Reporter calls out Biden's balderdash blather at White House briefing

White House National Security Council John Kirby danced around a question regarding alleged President Biden's frequent battles with the truth, after Biden lied about having been at Ground Zero on September 12, 2001, the day after the attacks.

[H/T New York Post]

“The president has lied about being at Ground Zero the day after the Sept. 11 attacks, falsely claimed he saw the Pittsburgh bridge collapse, claimed his grandfather died in the hospital days before his birth. What is going on with the president? Is he just believing things that didn’t happen did happen, or is he just randomly making stuff up?” Washington Times reporter Jeff Mordock bluntly asked Kirby in a real journalistic moment during Wednesday’s White House press briefing.

Kirby, a retired Navy rear admiral [the same rank as the very Rear Admiral Rachel Levine] and veteran military public affairs officer, waltzed around the question, highlighting Biden’s Monday trip to visit troops in Alaska and clarifying the 80-year-old president’s Ground Zero lie.

“The president was deeply touched and honored to be able to spend 9/11 with military members there in Alaska and some families and was honored by their presence and the chance to make an important set of remarks about why we need to continue to remember that day. And he did that,” Kirby, who has no sense of shame, said.

“And he spoke about a visit to Ground Zero, which he did participate in about a week or so after the event, and what that looked and what that smelled and what that felt like. And it had a visceral impact on him as it did so many other Americans on that terrible day.” After all, the human sense of smell is the last thing to go when we're older than dirt, but not when it comes to smelling young, human hair, it seems.

“What is going on with the president?” Jeff Mordock asked.

Biden, who is now older than what's left of his IQ, described the scene from Ground Zero one day after the collapse of the World Trade Center in remarks to military service members in Anchorage, Alaska, on the 22nd anniversary of the terrorist attacks. He is the first alleged president to break with tradition and not attend Ground Zero in New York because he was told not to do so by some unelected bureaucrat--possibly the same one who dressed as the Easter Bunny last year and interrupted him from blathering on about something in the jasmine of his mind.

“Ground Zero in New York — I remember standing there the next day and looking at the building. And I felt like I was looking through the gates of hell,” Biden said. He wasn't joking--he was simply lying.

“It looked so devastating because the way you could, from where you could stand,” he mumble-added.

A White House official who reads minds told The Post on Monday that old Joe was thinking about his Sept. 20, 2001, Ground Zero visit, as part of a 38-senator delegation nine days after the attack.

Kirby added that the president is “focused on making sure that an attack like that never happens again,”  by reducing the budget of the military, using a drag queen to entice recruitment, and basing everything on equity and inclusion, rather than killing any enemy that messes with us.

Unsatisfied with the White House official’s response, Mordock noted that Biden has “had a string of saying things that happened didn’t, things that are easily debunked. Why does he keep doing that?”

“The president was grateful to spend that time with those family members and those troops,” Kirby responded and walked off in a Bidenish shuffle.

Tweet

BREAKING: Comrade de Blasio doesn't make the cut-drops out of 2020 race

He even gives himself the finger

Warren Wilhelm Jr. [aka Bill de Blasio] didn't make the cut to be on the Democratic debate stage on September 12 for the 2020 presidential campaign. He will now be relegated to simply being the worst mayor New York City has seen in the last 100 years, followed by another Democrat, David Dinkins.

If he deems it necessary to return to the city that he's supposed to head, he can work on the latest proposal to rid the Big Apple of schools for the gifted so that they can be put into regular schools where they can take pride in the fact that they aren't so special after all, and can learn at the same pace as other kids. Sorry, Asian students--you lose.

De Blasio can also look forward to a police force that is suffering from the "Pantaleo Effect" after Officer Daniel Pantaleo was fired over the Eric Garner incident in which he was doing his job. Now police are hesitant to forcefully engage criminals due to their fear of being fired as well.

