This is not the way things usually look when a person goes to turn himself in on felony charges. TX Gov. Rick Perry used the opportunity to give a powerful speech, blasting his accusers for using bogus legal charges as a bludgeon against people they disagree with.
Here’s the video:
In case you were wondering, yes, Perry has a mug shot:
Freelance journalist James Foley was beheaded in Syria by ISIS, and video of the execution was posted online as a warning to President Obama to stop air strikes against the terrorist group. At the end of the beheading, the video shows a second American journalist who ISIS threatens to execute if Obama doesn’t call off the air strikes.
A video released by ISIS shows the beheading of U.S. journalist James Foley and threatens the life of another American if President Barack Obama doesn’t end military operations in Iraq.
In the video posted Tuesday on YouTube, Foley is seen kneeling next to a man dressed in black. He reads a message, presumably scripted by his captors, that his “real killer” is America.
"I wish I had more time. I wish I could have the hope for freedom to see my family once again," Foley can be heard saying in the video.
He is then shown being beheaded.
The National Security Council is aware of the video.
"The intelligence community is working as quickly as possible to determine its authenticity. If genuine, we are appalled by the brutal murder of an innocent American journalist and we express our deepest condolences to his family and friends. We will provide more information when it is available," NSC spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said.
Foley disappeared in November 2012 in northwest Syria, near the border with Turkey. He was reportedly forced into a vehicle by gunmen; he was not heard from again. At the time of his disappearance, he was working for the GlobalPost.
On Tuesday afternoon, the Facebook group set up to support Foley and his family, “Free James Foley,” wrote, “We know that many of you are looking for confirmation or answers. Please be patient until we all have more information, and keep the Foleys in your thoughts and prayers.”
The video also shows another American journalist. His life is said by the militants in the video to hang in the balance, depending on what Obama does next.
U.S. Official: ISIS ‘credible alternative to al Qaeda’
The journalist is believed to be Steven Sotloff, who was kidnapped at the Syria-Turkey border in 2013. Sotloff is a contributor to Time and Foreign Policy magazines.
Note to President Obama: you don’t negotiate with terrorists. Giving in to their demands will only further endanger the lives of American citizens who will become valuable as hostages.
A vest camera would have certainly prevented a lot of havoc in Ferguson, but the more the physical evidence stacks up, the more the police officer who shot Michael Brown’s story is looking to be true.
from Gateway Pundit:
The Gateway Pundit can now confirm from two local St. Louis sources that police Officer Darren Wilson suffered facial fractures during his confrontation with deceased 18 year-old Michael Brown. Officer Wilson clearly feared for his life during the incident that led to the shooting death of Brown. This was after Michael Brown and his accomplice Dorian Johnson robbed a local Ferguson convenience store.
Michael Brown robbed a Ferguson convenience store the morning of his death.
Local St. Louis sources said Wilson suffered an “orbital blowout fracture to the eye socket.” This comes from a source within the Prosecuting Attorney’s office and confirmed by the St. Louis County Police.
A blowout fracture is a fracture of one or more of the bones surrounding the eye and is commonly referred to as an orbital floor fracture. (AAPOS)
This comes after St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter tweeted out last night that a dozen local witnesses confirmed Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson’s version of the Brown shooting story.
We also know now that Michael Brown’s gunshot wounds were front to back, and he was not shot in the back as early reports indicated. There are now at least 12 witnesses, including one who is heard on camera only moments after the shooting, that corroborate Officer Darren Wilson’s account that Brown attacked him.
Again, this is why we always advocate staying principled and sticking to facts.
UPDATE: CNN is directly conflicting this story. Again, we must wait and see the actual evidence.
Accountability: it’s one of the keys to preventing police brutality and the potential violent aftermath from rioters. Had the officer who shot Michael Brown been wearing a vest camera at the time of his encounter, there wouldn’t be violence in the streets of Ferguson right now.
Now the city of Ferguson is pledging to outfit all of its officers with cameras so that they will have accountability for their actions and the security of being able to back up their reports.
from the Wire:
The City of Ferguson has pledged to make some serious changes to their police force. Most notably, police officers will be wearing cameras on their vests so all acts will be recorded.
In Rialto, California, the entire police force wears cameras of this kind. They record all interactions the officers have and they’re about the size of a pager. In the first year of their use in Rialto, use of force fell by 60 percent and citizen complaints by 88 percent. The Rialto police chief explained, “When you talk about putting a camera on somebody, human nature is going to dictate that you’re going to mind your p’s and q’s and you’re going to be on the best behavior. At the same time, I think it’s had an impact on citizens. If they know you’re wearing a camera, they too will be on their best behavior.”
Here’s the official statement from the city of Ferguson:
Another accolade for the “most transparent administration in history.”
from Cause of Action:
Cause of Action (CoA), a government accountability organization, sued 10 cabinet agencies, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Internal Revenue Service today for refusing to disclose communications concerning documents the agencies shared with the White House. The records would reveal whether and how the White House politicizes records requests sent to federal agencies.
