web analytics
a

Facebook

Twitter

Copyright 2015 Libero Themes.
All Rights Reserved.

8:30 - 6:00

Our Office Hours Mon. - Fri.

703-406-7616

Call For Free 15/M Consultation

Facebook

Twitter

Search
Menu
Westlake Legal Group > Posts tagged "Featured Story" (Page 223)

There’s a Huge Difference In What We Die From and What the Media Reports that We Die From

Westlake Legal Group terrorism-shutterstock-620x396 There’s a Huge Difference In What We Die From and What the Media Reports that We Die From Terrorism Television News Media homicide graph Google Front Page Stories Featured Story disease death cancer Allow Media Exception

The media sensationalizes, but that’s not necessarily uncommon knowledge. This is the age of click bait and breaking news that’s “breaking” for some reason. Fox News can’t switch to camera three without the breaking news animation playing and reading headlines on websites is like listening to your overdramatic friend begin a story.

The problem is that the media tends to sensationalize things that shouldn’t be sensationalized, and puts little emphasis on the things that actually are in our best interests to know about. One of those things is what we actually die from.

According to OurWorldInData.org, the things that kill us are oftentimes underreported by the media. This, in turn, may even affect our Googling habits, making the things that kill us go unnoticed. The site gives examples:

  • around one-third of the considered causes of deaths resulted from heart disease, yet this cause of death receives only 2-3 percent of Google searches and media coverage;

  • just under one-third of the deaths came from cancer; we actually google cancer a lot (37 percent of searches) and it is a popular entry here on our site; but it receives only 13-14 percent of media coverage;

  • we searched for road incidents more frequently than their share of deaths, however, they receive much less attention in the news;

  • when it comes to deaths from strokes, Google searches and media coverage are surprisingly balanced;

  • the largest discrepancies concern violent forms of death: suicide, homicide and terrorism. All three receive much more relative attention in Google searches and media coverage than their relative share of deaths. When it comes to the media coverage on causes of death, violent deaths account for more than two-thirds of coverage in the New York Times and The Guardian but account for less than 3 percent of the total deaths in the US.

A handy chart was made so you can get more of a visual representation of the information, which I’ve posted below.

As you can see, what we Google is actually more accurate to what really kills us than what the media tends to focus on. The media is far more interested in reporting on homicides (shootings, police actions, crime, etc), and reports on it around 23 percent of the time. However, things like cancer take a back seat. With 28 percent of people dying as a result of it, you’d figure the media would be more interested in talking about it, but it only covers it around 13 percent of the time.

When we’re left alone to find our own news, we tend to search for cancer far more often, with 37 percent of our searches

Oddly enough, the thing that kills us the most takes a back seat in searches and reporting. Heart disease kills us the most at 30 percent, yet our searches and the media give it around 2 percent of our attention. Meanwhile, terrorism kills us the absolute least, yet the media gives us an inordinate amount of news about it.

According to OurWorldInData.com, this has given us a skewed vision of reality and gives us the idea that our world is far more horrible than it is:

Media and its consumers are stuck in a reinforcing cycle. The news reports on breaking events, which are often based around a compelling story. Consumers want to know what’s going on in the world — we are quickly immersed by the latest headline. We come to expect news updates with increasing frequency, and media channels have clear incentives to deliver. This locks us into a cycle of expectation and coverage with a strong bias for outlier events. Most of us are left with a skewed perception of the world; we think the world is much worse than it is.

The post There’s a Huge Difference In What We Die From and What the Media Reports that We Die From appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group terrorism-shutterstock-300x192 There’s a Huge Difference In What We Die From and What the Media Reports that We Die From Terrorism Television News Media homicide graph Google Front Page Stories Featured Story disease death cancer Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Trump Just Announced His Re-Election Campaign and A Lingering Question Gets Answered

Westlake Legal Group trump-smirk2-620x414 Trump Just Announced His Re-Election Campaign and A Lingering Question Gets Answered twitter Politics Mike Pence Here We Go Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Election Announcement donald trump Crazy Season 2020 Race 2020 election

Donald Trump speaking at CPAC 2011 in Washington, D.C. by Gage Skidmore, licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0/Original

There was very little doubt Trump would run for a second term. Some of his critics on the right perhaps held out hope he’d decide not to and Mitt Romney would come riding in on a white horse, but nah. We are never going back there and it’s probably time for some to accept it.

Today, the President formally announced his re-election campaign, or better yet, he announced his coming announcement of his re-election campaign.

While I’m normally not too in to watching Trump rallies (dude’s hilarious but it’s a bit repetitive), this one is going to be grade A entertainment given its context. There’s no telling what the dude will say.

Another thing to note is that an important question appears to have been answered.

