Jake Tapper's vilification of Fox News may kick him in the butt in CNN defamation trial

CNN anchor Jake Tapper's criticism of Fox News might come back to haunt the network during an upcoming defamation lawsuit. This lawsuit stems from a 2021 segment on Tapper's show where they wrongly accused a Navy veteran named Zachary Young of exploiting Afghan nationals trying to escape after the Taliban took over.

A Florida judge decided on Thursday to side with Young, who claims that Tapper and CNN wrongly painted him as an "illegal profiteer" during America's exit from Afghanistan. This ruling allows Young to bring up Tapper's harsh words about Fox News from November 2023 in court. Back then, Tapper called Fox News a "cancer on the democracy we have" and accused them of not fulfilling their "grave responsibility" to report news fairly and honestly. This was first reported by Law and Crime.

Young is seeking $1 billion in damages, arguing that Tapper’s statements should be part of the trial to demonstrate that both Tapper and CNN knew they had a duty to deliver accurate and fair news. He claims the November 2021 broadcast harmed his reputation and destroyed his business, Nemex Enterprises.

Judge William Henry, overseeing the case in Florida’s 14th Judicial Circuit, has also allowed Young to use text messages in court. These messages allegedly show that CNN staff intended to tarnish Young's image as a war profiteer.

In one text, Alex Marquardt, the national security correspondent for CNN and lead reporter on the segment, said he wanted to "nail this Zachary Young mfucker." Another message from CNN senior editor Fuzz Hogan referred to Young as "a shit." CNN did not respond to requests for comment on this matter.

This lawsuit could be another public relations hit for CNN, which prides itself on being "the most trusted name in news." Previously, they settled with Nicholas Sandmann, a 16-year-old student from Covington Catholic High School, in 2020 after wrongly depicting him in a confrontation with activist Nathan Phillips.

The trial against CNN is scheduled to begin later this month, shortly after ABC News paid Donald Trump $15 million to settle a claim over comments made by ABC anchor George Stephanopoulos, who labeled Trump a rapist.

Tapper, who once worked for ABC News after serving as press secretary for former Congresswoman Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky in the 1990s, joined CNN later in his career.

Tweet

BREAKING: The verdict for Laken Riley's killer is in

On February 22, 2024, an Augusta University nursing student named Laken Riley, 22, was brutally murdered while jogging at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. Her body was found in Oconee Forest Park.

José Antonio Ibarra, 26, an illegal alien was arrested for the murder and his trial ended today, Wednesday. Laken's friends and family spoke and even this writer had tears in my eyes. This was a bench trial, meaning that there was no jury but the judge will decide on the guilt or innocence of the defendant. 

The verdict is in and here is what the judge ruled:

Count 1, 2, 3 and 4: Malice Murder--GUILTY

Count 5. Kidnapping with Bodily Injury--GUILTY

Count 6. Aggravated Assault with Intent to Rape--GUILTY

Count 7. Aggravated Battery--GUILTY

Count 8. Obstruction or Hindering a 991 Call--GUILTY

Count 9. Tampering with Evidence--GUILTY

Count 10. Peeping Tom--GUILTY

Blank expression on Jose Ibarra's face as the verdict was recited by Judge H. Patrick Haggard. And as Laken's mother spoke about Ibarra through the tears only a parent can feel over the murder of their child, this POS had no expression on his face. He even refused to wear his headset to translate her words into Spanish. 

The face of evil

It seems unfortunate to me that this murderer will probably get to live the remainder of his miserable life, albeit in incarcerated, and Laken does not. Watching the reaction of Laken's mother is too reminiscent of when I learned my own son was murdered. I wish the death penalty was not off the table but it is in this case.

Here is the sentence Judge Haggard imposed:

LIFE WITHOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF PAROLE

Tweet

BREAKING: Lori Vallow Daybell of the "Doomsday Cult," has been sentenced over triple murder

As the trial came to and end, the defendant, Lori Vallow Daybell, has refused to acknowledge that she was directly involved in the murder of her children the the wife of her lover.

Judge Steven Boyce acknowledged that she killed her children Tylee Ryan, and JJ Vallow and her lover's wife, Tammy Daybell, for monetary gain and that she has no remorse for what she had done: killed, mutilated, burned, and buried them like animals. 

“You justified all this by going down a bizarre, religious rabbit hole & clearly you're still down there,” Boyce added, stating that Vallow has any remorse for her actions. Judge Boyce, when rendering his sentence, ordered that three of Vallow's life sentences will run consecutively, which means she will never have the opportunity to leave prison other than in a box.

The sentencing is the culmination of a bizarre trial involving religious extremism, "demon" zombies, and marital strife. In May, Vallow was convicted of all charges in connection with the 2019 deaths. The murders occurred just before Vallow and her husband, Chad Daybell, got married and fled to Hawaii.

In her statement, however, Vallow claimed that she has spoken with her children and Daybell, whom she called a “wonderful friend.” In one conversation she claims to have had with her 7-year-old son, Vallow said JJ insisted that she did not do “anything wrong.” She concluded her statement by stating that she looks forward to be reunited with the three.

