women are precious to me and as a 74 year old big dude that is my charge.

However, when I listen to all the noise surrounding the Christine Blasey Ford accusations, I feel that I am being drawn into a Kafkaesque novella.  She has surrounded herself with hard core liberal partisans whose only goal is to delay Kavanaugh’s confirmation past the drop dead date and the entire proceeding runs out the calendar. These anti-men shriekers, Hirono, Gillibrand, Blumenthal, Whitehouse, Durbin, Schumer, Joy Behar, and many others, have contempt for men, especially white men. They actually think we have no credibility or even the right to express or defend ourselves, unless we are doctrinaire Democrats.  Any accusation, spurious or not, is to be taken at face value.  I am appalled.  Slow-Joe Biden said this out loud; men should presumed guilty until proven innocent. He obviously lacks any familiarity with the Constitution.

I have two sons; both are fine, strong men, loving husbands and fathers.  How dare all the pusillanimous Democrats insult me and them and all the other wonderful men who populate my life.   We take our responsibility to protect our families very seriously and revel in the joy and privilege it affords us.  So does Kavanaugh.  That is indisputable.  

I truly hope that enough men and women who are observing this absurd, vicious kabuki theater realize that the only hope for our nation is to get out and vote to prevent the Democrats from destroying what is left of what America used to be. The future of every young man in our republic is at grave risk thanks to the power-mad grasping of the progressives who think nothing of devastating an individual man as a stand-in for all men.  Most men are decent, loving and non-toxic.

Women like Blasey Ford and her defenders, not one of whom in Congress has ever met or spoken to her, have done terrible damage to women and girls.  Two generations of women have been taught that men are their enemies, that children are an unnecessary burden, a contribution to overpopulation.  The have been taught to see men as predators when in fact they are natural protectors.  They are taught that they don’t need protectors but they often do.

Blasey Ford is playing the victim, the victim of a grope 36 years ago about which she apparently has no specific memories.  This entire, abhorrent plot and all of its attendant anti-male nonsense is a crime, a terrible crime against this nation.

There is something we know that is absolutely true about the endless reports on networks and in newspapers about Christine Blasey Ford, and the man she is accusing of bad conduct, Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. That would be that there is absolutely no evidence that indicates that Kavanaugh did anything to Ford in 1982 or at any other time she might come up with in the future.

The first thing that the public should recognize about the reporting is that for the last several decades the media has colluded with Democrats to destroy people who get in the way of the Democrats’ quest for power They have been supported with the tag teams of Hollywood and leftist groups. The technique is always the same and facts haven’t mattered. They throw mud against the wall on people and hope some of it sticks. It does not matter how many lives they destroy, the Democrat agenda is all that matters. They hope a significant amount of the public believes the crap they spew forth. There are numerous easy examples: Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas, forged documents with Bush, a false story in NY Times about McCain and a lobbyist, a false story about Sarah Palin not being the mother of Trig, Herman Cain’s mistreatment of women, Romney bullying a kid over forty years ago, Romney not paying his taxes, Trump not paying taxes and a Democrat fake dossier used to destroy Trump. The media plants the stories in the publics’ head to destroy people’s chances to win.

We do know lots of actual things about this Kavanaugh story and the charges being leveled by Christina Ford. Here are some of them.

The Democrats and the media were always intent on delaying or destroying whichever candidate Trump nominated. If they dispose of Kavanaugh they will set out to destroy the next nominee no matter how clean and qualified.

Kavanagh has been a judge for years and his name has been well known for years that he might be a Supreme Court nominee and yet this story never came up until now.

Kavanaugh has gone through six FBI background checks over decades and the story never came up until now.

Democrats have had over one month to question Kavanaugh in private and in a public hearing and the story never came up. They have actually had years to review his record.

Senator Feinstein had the letter at the end of July and she never asked Kavanaugh in private or in public about the allegations.

Kavanaugh was sailing through to conformation and only then did the Democrats bring the accusation up because all their other efforts to stall, delay or derail Kavanaugh’s appointment had failed.

We still don’t know what is in the letter from Ford because Feinstein is keeping the unredacted letter private. What is she hiding? Isn’t the media curious?

I have read that Ford did not bring up Kavanaugh’s name in the 2012 session with a therapist but I believe none of us know because I assume those notes are protected by privacy.