It looks like VP Pence is along for the ride again. While Trump running was a forgone conclusion, there had been some chatter that Pence might not be on the ticket again and that it would be beneficial to replace him with someone else.

I can see both sides. On the one hand, it’d be crappy to dump him as he’s not done a bad job. On the other hand, Pence adds basically nothing to the campaign. I think evangelicals are already with Trump regardless and that’s Pence’s only real draw. He reminds me of Tim Kaine running with Hillary in the sense that he’s just an after thought. A woman or someone from a swing state would be very valuable in what will be a grueling campaign.

Regardless, what’s done is done. Trump is the guy moving forward and Pence will be at his side. No pipe dream primary challenges are going to derail their path to the general election. If I’m Trump, I don’t even engage with whatever nut job Bill Kristol and company decide to put forward.

Given something unforeseen, it looks like June 18th is going to officially kick off the 2020 election season. Buckle your seatbelts. It’s going to be an insane year and a half.

————————————————-

Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.

I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.

The post Trump Just Announced His Re-Election Campaign and A Lingering Question Gets Answered appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group trump-sunglasses-SCREENSHOT-300x172 Trump Just Announced His Re-Election Campaign and A Lingering Question Gets Answered twitter Politics Mike Pence Here We Go Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Election Announcement donald trump Crazy Season 2020 Race 2020 election   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop: Jerry Nadler Claims There ‘Certainly is’ Sufficient Evidence to Impeach Trump. But Will the Public Approve?

Westlake Legal Group jerrold-nadler-mueller-statement-response-SCREENSHOT-620x331 Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop: Jerry Nadler Claims There ‘Certainly is’ Sufficient Evidence to Impeach Trump. But Will the Public Approve? white house washington D.C. Uncategorized New York Mueller Investigation Jerrold Nadler impeachment House Judiciary Committee Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Congress Campaigns bill barr attorney general Allow Media Exception Alan Dershowitz

[Screenshot from CBS News, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YyqFhQPQnrM]

 

On Friday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler claimed “there certainly is” sufficient justification to impeach Donald J. Trump.

Oh boy…here we go.

The New York representative made the assertion in an interview with WNYC, during which he also explained that the maneuver must be done with the blessing of the public.

Good luck with that:

“Impeachment is a political act, and you cannot impeach a president if the American people will not support it. The American people, right now, do not support it because they do not know the story. They don’t know the facts.”

The facts? Good luck with THAT.

But he’s determined:

“We have to get the facts out. We have to hold a series of hearings, we have to hold the investigations.”

They’re never, ever, ever going to let the Mueller investigation go. The obsession is a tribute to time-wasting at the highest level. Think you’re good at it? You’re an amateur. Get elected to Congress and go pro.

“It’s very important that [Special Counsel Robert Mueller], to a television audience and to the American people, state [his findings] and answer questions about it, even if there is no new information.”

Mueller really stunk up the joint Wednesday, telling the country — essentially — that he couldn’t prove Trump didn’t do anything wrong:

“If we had confidence that the President clearly did not commit a crime, we would have said so. We did not, however, make a determination as to whether the President did commit a crime.”

Why say that? That’s not how proof is supposed to work when someone’s accused.

Alan Dershowitz was unimpressed. Likewise, Tucker Carlson.

Presumably, Jerrold wasn’t opposed.

Despite the congressman’s statements, Mueller made clear he has no plans to testify before congressional committees:

“I hope and expect this to be the only time I will speak to you on this matter. No one has told me whether I can or should testify or speak further about this matter. There has been discussion about an appearance before Congress. Any testimony from this office would not go beyond our report. It contains our findings and analysis, and the reasons for the decisions we made. We chose those words carefully, and the work speaks for itself.”

Speaking to CBS News Friday, Attorney General Bill Barr backed up Robert:

“It’s up to Bob, but I think the line he’s drawing, which is he’s going to stick to what’s in the report, is the proper line for any department official.”

Mueller also made reference to the longstanding DOJ policy of not charging a sitting president:

“Charging the president was not an option we could consider.”

Additionally, he recognized that “the Constitution requires a process other than the criminal justice system to formally accuse the president of wrongdoing.”

Now, it seems, Jerrold’s going full-on Al Green (here):

“No one, not even the President of the United States, is above the law.”

He declared Congress’ll “respond to the crimes, lies and other wrongdoing of President Trump.”

On Thursday, Trump shot back against notions of the “I” word:

“I don’t see how they can. It’s a dirty, filthy, disgusting word, impeach. It’s high crimes –there was no high crime. So how do you impeach?”

For a brief moment in time, I thought perhaps we could let go of the black balloon that is the ever lingering Mueller probe (here).

Now it appears I was right to begin with: It’ll outlast both cockroaches and the Rolling Stones. The investigation is forevermore a permanent component of existence. It will float above us like a cosmic fart, long after humanity’s bones have bleached in the sun.

