Leftist Media Blames Trump for Capital Gazette Shooting that Left 5 Dead

su_note note_color=”#efe1a7″ text_color=”#00000″ radius=”5”]Annapolis, Maryland: Jarrod Ramos, 38, the man accused of killing 5 people and injuring many more at the Capital Gazette building, was identified after his arrest through facial recognition as his fingertips had been self-mutilated. Ramos had a long history of harassing the Capital Gazette and lost a defamation lawsuit against the paper. Despite his record of nearly a decade of harassing the journalists, long before Trump ever ran for office, many in the mainstream media are blaming Trump for the murders. By blaming the President before all the facts are known, the leftist media is inciting more hatred.

Ramos, who had been a federal employee, was known to the authorities for harassing the paper. Coincidentally, just days before the massacre, there was a mass shooter drill by the police and fire department that was covered by the Capital Gazette.[/su_note]

Several members of the mainstream media blamed President Donal Trump for a suspect who allegedly killed five journalists on Thursday and reportedly had a longstanding dispute with the newspaper dating back to before Trump even declared his candidacy for the Oval Office.

Per several reports, authorities late Thursday identified Jarrod W. Ramos as the shooter who allegedly opened fire on the news staff of Maryland’s The Capital-Gazette newspaper. It came out shortly thereafter that Ramos had a longstanding battle with the newspaper dating back nearly a decade–one that resulted in lawsuits being filed and the man appearing to create a Twitter account in which he repeatedly bashed the Maryland newspaper for years.

Ramos appears to have had a long and troubled history with the newspaper. In 2011, he was convicted of criminally harassing a romantic interest. A then-Gazette columnist, Eric Hartley, wrote a story about his conviction and his history as a harasser. Ramos reportedly turned his anger on Hartley and the paper, starting a website dedicated to discrediting Hartley. In 2012, Ramos launched a lawsuit, representing himself, against Hartley, the Capital Gazette, its parent company, and editor Tom Marquardt.

“He waged a one-person attack on anything he could muster in court against the Capital,” Marquardt told the Los Angeles Times Thursday. “I said during that time, ‘This guy is crazy enough to come in and blow us all away.’”

Ramos lost his last appeal in the lawsuit in 2015 but appears to have continued to let loose against the paper on social media until the summer of 2016, using a defaced image of Eric Hartley as his Twitter avatar.

This appears to demonstrate a long-standing, deeply troubling hatred that Ramos had for the paper and against the legal system. Just before he allegedly went into the newspaper’s offices, a tweet was published from what appears to be Ramos’s Twitter account bashing the judge in the case he filed against the newspaper.

Read full article here…

Article on the Active Shooter Drill…

 




Who Is Really to Blame at the Border? Why Can’t Border Crossers Be Deported?

In April, US Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero-tolerance” policy for illegal entry and all aliens caught entering the country illegally would be held for prosecution instead of “catch and release” that allows the aliens to stay in the US while awaiting a hearing that they often ignore.

Due to a long-running class-action lawsuit, alien minors cannot be confined by the government for longer than 20 days, forcing authorities to either detain the adult separately, until his claim is heard, and release the child after 20 days, or release both adult and child together into the US. The Obama administration chose the ‘catch an release’ option, resulting in a surge at the border of 70,000 adult-child units and 70,000 unaccompanied minors in 2014. Unless the ruling is overturned on appeal or Congress changes the relevant law, the administration will have two choices: try to get asylum hearings down to 20 days, or resume catch-and-release at the border for adults with children.

So it was a ruse. The hysteria over the separation of illegal-alien asylum-seekers from their children (or their purported children) was in large part pretextual. The real target of rage was the Trump administration’s policy of prosecuting all illegal border-crossers for the federal misdemeanor of illegal entry.

In April, U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced a “zero-tolerance” policy for illegal entry. Henceforth, virtually all aliens caught entering the country illegally would be held for prosecution, rather than being released on their own recognizance for a later noncriminal deportation proceeding, to which few ever showed up. (This new enforcement policy would have come as a surprise to anyone who had fallen for the advocates’ decades-long lie that illegal entry is not a crime.) Under the new policy, even if the adult had brought a child with him across the border—the usual accoutrement of an asylum-seeker, for reasons explained below—the adult would still be prosecuted. The adult would be held in a U.S. marshal’s facility pending trial, while the child would be placed in a dormitory run by the U.S. Health and Human Services department, since children cannot be held in criminal lockups.