I have heard or read that what Ford told the therapist does not match what she said in her letter but we obviously have no idea since we haven’t seen the letter or the therapist’s notes.

Somehow, Ford doesn’t know when or where the attack happened and she didn’t tell anyone at the time but she and her leftists backers want FBI to investigate. How would that go? Would they interview everyone that went to those schools for years and then ask if there ever was a party? The request for an FBI investigation is obviously a joke and a delaying tactic.

We are told that a woman would never make stuff like that up but we know that is absolutely not true. The fake Duke University rape case and the fake Rolling Stone rape case about a fraternity come to mind. In those cases, the media were also willing to destroy young men’s lives with absolutely zero evidence that the stories were true. But there was an agenda to push that men abuse women so those boys’ lives didn’t matter.

The story the Ford-Kavanaugh story most reminds me of is the unverified story about Roy Moore. For decades Moore had been running for public office and the story never came up. Roy Moore ran for the primary for Senator and the story never came up. After Moore won the primary and it was too late for Republicans to put another candidate on the ballot, all of a sudden, decades-old accusations that he abused a few young women showed up. The story didn’t end up in an Alabama paper. Nope, it ended up on a national paper, the Washington Post (the same paper Christine Ford used) and they ran the story. Of course the national media immediately picked up the unverified story as if it was true. The agenda was that the Democrats wanted to win a Senate seat in the red state Alabama and they couldn’t win on their agenda so they had to destroy. The accusers were used until Moore lost and then as far as I know of they have essentially disappeared. They were useful pawns. The method was successful so why not use it again against Kavanaugh?

The media, Democrats, Hollywood and leftists pretend they care about the supposedly abused Ford and other abused women but we know that is absolutely not true. For decades Bill and Hillary physically and mentally abused multiple women and these groups wholeheartedly supported putting them back in the White House in 2016. Bill and Hillary set out to destroy the lives of any of the accusers as they got in their way of their quest for power and the media and other leftists were complicit in destroying the accusers. Not once did Democrats or the media care about these women and we are supposed to all of a sudden believe that they care. These accusers of the Clintons were as disposable as the accuser of Keith Ellison.

It is an extreme danger to our republic, our freedom and our rights when the media, including Google and Facebook collude with Democrats to shut up and destroy anyone who disagrees with the leftist agenda but that is where we are.

I am trying to think of the proper term to call people who will protect and enable anyone whose agenda they like no matter what they do while setting out to destroy anyone whose agenda they don’t like no matter how clean they are. Hypocrite is too polite a term. The best I could come up with is despicable, deplorable creeps.

There is something we know that is absolutely true about the endless reports on networks and in newspapers about Christine Blasey Ford, and the man she is accusing of bad conduct, Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. That would be that there is absolutely no evidence that indicates that Kavanaugh did anything to Ford in 1982 or at any other time she might come up with in the future.

The first thing that the public should recognize about the reporting is that for the last several decades the media has colluded with Democrats to destroy people who get in the way of the Democrats’ quest for power They have been supported with the tag teams of Hollywood and leftist groups. The technique is always the same and facts haven’t mattered. They throw mud against the wall on people and hope some of it sticks. It does not matter how many lives they destroy, the Democrat agenda is all that matters. They hope a significant amount of the public believes the crap they spew forth. There are numerous easy examples: Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas, forged documents with Bush, a false story in NY Times about McCain and a lobbyist, a false story about Sarah Palin not being the mother of Trig, Herman Cain’s mistreatment of women, Romney bullying a kid over forty years ago, Romney not paying his taxes, Trump not paying taxes and a Democrat fake dossier used to destroy Trump. The media plants the stories in the publics’ head to destroy people’s chances to win.

We do know lots of actual things about this Kavanaugh story and the charges being leveled by Christina Ford. Here are some of them.

The Democrats and the media were always intent on delaying or destroying whichever candidate Trump nominated. If they dispose of Kavanaugh they will set out to destroy the next nominee no matter how clean and qualified.

Kavanagh has been a judge for years and his name has been well known for years that he might be a Supreme Court nominee and yet this story never came up until now.

Kavanaugh has gone through six FBI background checks over decades and the story never came up until now.

Democrats have had over one month to question Kavanaugh in private and in a public hearing and the story never came up. They have actually had years to review his record.

Senator Feinstein had the letter at the end of July and she never asked Kavanaugh in private or in public about the allegations.