I believe the American people are sick of it. Give up, already. For Pete’s sake. Trump won. Let it go.

Do you think the public want to see impeachment? Let us all know in the Comments section.

-ALEX

 

Relevant RedState links in this article: here, here, and here.

See 3 more pieces from me:

He Has The Power: CNN Talking Heads Forced To Admit The Mueller Report Vindicates Donald Trump

John Cleese Fights Back After Twitter Attacks His Unwoke, Traditionalist Comments: ‘London Isn’t Really English Anymore’

A Celebrity Couple Can’t Let Their Parents Meet For The Stupidest Of Reasons, & It’s A Pathetic Commentary On What We’ve Become

Find all my RedState work here.

And please follow Alex Parker on Twitter and Facebook.

Thank you for reading! Please sound off in the Comments section below. 

If you have an iPhone and want to comment, select the box with the upward arrow at the bottom of your screen; swipe left and choose “Request Desktop Site.” If it fails to automatically refresh, manually reload the page. Scroll down to the red horizontal bar that says “Show Comments.”

The post Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop: Jerry Nadler Claims There ‘Certainly is’ Sufficient Evidence to Impeach Trump. But Will the Public Approve? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group jerrold-nadler-mueller-statement-response-SCREENSHOT-300x160 Can’t Stop, Won’t Stop: Jerry Nadler Claims There ‘Certainly is’ Sufficient Evidence to Impeach Trump. But Will the Public Approve? white house washington D.C. Uncategorized New York Mueller Investigation Jerrold Nadler impeachment House Judiciary Committee Front Page Stories Featured Story elections donald trump democrats Congress Campaigns bill barr attorney general Allow Media Exception Alan Dershowitz   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Hillary’s Gone Hollywood

Westlake Legal Group hillary-chelsea-clinton-1024x699-620x326 Hillary’s Gone Hollywood steven spielberg Hollywood Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story Entertainment Chelsea Clinton

Let’s face it, a Hollywood ending was the only proper ending to the long, at times mysterious but always dramatic, political career of Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Taking a cue from her one-time boss Barack Obama, who, along with his wife Michelle, are contributing their talents to Netflix, Hillary and daughter Chelsea are planning to “influence culture and society” by creating a Hollywood production company that will offer — what else? — adaptations of overtly female-centric material.

Hillary Clinton and her daughter Chelsea are forming a production company to pursue film and television projects, making a foray into Hollywood after decades in the public eye.

The two have spoken to studios about financing a pipeline of programs, said people familiar with the matter. They would give a studio first crack at releasing the projects, said the people, who asked not to be identified because the discussions are at an early stage.

The family hopes to use film and television to influence culture and society now that Hillary Clinton is out of politics. They plan to focus on stories by and about women. The production company is one of many potential business opportunities that Hillary Clinton, 71, is considering.

Hillary Clinton previously signed on to help produce a TV show with Steven Spielberg. That series, “The Woman’s Hour,” is an adaptation of a book about activists who fought to earn women the right to vote.

The story of the women’s suffragette movement doesn’t necessarily have to be overlaid with today’s particular flavor of militant feminism. And it would be lovely if that historical time, which women in this country actually do look to favorably every time we cast a vote, could be presented in a way that’s lighter on preaching and shaming and heavier on historical accuracy and the triumph of the American spirit of equity.

But I’m not optimistic, unfortunately. Even with the esteemed and talented Spielberg in the director’s chair.

“The Woman’s Hour” is a project Hillary has planned to do with Steven Spielberg since August. Spielberg was Hillary’s 4th largest Hollywood donor during her 2016 presidential run, contributing a generous $2.2 million to the campaign. Director J.J. Abrams and producer Jeffrey Katzenberg were Hillary’s 3rd and 5th largest Hollywood donors, respectively. Now, throwing good money after bad, these big names might also supply projects to Clinton’s anticipated production company.

I suppose with all the other studios and productions companies moving to Georgia — and threatening to leave every other day — Hillary sensed some room in California to make a launch back into the spotlight. And if the Georgia contingent moves back to California, she’ll already have gained an advantage when they return.

Oddly, and rather hilariously, her association with Spielberg — who was critical of streaming services being taken seriously by the Academy of Motion Pictures — puts her at odds once again with the Obama as he helps produce content for streaming service Netflix.

So those old DC battles will still be playing out on your television and computer screens, just much more subtly. And with actors who aren’t also politicians. And everyone can still count on being told how to think and which woke issue is the woke issue of the day. But really that’s nothing new. And at least it’s blatantly in our faces rather than subliminally hinted at.

And just remember, as politicians invest themselves more and more into entertainment: you can always change the channel.

