Sunday, May 3, 2015

New Black Panther Party chairman says he's 'willing to kill' in white war against black!

American Thinker ^ | 5/2/2015 

When last we left our good friends of the New Black Panther Party, they were in Ferguson, MO attempting to kill the prosecutor in the Michael Brown case and trying to blow up the Gateway Arch.
The FBI stopped those plots in their tracks, and the NBPP disappeared from the media for a few months.
You just knew they couldn't keep their mouths shut about the Freddie Gray matter. And in typical Black Panther fashion, they are threatening to kill people in the "war" against blacks.
The leader of the New Black Panther Party says the United States has declared war against the nation's black population -- and that, like American revolutionaries, they are willing to kill if that's what it takes to achieve justice in the aftermath of Freddie Gray's death.
Hashim Nzinga, the national chairman of the black rights organization, made the remarks this week on Black Power Radio -- in response to the nationwide outrage over Gray's mysterious death, Breitbart reportedThursday.
Nzinga said that the United States has effectively declared war on black Americans by sending "military police in the black neighborhood" to protect the wealthy -- so they are well within their rights to fight for justice.
"We have to love ourselves enough to be willing to die or kill to save our babies and to save a black nation that is dying before our eyes," he said.
"We pay taxes. They have declared war on us and it's nothing but state racism," Nzinga added. "America is about protecting the rich and the powerful."
The party's leader went on to liken his movement to the American Revolution, when patriots fought to free the nation from British rule behind leaders like George Washington.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Of Course Democrats Deserve The Blame For What’s Happening In Baltimore ^ | April 30, 2015 | David Harsanyi 

If a person happens to point out that Baltimore’s criminally inept government has been run exclusively by Democrats since 1967 (with one Republican mayor since 1947), and features not a single council member who isn’t a liberal, they may be called a “lazy apparatchik.” Because not everything, you see, is reducible to mere party politics.

Now, if an economic renaissance sparked by the progressive policies of Stephanie Rawlings-Blake had lifted Baltimore from poverty, I imagine Democrats would be eager to claim credit for the accomplishment. Entire political debates are predicated on the effectiveness of partisan ideas. We blame presidents for recessions they probably have little to do with, yet, according to liberal pundits, the party overseeing a city riddled with poverty, failing schools, high crime rates, and racial tension bears no responsibility for what’s happening.
The president disagrees. Sort of. After a night of violence and looting in Baltimore, Barack Obama spoke to the press and said that “we,” as a country, “have to do some soul searching” – by which he meant “they,” as in conservatives, need to get on board.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Soros Uses His Foundations to Dodge Taxes

FrontPage Magazine ^ | May 1, 2015 | Daniel Greenfield 

While Obama Inc. targets conservative groups, it isn’t going to annoy the guy who bought its boss his spot in the White House.
Soros’ wealth increased tremendously during Obama’s time in office. And much of it came from dodging taxes. You know, the taxes he insists that middle class peons and small business owners need to be socked with.
George Soros likes to say the rich should pay more taxes. A substantial part of his wealth, though, comes from delaying them. While building a record as one of the world’s greatest investors, the 84-year-old billionaire used a loophole that allowed him to defer taxes on fees paid by clients and reinvest them in his fund, where they continued to grow tax-free. At the end of 2013, Soros—through Soros Fund Management—had amassed $13.3 billion through the use of deferrals, according to Irish regulatory filings by Soros.
Congress closed the loophole in 2008 and ordered hedge fund managers who used it to pay the accumulated taxes by 2017. A New York-based money manager such as Soros would be subject to a federal rate of 39.6 percent, combined state and city levies totaling 12 percent, and an additional 3.8 percent tax on investment income to pay for Obamacare, according to Andrew Needham, a tax partner at Cravath, Swaine & Moore. Applying those rates to Soros’s deferred income would create a tax bill of $6.7 billion.
Obviously the IRS is not going to come pounding on Soros’ door. He’s not a conservative organization after all. And he uses his radical left-wing foundations not only to build political influence, but to avoid taxes.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