Maybe if de Blasio returns to New York City he'll make it his business to attend public events, such as the New York City Marathon, for example, rather than having one of his lackies go in his place. After all, he missed the Puerto Rican Day Parade and stayed in Iowa for his campaign when the city had an electrical blackout.

In May, he dissed a memorial event for victims of toxic exposure to Ground Zero--and he blamed his staff! What a guy.

Yes, and attending a murdered cop's vigil in 2017 was just too much to ask of him because he didn't want to interrupt his fun time in Germany. The cops show him their backs when he speaks to them.

So de Blasio finally dropped out of the race but unfortunately he is still Mayor of New York City. Hopefully not for long.


Please consider following this blog and feel free to click on the ads on this page. It costs nothing, and may just save your life. Or not. But seriously, please check out the ads as this is my source of generating revenue.






Tweet

Atheist Group Offended by Islamic Symbols--No, Wait

An atheist group is trying to keep American mosques from displaying the crescent moon and star above their domes--oh wait, that isn't right. Atheist groups are not offended by Islamic symbols; I almost forgot. 

An atheist group does not want the Ground Zero Cross displayed at the National September 11 Memorial Museum in New York (which opened this past May 21st) where religious Muslims commandeered two commercial jet planes filled with terrified passengers and pilots who had their throats slashed with box cutters, and flew the jets into the Twin Towers, killing 3000 people. 

The mosque displays don't bother the atheists, the cross does.

A federal appeals court now says the group has to better explain how displaying the cross is "offensive" and violates their constitutional rights. Perhaps these atheists are offended by people who believe in God and practice their faiths in ways they see appropriate. Perhaps they had personal experiences with religion that tarnished them for life, or maybe they simply do not believe in a supreme being. What they believe, however, is to stifle the expression of the beliefs of others, except for Muslims.

The 17-foot-high cross is actually a steel beam that was part of the physical structure of one of the towers. It became a source of comfort for first responders who often prayed there and left flowers at its base. This offends atheists but the religious belief in jihad has yet to be confronted by these testicle-challenged atheists.

American Atheists first filed the suit in 2011, allowing 10 years to go by before having the courage to be offended. Imagine if these brave soulless creatures filed the suit in late 2001 or early 2002. The case was thrown out last year by a federal judge in the Southern District of New York.

An amicus brief was filed by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, an non-profit law firm specializing in church-state law, and whose goal is to protect free religious expression and traditions--things that evidently offend atheists.

Eric Baxter, a lawyer for the Becket Fund argued that American Atheists haven't the right to bring a lawsuit in the first place and said, "We're thrilled that the court picked up on this issue."

The atheist plaintiffs have until July 14th to file supplemental legal briefs to determine if the case will proceed. One question they must answer is how the offensiveness of the cross, which the atheists view as a Christian symbol for all 9-11 victims, becomes a "constitutional injury."

Sounds to me like their "feelings are hurt," but hurt is itself a feeling and you cannot hurt a feeling.

Another question these intolerant atheists must also answer is: if displaying the cross "marginalizes them as American citizens" how is that a "particular and concrete injury" compared to just "the abstract stigmatization of atheists generally."

The judge also wants the plaintiffs to prove their claim that taxpayer dollars are funding the museum. Sounds like the atheists make stuff up as they go along.

"Taking personal offense is not an injury that warrants invoking the power of the courts to shut down everything you disagree with," Baxter said. "The Constitution is not a personal tool for censoring everyone's belief but your own."

Sometimes it seems like liberals and atheists search high and low to find things they can be offended by--it isn't that they're actually offended; they just need to feel powerful.

If they really wanted to feel powerful, they ought to do something about the religion that attacked us. They ought to speak out against Islam's hatred for Christians, Jews, and all non-believers. They ought to speak out about those "moderate Muslims" who fail to speak out against jihadist atrocities. But that would require real courage and that is lacking in them like their lacking a belief in God.

Tweet