The post Hillary’s Gone Hollywood appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group hollywood-300x188 Hillary’s Gone Hollywood steven spielberg Hollywood Hillary Clinton Front Page Stories Featured Story Entertainment Chelsea Clinton   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

[Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense?

Westlake Legal Group lou-620x351 [Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense? Lou Perez immigration Humor Front Page Stories Featured Story comedy Celebrities

Comedian and head writer at We the Internet TV Lou Perez recently posted a hilarious but thoughtful video diatribe about immigration. Lou – who’s father was an immigrant – points out the amusing dichotomy between what open-borders progressives say about immigration and what they say about the man who currently resides in the White House.

I’m so thankful my father made that long journey nearly 40 years ago, but to be honest if my father were thinking about crossing the border today in 2019, I’d tell him not to. Even if it meant I’d never been born. Why? Ummm…because Donald Trump is president. You know- the racist, fascist otherwise known as HITLER. What American in their right mind would ever let immigrants legal or undocumented enter the country while Hitler is in office?? That would be so messed up. I keep seeing all this mixed messaging. It’s confusing. The same people who call Trump Hitler also want to let in migrants and asylum seekers? they compare turning away asylum seekers at the border to the U.S. turning away Jews before WWII, but wouldn’t the analogy be more like Jewish asylum seekers being sent right into the arms of Hitler. Because remember, Donald Trump is just like Hitler. Possibly worse depending on who’s tweet you’re reading.

Perez goes on to point out the hysterical hypocrisy of the celebrity Left, who keep promising to move to Canada while simultaneously demanding an open border to allow in as many immigrants as care to come.

If living under a Trump dictatorship is too hard for Lena Dunham to bear, can you imagine what it’s going to be like for Maria, a single mother with 2 children fleeing a murderous drug cartel in Central America?? If celebrities really cared they’d be down there at the border building a wall, pleading with them, “Stay out, Maria! It’s not safe here!  You can’t nanny our children or clean our houses!”

The kicker is the end, when Perez reminds us how great this nation truly is no matter who is in the White House.

Man, it is truly a testament to how amazing our country is that Donald Trump is the president and people are still risking their lives to get here.

Check out the video here and be sure to subscribe to We the Internet TV on YouTube so you don’t miss a single laugh.

The post [Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group lou-300x170 [Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense? Lou Perez immigration Humor Front Page Stories Featured Story comedy Celebrities   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Awkward: Charlemagne Tha God Tells Elizabeth Warren ‘You’re Kind Of Like The Original Rachel Dolezal’

Westlake Legal Group Fauxcahontas-620x413 Awkward: Charlemagne Tha God Tells Elizabeth Warren ‘You’re Kind Of Like The Original Rachel Dolezal’ racism Rachel Dolezal President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Charlemagne tha God Allow Media Exception 2020

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., winks as she jokes with other senators on the Senate Banking Committee ahead of a hearing on the nomination of Marvin Goodfriend to be a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors, Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2018, on Capitol Hill in Washington. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)

 

President Trump’s nickname of “Pocahontas” has inflicted what looks like fatal damage to Sen. Elizabeth Warren. No matter how hard she tries, she just can’t seem to shake it. I can even imagine the flap being mentioned in her obituary one day. “Warren ran in the Democratic presidential primary, but was unable to gain traction in the race due to a running feud with President Trump over her claims of Native American heritage…”

The 2020 Democratic presidential candidate appeared on the popular radio show, “The Breakfast Club,” this morning. During the interview, host “Charlemagne tha God” (CTG) doesn’t look like he’s buyin’ what Sen. Warren is sellin’. Warren turned on her best down-home accent, dropped her g’s, but CTG looked unconvinced.

She told her hosts, “I grew up in Oklahoma. I learned about my family the way that most people learn about their families. From my mama, my daddy, my aunts, my uncles. And, it’s what I believe…But I’m not a person of color. I’m not a citizen of a tribe. And I shouldn’t have done it.”

She acts like she has to convince us she’s not a person of color. We’ve known that all along Senator.

CTG asked, “If you had to do it over, would you?”

Warren dismisses that and says, “I can’t go back, but I should. But, what I can do is…” (She rattles off a list of campaign promises, housing, student loans, health)

Uninterested in her promises, CTG asks, “How long did you hold onto that? Because there’s some report that shows you were Native American on your Texas bar license and you were Native American on some documents when you were a professor at Harvard. So, like, why’d you do that?”

She tells him, “It’s what I believed. You know. It’s what I said. It’s what I learned from my family.”

Yeah, you already told us that.

CTG asks, “When did you find out you weren’t?”

Warren doesn’t want to answer that, because she’s always known she wasn’t a Native American. She tries to dodge the question. “You know. It’s. I’m not a person of color. I’m not a citizen of a tribe. And tribal citizenship is an important distinction. And not somethin’ I am. So…

Mother of God.

