Git Yer Red Hots! Red hot lies! Fresh off da presses!!!

Thanks for uploading them.

But now I feel like an underachiever...

Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

here is a story You will not find on rachel madcow": https://nypost.com/2020/06/12/three-...nypd-vehicles/


Three indicted for allegedly throwing Molotov cocktails at NYPD vehicles, face life in prison

An upstate woman and two Brooklyn lawyers were indicted Friday on federal explosives and arson charges for allegedly tossing Molotov cocktails at NYPD vehicles during George Floyd protests in New York City.
Samantha Shader, 27, of Catskill, is accused of hurling the makeshift explosive at an NYPD vehicle occupied by four police officers on early Saturday morning, May 30.
Prosecutors allege Shader bit one of the officer’s legs when she was being taken into custody.
Around the same time, Brooklyn lawyers Urooj Rahman, 31, and Colinford Mattis, 32, were accused of tossing their own Molotov cocktail at an unoccupied police vehicle in Brooklyn during a separate attack.
Colinford Mattis, left, and Urooj RahmanAP All three face life in prison on the seven-count indictments, charging them with the use of explosives, arson, use of explosives to commit a felony, arson conspiracy, use of a destructive device, civil disorder, and making or possessing a destructive device.
“Such criminal acts should never be confused with legitimate protest,” said United States Attorney Richard Donoghue in a statement. “Those who carry out attacks on NYPD Officers or vehicles are not protesters, they are criminals, and they will be treated as such.”
No police were hurt by the explosives. Shader’s lit bottle never ignited. The explosive Rahman and Mattis tossed did ignite and set the empty, parked police vehicle ablaze, prosecutors allege.
Prosecutors said Shader, whose actions were allegedly caught on camera, has an extensive rap sheet that includes arrests in 11 different states.
In January of last year, she was busted for interfering with a police officer in Waterford, Connecticut — a few years after she was convicted in February of 2017 for possession of a controlled substance in Shawnee, Oklahoma.
Both Rahman and Mattis were described as humble Brooklynites who worked their way to prestigious law schools and promising careers.
Mattis, who was on furlough from Pryor Cashman before his arrest, has been suspended. He had been a member of Brooklyn’s Community Board 5, but was removed by the borough president for lack of attendance, according to board chair Andre Mitchell.


makes One wonder what in the hell the law schools are teaching their students - where did they attend - harvard law School???
WYID - thanks for the thoughts on separating out "fake news" - thee is a lot of crap going on on both the ultra right and ultra Left propagadna wars.

Git Yer Red Hots! Red hot lies! Fresh off da presses!!!

Trump's recent lies (yes, lies):

"Buffalo protester shoved by Police could be an ANTIFA provocateur. 75 year old Martin Gugino was pushed away after appearing to scan police communications in order to black out the equipment ... Was aiming scanner. Could be a set up?"

stated on June 7, 2020 in a tweet: Says Joe Biden wants to "defund the police."


“If you look at the one (hydroxychloroquine) survey, the only bad survey, they were giving it to people that were in very bad shape. They were very old. Almost dead.”

“Germany and the United States are the two best in deaths per 100,000 people, which, frankly, to me, that's perhaps the most important number there is.”

Says Joe Biden has “written a letter of apology” for calling Trump’s travel restrictions from China “xenophobic.”

stated on April 16, 2020 in a tweet:
Says House Speaker Nancy Pelosi deleted a video of her telling people to go to Chinatown.

stated on April 13, 2020 in a tweet: "It is the decision of the President," not governors, to "open up the states."

“you get thousands and thousands of people sitting in somebody's living room, signing ballots all over the place.”

"We've done more tests in eight days than South Korea has done in eight weeks."

Says N.Y. Gov. Andrew Cuomo “rejected buying recommended 16,000 ventilators in 2015 for the pandemic, for a pandemic, established death panels and lotteries instead. So, he had a chance to buy, in 2015, 16,000 ventilators at a very low price, and he turned it down.”

The WHO coronavirus test “was a bad test.”

The health insurance industry has “agreed to waive all co-payments for coronavirus treatments.”

The Obama administration "didn't do anything about” swine flu.

“The Obama administration made a decision on testing that turned out to be very detrimental to what we’re doing” on the coronavirus.

Says the media cut out his request of Russian hackers to find Hillary Clinton’s emails “right at the end so that you don’t see the laughter, the joke.”

Says the USMCA is the “biggest trade deal ever made.”

"Years of economic decay are over" because Trump "reversed the failed economic policies of the previous administration."

"The Democrat controlled House never even asked John Bolton to testify."