“I know where they are now and what they're doing. I know how wonderful heaven is, and I'm homesick for it every single day,” she added in that weird mentally ill way that she has.

Before Vallow spoke, several family members of the victims made impact statements and asked that she be punished to the fullest extent of the law. Samantha Gwilliam, the sister of Tammy Daybell, called Vallow a “liar, adulteress, and [a] murderer” adding, “[N]o angels are coming to rescue you”—an apparent reference to Vallow’s apocalyptic religious beliefs.

“You will live in your prison cell for the rest of your life,” she added.

Vicki Hoban, one of Tammy’s aunts, told Vallow she hopes the rest of the 49-year-old’s life is “filled in fear and you live every day terrified” for her role in the “savage murders of great people.” 

Boyce pointed out that even the jurors and family members were traumatized after viewing the photos of the dead children. Vallow has not shown any remorse for the murders while using her bizarre religious beliefs as a justification for what she did.

The sentence pronounced by Judge Boyce was life in prison without the possibility of parole for all counts. She has the right to appeal and to an attorney, and if she cannot afford one, an attorney would be appointed for her.  There was also a financial penalty of over $20,000.

She has 42 days to file the judgment.

Due to the fact that she said she welcomed death and does not fear it, they might put her on suicide watch.

Tweet

Sgt. Perry's Attorneys file motion for new trial

The attorney for Sgt. Daniel Perry filed a motion Tuesday seeking a new trial. Perry was convicted of murdering Garrett Foster, a far-left protester, who pointed an AK-47 at him in a menacing manner causing the Army Sergeant to respond in kind with his own weapon and killing him.

Attorney Clinton Broden's motion said that a new trial was needed because DA Jose Garza, prevented exculpatory evidence from being presented to the jury. Garza's campaign was funded by billionaire leftist mega-donor George Soros who backs Democrats that will follow his theme of allowing justice to be turned on its head. Criminals often walk free and victims pay the price with the miscarriage of justice as it appears to have happened in this case.

The shooting incident happened on July 25, 2020 in what Broden contends was self-defense. Although Perry was convicted on a murder charge, he was acquitted on an aggravated assault charge.

When the shooting was first investigated Perry was not charged with any crimes, but months later, in 2021, Garza became DA and prosecuted him.

David Fugitt [his real name] was the lead detective in the case and said in an affidavit that DA Garza acted with "criminal behavior" in the case.

“I had several conversations with the District Attorney’s Office regarding the presentation of exculpatory evidence related to Daniel Perry,” Fugitt said. “It became clear to me that the District Attorney’s Office did not want to present evidence to the grand jury that would be exculpatory to Daniel Perry.”

“On more than one occasion I was directed by the Travis County Attorney’s Office to remove exculpatory information that I had intended to present to the grand jury during my testimony,” he said. “Of my original 158 slide powerpoint presentation, the presentation was reduced to 56 slides with almost all of the exculpatory evidence ordered removed. I felt like I did not have any other options but to comply with their orders.”

Fugitt said that Garza’s directive to forbid exculpatory evidence from being shown during the case “is when the conduct of the District Attorney’s Office [went] from highly unethical behavior to criminal behavior.”

Texas Governor Greg Abbott (R) signaled over the weekend that he was working to get Perry a pardon. The one question remaining is why isn't Abbott working on getting Garza criminally indicted, or at least removed from office?

“Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney,” Abbott said in a statement. “Unlike the President or some other states, the Texas Constitution limits the Governor’s pardon authority to only act on a recommendation by the Board of Pardons and Paroles.”

“Texas law DOES allow the Governor to request the Board of Pardons and Paroles to determine if a person should be granted a pardon,” Abbott continued. “I have made that request and instructed the Board to expedite its review. I look forward to approving the Board’s pardon recommendation as soon as it hits my desk. Additionally, I have already prioritized reining in rogue District Attorneys, and the Texas Legislature is working on laws to achieve that goal.”

Abbott's decision to go after "rogue District Attorneys" follows in the footsteps of Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) who sent law enforcement officials to remove a Soros puppet from power in the state, making it the first time this had been done to a Soros prosecutor by a governor.

Tweet

Let the Shadenfreude begin: Trump Org. Guilty of Tax Evasion

The Trump Organization was found guilty Tuesday of committing tax fraud, to the utter delight of the left. In spite of the fact that former President Trump is not being charged in the case, the left hopes that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, will be able to find something, anything, that will put Trump in prison for the rest of his life.

The jury began deliberating on Monday and found the Trump Organization companies guilty on all charges of tax fraud as well as other crimes. The verdict of the six-week trial was announced Tuesday and included 17 criminal counts for the Trump Payroll Corporation and the Trump Corporation, both which were indicted in July of last year.

The company's CFO, Allen Weisselberg was accused of using illegal measures to reduce payroll liability from executive salaries via untaxed bonuses and perks worth millions. He pleaded guilty in August and agreed to testify against the company to save his sorry butt in a deal with prosecutors. He is expected to serve a mere five months in jail and vowed not to drop the soap like he dropped a dime on the company.