CTG wants to know, “Were there any benefits to that?”

Warren answers, “No. Boston Globe did a full investigation. Nothin’ about my family ever affected any job I ever got.”

Hmmm.

Finally, CTG says, “You’re kind of like the original Rachel Dolezal, a little bit. Rachel Dolezal was a white woman pretending to be black.”

Warren blames it on her family again. “Well, this is what I learned from my family.”

Good grief.

 

Plus: A little something extra via Jim Treacher, PJ Media

Westlake Legal Group Pajama-Media-620x538 Awkward: Charlemagne Tha God Tells Elizabeth Warren ‘You’re Kind Of Like The Original Rachel Dolezal’ racism Rachel Dolezal President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Charlemagne tha God Allow Media Exception 2020

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The post Awkward: Charlemagne Tha God Tells Elizabeth Warren ‘You’re Kind Of Like The Original Rachel Dolezal’ appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group Fauxcahontas-300x200 Awkward: Charlemagne Tha God Tells Elizabeth Warren ‘You’re Kind Of Like The Original Rachel Dolezal’ racism Rachel Dolezal President Trump Front Page Stories Featured Story Elizabeth Warren donald trump democrats Charlemagne tha God Allow Media Exception 2020   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

[Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense?

Westlake Legal Group lou-620x351 [Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense? Lou Perez immigration Humor Front Page Stories Featured Story comedy Celebrities

Comedian and head writer at We the Internet TV Lou Perez recently posted a hilarious but thoughtful video diatribe about immigration. Lou – who’s father was an immigrant – points out the amusing dichotomy between what open-borders progressives say about immigration and what they say about the man who currently resides in the White House.

I’m so thankful my father made that long journey nearly 40 years ago, but to be honest if my father were thinking about crossing the border today in 2019, I’d tell him not to. Even if it meant I’d never been born. Why? Ummm…because Donald Trump is president. You know- the racist, fascist otherwise known as HITLER. What American in their right mind would ever let immigrants legal or undocumented enter the country while Hitler is in office?? That would be so messed up. I keep seeing all this mixed messaging. It’s confusing. The same people who call Trump Hitler also want to let in migrants and asylum seekers? they compare turning away asylum seekers at the border to the U.S. turning away Jews before WWII, but wouldn’t the analogy be more like Jewish asylum seekers being sent right into the arms of Hitler. Because remember, Donald Trump is just like Hitler. Possibly worse depending on who’s tweet you’re reading.

Perez goes on to point out the hysterical hypocrisy of the celebrity Left, who keep promising to move to Canada while simultaneously demanding an open border to allow in as many immigrants as care to come.

If living under a Trump dictatorship is too hard for Lena Dunham to bear, can you imagine what it’s going to be like for Maria, a single mother with 2 children fleeing a murderous drug cartel in Central America?? If celebrities really cared they’d be down there at the border building a wall, pleading with them, “Stay out, Maria! It’s not safe here!  You can’t nanny our children or clean our houses!”

The kicker is the end, when Perez reminds us how great this nation truly is no matter who is in the White House.

Man, it is truly a testament to how amazing our country is that Donald Trump is the president and people are still risking their lives to get here.

Check out the video here and be sure to subscribe to We the Internet TV on YouTube so you don’t miss a single laugh.

The post [Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense? appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group lou-300x170 [Watch] Does Your Position on Immigration Make Sense? Lou Perez immigration Humor Front Page Stories Featured Story comedy Celebrities   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

AG Barr Exhibits More Tolerance For Collusion Players (Who He Says Probably Did Not Commit Treason) Than He Does For Media And Anti-Trump Officials

Westlake Legal Group barr-press-conference-620x332 AG Barr Exhibits More Tolerance For Collusion Players (Who He Says Probably Did Not Commit Treason) Than He Does For Media And Anti-Trump Officials Front Page Stories Featured Story Abuse of Power

Screengrab from https://youtu.be/_X13UvNBBec

In his extraordinary, hour-long interview with CBS This Morning, Attorney General William Barr revealed many things. Among them are that he and Bob Mueller are on the same page and have always been; that the idea the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians was “bogus”; that he still has some questions about how the investigation was handled and that it went outside of normal protocol; that the collusion players were a small cabal of upper echelon employees rather than an entire corrupt system; that, in his view, trying to unseat a duly elected, sitting president was as much of a danger to democracy as foreign interference in electoral processes; and that Utah Attorney General John Huber’s investigation is focused on Hillary Clinton and could be wrapped up soon (!).

But among those many revelations, Barr implies he may give the players in the collusion hoax more latitude than he gives the press and the opponents of Trump who have twisted the investigation and misled the public on all manner of things related to the investigation.

