westernjournal--2020-01-27--Ted Cruz Brilliantly Exposes House Dems’ Misleading Lawyer Trick

There is no shortage of impeachment-centric podcasts out there nowadays , given the interest that political junkies have in the current kerfuffle .
It helps , of course , if the podcast is hosted by a lawyer .
While it doesn ’ t necessarily lend itself to even-handed analysis , it also helps if the lawyer is involved in the impeachment process .
Lo and behold , Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has stepped into the gap .
He ’ s currently hosting a post-trial analysis show with the Daily Wire ’ s Michael Knowles .
( The Verge , Vox @ @ @ @ @ @ @ never heard of the guy , so they described him as “ a stupendously softball interviewer.
” They either don ’ t get that Knowles is supposed to serve as the Ed McMahon to Cruz ’ s Johnny Carson or are under the impression that anyone in the same room as Cruz should be grilling him about the numerous perfidies they think Cruz commits every time he opens his mouth .
Whatever . )
“ Verdict with Ted Cruz ” is only a few episodes old — and given the fact that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ ll pretty much be a miniseries at best — but Cruz has already made some trenchant arguments that should interest everyone not in the employ of The Verge .
In fact , as The Blaze pointed out , Cruz managed to expose one of the oldest lawyer tricks in the book in episode five .
When Knowles asked if Cruz thought the Democrats had been deceptive during the trial , the senator responded in the affirmative .
TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ managers “ were deceptive using lots of different tools ” and then broke that claim down .
“ Here ’ s a particular logical construct that the House managers used to be deceptive .
They used this several times , and it ’ s a logical construct of ‘ X , not Y , ' ” Cruz said .
What ’ s that ?
Well , here ’ s Cruz on the construct : “ They say , for example , that ‘ President Trump and Republicans bought the narrative that Ukraine , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 2016 election.
’ Now in that model , X is right ; Ukraine did interfere in 2016 .
The lie , the deception , is the ‘ not Y , ” he said .
Cruz added that “ it is obvious Russia … did interfere in 2016 .
… That happened , that was real and anyone who looks at the evidence recognizes that .
But the fact that Russia did doesn ’ t mean no other country did.
” “ It ’ s true that the Republicans are saying that Ukraine interfered @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Republicans are also saying ‘ therefore , Russia did not interfere . '
” Knowles said .
“ And it would be false , ” Cruz responded , “ if we said ‘ Russia did not interfere , ’ that ’ s a false statement.
” However , the deception goes far beyond that .
RELATED : Ted Cruz Rips Adam Schiff 's 'Very Serious Strategic Error ' During Day 2 of Impeachment Arguments “ What the House managers said over and over and over again is : ‘ The president wanted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an actual investigation , ' ” Cruz said .
“ X , and not Y .
So , there ’ s lots of evidence Trump wanted an investigation announced .
There is zero evidence that Trump didn ’ t want an actual investigation .
And the House managers asserted over and over and over again ‘ an announcement , and not an actual investigation.
’ They ’ ve never cited any evidence whatsoever .
And by the way , think about it : In what universe would Trump not want an investigation ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is that they ’ re making a true statement and they ’ re using the true statement to cover up for the false statement that they say immediately afterward , ” Knowles said .
“ Yes … the media does this all the time , ” Cruz responded .
“ ‘ You ’ re saying Ukraine , and not Russia , interfered.
’ No , no , that ’ s not what we ’ re saying.
” “ That logical construct , ‘ X and not Y , ’ is a real giveaway @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sleight of hand.
” And this is one of Schiff ’ s go-to tricks , according to Cruz .
“ By the way , ” he said , “ Adam Schiff says it very smoothly , he says it smiling .
And to date , I haven ’ t seen anyone actually contradicting it and pointing out that half of that sentence is total deception.
” So , in short : Schiff is explaining what we already know , that Trump wanted an investigation into Ukrainian corruption .
He hasn ’ t proven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this wasn ’ t going to be an actual investigation into corruption in Ukraine , which was a serious problem .
Don ’ t expect them to prove this , since they have no intention of doing so .
They ’ re perfectly happy with leaving things as they are .
This is why Republicans should be happy Ted Cruz is around .
As much as I love the Texas Republican , even I ’ ll admit this much : He ’ s not traditionally likable in the way a politician is .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ s going to give a stump speech full of bromides like , “ I love this country !
I love the opportunity it provides !
I love freedom !
I love apple-rhubarb pie , a good football game and big-headed babies !
I love my wife !
Almost as much as I love America !
” This is a man whose attempt at that sort of humanization is to remind us at every opportunity that he loves “ The Princess Bride.