Kavanaugh was sailing through to conformation and only then did the Democrats bring the accusation up because all their other efforts to stall, delay or derail Kavanaugh’s appointment had failed.

We still don’t know what is in the letter from Ford because Feinstein is keeping the unredacted letter private. What is she hiding? Isn’t the media curious?

I have read that Ford did not bring up Kavanaugh’s name in the 2012 session with a therapist but I believe none of us know because I assume those notes are protected by privacy.

I have heard or read that what Ford told the therapist does not match what she said in her letter but we obviously have no idea since we haven’t seen the letter or the therapist’s notes.

Somehow, Ford doesn’t know when or where the attack happened and she didn’t tell anyone at the time but she and her leftists backers want FBI to investigate. How would that go? Would they interview everyone that went to those schools for years and then ask if there ever was a party? The request for an FBI investigation is obviously a joke and a delaying tactic.

We are told that a woman would never make stuff like that up but we know that is absolutely not true. The fake Duke University rape case and the fake Rolling Stone rape case about a fraternity come to mind. In those cases, the media were also willing to destroy young men’s lives with absolutely zero evidence that the stories were true. But there was an agenda to push that men abuse women so those boys’ lives didn’t matter.

The story the Ford-Kavanaugh story most reminds me of is the unverified story about Roy Moore. For decades Moore had been running for public office and the story never came up. Roy Moore ran for the primary for Senator and the story never came up. After Moore won the primary and it was too late for Republicans to put another candidate on the ballot, all of a sudden, decades-old accusations that he abused a few young women showed up. The story didn’t end up in an Alabama paper. Nope, it ended up on a national paper, the Washington Post (the same paper Christine Ford used) and they ran the story. Of course the national media immediately picked up the unverified story as if it was true. The agenda was that the Democrats wanted to win a Senate seat in the red state Alabama and they couldn’t win on their agenda so they had to destroy. The accusers were used until Moore lost and then as far as I know of they have essentially disappeared. They were useful pawns. The method was successful so why not use it again against Kavanaugh?

The media, Democrats, Hollywood and leftists pretend they care about the supposedly abused Ford and other abused women but we know that is absolutely not true. For decades Bill and Hillary physically and mentally abused multiple women and these groups wholeheartedly supported putting them back in the White House in 2016. Bill and Hillary set out to destroy the lives of any of the accusers as they got in their way of their quest for power and the media and other leftists were complicit in destroying the accusers. Not once did Democrats or the media care about these women and we are supposed to all of a sudden believe that they care. These accusers of the Clintons were as disposable as the accuser of Keith Ellison.

It is an extreme danger to our republic, our freedom and our rights when the media, including Google and Facebook collude with Democrats to shut up and destroy anyone who disagrees with the leftist agenda but that is where we are.

I am trying to think of the proper term to call people who will protect and enable anyone whose agenda they like no matter what they do while setting out to destroy anyone whose agenda they don’t like no matter how clean they are. Hypocrite is too polite a term. The best I could come up with is despicable, deplorable creeps.

There are three crimes that I consider worthy of capital punishment: murder, rape, and treason.

I consider forcible rape to be one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed against another human being. In my view, forcible rape deserves to be a capital offense. Any person proven guilty of forcibly raping another person should be executed. I suspect that many people would not agree with my view on this. But I state it for perspective.

I consider sexual assault to be a very serious crime. Not deserving to be classified a capital offense in most cases, but, nevertheless, deserving of very harsh punishment. 

Having said that, the idea that any woman who alleges a sexual crime should be believed without regard to evidence is unreasonable and unjust. Every case ought to be judged individually on the specific evidence.

But Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) says:

“Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed…. We have to create an environment where women can come forward and be heard and be listened to… I believe her.”

In the environment which Sen. Hirono would create, men should shut up.

“Guess who is perpetuating all of these kinds of actions? It’s the men in this country. And I just want to say to the men in this country: just shut up and step up, do the right thing for a change.”

In an environment where women must be believed on a blanket basis, men are presumed guilty not for their own crimes necessarily, but for the crimes that other men have committed. Men, collectively, are guilty. The allegation of assault is all that is required to establish the guilt of a man.