For example, Barr suggests that the the players in the collusion hoax, while certainly endangering the democratic process, were, in some ways, acting on what they believed to be the right thing to do, as misguided as Barr clearly thinks it was.

When interviewer Jan Crawford ask Barr about whether he had concerns about how the counterintelligence investigation into the Trump campaign was conducted, Barr gives a stunning response.

WILLIAM BARR: Yes but you know, when you’re dealing with official government contact, intent is frequently a murky issue. I’m not suggesting that people did what they did necessarily because of conscious, nefarious motives. Sometimes people can convince themselves that what they’re doing is in the higher interest, the better good. They don’t realize that what they’re doing is really antithetical to the democratic system that we have. They start viewing themselves as the guardians of the people that are more informed and insensitive than everybody else. They can- in their own mind, they can have those kinds of motives. And sometimes they can look at evidence and facts through a biased prism that they themselves don’t realize.

That something objectively as applied as a neutral principle across the board really you know, shouldn’t be the standard used in the case but because they have a particular bias they don’t see that. So that’s why procedures and standards are important and review afterward is an important way of making sure that government power is being conscientiously and properly applied. It doesn’t necessarily mean that there are people- you know, that people have crossed lines have done so with corrupt intent or anything like that.

At a different point in the interview, Barr discusses the “appalling” behavior of Peter Strzok, so he by no means lets the collusion team off the hook. But it’s an interesting response, especially in light of how very little rope he gives to talking heads and media members who have misled the populace in a “hyper-partisan” frenzy. As Barr tells Crawford near the beginning of the interview:

Well, we live in a hyper-partisan age where people no longer really pay attention to the substance of what’s said but as to who says it and what side they’re on and what it’s political ramifications are. The Department of Justice is all about the law, and the facts and the substance and I’m going to make the decisions based on the law and the facts and I realize that’s intention with the political climate we live in because people are more interested in getting their way politically. so I think it just goes with the territory of being the attorney general in a hyper-partisan period of time.

Later, he reveals why he wrote his four-page memo after the redactions he was promised from the Mueller team never came and he realized he had to give the public and the media something as they extended the redaction period for a few more weeks.

BARR: I didn’t think the body politic would allow us to go on radio silence for four weeks. I mean, people were camped outside my house and the department and every- there was all kinds of wild speculation going on. Former senior intelligence officials who were purporting to have it- or intimating that they had inside information were suggesting that the president and his family were going to be indicted and so forth–

JAN CRAWFORD: And saying that publicly?

WILLIAM BARR: Saying that publicly. There was all kind of wild and–

JAN CRAWFORD: And you knew that to be false?

WILLIAM BARR: Yes, and it was wild and irresponsible speculation going on which the very–

JAN CRAWFORD: Wild and irresponsible. The former intelligence officials’ speculation–

WILLIAM BARR: Right, and talking heads and things like that, and these things affect the United States’ ability to function in the world. We have an economy. It could affect the economy. It can affect – it can affect our foreign relations during very delicate period of time with, you know, serious adversaries in the world. So I felt- that in order to buy time, in order to get the report out, I had to state the bottom line just like you’re announcing a verdict in a case. My purpose there was not to summarize every jot and tittle of the report and every, you know, angle that – that Mueller looked into. But, just state the bottom line which I did in the four page memo.

Later he talks about his amusement that people are concerned he might slip up and declassify things that could compromise assets or hurt intelligence recruiting.

WILLIAM BARR: Well in an exceptional circumstance I have that authority but obviously I intend to consult with them. I’m amused by these people who make a living by disclosing classified information, including the names of intelligence operatives, wringing their hands about whether I’m going to be responsible in protecting intelligence sources and methods. I’ve been in the business as I’ve said for over 50 years long before they were born and I know how to handle classified information and I believe strongly in protecting intelligence sources and methods. But at the same time if there is information that can be shared with the American people without jeopardizing intelligence sources and methods that decision should be made and because I will be involved in finding out what the story was I think I’m in the best decision to make that decision

Finally, he marvels at the media’s apparent new focus away from fact-finding and toward protecting government sources.

WILLIAM BARR: Well the media reaction is strange. Normally the media would be interested in letting the sunshine in and finding out what the truth is. And usually the media doesn’t care that much about protecting intelligence sources and methods. But I do and I will.

The interview should be a must-watch for all Americans. Barr, very near the end, hits on what has characterized U.S. politics for the last 10 years or so: a growing partisan opportunism that, arguably, has been fueled and sustained by a media that has their own political agenda.