Says House Intelligence Chair Adam Schiff "made up the conversation. He lied. If he didn't do that in the halls of Congress, he'd be thrown in jail. He did it in the halls of Congress, he's given immunity."

"Today I opened a major Apple Manufacturing plant in Texas that will bring high paying jobs back to America."

"They never thought ... that I was going to release that call and I really had no choice because Adam Schiff made up a call."

glad i have punk denver on Ignore!

Git Yer Red Hots! Red hot lies! Fresh off da presses!!!... Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

Number one rule of lies, fake or otherwise is: provide a verifiable source. Otherwise, it is presumed as fake as the poster.

Number one rule of lies, fake or otherwise is: provide a verifiable source. Otherwise, it is presumed as fake as the poster. Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Yeah, he spent all of about two minutes gathering up all Politifact statements regarding Trump that were labeled as false. And we all know how they like to set context to set their decisions.

It's covers about a full 7 months of statements, and I'm sure he didn't list his source because he didn't want people actually reading the underlying details or full context of the statements.

But as liberal sheeple tend to do, Politifact becomes gospel to them. And as a courtesy, the link below gives you his full list(in order, so its obvious he lifted it from there) over the 7 months and even more going much further back.

You can be the judge of exactly how truthful and biased you think Politifact is, especially in the context of the poster of the list not providing them as the source.

And based on the context given, you can determine exactly how egregious you feel they are.



https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...p&ruling=false

Mortally ironic stupidity must be a prereq for liberals loons these days. They figure nobody else can use a search engine or something? They run in, toss a fire bomb, steal some stuff and then are shocked - shocked I say - when the video is used in court to convict them. Sometimes, it's even the video that they themselves life streamed. But to be fair, he/she/it/sheit probably took more than 2 minutes to do a simple cut-n-paste. And to think, we closed down mental institutions...

Yeah, he spent all of about two minutes gathering up all Politifact statements regarding Trump that were labeled as false. And we all know how they like to set context to set their decisions.

It's covers about a full 7 months of statements, and I'm sure he didn't list his source because he didn't want people actually reading the underlying details or full context of the statements. ... Originally Posted by eccielover

Regardless of where I copied them from, they are still lies. Donald Trump is a big, fat liar!

Regardless of where I copied them from, they are still lies. Donald Trump is a big, fat liar! Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

thank you valued poster

AG Bill Bar was interviewed by Steve Inskeep of the National Propaganda Reporters (NPR) and schooled them effortlessly - yet they remain steadfast in their chicanery, i.e. sticking to their narrative. Why is that group still even funded by American taxpayers?!?

Generalized Synopsis of the interview:

NPR: I really like the red tie you're wearing today Mr AG
AG: It's a blue tie with green stripes

NPR: Oh, right. So I was wondering why you chose a red tie for today
AG: I didn't. It's a blue tie with green stripes

NPR: Sorry, what I meant was; did you consider any other ties before settling on a red tie?
AG: No I did not . I chose this blue tie with green stripes because it matches the ensemble.

NPR: So you didn't even consider any other tie except that red one?
AG: I don't own a red tie.

I know you think I'm kidding - but yeah, it's just like the above. I'll pull a couple snippets, but the whole piece is worth a read - IMHO.

NPR's Full Interview With Attorney General William Barr

...NPR: I want to note that in the last few days, there have been three acts of yours that have made the news, sometimes not for the first time. The dismissal of the case against Michael Flynn, which, of course, an appeals court upheld; the Roger Stone case in which a whistleblower questioned the way that you changed the sentencing recommendation; and then the removal of Geoffrey Berman in New York. I want to ask about your underlying authority as you see it in cases like this. Does the president, acting through you, have the power, complete power, to use his authority in cases where he has an interest?

AG: Well, this wasn't a case of the president acting. It was, these were cases of me acting

NPR: Although you say your act as the president's hand. I mean, it's the president acting

AG: Well, the president ultimately has the authority as chief executive to, quote, see that the laws are faithfully executed against the attorney general who performs that function under the law. And so I will take them in any order you want.

NPR: Well, I see here in each case, you have someone who is the president's national security adviser and he'd spoken up publicly in defense of him. Someone who's a close personal friend of the president, who the president said was being unfairly treated. And Geoffrey Berman, a U.S. attorney, who is believed to be investigating cases involving friends of the president, among other matters of interest to the president. In every case, was it appropriate to intervene at the highest levels in what was being done and what personnel did it?