Bragg said that Trump remains under investigation and will be for the rest of his life if nothing can immediately implicate him in a crime.

The investigation initially targeted hush-money payments made by former Trump lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen during the 2016 presidential campaign to porn performer Stormy Daniels, but later widened to include the corporate tax fraud charges. Once Cohen turned on Trump, he instantly became the darling of the left and his name was barely mentioned in the trial.

Weisselberg [aka "The Weasel"] spent several days on the stand where he testified about the tax schemes. He, along with two others, Jeff McConney and Donald Bender, who had been given immunity detailed the methods the Trump Organization executives used to avoid taxes and payroll liability on large bonuses and benefits.

"Weisselberg did it for Weisselberg," Trump's lawyers said repeatedly, a phrase a prosecutor later called their "mantra."

Prosecutors said Weisselberg was one of several top executives who received large annual bonus checks, signed by Trump and logged as if they were payments to independent contractors, and luxury perks such as high-end apartments, private school tuition and cars that were not reported as salary.

And Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass said during his closing argument that Trump knew about because he can read minds and asked Juror number four to pick a number; any number.

"The fact is this was sanctioned, and that the practice was known to Mr. Trump," Steinglass claimed.

The Trump Organization could face up to $1.6 million in fines. Sentencing is expected to take place on Jan. 13, 2023.

Alan Futerfas, an attorney for the Trump Organization, said the company will "certainly" file an appeal.

Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg, a soft-on-crime progressive, praised the jury and called the verdict "a very just result." 

"The former president's companies now stand convicted of crimes. That is consequential. It underscores that in Manhattan, we have one standard of justice for all," Bragg told reporters outside the courtroom.

Meanwhile, murder is up in Bragg's borough and criminals get their no-bail walking papers before the cops finish writing their reports. Many have called for Bragg's removal from office, but only the Governor of New York, Kathy Hochul, can do that and she isn't going to lift a finger. Bragg has downgraded over half of the felony cases that came before his office, but Trump is a different story.

Alvin Bragg

New York Attorney General Letitia James has indicated the jury's findings could have bearing on a civil case being pursued by her office, which conducted a civil investigation to find something, anything, on Trump. They have the person, now they're looking to find a crime, a maneuver known as 'law fare.'

The criminal case is laser focused on executive compensation while James' case, filed in September, accuses the former President and his children of widespread, long standing efforts to commit fraud and manipulate property valuations [which means they tried to get as much money as they could when selling property--like asking more for your house when selling it than the market says it's worth--something that isn't illegal unless it's Trump and his progeny]. 

The company and the Trumps deny all allegations in that case, which is scheduled to go to trial in October 2023.

Tweet

Waukesha trial day 12: doofense axes questions

WAUKESHA, Wisconsin --  The trial of Darrell E. "I don't consent to be called that name" Brooks is coming to a close as the states rested on Thursday and Brooks began calling witnesses to the stand. But the problem with his witnesses is that their testimony sounds as if the state had called them.  

Another problem for the "genius" defense attorney [Brooks is defending himself against advisement from the court and his own mother] is his paucity of questions and his huge misunderstanding of the law. He mutters under his breath, rolls his eyes, and tries to testify when questioning the state's witnesses even after being told to stop. He is incredibly disrespectful of the judge but she has the patience of Job.

But the biggest problem this cretin of jurisprudence has is his blatant disrespect for the judge and court procedure. He constantly interrupts Judge Jennifer Dorow and doesn't know the definitions of "relevance," and "speculative," as he uses these terms like candy and acting like he's Perry Mason. 

Brooks also objects to nearly every question the state presents to a witness and the instant the state objects to his questions and gives their reasons for the objection, he quickly calls for "grounds" when the objection is sustained against his line of questioning. He even objects to the judge's ruling on his objections and calls for grounds when she speaks.

Worse than that, he believes that because the state is not a person, but an entity, they cannot be the plaintiff in the case. He invariably asks on cross examination whether the witness has "spoken to the state," for example, and this is always objected to by the prosecution, but this doesn't stop his lunacy.

In other words, Darrell E. Brooks could not have done worse in defending himself even if he had Joe Biden as his lawyer.

* * *

Hey folks, consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and please check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against Critical Race Theory, ignorance, The New York Times, and bovine flatulence. You also help me. Thanks.

* * *

It's likely the "defense" will rest Friday and the jury will deliberate. If after all the eye witness and video testimony does not find Brooks guilty of killing 6 parade goers and injury over 60 others, there is no justice and the lunatics will be running the asylum.

Tweet

BREAKING: R. Kelly guilty of sex-trafficking

I believe he can cry. 

R. Kelly was found guilty Monday of sexually abusing multiple women, boys and girls for decades. This is the superstar's stunning fall from grace, as a jury of seven men and five women deliberated for about nine hours over two days before reaching their unanimous verdict on racketeering charges.

The trial lasted about a month in the federal courthouse in Downtown Brooklyn, just a stone's throw from the Brooklyn Bridge.