WILLIAM BARR: Yeah, because I realize we live in a crazy hyper-partisan period of time and I knew that it would only be a matter of time if I was behaving responsibly and calling them as I see them, that I would be attacked because nowadays people don’t care about the merits and the substance. They only care about who it helps, who benefits, whether my side benefits or the other side benefits, everything is gauged by politics. And as I say, that’s antithetical to the way the department runs and any attorney general in this period is going to end up losing a lot of political capital and I realize that and that is one of the reasons that I ultimately was persuaded that I should take it on because I think at my stage in life it really doesn’t make any difference.

For all the revelations, the most astonishing is the one where Barr appears more forgiving of the small group of anti-Trump bureaucrats than he is of the media machine and partisan officials who divide Americans with histrionic misinformation.

The post AG Barr Exhibits More Tolerance For Collusion Players (Who He Says Probably Did Not Commit Treason) Than He Does For Media And Anti-Trump Officials appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group william-barr-300x169 AG Barr Exhibits More Tolerance For Collusion Players (Who He Says Probably Did Not Commit Treason) Than He Does For Media And Anti-Trump Officials Front Page Stories Featured Story Abuse of Power   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Go Girl: Actress Selma Blair, An MS Sufferer, Shuts Down Trolls Who Said Her Head Wrap Was Cultural Appropriation

Westlake Legal Group SelmaBlair-ABCNews-620x347 Go Girl: Actress Selma Blair, An MS Sufferer, Shuts Down Trolls Who Said Her Head Wrap Was Cultural Appropriation Social Media Not Today Internet North Carolina multiple sclerosis Hollywood hero Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Faith Culture & Faith Culture concern troll California Allow Media Exception

Actress Selma Blair on Good Morning America – February 2019. Screen grab via ABC News.

Actress Selma Blair is hitting back at critics who accused her of cultural appropriation after she shared two photos of herself on Instagram wearing a head wrap.

People magazine reports:

The actress, 46, first sported the wrap in a photo taken with Rachel Fleit, a filmmaker known for embracing her hair loss and baldness, caused by alopecia.

“We have one answer to your bad hair days or NO hair days. #alopecia @rachelfleit … wraps! (oh, it’s been around for thousands of years…),” Blair wrote.

The Cruel Intentions star has been open about dealing with the intense side effects of multiple sclerosis, which may include hair loss, ever since she revealed she was diagnosed with the chronic neurological condition in October.

Blair also shared a photo of herself and her son Arthur Saint, 7½, both wearing headwraps.

[…]

“This is not brilliant and is not cool,” one user wrote. “White people have scorned Sikhs for hundreds of years, and now we wanna appropriate and make it trendy? No. Just no. We dont get to do this.”

Another added: “Cultural appropriation. How can one wear that when the religious people who actually wear it gets so much ridicule.”

“You are so wonderful and I know you mean no harm, but this is serious cultural appropriation,” a third commenter wrote. “I’d be happy to have a private conversation about how this is hurtful to Sikhs if you’re open to it.”

Here are the “hurtful” photos:

Some people would just delete the photos out of frustration over the sheer stupidity of the criticisms, but not Blair. Here’s how she handled it:

The “Legally Blonde” actress also responded to comments on her posts, writing: “This is not at all a Sikh turban or imitating one. And funnily enough, Sikhs absorb negativity, diffuse it. Tolerance. So none of these comments hurt. They may be not knowing what they write. A head wrap can be useful and beautiful in all cultures.”

“Covering one’s head is not appropriating anything but warmth and a wig alternative,” she responded to another critic.

“Scarves have been worn by all colors for ages. Relax. What do you want a woman with no hair to wear? Just an itchy wig? Why not tie your own scarf and bejewel it. I think it’s a pretty alternative.”

Good for her.

Accusations of “cultural appropriation” have gotten way out of hand over the years as bored people online actually look for things to get offended over. That Blair took the time out in the middle of her MS battle to push back against the concern trolls in her comments section is a testament to just how strong of a fighter she is. For those who actually do engage in the comments of their social media posts or blogs, it’s a lot more emotionally taxing than you might think. That goes double for anyone who is dealing with serious health issues, as Blair is.

Blair opened up to “Good Morning America”‘s Robin Roberts back in February about her struggle with MS. At the time of the interview, she was experiencing an MS flare-up but still held her own because she wanted to raise awareness of what MS was like.

Watch the interview below, and please keep her, her family, and everyone who lives with MS in your thoughts and prayers.

To learn more about multiple sclerosis, click here.

