The Dallas Cop Killings Shows Us the Worst of Americans

Following the Dallas Police killings, a City Council Woman, Reinette Senum, from Nevada City, California posted this on Facebook:

 "This was completely incited by America's police force. They have obviously been given directives to go out there and kill."

So, basically, you have a public official claiming that the 5 Dallas cops deserved to die.  And, worse, she is saying that all cops have been given orders to kill.

If this was only one person's twisted viewpoint, then, we could afford to ignore it.  But, unfortunately, a lot of people who align themselves with Black Lives Matter believe this to be true.  Last year, at several of their protest marches, supporters chanted "Pigs In A Blanket, Fry 'Em Like Bacon".  Another chant was "What do we want.  Dead cops. When do we want em? Now." On Twitter, another posted this "“Y’all pigs got what was coming for y’all.”  And, it goes on and on.

The fact is that Black Lives Matter, and other groups have openly called for the killing of police officers; and Barack Obama and Loretta Lynch still refer to their demonstrations as "peaceful protests".

Lastly, as to the comment by Senum that cops have been given orders to kill.  Every year, police in this country make approximately 9 million arrests of which 2.5 million are blacks.  Yet, last year, just 40 unarmed blacks were shot and killed.  If cops were given orders to kill, they sure are doing a poor job of it.  Maybe, Obama and Lynch would best serve this nation by publicly stating these facts and supporting the police, instead of depicting Black Lives Matter as being peaceful and deserving of our "respect".

References:

Following the 2016 Dallas Police Protest Shooting, Senum posted on Facebook, blaming the Dallas Police Department for the attacks: https://www.everipedia.com/reinette-senum/

Black Lives Matter: 'Pigs In A Blanket, Fry 'Em Like Bacon': http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/29/black-lives-matter-protesters-chant-pigs-in-a-blanket-fry-em-like-bacon-video/

SICK: ‘Black Lives Matter’ Supporters Celebrate Murder of Dallas Cops: http://www.infowars.com/sick-black-lives-matter-supporters-celebrate-murder-of-dallas-cops/

#Blacklivesmatter chants for dead cops: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hqQXmnMr_w8

Obama defends Black Lives Matter movement as protests heat up: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-defends-black-lives-matter-movement-as-protests-heat-up/

AG Lynch: Peaceful protest will be protected - CNBC.com: http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000532771

Obama calls for mutual respect from Black Lives Matter and police: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/07/10/obama-calls-mutual-respect-black-lives-matter-and-police/86917082/

FBI: National 2014 Arrests: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-43

People Killed by Police: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

Dallas and the False Narratives of Obama and Black Lives Matter

It was just a matter of time before the mass killing of police officers was bound to happen.  Anytime you have a group, such as Black Lives Matter and even the President of the United States, spreading the belief that white cops are racists and only want to kill blacks, Dallas was waiting to happen.  And, what happened in Dallas is sure to be replicated elsewhere.

This belief, that white cops are racist is based on complete dishonesty. The more this false narrative is repeated and believed, more blacks will die as cops increasingly back away from aggressive policing for fear of losing their jobs or going to prison.  Meanwhile,  record numbers of murders keep piling up in cities like Chicago where, already this year, 267 blacks have been killed, and 77% of all the murder victims are black.

According to the website "The Counted" which started tracking people killed by police beginning in 2015, there were 1146 persons killed by police in that year due to a variety of reasons including vehicular deaths. Of that total, 40 unarmed blacks were shot and killed.  To put this number into perspective, according to the FBI, our police arrest more than 2.5 million blacks each year.  Not a fact that supports the perception that there is widespread killing of unarmed blacks by police such as the mantra; "Hands up...Don't Shoot" suggests. Also, that 40 blacks were killed makes no distinction as to the race of the cop that killed them.  But, even if they were all white, the number is still extremely small relative to the number of blacks that are arrested each year.

This is not to say that any cop involved in a questionable death shouldn't be tried and convicted if  warranted.  But, we should let our legal system decide that.  Not take to the streets and start revenge killing white police officers .