From the beginning of the month-long trial, prosecutors depicted Kelly, 54, as a “predator” who used his fame and a cadre of employees to prey on young victims. Others paint him as a POS [google it].

“This case is not about a celebrity who likes to party a lot,” Assistant US Attorney Maria Cruz Melendez said in her opening statement last month. “This case is about a predator.” 

Prosecutors were able to prove the racketeering charges by showing the jury how Kelly used a network of his friends and people who worked for him in his "inner circle" to transport his targets across state lines, control their actions, and facilitate the sexual abuse.

Prosecutors from the Eastern District of New York then called a bunch of witnesses who testified about the abuse the singer of "I Believe I Can Fly," subjected them to. 

His wings have been clipped.

The first witness to take the stand was Jerhonda Pace, who said Kelly repeatedly had sex with her over the course of several months after they had exchanged numbers at a party at Kelly's Chicago mansion when she was under 18 years old. 

In their last encounter, Kelly became pissed off at Pace because she was texting on her phone and paid him no attention when he walked into the room, she explained.

Kelly smacked her in the face and forced her to perform oral sex on him after berating her, she said in court. 

During her testimony, she read from a journal, at times pausing to wipe away tears. 

“I went to Rob’s house and he called me a bitch,” she read aloud. “He said I was a silly bitch. He slapped me three times and said if I lied to him again it’s not going to be an open hand next time.

“He spit in my face and mouth,” she said. “He choked me during an argument. I had sex with him. I had oral sex with him. I went home and confessed.”

Other than that, he was a perfect gentleman.

* * *

Why not subscribe to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every time you click on an ad, you help in the fight against the tech giants.

* * *

Kelly’s attorneys tried to cast Pace — and his other accusers — as hysterical fans who were obsessed with Kelly and concocted stories about him because he refused their advances.

One of his victims was R&B singer Aaliyah, who Kelly illegally wed in a Chicago hotel room in 1994, when she was 15 years old. Kelly had to rely on his entourage in order for the nuptials to move forward.

A former tour manager for the disgraced singer testified in August that he bribed a Chicago-area welfare office employee to make a fake ID for Aaliyah, which listed her age as 18. Kelly was 27 years old at the time. Prosecutors alleged Kelly married Aaliyah in order to dodge criminal charges for having sex with a minor and to block her from testifying against him about abuse. Unfortunately, Aaliyah died in a plane crash when she was 22.

A witness at trial, a former backup dancer known as "Angela," testified that she witnessed Kelly performing oral sex on Aaliyah when she was 13 or 14 years old on a tour bus they were traveling on. 

The defense called on several witnesses whose careers were closely tied to Kelly as they tried to cast him as less of a scumbag as he apparently is. 

One defense witness, music consultant Julius Darrington, testified that he did not see Kelly abuse women while working with him in his Chicago studio and when they traveled across country for shows. 

He said on cross-examination that he had no knowledge of what Kelly did when he wasn't with him, so his testimony was as useful as ice skates on a beaver.

Kelly did not take the stand in his own defense, meaning he had a good lawyer. But the singer faces more criminal charges outside of New York as he was also charged by state prosecutors in Minnesota with engaging in prostitution with a minor and by federal prosecutors in Illinois for child pornography and obstruction.

I believe he wishes he can fly.

Tweet

After years on his trail, 100-year-old Nazi to stand trial for over 3,000 deaths

He was on the run for many years but authorities finally caught up to 100-year-old Herr Otto von Schmidtfluffer, or whatever his real name is [because the Germans have privacy laws and I made up the name] for being a nasty Nazi and working as an SS guard at a concentration camp near Berlin during the "War to end all wars." 

Schmidtfluffer is now ready to stand trial in October, if he lives that long, according to the Associated Press.

Although we don't know his name, he purportedly worked at the Sachsenhausen camp from 1942 to 1945 as an enlisted man of the Nazi Party's paramilitary wing. And while the old guy is able to stand trial, the hours during court may be limited to provide him with the rest he never allowed for his prisoners and does not deserve himself.

“A medical evaluation confirms that he is fit to stand trial in a limited way,” court spokeswoman Iris le Claire said.

In 2019, special federal prosecutors whose aim is to investigate Nazi-era war crimes gave the Neuruppin office the case. The state court is in the town of Oranienburg, near the location of Sachsenhausen concentration camp where over 200,000 prisoners died of starvation, disease, being worked to death, and other causes having nothing to do with COVID-19. 

The prisoners were also subjected to barbaric medical experiments and extermination via mass shootings, hangings and gassing. The total deaths at the facility, while unknown, are said to range from 50,000 to 100,000.

Sachsenhausen, established in 1936, was the first camp under SS control after Hitler gave his anti-Semites complete control of the Nazi concentration camp system. This camp was largely a training facility where the men learned the fine arts of torture, how to humiliate, and teach how it's actually the Jews who are the bad guys.

The suspect reportedly lives in Brandenburg outside of Berlin. But not for long, no matter how you slice it.

Why not consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against ignorance and evil.