AG: OK well, all cases in the Department of Justice are subject to the supervision of the attorney general. In fact, all the powers carried out by the department are vested in the attorney general and it's appropriate for the attorney general to exercise supervisory authority over cases. So starting with the Flynn case, Flynn was entered into a plea agreement before I arrived that had been there for a long time. And because of legal squabbling, the sentencing didn't come up until after I was attorney general. And he had a new lawyer and she raised a lot of claims. And, you know, we, number one, he was subject to the sentencing process. But before that occurred, the judge started taking up some orders. And we filed a motion to dismiss the indictment based on information we had obtained from another U.S. attorney who I had asked to review the case. There were a lot of issues about that case and it was taking a lot of time to resolve them because the defendant had raised those issues, including misconduct by the government. So I brought in somebody who had been a former FBI agent for 10 years and a prosecutor for 10 years. And I asked him to take a look at it and he recommended that the charges be dismissed.

NPR: What I'm driving at is the underlying power here. There's nothing inappropriate about you getting so involved in a case involving a friend of the president. Is that your view of the law?

AG: Well, what I'm saying is, well, Flynn was an appointee in the administration. I don't know whether I would refer to him as a friend of any administration. But unless there's some conflict of interest that I have, it is appropriate for me to deal with it. And I've said publicly that in those cases, it's very important that the attorney general make sure that there's no political influence at stake involved in that, and there wasn't.

NPR: Is there no limit to what the president can do in exercising what you've described as a supervisory authority when it comes to law enforcement cases, even when he has an interest?

AG: So, I testified about this a lot. I think at some point in certain circumstances, presidential action could amount to an abuse of his power. Yes...

...NPR: And just to go to the third case what was the reason for removing Geoffrey Berman?

AG: That's personnel action, which of course is different. You know, in the criminal justice process, as I've made clear, it's very important that politics be kept out of that. Now, in this other matter, which is a personnel appointment, obviously all U.S. attorneys are appointed by the president and can be removed by the president. And, you know, that's been for as long as there have been U.S. attorneys. And New York is one of the preeminent offices in the Justice Department. The president had never made an appointment to that office. Geoffrey Berman was interim. He was appointed by the court as a temporary U.S. attorney holding the fort. He was living on borrowed time from the beginning. And when a really strong, powerful candidate raised his hand, that is Jay Clayton, currently the chairman of the S.E.C., a prominent New York lawyer from Sullivan and Cromwell, very well-known and highly regarded, an independent, and he said that he was prepared to leave the government, was going back up, wanted to go back up to New York but very much would desire this job, I view that as an opportunity to put in a very strong person as a presidential appointment to that office.

NPR: And there was no consideration, or let me ask it a different way. Did you consider the possibility that some might find that inappropriate, given the matters that Mr. Berman was investigating and the president's interest in those matters?

AG: I certainly was aware that given the current environment, anytime you make a personnel move, you know, conspiracy theorists will suggest that there's something, there's some ulterior motive involved. But I felt this was actually a good time to do it because I was not aware of anything that should in reality, give rise to that.

NPR: And let me circle back to that big question. How do you answer a voter who sees a pattern here of continually upholding the personal interests of the president?

AG: Well, I'd say that there is no such pattern. I would say that that is a media narrative that has been adhered to, where things that happen all the time in the Department of Justice are misrepresented to the public and cast is somehow suspicious. I mean, do you think someone, do you think a 68-year-old man, with no prior criminal history record, should have gone to prison for a decade for what happened? You know, for misleading Congress? Show me a case where that's even remotely close. As I've said, the judge herself said that the case closest was the Scooter Libby case, who got about three years, and she gave three years and four months. So that's justice. That's what we call justice. And there was a Democratic senator who said that, you know, part of the job of the attorney general or being the attorney general is like being a sheriff standing in front of the jail. There's always the mob. And these days, the media is very prominent among the mob, who either want someone hung or they want him sprung. And part of what the Department of Justice is about and the attorney general is about, is ignoring the mob and the calls and the false narratives, and doing in each case what they think is right. Right and just for the individual, that's what I'm doing and that's why I'll continue to do...


AG Barr completely dismantled each NPR narrative with ease and even aplomb by using actual facts and common sense. I wonder if it will leave a noticeable mark. Who am I kidding?!?

Geoffrey Berman, ok, how he got there was interesting. the president didn't appoint him as acting district attorney, he was appointed by the court???

how does this happen?

Geoffrey Berman, ok, how he got there was interesting. the president didn't appoint him as acting district attorney, he was appointed by the court???

how does this happen? Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

Dunno for sure. Maybe it happened around Presidential transition time or it is some normal thing to do. Interesting that Barr refers to it as a regular HR function. Kinda totally swatted down the annoying as a hungry mosquito narrative of political gerrymandering by Inskeep.

You are just stuck under your rock. Good luck to you.

Prove it. You want to know who is the lied. Why don’t we go back to Mr. Obama, there you is a liver. Along with his whole administration. Thank you