The conversation that Black Lives Matter and Obama should be having is why there is an almost wholesale slaughter of blacks by other blacks.  In 2013, the FBI reported that 2,491 blacks were murdered.  That was 41% of all murders reported in that year. Of that, 90% or 2,245 of those were committed by other blacks.  But, no one wants to talk about that.  Instead, the discussion is all about the 40 or so, unarmed blacks that might be shot by police each year.

Lastly, the President stated that blacks are twice as likely to be arrested than whites, the reason is that blacks commit more crimes relative to their share of our population.  For example, while blacks only make up 13% of the population, 51% of murders in this country and 56% of robberies are committed by blacks.  Also, in a recent Gallup poll, 78% of blacks said they were "not treated less fairly" by cops; although this is down from 81% in 2013.  Thus, the claim or implication that there is widespread harassment of black citizens by police, for only racial reasons, does not appear to be true.


References:

Dallas police shooting: Suspect told police he 'wanted to kill white people' as Philando Castile's death ruled a homicide: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/08/dallas-shooting-two-police-officers-wounded-as-shots-fired-at-ra/

Obama, angered by police shootings, calls for elimination of racial bias: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/07/07/obama-police-shootings-alton-sterling-philando-castile/86824568/

The Counted: http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2015/jun/01/the-counted-police-killings-us-database

Murder by Race of Victim and Offender: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded-homicide/expanded_homicide_data_table_6_murder_race_and_sex_of_vicitm_by_race_and_sex_of_offender_2013.xls

2013 Arrests: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2013/crime-in-the-u.s.-2013/tables/table-43

HeyJackass!: 2016 Stats | Chicago Murder, Crime & Mayhem: http://heyjackass.com/

Despite Unrest, Blacks Do Not Feel More Mistreated by Police: http://www.gallup.com/poll/184439/despite-unrest-blacks-feel-mistreated-police.aspx?g_source=RACE_RELATIONS&g_medium=topic&g_campaign=tiles 

Comey Hearing: Complete Bipartisan Partisanship

Yesterday, I listened to Congress grilling FBI Director Comey over his decision not to recommend any charges against Hillary Clinton, for her use of a personal email server.

What I basically heard is the Republicans focusing in on Hillary's lies that contradicted the FBI reported facts.  On the other hand, Democrats were dismissive of those lies and attempted to prove that no actions rose to a level that would warrant charges.  I actually  heard one Democrat slam the hearing as being purely political partisanship, as if the defense of Secretary Clinton wasn't, in itself, partisan.

In my opinion, this country will never achieve true bipartisan agreement on anything if the Democrats can't understand that lying to the American people, over-and-over again, is a violation of the public trust by a person who wants to lead this country.  I feel that is actually a bigger problem than whether or not Hillary was charged.

The Trial of Hillary Is Happening Anyway

When FBI Director Comey outlined a litany of security violations with regard to Hillary Clinton's email server, he essentially showed her to be a liar and a reckless individual on so many issues as this video clip of MSNBC's Morning Joe so clearly states:

In my opinion, this may possibly explain why Comey didn't bring any charges.

He merely tossed all of the violations out into the public domain and, as a result, she will be  tried in the court of public opinion; and, as that video shows, not favorably.  He could have simply handed the conclusions of his FBI investigation to the Justice Department without a press conference and allowed that agency to decide whether or not to press charges.  But, by having an unprecedented news conference, he ensured that what she did wouldn't be swept under the rug.  He also gave Donald Trump, the Republican National Committee (RNC), and any Trump SuperPacs, all the sound-bites they need to keep prosecuting her in that fabled public court.  In fact, as of this writing, the RNC has already released this ad:

If Hillary Clinton does lose the election because of her server problem, the Democrats may regret that she wasn't charged so that they could have had the opportunity run someone else for President.

References:

Morning Joe eviscerates Hillary Clinton in wake of brutal FBI report about email conduct: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maVuOWDOHL8

Transcript: Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System: https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Impossible! No Charges for Hillary Clinton?

The federal government takes security very seriously.  It doesn't just give you a security clearance and a pat on the back and let you go off on your merry way.  Instead, you are briefed on the responsibilities of having a clearance and you must also sign a legally binding  Standard Form 312 (SF 312) "CLASSIFIED  INFORMATION  NONDISCLOSURE  AGREEMENT".