Tweet

Derek Chauvin's attorney files a motion for a new trial

Eric Nelson, the attorney for former Minneapolis cop Derek Chauvin, has filed a motion for a new trial Tuesday. You may remember [if you aren't living in a Tibetan cave] that Chauvin was found guilty of murder in the death of a Black man with a long history of criminal activity.

The court filing lists several grounds, one of which was that his right to due process and fair trial were violated when the court decided against sequestering the jury from the get-go, and refusing to grant a change in venue.

Some of the filing states:

The Court abused its discretion when it failed to sequester the jury for the duration of the trial, or in the least, admonish them to avoid all media, which resulted in jury exposure to prejudicial publicity regarding the trial during the proceedings, as well as jury intimidation and potential fear of retribution among jurors, which violated Mr. Chauvin’s constitutional rights to due process and to a fair trial.

While Nelson didn't provide specific details in the filing, Judge Peter Cahill [who appeared to favor the prosecution as he allowed emotional testimony into the courtroom] said at the end of trial that Chauvin's legal team may have grounds to overturn the trial on appeal due to the antagonistic call for violence by the disgusting Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA).

Nelson also argued that the court violated Chauvin’s rights by not ordering Morries Hall — the man in the car with Floyd before his death — to testify at the trial or to submit into evidence “his statements to law enforcement regarding his” interaction with Floyd. 

According to the bird cage liner known as The New York Times, Hall invoked the Fifth Amendment during the trial after his lawyer argued that Hall’s testimony could expose him to drug-related charges.

But even more importantly, Nelson requested a hearing to throw out the court’s verdict “on the grounds that the jury committed misconduct, felt threatened or intimidated, felt race-based pressure during the proceedings, and/or failed to adhere to instructions during deliberations.”

One of the jurors, Brandon Mitchell, 31, was later discovered to have allegedly lied during the jury selection phase of the trial. He spoke publicly to the media after the trial was over and was photographed wearing a shirt that said “BLM” and “Get Your Knees Off Our Necks” last summer in Washington, D.C. The filing, however, did not mention Mitchell, so it’s unclear whether it even relates to him or not, although it should definitely be mentioned.

Chauvin was found guilty earlier this month of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter in the death of George Floyd. His sentencing is currently scheduled for June along with expected riots.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

Even Democrats are angry at Waters and will back censure resulting in her losing her musical chair

She's one of the most racist and corrupt politicians on Capitol Hill and has been the catalyst, at least in part, for the Los Angeles riots and the current ones over the Derek Chauvin-George Floyd case.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-CA) couldn't allow justice to run its course, She got her butt on a jet and headed for Minneapolis to help cheer on the leftist rioters and basically said that former police officer Derek Chauvin should be found guilty, not only for the three counts against him, but for First Degree Murder of George Floyd, who is now an angel in heaven, flying even higher now than ever before.

Due to Waters' boneheaded move, the case might be declared a mistrial, as it should. Even our Co-President Biden got in the act and stupidly added to the mix by saying he hoped the "correct" verdict was reached, and alluded to a guilty verdict as he has all along the trial.

It was so stupid of Waters that even some Democrat lawmakers are reportedly “so angry” with remarks she made over the weekend about the Chauvin trial that they are willing to back her GOP-led censure, which would strip her of her position as chairwoman of the House Financial Services Committee, a position she should have never been appointed to in the first place after her past history of financial dealings with her husband's bank.

The idiot said that "protesters" [aka rioters] were "looking for a guilty verdict" and if they don't get what they demand, "we cannot go away," she shouted. Regarding what “protesters” should do if they do not get the verdict that they want, Waters responded that activists have “got to stay on the street,” “get more active,” and “get more confrontational.”

By "confrontational" she means riot, destroy, loot, and attack innocent White people.

According to Fox News' Chad Pergram, the anger among the left "metastasized" after Judge Peter Cahill, who presided over the case involving Chauvin and Floyd, blasted Waters on live TV during closing arguments Monday.

“Some Democrats conceded privately they are not pleased with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) saying that Waters shouldn’t apologize,” Pergram wrote. “Fox is told that a lot of Democrats are angry at Waters, are concerned about the optics of potential violence being linked back to her and Democrats generally.”

Gee, whatever gives us that impression?

Moderate Democrats were hurt during the election when far-left lunatics pushed to "defund the police." These lunatics, it should be noted, have private security and don't need police to protect them. It's the rest of the public, particularly the poor, who would suffer most if the police weren't able to do their job.

Pergram noted that the reason Democrats are reportedly angry at Waters doesn't seem to be based on any kind of moral issue--Democrats only pretend to be moral--but rather because they are “concerned about the optics of potential violence being linked back to her and Democrats generally.”

Meanwhile the media, particularly CNN and MSNBC are licking their chops hoping for more riots to fill their coffers. 

Pergram explained that Democrats’ majority is so slim now that they can only afford to lose two votes on their side. “One knowledgeable Democrat told Fox that some Democratic members are so angry at Waters now that they would relish the opportunity to censure her,” Pergram said. “So, McCarthy’s censure resolution may actually have legs.”