Images of child border-crossers, separated from their adult companion and crying or looking upset—and the experience would undoubtedly be traumatic for most young children—triggered nonstop coverage of Trump administration cruelty. MSNBC and CNN set up border encampments from which reporters and pundits pontificated on the child-separation crisis. Nazi and Holocaust analogies flew around the Internet; faculty petitions invoked the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II. Mexico and four other Latin American countries filed a human rights complaint against the U.S. Politicians and religious leaders lined up to denounce White House racism and anti-immigrant hatred.

On Wednesday, Trump called their bluff. He signed an executive order that would house illegal-alien adults with minors in Department of Homeland Security or other government facilities.  The zero-tolerance policy, however, would continue. Democratic politicians and illegal alien advocates immediately cried foul. “Make no mistake: the President is doubling down on his ‘zero tolerance’ policy,” Democratic U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, said in a statement Wednesday. “His new Executive Order criminalizes asylum-seekers . . . . Locking up whole families is no solution at all—the Trump Administration must reverse its policy of prosecuting vulnerable people fleeing three of the most dangerous countries on earth.”

The Harvard Kennedy School’s Juliette Kayyem told CNN’s Don Lemon on Wednesday night: “The real problem is Sessions’ decision to prosecute [illegal border crossers] 100 percent.” A CNN anchor on Thursday morning asked U.S. Representative Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, if his position was: don’t criminally charge each person who illegally crosses the border. Schiff responded: “We don’t have to criminalize everyone that’s coming here seeking asylum.” NPR interviewed the director of Migrant Rights and Justice at the Women’s Refugee Commission, Michelle Brané. “Families will be just as traumatized, children will be just as traumatized” under the executive order, she said on Thursday morning. “Exchanging one form of trauma for another is not the solution”; getting rid of the prosecutorial mandate is.

And the open-borders lobby possesses a powerful weapon for doing just that. The extraordinarily complex thicket of interpolated rules and rights that govern U.S. immigration policy (the result of decades of nonstop litigation by the immigration bar) contains a series of judicial mandates that defeated even the Obama administration’s tepid efforts to bring some semblance of lawfulness to the border. A long-running class-action lawsuit in the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, originally styled Flores v. Reno, has held that alien minors cannot be confined by the government for longer than 20 days. This 20-day cap contributed to the flood of Central American child-toting asylum seekers that picked up steam during President Obama’s second term. Asylum petitions typically take months, if not years, to adjudicate, given the long backlog of such cases in the immigration courts. If an adult crosses the border alone and utters the magic asylum words—a fear of persecution in his home country—he could in theory be held in detention until his asylum claim was adjudicated. If, however, he brings a child with him and makes an asylum pitch, he puts the government to a choice: detain the adult separately until his claim is heard and release the child after 20 days, or release both adult and child together.

The Obama administration usually chose the second option. Word coursed through Mexico and Central America that taking a child across the border was a get-out-of-jail-free card that would exempt its holder from both criminal prosecution and detention. This child-release lever, coupled with Obama’s announcement in 2012 that he would grant amnesty to the so-called Dreamers, meant that Obama soon had his own family border crisis on his hands. In 2014, 70,000 adult-child units and 70,000 unaccompanied minors were apprehended illegally crossing into the U.S. The administration tried building large family detention centers to hold the children and their accompanying adults, but the same Flores decree that has bedeviled the Trump White House stymied that effort. In 2015, a federal trial judge, Holly Gee, herself appointed by Obama and the very definition of an activist jurist, vastly expanded the scope of the original decree and ordered the administration to release the detained minors. The Department of Homeland Security warned that ending family detention would trigger another border surge. Judge Gee dismissed this concern as “fear-mongering,” according to the Associated Press.

Read full article here…




Las Vegas: New Video Shows Police Waiting Around in Hallway During Mass Shooting

su_note note_color=”#efe1a7″ text_color=”#00000″ radius=”5”]New video shows officers waiting in a hallway during the Las Vegas shooting while the event was happening. Attorney Catherine Lombardo says that a Mandalay Bay security officer gave testimony to the FBI on nine occasions that he was on the 32nd floor with Officer Hendricks during the shooting, but the video shows Officer Hendricks on the 31st floor, in yet another discrepancy in the official narrative.[/su_note]