Unless the man is a prominent Democrat, like Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, or Keith Ellison. Democrats forgave Ted Kennedy for leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to die in the back seat of his car and made him the “Lion of the Senate”. Democrats didn’t believe Kathleen Willey, or Juanita Broadrick, or Paula Jones, each of whom accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault. In the case of Broadrick, it was rape. Even now, they don’t believe Karen Monahan, former girlfriend of deputy Democrat National Chairman Keith Ellison, former congressman and current candidate for Minnesota attorney general. The evidence that Ellison abused Monahan is significant. Yet, Monahan says of the Democrats “I’ve been smeared, threatened, isolated from my own party.” No support for Monahan from Sen. Hirono. No calls from Sen. Diane Feinstein for Keith Ellison to step down from his position with the DNC. No cabal of Hollywood actresses releasing a video with the message to Karen Monahan saying “Millions of us have your back. You and your testimony are credible. We believe you.”

Why? Because Kennedy, Clinton, and Ellison are Democrats. Kavanaugh is not.

In her interview with Politico, Hirono made it clear that this is about politics:

“If Kavanaugh’s nomination fizzles and President Donald Trump has to name a replacement, Hirono says he better find someone whom she considers less of a conservative ideologue, or else prepare for Senate Democrats—especially if they win a majority in November’s elections—to keep the court seat vacant until after the 2020 election.”

Politics. That’s what this is about.

There are three crimes that I consider worthy of capital punishment: murder, rape, and treason.

I consider forcible rape to be one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed against another human being. In my view, forcible rape deserves to be a capital offense. Any person proven guilty of forcibly raping another person should be executed. I suspect that many people would not agree with my view on this. But I state it for perspective.

I consider sexual assault to be a very serious crime. Not deserving to be classified a capital offense in most cases, but, nevertheless, deserving of very harsh punishment. 

Having said that, the idea that any woman who alleges a sexual crime should be believed without regard to evidence is unreasonable and unjust. Every case ought to be judged individually on the specific evidence.

But Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) says:

“Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed…. We have to create an environment where women can come forward and be heard and be listened to… I believe her.”

In the environment which Sen. Hirono would create, men should shut up.

“Guess who is perpetuating all of these kinds of actions? It’s the men in this country. And I just want to say to the men in this country: just shut up and step up, do the right thing for a change.”

In an environment where women must be believed on a blanket basis, men are presumed guilty not for their own crimes necessarily, but for the crimes that other men have committed. Men, collectively, are guilty. The allegation of assault is all that is required to establish the guilt of a man.

Unless the man is a prominent Democrat, like Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, or Keith Ellison. Democrats forgave Ted Kennedy for leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to die in the back seat of his car and made him the “Lion of the Senate”. Democrats didn’t believe Kathleen Willey, or Juanita Broadrick, or Paula Jones, each of whom accused Bill Clinton of sexual assault. In the case of Broadrick, it was rape. Even now, they don’t believe Karen Monahan, former girlfriend of deputy Democrat National Chairman Keith Ellison, former congressman and current candidate for Minnesota attorney general. The evidence that Ellison abused Monahan is significant. Yet, Monahan says of the Democrats “I’ve been smeared, threatened, isolated from my own party.” No support for Monahan from Sen. Hirono. No calls from Sen. Diane Feinstein for Keith Ellison to step down from his position with the DNC. No cabal of Hollywood actresses releasing a video with the message to Karen Monahan saying “Millions of us have your back. You and your testimony are credible. We believe you.”

Why? Because Kennedy, Clinton, and Ellison are Democrats. Kavanaugh is not.

In her interview with Politico, Hirono made it clear that this is about politics:

“If Kavanaugh’s nomination fizzles and President Donald Trump has to name a replacement, Hirono says he better find someone whom she considers less of a conservative ideologue, or else prepare for Senate Democrats—especially if they win a majority in November’s elections—to keep the court seat vacant until after the 2020 election.”

Politics. That’s what this is about.

If the results of an investigation are only as good as the data it utilizes, then the recent investigation into the Las Vegas massacre is one for the record books – at the bottom of the list.

Predictably, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo reiterated the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD)’s preliminary findings in the final report: one and only one shooter, Stephen Paddock, was responsible for the carnage in the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.  Other possibilities – including shooters at other locations on or near the Las Vegas Strip – he dismissed.  

Where is the muzzle flash?

While the report discusses weapons fired during the event, it does not mention recorded imagery of muzzle flash from the 32nd-floor window where Paddock was determined to have carried out his killing spree.  