In a statement Monday, McCarthy announced that he would seek to censure Waters:

This weekend in Minnesota, Maxine Waters broke the law by violating curfew and then incited violence. Increased unrest has already led to violence against law enforcement and her comments intentionally poured fuel on the fire. We’ve heard this type of violent rhetoric from Waters before, and the United States Congress must clearly and without reservation reprimand this behavior before more people get hurt. But Speaker Pelosi is ignoring Waters’ behavior. That’s why I am introducing a resolution to censure Rep. Waters for these dangerous comments, and I hope that all my colleagues – both Republican and Democrat – will stand up for peace on America’s streets.

Waters double-downed on her remarks at an interview on Monday, making a baseless, disgusting claim that Republicans were attacking her in an attempt to raise money from the "KKK" [a Democratic racist organization] and "white supremacists' an incredibly small number of morons that the left pretends is leading the charge against all Black people.

These are the kinds of incendiary remarks that should get that gas bag censured.

Waters claimed that her comments about being “confrontational” were about “confronting the justice system” and “confronting the policing that’s going on,” in spite of her being totally nonspecific about who she wants to confront.

“I am not worried that they’re going to continue to distort what I say. This is who they are and this is how they act,” Waters said without providing any evidence that her opponents had distorted the comments that she made. “And I’m not going to be bullied by them.”

By distorting, Waters is referring to the notion of quoting her words.

Please consider subscribing to Brain Flushings and check out the ads on these pages. It costs nothing to subscribe and it's worth every penny. And remember, every ad you click on, you help in the fight against the China virus.

Tweet

DOJ exploring possible follow-up on Steinle case

The Department of Justice is exploring an option of bringing federal charges against Jose Garcia Zarate after the San Francisco court reached a not guilty verdict in the Kate Steinle murder trial, according to Fox News who spoke with department officials of the DOJ.

A brain-dead California jury acquitted Zarate of the more serious charges in the case, which includes murder, involuntary manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon.

The 5-time felon was only convicted of possession of a firearm.

U.S. immigration officials said they'd deport Garcia Zarate (aka Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez) who was wanted for deportation. 

Steinle family

Zarate was previously deported only 5 times and kept worming his way back into the country, specifically, San Francisco because it's a sanctuary city for felons and other illegal aliens and he knew they'd protect him from the law.

Kate Steinle, 32, was with her father on a San Francisco pier in 2015 when Zarate, about 90 feet away, found a Sig Sauer handgun, picked it up, and it allegedly went off all by itself as handguns are all known to do, and shot her in the back.

Zarate could be sentenced 3 years in prison for the firearm charge, but he's already been locked up for over 2 years awaiting trial. 

President Trump, who simply cannot not comment on legal matters called the verdict "disgraceful" and has used the case to rally support for a border wall.

"The Kate Steinle killer came back and back over the weakly protected Obama border, always committing crimes and being violent, and yet this info was not used in court. His exoneration is a complete travesty of justice. BUILD THE WALL!" he tweeted Friday.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions also disagreed with the verdict in a written statement using zero exclamation marks, unlike the president.

"When jurisdictions choose to return criminal aliens to the streets rather than turning them over to federal authorities, they put the public's safety at risk. San Francisco's decision to protect criminal aliens led to the preventable and heartbreaking death of Kate Steinle," Sessions said. "While the State of California sought a murder charge for the man who caused Ms. Steinle' death--a man who would not have been on the streets of San Francisco if the city simply honored an ICE detainer--the people ultimately convicted him of felon in possession of a firearm."

Sessions said the DOJ "will continue to ensure that all jurisdictions place safety and security of their communities above the convenience of criminal aliens." 

He did not mention any additional charges that may be brought forward if the DOJ pursues the case.

The jury was never told that Zarate was a 7-time convicted felon and had been deported 5 times. Had they known this, the verdict may have been different. But in San Francisco, you never know.

Zarate didn't deny shooting Steinle, but he said it was an accident. He had several different explanations as to how the "accident" occurred, but that didn't seem to matter to the jury.

Kate Steinle was a white privilege woman.


Tweet

Bergdahl fears jury trial, want judge only

Photo: AP

Raleigh, NC -- Army Private who was promoted to Sergeant while in captivity by the Taliban who he was looking to team up with, has decided to be tried by a judge rather than a military jury. The charges are that he endangered his comrades by walking off his post into the arms of the enemy.

Soldiers died trying to find his traitorous butt.

Bergdahl's lawyers told the court last week that he chose to be tried by a judge alone rather than a panel of officers [because he probably knows they'd convict him with the overwhelming evidence against him].

The hippy-dippy Bergdahl faces charges of desertion and misbehavior before the enemy. His trial is scheduled for late October at Fort Bragg, (if Antifa doesn't try to have the name of the fort changed before then).

Misbehavior before the enemy carries a maximum sentence of life in prison but the likelihood of that sentence being rendered is about the same as Rosie O'Donnell having sex with President Trump on MSNBC.

Bergdahl's lawyers refused to comment on the traitor's decision and previously questioned whether he could get a fair trial by jury because of negative comments made by Trump on the campaign trail.