————
—Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 15+ year veteran of blogging with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars. Read her Red State archives here. Connect with her on Twitter.–

The post Go Girl: Actress Selma Blair, An MS Sufferer, Shuts Down Trolls Who Said Her Head Wrap Was Cultural Appropriation appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group SelmaBlair-ABCNews-300x168 Go Girl: Actress Selma Blair, An MS Sufferer, Shuts Down Trolls Who Said Her Head Wrap Was Cultural Appropriation Social Media Not Today Internet North Carolina multiple sclerosis Hollywood hero Front Page Stories Front Page Featured Story Featured Post Faith Culture & Faith Culture concern troll California Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com 

Remember the Time That Jim Comey Sent Peter Strzok To Brief Donald Trump On the Danger From Russia

Westlake Legal Group strzok-hearing-620x413 Remember the Time That Jim Comey Sent Peter Strzok To Brief Donald Trump On the Danger From Russia Politics Peter Strzok Paul Manafort Lisa Page james comey Government george papadopoulos Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Carter Page Allow Media Exception

FBI Deputy Assistant Director Peter Strzok, testifies before a House Judiciary Committee joint hearing on “oversight of FBI and Department of Justice actions surrounding the 2016 election” on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, July 12, 2018. (AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta)

One of the overarching mysteries of the whole Russia collusion hoax is why the FBI, despite it’s legitimate concerns about the activities of a few people in and associated with the Trump campaign, never warned the candidate about those concerns. This lack of warning was a stark break in departure from historical practice. It has, for instance, been reported the FBI did deliver such defensive briefing to Senator John McCain during the 2008 campaign and he removed a staffer who may have been a counterintelligence risk.

As it turned out, the FBI did deliver such a briefing to then-candidate Trump. The briefing was conducted by none other than Peter “Insurance Policy” Strzok at the direction of James Comey, himself.

A mid-August 2016 counterintelligence briefing for the Trump campaign did not specifically warn officials about Russian outreach to the Trump team, nor did it warn that two campaign aides, Mike Flynn and George Papadopoulos, were already under FBI investigation, Fox News has learned.

The new details about the so-called “defensive briefing” have emerged from congressional letters, text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and lawyer Lisa Page, and sources familiar with the matter. Such briefings are designed to warn the candidate and his team about national security threats.

“There was a defensive briefing of candidate Trump on Aug. 17 of 2016,” Texas Rep. John Ratcliffe, a member of the House Judiciary Committee, said Thursday on Fox News’ “America’s Newsroom.” “And I can tell you what he wasn’t told: He wasn’t warned about a Russia investigation that Peter Strzok had opened 18 days earlier.”

A source familiar with sensitive records documenting the August briefing told Fox News that Strzok was in a unique — and apparently conflicted — position. Strzok opened the FBI investigation into Russian outreach to Trump campaign aides, while at the same time he was supposed to be warning the Trump campaign about Russian activities.

Critics of the Russia and special counsel probes question whether the lengthy investigation could have been shorter, or whether it could have been avoided altogether, had Strzok and others provided adequate warning.

Of course he was conflicted. Strzok appears to have been, like the rest of FBI and Justice leadership, Hillary Clinton partisans. He could see the value of hammering the Trump campaign at some later time with allegations of “Russians in the Mist.” In fact, is was shortly before this that Strzok sent his mistress the text message that referred to the “insurance policy” and promising that Trump would never become president because they would “stop it.”

By the time that this briefing took place, the FBI already knew that George Papadopoulos didn’t know squat…he was spoonfed a rumor by another Western intelligence, if not FBI, asset. The sole person on the campaign with any major role still under suspicion was Manafort. Apparently, Mike Flynn had tickled the FBI’s sensors by making a hugely public appearance at an RT gala in Moscow. But, as far as we know, Flynn was not under any suspicion in August 2016 and he still retained his security clearances.

Watch the latest video at foxnews.com

Ratcliffe on Thursday questioned Strzok’s role.

“Why would Peter Strzok, who would participate at [former FBI director] Jim Comey’s direction in a defensive briefing designed to protect and warn a candidate, be the same person who is in fact at that time already investigating the candidate’s campaign? That shouldn’t happen. There should be answers to those questions,” he said.

We hope that John Durham’s investigation finds the answers because it would be interesting to hear the explanation of why the FBI refused to tell the man who would become the President of the United States that there were possible foreign agents in his inner circle so he could remedy the problem and, instead, elected to husband those allegations and use them to launch the Mueller investigation.

=========
=========
Like what you see? Then visit my story archive.

I’m on Facebook. Drop by and join the fun there.
=========
=========

The post Remember the Time That Jim Comey Sent Peter Strzok To Brief Donald Trump On the Danger From Russia appeared first on RedState.

Westlake Legal Group strzok-hearing-300x200 Remember the Time That Jim Comey Sent Peter Strzok To Brief Donald Trump On the Danger From Russia Politics Peter Strzok Paul Manafort Lisa Page james comey Government george papadopoulos Front Page Stories Featured Story donald trump democrats Carter Page Allow Media Exception   Real Estate, and Personal Injury Lawyers. Contact us at: https://westlakelegal.com