CDC Report: 35,369 Vehicle Accident Deaths, 505 Gun Accident Deaths! ^ | 5/1/2015 | AWR Hawkins 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) final report on death statistics for 2013 shows there were 35,369 deaths from motor vehicle accidents versus 505 deaths from the accidental discharge of firearms.
That is not a typo—35,369 versus 505. Americans are 70 times more likely to die in a vehicle accident than by the accidental discharge of a firearm.
Yet Michael Bloomberg, Moms Demand Action, and Everytown for Gun Safety have not uttered a peep about Ford, Dodge, or Toyota control. They are utterly consumed with a new gun control push framed around accidental firearm deaths.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Oops: Bill Clinton 'Mistakenly' Misreports Taxable Income as Tax-Free Donations!

Townhall ^ | May 1, 2015 | Guy Benson 

Once again, mistakes -- passive voice -- were made:

Clinton Foundation mistakenly listed payments to Bill from Chinese developer & US-Islamic Conference as donations.
— Kenneth P. Vogel (@kenvogel) April 30, 2015The foundation has also come under scrutiny for failing to clear all foreign government donations through an agreed-upon State Department vetting process when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, and for failing to identify foreign government donations on tax returns. Fact-checkers this week challenged the foundation’s claims that it’s barred by Canadian privacy laws from revealing the names of more than 1,000 mostly foreign donors to a joint Clinton-Giustra nonprofit registered in Vancouver, British Columbia. It acknowledged in response to POLITICO’s questions that it mischaracterized as foundation donations money from the China Overseas Real Estate Development and the U.S.-Islamic World Conference. That money was actually honoraria paid for Bill Clinton speeches by those entities, said foundation officials, who added this week those were the only mistakes “we are aware of.”

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

(Carjacking) Suspect shot dead by shopper (with concealed carry permit) outside Utah grocery store

Washington Post ^ | May 2, 2015 

OREM, Utah — Police say a shopper with a concealed weapons permit fatally shot a suspect to thwart a carjacking Saturday outside a Utah grocery store.
... the shooter ... heard a woman’s screams as she was being pulled from her SUV by the suspect ... went to assist the woman and fired one round after the 27-year-old male suspect lunged at him in an attempt to grab his gun.
The suspect, who was shot in the chest, later died at a hospital.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Baltimore State Attorney Marilyn Mosby just bought herself some trouble over Freddie Gray