By 'fair trial' his lawyers mean get a 'not guilty' decision as would have likely been the case under the former POTUS who doesn't know the difference between a corpsman and a corpse man.

Earlier this year Army Col. Jeffery R. Nance, the judge in the case, rejected a defense request to dismiss the case over Trump's public criticism of the alleged traitor and scum bucket.

Potential jurors had received a questionnaire including questions about President Trump, but defense lawyers were not allowed to ask them if they voted for Trump or 'Crooked Hillary'.

Rachel VanLandingham, a former USAF lawyer not involved in the case, said defense attorneys probably felt limited in how they could probe juror opinions. 

She believes Nance has thus far demonstrated his objectivity. "His pretrial rulings have shown that he's fair," she said.

But that will not matter any longer as there will be no jurors, only a judge who, hopefully, will come to the right decision.

Bergdahl walked away from his remote post and was captured by the Taliban in 2009. He claimed that he wanted to draw attention to what he saw as problems with his unit.

In 2014 he was freed in exchange for five high-ranking Taliban prisoners. Bergdahl was a private--the Taliban prisoners could be considered top officers in their organization. Former President Obama was rightly criticized by Republicans who said the trade jeopardized the nation's security but Obama apparently was not worried as he has armed security around the clock.

Bergdahl has been assigned desk duty at a Texas Army base pending the outcome of the case.

Bergdahl is considered to be a hero to the left as he, like they, clearly sees the country as a nation populated by evil imperialists and capitalists along with racists and Islamophobes.


Tweet

Bergdahl deserted as "an act of self-sacrifice"

Alleged deserter and fan of the Taliban, Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, told an interrogating officer when he was swapped for 5 Islamic terrorist leaders that the reason he deserted his post in Afghanistan was an act of "self-sacrifice." 

Bergdahl (his friends call him "Mahmoud  Barack Mohammad") told a general that the reason he deserted was because he wanted to cause an alarm by leaving his post. He hoped by deserting, he would get an audience with a top commander.

Well, not only did he cause an alarm, he caused a bunch of actual patriots to lose their lives looking for him.

According to the document from the 2014 interview with Maj. General Kenneth Dahl,  Bergdahl said, "So, the idea was to--it was--literally, it was sacrificial--it was a self-sacrifice thing." 

If it was "literally" sacrificial, Bergdahl would be dog meat. As it is, he's a schmuck.

A document released in July 2015 concluded that Bergdahl suffered from schizotypal personality disorder. I discuss the diagnosis here.

The military trial is scheduled to begin this summer but hopefully it won't interfere with his prayer times.

Wouldn't it be interesting to have a televised "double-header" of his trial and Hillary's? 


Tweet

Nidal Hasan, the Trial and the Religion of Peace

Calling Nidal Hasan's killing of Americans at Fort Hood "workplace violence" is like calling the injuries and death from the Boston Marathon bombers "sports injuries." I find it insulting that our president and attorney general (I have difficulty capitalizing their titles lately) think so little of the American public that they believe they we would buy this nonsense. 

The Verdict is Not Guilty

Even the DoJ's involvement with the Zimmerman case could change the outcome. Nothing he does seems to work. George Zimmerman is a free man. This is the American justice system at its best.

Nobody rioted in the streets when OJ was first acquitted. I wonder what would have happened had he originally been found guilty. Would there have been rioting? Perhaps. But conservatives don't riot. We even clean up after ourselves when we protest. Look at the tea party for example. Conservatives don't riot because we back our systems of justice and our Constitution. It's the left that riots.

Wrapping Up Zimmerman in Fox

It's 3:25 pm, Tuesday, July 10th, and court is in 15 minute recess in the George Zimmerman-Trayvon Martin case. You remember President Obama saying that if he had a son, he would look like Trayvon. What he might have added that if he had a son with a white woman, he would have looked like George. But he didn't--he took sides.

So we will learn before I'm done here, whether Zimmerman will testify--if he does, he's crazy. Look how fast this is--they're back.

KSM and Company Playfully Prepare for Trial

An Islamic Holy Man

Khalid Sheik Mohammed and his four terrorist co-defendants were arraigned yesterday in a process that took 13 hours rather than the typical 13 minutes, at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.  One made a paper airplane, signifying the jihadist's suicide missions that killed over 3,000 innocent Americans, another terrorist scumbag gave a "thumbs up" to a victim's family member, and one removed his shirt, revealing his oily chest hair, and this was just the start.

These creatures (I refuse to call them animals because animals don't do what these dickweeds did to fellow human beings) can receive the death sentence if convicted, but the way the trial has begun suggests to me that by the time the sentence is finally imposed, they will have died of natural causes in prison.  If these orthodox Islamic worshipers are not convicted, I propose they be released on their own recognizance in a locked room in Manhattan with the families of the 911 victims and a few members of SEAL Team 6.

bin Quikta Sin

During the opening hearing, an attorney for one of the scumbags complained that the military commission trial is unconstitutional (as is the killing of American citizens, and the beheading of Daniel Pearl, which he left out).  Another lawyer and useful idiot for Islam wore a hijab and abaya, which to the Muslim mind can be thought of as an "anti-erection outfit" as she told the military attorneys that they should dress more modestly as they might cause these Muslim holy men to commit a sin.  You see, if a Muslim looks at human skin tissue, it causes an immediate sexual reaction with concomitant "dirty" thoughts.  These "dirty" thoughts can cause these holy Muslim terrorist jihadists to go past Paradise and land in Hell where Allah burns away their skin as they scream in pain, then replaces this skin with new skin.  This is their conception of their god. Really, it's in their "holy book," that can get you killed if they find it in your outhouse.