“Accountable and transparent government does not involve instructing agencies to send politically sensitive records to the White House for review. The bureaucracy has violated the law by stonewalling the public’s access to documents for political reasons. Cause of Action’s own investigation reveals that the White House is actually demanding access from agencies to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and Congressional document requests, as well as the documents subject to those requests, in a manner that may obstruct congressional oversight and violate the spirit of FOIA,” stated Dan Epstein, Cause of Action’s executive director.
After sending 22 FOIA requests between 2013 and 2014 to various agencies regarding the review of agency records by the Office of White House Counsel and releasing a report in April of this year about “White House equities,” a broad term the White House uses to review and advise agencies on what should or shouldn’t be released to FOIA requesters and Congress, 10 of the agencies have responded to Cause of Action.
Cause of Action’s White House equities investigation previously uncovered internal emails from the Environmental Protection Agency showing that the White House improperly withheld documents related to a request from Congress, leading to a subpoena from the House Oversight Committee. Cause of Action also obtained documents revealing that a public records appeal filed by Americans for Limited Government with the Department of Labor (DOL) concerning former Secretary Hilda Solis’ calendars was held up for years before DOL released the information, showing that agencies are hiding responsive documents, or delaying the production of responsive documents, because of what they are sharing with the White House.
The list of agencies that Cause of Action is suing include the Justice Department, Homeland Security, the VA, HHS, and the Treasury.
Solar energy has been largely impractical at this juncture because of the tremendous cost of manufacturing panels and the relatively small amount of energy these panels are capable of capturing. As technology improves, solar cells have been growing more and more efficient, but that efficiency comes at a cost: birds being fried in mid air.
Workers at a state-of-the-art solar plant in the Mojave Desert have a name for birds that fly through the plant’s concentrated sun rays — “streamers,” for the smoke plume that comes from birds that ignite in midair.
Federal wildlife investigators who visited the BrightSource Energy plant last year and watched as birds burned and fell, reporting an average of one “streamer” every two minutes, are urging California officials to halt the operator’s application to build a still-bigger version.
The investigators want the halt until the full extent of the deaths can be assessed. Estimates per year now range from a low of about a thousand by BrightSource to 28,000 by an expert for the Center for Biological Diversity environmental group.
The deaths are “alarming. It’s hard to say whether that’s the location or the technology,” said Garry George, renewable-energy director for the California chapter of the Audubon Society. “There needs to be some caution.”
The bird kills mark the latest instance in which the quest for clean energy sometimes has inadvertent environmental harm. Solar farms have been criticized for their impacts on desert tortoises, and wind farms have killed birds, including numerous raptors.
"We take this issue very seriously," said Jeff Holland, a spokesman for NRG Solar of Carlsbad, California, the second of the three companies behind the plant. The third, Google, deferred comment to its partners.
The $2.2 billion plant, which launched in February, is at Ivanpah Dry Lake near the California-Nevada border. The operator says it’s the world’s biggest plant to employ so-called power towers.
A $2.2 billion bird roaster…paid for by you, the taxpayer.
What bias at the New York Times? Nah, it couldn’t be true!
Take for example today’s editorial on Gov. Rick Perry’s recent indictment on corruption charges. An honest, straightforward piece of journalism would simply report the facts, and an honest, straightforward editorial board could simply say that the facts don’t support a conviction of Gov. Rick Perry.
But the New York Times can’t simply publish an honest, straightforward editorial about Gov. Rick Perry being innocent. They have to make sure their liberal readers know that it really, really hurts them to admit that he’s probably not guilty.
Gov. Rick Perry of Texas is one of the least thoughtful and most damaging state leaders in America, having done great harm to immigrants, abortion clinics and people without health insurance during his 14 years in office. But bad political judgment is not necessarily a felony, and the indictment handed up against him on Friday — given the facts so far — appears to be the product of an overzealous prosecution.
See what I mean? It’s an editorial about the indictment against him, but they have to write an entire paragraph about how much they hate him before they get to the facts.
Governors and presidents threaten vetoes and engage in horse-trading all the time to get what they want, but for that kind of political activity to become criminal requires far more evidence than has been revealed in the Perry case so far. Perhaps Mr. McCrum will have some solid proof to show once the case heads to trial. But, for now, Texas voters should be more furious at Mr. Perry for refusing to expand Medicaid, and for all the favors he has done for big donors, than for a budget veto.
read the rest (if you can stomach it)
You see how ridiculous this is? They can’t simply stick with the facts of the case. They feel obligated to make sure they let their readers know how much they can’t stand Perry’s views on immigration, abortion, and Obamacare which have absolutely nothing to do with this story.
I don’t think I could have dreamed up a more perfect example of how the New York Times’ editorial board’s political bias affects their reporting. This article is dripping with bias and only begrudgingly presents the facts.