Hotair ^ | 05/02/2015 | Jazz Shaw 

We’ve now had the better part of a day to absorb all the information coming out of the rather stunning announcement from Baltimore City State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby, which Ed covered yesterday. After she leveled very serious charges against six police officers related to the death of Freddie Gray, Mosby was immediately being hailed as a hero by the usual sources on the left. But now that I’ve had some time to go over the charges and what’s been revealed of the case thus far, it seems very likely that Ms. Mosby, barely three months into her first elected office, has grabbed a tiger by the tail.
To be clear, as I wrote earlier this week, it’s certainly possible there is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing in this case to merit charges against one or more police officers, but we won’t know that until all the evidence is presented as the state prepares to go to trial. But from what we have managed to learn thus far, some of the charges Mosby has delivered look like a dramatic overreach. In particular, tagging Caesar R. Goodson, Jr with second degree depraved heart murder will be a serious stretch, considering the need to prove intent (on top of everything else) against someone who was walled off in the driver compartment of the vehicle and unable to reach – or for the most part even see – Freddie Gray. As things stand, involuntary manslaughter might be the best the state could hope for.
But even if we are to accept that the state’s investigation has revealed sufficient evidence for such charges, the handling of this case by Mosby thus far is only handing ammunition to the defense. I was particularly struck by the tone and wording of Mosby’s speech, which veered far from any pretext of the rule of law and well into social justice territory regarding law enforcement officials who have yet to have their day in court.
“To the people of Baltimore and demonstrators across America, I heard your call for ‘No Justice, No peace,'” she said. “Your peace is sincerely needed as I work to deliver justice on behalf of this young man.”
This should be alarming to anyone in the justice system. Cries in the streets of “No Justice No Peace” are certainly protected, First Amendment speech, but they are also a strongly implied threat of lawlessness which stands apart from whatever perceived injustice is being protested. To have the State’s Attorney echo that on the steps of the courthouse was off-putting to say the least. What’s more, it was a very direct signal that the crowds threatening the state with “no peace” had secured a victory by having Mosby stand up in public and declare that she would “deliver justice” for Freddie Gray long before there has been a trial, to say nothing of a conviction of officers who are innocent until proven guilty. How does one promise what justice will look like before a determination has been made?
Beyond the speech, Mosby has other problems which the defense is already jumping on. Gene Ryan, president of Fraternal Order of Police Lodge 3,has already called on Mosby to recuse herself for a variety of reasons.
Ryan requests that Mosby appoint a “Special Independent Prosecutor.”
“I have very deep concerns about the many conflicts of interest presented by your office conducting an investigation in this case,” the letter states.
“These conflicts include your personal and professional relations with Gray family attorney, William Murphy, and the lead prosecutor’s connections with members of the local media,” the letter states. “Based on several nationally televised interviews, these reporters are likely to be witnesses in any potential litigation regarding this incident.”
Being so young and so new to the job should not preclude Mosby from tackling this case, though normally you’d want a more experienced hand on the tiller for such a nationally inflamed procedure. These are the types of cases which can make (or break) someone’s career. But I have to wonder if she has fully weighed the optics of handling this case when she has close ties to the Gray family attorney while also being married to a legislator representing the district where the riots happened. (Someone with an obvious interest in trying to appease the masses in the streets and prevent more violence.) Those relationships, combine with an attitude which seems to indicate that she has convicted the officers in her mind before they’ve said a word in their defense, will throw all sorts of shadows on her handling of the case as we move forward.
As a side note on the legal wrangling to come, don’t be surprised if the defense for the officers opts to waive their right to a trial by jury and go for a bench trial. Finding a jury from those zip codes who wouldn’t convict all of the cops on the most serious charges – even if the evidence totally failed to support it – might be a serious chore. But an experienced judge should, in theory, be able to turn a more neutral eye on the evidence.
It’s too early to tell, but my initial reaction is that we’re seeing an ambitious but inexperienced prosecutor who was facing the possibility of not only more violence in the streets of Baltimore, but losing her credibility and popularity with the minority voters of the city. These factors may have clouded her judgement and led her to a serious overreach in an attempt to assuage the feelings of the protesters in the streets while potentially endangering her case.

Ted Cruz Claims to Have the Key to Hispanic Vote, And It’s Shockingly Simple

Independent Journal Review ^ | May 2, 2015 | Frank Camp 

CNN reports that, while speaking to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce on Wednesday, Ted Cruz took a swipe at Mitt Romney’s infamous “47 percent” remark.
Cruz reframed the conversation, taking the opportunity to connect the remark to the Hispanic vote:
“The media repeatedly said the reason Mitt Romney got clobbered in the Hispanic community was because of immigration…the data don’t bear that out…”
“What the polling data showed is actually Hispanic voters agree with Mitt Romney on a great many issues. Where he got clobbered was ‘cares about somebody like me.’ Where he got clobbered was the 47 percent–you remember the infamous comment…”
“I think Republicans are and should be the party of the 47 percent.”
While Cruz received only 35% of the Hispanic vote in his 2012 Senate race, conservative politicians made some considerable gains in the 2014 mid-terms.
According to Pew Research, Greg Abbott of Texas garnered 44% of the Hispanic vote, and David Perdue of Georgia garnered 42%.
This is significant, given that just two years prior, Mitt Romney received only 27% of the national Hispanic vote.
Ted Cruz may be on to something. Despite Pew reporting that 84% of Hispanic voters say a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants is more important or equally important as securing the border:
“When it comes to their vote, half (54%) of Latino registered voters say they would vote for a candidate who disagrees with them on immigration policy if that candidate agrees with them on most other issues.”
On Wednesday, Cruz said:
“We asked Hispanic voters in Texas what your number one issue is. You know what percent said immigration? Three percent…54 percent said jobs and the economy.”
It appears that 2016 will be the laboratory that puts this concept to the test.


JEB Busters


Boom, Boom, Boom

Love Ya!