Muzzle flash from weapons such as the AR-15 is one of the key indicators of shooter location, particularly in the thermal infrared, a region of the electromagnetic spectrum extending beyond the range that the human eye can see.  According to the report, Paddock used a total of 13 weapons during the shooting (not including the pistol with which he killed himself).  Even if some weapons were flash-suppressed, the incessant, continuous, violent barrage from one location should have produced some flashes whose signatures were captured on video – even on the cell phone camera videos taken by many individuals on the ground.  

Moreover, FBI forensic experts determined that some of the weapons had been loaded with tracer ammunition, making a signature more likely to be seen on imagery.  No discussion of flash or tracer signatures appears in the document, and no explanation for the omission is provided.

The good news is that the LVMPD infrared camera deployed on the night of 1 October appeared to be working properly, clearly showing the broken windows on the 32nd floor.  When the imagery was recorded is left to the imagination, as no time stamps appear on the video.  (Incidentally, the thermal imagery does not show the numerous reflections off the building from light sources below: artificial lighting is designed for the human visual spectrum, and this camera operates outside it.)

Where are the witnesses?

More interesting than the final report is this account of officers deployed in response to the crisis.  Personnel in one helicopter, Metro Air 5, “were able to determine that there appeared to be shots coming from an elevated position on the east side of Mandalay Bay.”  Determine, how?  Did they see muzzle flash?  Hear gunshots?

While the crew did not observe broken windows at the time (what time?), due, they believed, to reflections off the building’s side, they did note several possible firing locations: “the upper roof, the Foundation Room balcony [and] the lower casino roof[.] … They then worked to clear the upper roof first, along with the Foundation Room balcony.”

It is reasonable to assume that “to clear,” in this context, means to direct people away from specific locations.  But why were people present on the hotel’s upper roof during a shooting event, rather than seeking cover inside?  And who, exactly, has access to that area?

The Mandalay Bay tower is composed of 43 floors.  Paddock’s suite on Floor 32 was in the lower segment, floors 1-34.  Floors 35-39 are managed by The Four Seasons Company, whose major shareholders are Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and Bill Gates.  Floors 40-42 contain penthouse suites, and Floor 43 (oddly numbered 63) is the aforementioned Foundation Room with a restaurant and lounge.  Guests on this level had a bird’s-eye view of the tragedy unfolding below, yet their witness statements do not appear among those documented by LVMPD, which focused on hotel employees, police officers, and Paddock family members. 

Why not?

Where are the cameras?

Metro Air 5 later left this scene to respond to reports of a shooter in New York, New York, which it determined to be unfounded.  It next returned to the Tropicana to investigate another call but saw no sign of a disturbance.   The aircrew may not have known that the reported shootings occurred inside the properties, in lounges and casinos.

More than 500 911 calls appear in the records of that night.  The table below, which includes several links to audio files, offers a template that a thorough investigation might have followed before dismissing calls as unfounded.  While most events will not have officer body cam available, the inclusion of video from indoor closed-circuit television cameras (CCTVs) and traffic cameras on the streets would have allowed more detailed consideration of calls than the official approach provided.  It would also have facilitated comparison with individual videos such as this one, showing more than a dozen ambulances arriving and departing Hooter’s Hotel following the massacre.

Suggested data to evaluate 911 calls

Property	911 call file
Excalibur Hotel	407
Tropicana Hotel	381
Hooter’s Hotel	205
America’s Best Value Inn	242
New York, New York	365
Paris Hotel	396

Muzzle flash imagery, statements from key witnesses, camera video…all of these sources would have provided a more robust dataset had they been included in the LVMPD investigation.  While that investigation has concluded, the dataset used to achieve the conclusion is far from complete.  

Barbara G. Grant is an electro-optical engineer and imagery analyst with three technical books in print.  She has investigated primary phenomena such as muzzle flash while studying the manner in which government investigations address controversial scientific issues and is looking for a publisher for a book explaining some of these technologies to the general public.

Image: Alicia Yo via Wikimedia Commons.

If the results of an investigation are only as good as the data it utilizes, then the recent investigation into the Las Vegas massacre is one for the record books – at the bottom of the list.

Predictably, Las Vegas Sheriff Joseph Lombardo reiterated the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department (LVMPD)’s preliminary findings in the final report: one and only one shooter, Stephen Paddock, was responsible for the carnage in the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history.  Other possibilities – including shooters at other locations on or near the Las Vegas Strip – he dismissed.  