While peace between Israel and Hamas would be the most desirable outcome, from the beginning, it has been obvious that Hamas is not interested in peace.
from New York Times:
Three rockets fired from Gaza struck southern Israel on Tuesday, breaking a cease-fire, drawing Israeli retaliation and prompting Israel to recall its delegation from already fraught Egyptian-brokered talks in Cairo for an agreement to end the latest conflict.
The rockets landed in open ground near the cities of Beersheba and Netivot, causing no damage or injury, according to the Israeli military, which added in a statement that it was “targeting terror sites across the Gaza Strip” in response
Israel has repeatedly said it would not negotiate under fire. As a five-day cease-fire expired at midnight on Monday, Israeli and Palestinian officials had announced a 24-hour extension to allow the negotiations to continue.
“Today’s rocket attack on Beersheba is a grave and direct violation of the cease-fire to which Hamas committed itself,” said Mark Regev, a spokesman for the Israeli government. “This is the 11th cease-fire that Hamas has either rejected or violated,” he added.
For all the talk about “occupation,” it remains a fact that the only time Israel has ever expanded her borders is when she was attacked.
According to a new report, more than a dozen witnesses have corroborated officer Wilson’s story.
From The Blaze:
More than a dozen witnesses have backed up the account of Ferguson police officer Darren Wilson in the controversial shooting of 18-year-old Michael Brown, police sources reportedly told St. Louis Post-Dispatch reporter Christine Byers.
Byers also reported on Monday that Brown’s body was transported from the county medical examiner to a funeral home and then back to the medical examiner for three autopsies.
Protests continued on Monday night, more than a week after Brown was fatally shot by Wilson.
Though Wilson has not spoken publicly about his side of the story, an alleged friend of the officer, identified only as Josie, shared what she claimed to be Wilson’s recollection of events. CNN later confirmed that the woman’s account matches Wilson’s account of the shooting, according to their law enforcement sources.
The woman called into TheBlaze TV host Dana Loesch’s radio show on Friday, claiming that Brown “bum-rushed” Wilson moments after pushing him into his squad car, punching him in the face and trying to grab the cop’s gun.
The truth is the only thing that should matter. It’s what we should all strive for, regardless of what we think it should be or what we want it to be.
This is yet another piece of information that will be vital when attempting to surmise exactly what happened when Michael Brown was shot. According to the preliminary autopsy report, Michael Brown was shot (at least) 6 times, every shot entering the front of his body.
From the NYT:
Michael Brown…was shot at least six times, including twice in the head, a preliminary private autopsy performed on Sunday found.
One of the bullets entered the top of Mr. Brown’s skull, suggesting his head was bent forward when it struck him and caused a fatal injury, according to Dr. Michael M. Baden, the former chief medical examiner for the City of New York, who flew to Missouri on Sunday at the family’s request to conduct the separate autopsy.
…Mr. Brown, 18, was also shot four times in the right arm, he said, adding that all the bullets were fired into his front.
Again, let me encourage you to refrain from “taking sides” in this matter. It is counter productive to do so. We must keep cool heads, remain unbiased and let the evidence do the talking.
It has been erroneously asserted by countless people that Michael Brown was shot in the back. According to this latest report, that was false. If people would wait for actual evidence to come out, we wouldn’t have the situation we have now.
Texas A&M has a new report on the Cash for Clunkers program, and it’s not good.
From Fox News:
Researchers at Texas A&M, in a recently released report, measured the impact of Cash for Clunkers on sales and found the program actually decreased industry revenue by $3 billion over a nine-to-11-month period. Meanwhile, the “stimulus” also cost taxpayers $3 billion.
The Car Allowance Rebate System, commonly called Cash for Clunkers, was part of a 2009 economic stimulus program that was sold as a lifeline from the federal government to a sinking U.S. auto industry.
The program let people turn in their old cars for up to $4,500 in cash to be used toward the purchase of a more fuel-efficient alternative. Nearly 700,000 vehicles were traded in through the program.
But the Texas A&M University study, for the National Bureau of Economic Research, shows the program may have actually created a drag on the economy.
This is nothing but a little microcosm of Keynesian economics. The “thinking” is that an economy can be stimulated by the government simply paying people. The problem is, it doesn’t work.
- First of all, people were paid, but no actual wealth was created. People are simply the beneficiaries of something without working or creating anything.
- Second, wealth (in the form of cars) was actually destroyed.
- Third, it hurt those who were looking to purchase an inexpensive car because it raised the price of older, used cars. This happened because cars that were only worth a few hundred bucks could be traded in for $4,500. Anyone with a cheap car to sell, would be stupid not to take that deal. This lowered the number of cars in the marketplace and, as supply and demand might dictate, those who needed a cheap car (most likely the poor), could no longer afford one.
- Fourth, it’s redistributive. Those who had no need for a car and didn’t have one to sell, had to fund the program anyway.
- Fifth, the government went into debt to do it. This not only means that we’re now paying interest on it, but we’re saddling people with debt who weren’t even eligible to vote for the candidates who initiated the program.
It should come as no surprise that the program was a huge failure.