"Quiet, I need to pray"

One lawyer for them was upset that we had these terrorists strip-searched before leaving Gitmo.  If we strip-searched Mohammad Atta, they would have found his box-cutters and the Twin Towers might still be standing.

Yes, I am angry at this nonsense.  We are allowing this mockery of our justice system to get off on the wrong foot.  I say put the garbage in another room where they have the choice to watch it on CCTV.  I say that when one of their useful idiot lawyers tells us to respect their religion, we remind that moron that it is their religion that commanded their actions in the first place.  Anyone who disagrees with that statement has not read their koran; and if they had, they didn't understand it in the way it's intended.  Giving in to these demands by their lawyers, is a victory for them. Tape their mouths in the courtroom if they're inappropriate. 

 

If you want a great read about modern day terrorism and suspense, my latest novel, Jihad Joe, is now available both in soft cover and as an Ebook--see the links below. 

Jihad Joe Soft Cover          

click here for ebook version  

Tweet

Casey Anthony and Terrorism

Now that the Casey Anthony trial is finally over, we can all go back to our normal lives of watching Judge Judy and pontificating over her decisions. The one thing this trial has showed me, and I must admit that I haven't followed it as closely as many people I know, is that we should never use civil litigation to try terrorists lest the same result be rendered and they slink away only to kill another day.

Just imagine a guy named Muhammad Mohammad Mohannad, let's call him 3M, (but no reflection on that wonderul American company nor their Scotch Tape) on trial for blowing up a Synagogue and killing fifty nine Jewish congregants during evening prayers. Let us also assume that he did, in fact, do this terrible crime, but let us also imagine 3M as an incredibly handsome 25 year old Arab, with piercing brown eyes, thick, black hair, a sturdy build, and who speaks perfect English with no foreign accent. Let's even say 3M was well-educated and looks a lot like Omar Sharif. He hires a hot shot attorney, a guy who makes Alan Dershowitz look like an ambulance chaser, and a jury of his peers is selected; only they aren't peers, of course, because peers would mean they would have to be killers themselves--they're just a bunch of people, a few of them women who happen to find 3M incredibly handsome, and men who find him to be the kind of guy you could have a beer with and discuss sports.

One of the witnesses for the prosecution is a maintenance man who works for the temple.  He is bald, overweight, and always looks like he wants to be elsewhere--let's call him Mr. Adolf Schnitzer. The jury watches Schnitzer and they hear how he was working on a broken water line near the front of the building and saw 3M running down the street, away from the temple. Next came the explosion and Mr. Schnitzer was knocked to the ground.

The hotshot attorney asks a lot of tough questions but Schnitzer's answers are nonwaivering and has the facts clear as to time and description of 3M, even though it was becoming dark outside. He saw 3M running from the Synagogue shouting, "Allahu Akbar!" and then the explosion.

The jury hears the facts, and they learn that 3M has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood through another Islamic organization called ISNA. They listen to the defense and watch 3M, other people testify and one even serves as character witnesses for him, and after days of testimony, the prosecution finally rests. The jury deliberates and after, say, eleven hours, they reach a verdict. Everybody waits as the anticipation builds, and finally the verdict is read by the jury foreman. The announcement is loud and clear: "Not Guilty." 3M hugs his attorney, walks away from the courtroom, not innocent, but not proven guilty. The jury could not believe that a nice looking, educated guy who looks a lot like Omar Sharif could kill innocent people as he was accused of doing. One of the jurists doesn't even like Jews all that much and was in full support of the Gaza flotilla, but that never came up in the voir dire, unfortunately.

Had this been a military trial, where 3M was considered to be an enemy combatant, there would be no emotional jurists, the outcome would have been different and justice would have been served.

As I mentioned, I hadn't seen a lot of the Casey Anthony trial, but many people who did believed that she was guilty and got away with murdering her child. The evidence was quite convincing, at least it was to Nancy Grace, who, I should add, was just as quick to condemn the Duke LaCross team players of raping a young lady, and who were found innocent. I don't particularly like Nancy Grace but just because she felt that Casey Anthony was guilty and was found not guilty does not mean she was wrong in her assessment of the trial. In the LaCross team's case, the accuser confessed to lying, but in this case we could only go with the evidence, which seemed to point to Casey's guilt. I hope this case serves as a wakeup call to our politicians who still want to try terrorists, enemy combatants, in civil courts where they are afforded the rights of an American citizen. They are not American citizens and do not deserve to be treated with the liberties and respect they seek to destroy.

Please feel free to comment and let me know what you think.

Tweet