When Hillary Clinton became Secretary of State, she was issued the highest possible security clearance known as "Top Secret/Special Access" and, as such, she would have had to sign a new SF 312. Following are some highlights of that Standard Form with regards to the use of her email server:

"Intending  to  be  legally  bound,  I  hereby  accept  the  obligations  contained  in  this  Agreement  in  consideration  of  my  being  granted  access  to  classified  information."

Also:

"I  have  been  advised  that  the  unauthorized  disclosure,  unauthorized  retention,  or  negligent  handling  of  classified  information  by  me  could  cause  damage  or  irreparable  injury  to  the  United  States  or  could  be  used  to  advantage  by  a foreign  nation. "

We know from the Inspector General's Report that she violated "unauthorized retention" because she never once sought authorization for her email server.  Additionally, from the FBI report we know that she and her aides were "extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information" which was, again, a violation of her SF 3121 agreement covered by the statement  "negligent  handling  of  classified  information  by  me  could  cause  damage  or  irreparable  injury  to  the  United  States".  Additionally, she agreed that she may be prosecuted for violations of this agreement and lose her security clearance.

But, more importantly, the FBI report said this:

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information."

"...seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

This completely contradicts her claim that she never sent or received emails that were classified at the time they were sent or received.

In my opinion, Secretary Clinton grossly violated her sworn responsibilities in the handling of highly classified information.  And, now, she gets a pass on any charges?  Apparently, her signed agreement is as worthless as her word.  All this does -- along with the Inspector General's Report -- is reinforce the fact that she is a serial liar and incompetently reckless with the nation's secrets.  But, also, this shows that the FBI's integrity has been compromised.  Could we expect anything less from the pseudo-most-transparent Obama Administration?

Lastly, by rights, Hillary Clinton and her staff should lose whatever security clearances they now hold.  Of course that won't happen since you can't have a potential President that can't even read the lowest level of classified materials. But, does America really care?

References:

SF 312: CLASSIFIED  INFORMATION  NONDISCLOSURE  AGREEMENT: https://www.fas.org/sgp/isoo/new_sf312.pdf

The State Department inspector general contradicts several of Clinton's long-standing talking points: http://www.factcheck.org/2016/05/ig-report-on-clintons-emails/

Transcript: Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System: https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b.-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clintons-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

Clinton and Trump Seem To Forget Congress Controls the Purse Strings

Both Clinton and Trump have their tax plans. Hillary promises a $275 billion infrastructure spending program and higher taxes on the rich, along with debt-free college, universal pre-K, and paid family leave.

The only problem with these candidates' promises is that they seem to forget that Congress controls all budget issues.   If Hillary wins and the control of Congress remains with the Republicans, she won't get any of these things accomplished.  Similarly, Trump may also have difficulty dealing with a Republican Congress if his proposals are too radical, such as singling out Ford for moving a plant to Mexico.

The issue going forward is which of these two candidates can best work with Congress in order to truly get things done.   Personally, I don't think either would be successful unless, for some reason, Hillary is fortunate to have both Houses controlled by the Democrats. 

Reference:

How Congress Controls the Budget in Washington, DC: http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/how-congress-controls-the-budget-in-washington-dc.html

The Upward Mobility of the Middle Class

According to Pew Research, the number of Americans who are identified as being in the middle class has fallen from 62% of the population in 1971, to only 43% in 2015.

Normally, this would be a sign that the country is getting poorer.  However, over the same period, the percentage of those in the lower class fell as well; albeit by only a meager 1%.  On the other hand, the upper class grew from 29% to a whopping 49% by 2015.  Thus, the middle class decline is more a result of them moving towards the upper class, and not the other way around.

However, when it comes to America's economic strength, the real issue is growth in incomes among the various classes from 1971 to 2015.  As Pew further reported, the middle class income gains were just 34% against an upper class that saw its income rise by 47%.  Thus, not only is the size of the upper income population increasing, but their share of the nation's wealth is also growing at a faster rate. The real lag in wages was in the lower class, which saw incomes only rise by 28%.

Of course, this plays into the Democrat's claim about income inequality and the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.  But, understand, this trend is over decades with both Republicans and Democrats to blame.

Reference:

The American Middle Class Is Losing Ground: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/12/09/the-american-middle-class-is-losing-ground/