Where is the muzzle flash?

While the report discusses weapons fired during the event, it does not mention recorded imagery of muzzle flash from the 32nd-floor window where Paddock was determined to have carried out his killing spree.  

Muzzle flash from weapons such as the AR-15 is one of the key indicators of shooter location, particularly in the thermal infrared, a region of the electromagnetic spectrum extending beyond the range that the human eye can see.  According to the report, Paddock used a total of 13 weapons during the shooting (not including the pistol with which he killed himself).  Even if some weapons were flash-suppressed, the incessant, continuous, violent barrage from one location should have produced some flashes whose signatures were captured on video – even on the cell phone camera videos taken by many individuals on the ground.  

Moreover, FBI forensic experts determined that some of the weapons had been loaded with tracer ammunition, making a signature more likely to be seen on imagery.  No discussion of flash or tracer signatures appears in the document, and no explanation for the omission is provided.

The good news is that the LVMPD infrared camera deployed on the night of 1 October appeared to be working properly, clearly showing the broken windows on the 32nd floor.  When the imagery was recorded is left to the imagination, as no time stamps appear on the video.  (Incidentally, the thermal imagery does not show the numerous reflections off the building from light sources below: artificial lighting is designed for the human visual spectrum, and this camera operates outside it.)

Where are the witnesses?

More interesting than the final report is this account of officers deployed in response to the crisis.  Personnel in one helicopter, Metro Air 5, “were able to determine that there appeared to be shots coming from an elevated position on the east side of Mandalay Bay.”  Determine, how?  Did they see muzzle flash?  Hear gunshots?

While the crew did not observe broken windows at the time (what time?), due, they believed, to reflections off the building’s side, they did note several possible firing locations: “the upper roof, the Foundation Room balcony [and] the lower casino roof[.] … They then worked to clear the upper roof first, along with the Foundation Room balcony.”

It is reasonable to assume that “to clear,” in this context, means to direct people away from specific locations.  But why were people present on the hotel’s upper roof during a shooting event, rather than seeking cover inside?  And who, exactly, has access to that area?

The Mandalay Bay tower is composed of 43 floors.  Paddock’s suite on Floor 32 was in the lower segment, floors 1-34.  Floors 35-39 are managed by The Four Seasons Company, whose major shareholders are Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and Bill Gates.  Floors 40-42 contain penthouse suites, and Floor 43 (oddly numbered 63) is the aforementioned Foundation Room with a restaurant and lounge.  Guests on this level had a bird’s-eye view of the tragedy unfolding below, yet their witness statements do not appear among those documented by LVMPD, which focused on hotel employees, police officers, and Paddock family members. 

Why not?

Where are the cameras?

Metro Air 5 later left this scene to respond to reports of a shooter in New York, New York, which it determined to be unfounded.  It next returned to the Tropicana to investigate another call but saw no sign of a disturbance.   The aircrew may not have known that the reported shootings occurred inside the properties, in lounges and casinos.

More than 500 911 calls appear in the records of that night.  The table below, which includes several links to audio files, offers a template that a thorough investigation might have followed before dismissing calls as unfounded.  While most events will not have officer body cam available, the inclusion of video from indoor closed-circuit television cameras (CCTVs) and traffic cameras on the streets would have allowed more detailed consideration of calls than the official approach provided.  It would also have facilitated comparison with individual videos such as this one, showing more than a dozen ambulances arriving and departing Hooter’s Hotel following the massacre.

Suggested data to evaluate 911 calls

Property	911 call file
Excalibur Hotel	407
Tropicana Hotel	381
Hooter’s Hotel	205
America’s Best Value Inn	242
New York, New York	365
Paris Hotel	396

Muzzle flash imagery, statements from key witnesses, camera video…all of these sources would have provided a more robust dataset had they been included in the LVMPD investigation.  While that investigation has concluded, the dataset used to achieve the conclusion is far from complete.  

Barbara G. Grant is an electro-optical engineer and imagery analyst with three technical books in print.  She has investigated primary phenomena such as muzzle flash while studying the manner in which government investigations address controversial scientific issues and is looking for a publisher for a book explaining some of these technologies to the general public.

Image: Alicia Yo via Wikimedia Commons.