” Which , don ’ t get me wrong , is an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ plenty of other acerbic films that work on multiple levels in the 33 years since that movie debuted and maybe displaying some love for at least one of them might have helped his cause .
Forget that .
Ted Cruz isn ’ t that kind of politician .
What he does better than anyone else in the upper chamber is not only dissect logical fallacies but also manage to make the formal logic behind those fallacies accessible and engaging to the average voter .
This isn ’ t a surprise .
Not only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , this is how he got within spitting distance of the Republican nomination in 2016 in spite of the fact America was tired — long before the Iowa caucuses — of the Princess Buttercup references .
But again , never mind .
Ted Cruz will take you apart .
He will dismantle your argument , do it in a profoundly organized way and do it in a way a fifth-grader can understand .
That ’ s not the easiest way to win an election , and yet he was essentially the last man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , now that Trump ’ s been impeached and Adam Schiff is essentially the prosecution , one gets the feeling Cruz ’ s specific skill set is very likely to come in handy .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

There is no shortage of impeachment-centric podcasts out there nowadays, given the interest that political junkies have in the current kerfuffle. It helps, of course, if the podcast is hosted by a lawyer. While it doesn’t necessarily lend itself to even-handed analysis, it also helps if the lawyer is involved in the impeachment process.
Lo and behold, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz has stepped into the gap. He’s currently hosting a post-trial analysis show with the Daily Wire’s Michael Knowles. (The Verge, Vox’s tech-centric publication, had apparently never heard of the guy, so they described him as “a stupendously softball interviewer.” They either don’t get that Knowles is supposed to serve as the Ed McMahon to Cruz’s Johnny Carson or are under the impression that anyone in the same room as Cruz should be grilling him about the numerous perfidies they think Cruz commits every time he opens his mouth. Whatever.)
“Verdict with Ted Cruz” is only a few episodes old — and given the fact that the trial will be over quickly, it’ll pretty much be a miniseries at best — but Cruz has already made some trenchant arguments that should interest everyone not in the employ of The Verge.
In fact, as The Blaze pointed out, Cruz managed to expose one of the oldest lawyer tricks in the book in episode five.
When Knowles asked if Cruz thought the Democrats had been deceptive during the trial, the senator responded in the affirmative.
Cruz argued Democratic House managers “were deceptive using lots of different tools” and then broke that claim down.
“Here’s a particular logical construct that the House managers used to be deceptive. They used this several times, and it’s a logical construct of ‘X, not Y,'” Cruz said.
What’s that? Well, here’s Cruz on the construct:
“They say, for example, that ‘President Trump and Republicans bought the narrative that Ukraine, and not Russia, interfered in the 2016 election.’ Now in that model, X is right; Ukraine did interfere in 2016. The lie, the deception, is the ‘not Y,” he said.
Do you think President Trump will be convicted? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 1% (5 Votes) No: 99% (983 Votes)
Cruz added that “it is obvious Russia … did interfere in 2016. … That happened, that was real and anyone who looks at the evidence recognizes that. But the fact that Russia did doesn’t mean no other country did.”
“It’s true that the Republicans are saying that Ukraine interfered, but it’s not true that Republicans are also saying ‘therefore, Russia did not interfere.'” Knowles said.
“And it would be false,” Cruz responded, “if we said ‘Russia did not interfere,’ that’s a false statement.”
However, the deception goes far beyond that.
“What the House managers said over and over and over again is: ‘The president wanted the announcement of an investigation and not an actual investigation,'” Cruz said.
“X, and not Y. So, there’s lots of evidence Trump wanted an investigation announced. There is zero evidence that Trump didn’t want an actual investigation. And the House managers asserted over and over and over again ‘an announcement, and not an actual investigation.’ They’ve never cited any evidence whatsoever. And by the way, think about it: In what universe would Trump not want an investigation?”
“The Democrats’ trick here is that they’re making a true statement and they’re using the true statement to cover up for the false statement that they say immediately afterward,” Knowles said.
“Yes … the media does this all the time,” Cruz responded. “‘You’re saying Ukraine, and not Russia, interfered.’ No, no, that’s not what we’re saying.”
“That logical construct, ‘X and not Y,’ is a real giveaway that they’re engaging in lawyerly sleight of hand.”
And this is one of Schiff’s go-to tricks, according to Cruz.
“By the way,” he said, “Adam Schiff says it very smoothly, he says it smiling. And to date, I haven’t seen anyone actually contradicting it and pointing out that half of that sentence is total deception.”
“That’s an incredibly deceptive trick,” Knowles said.
“There’s a reason lawyers are so beloved,” a grinning Cruz replied.
So, in short: Schiff is explaining what we already know, that Trump wanted an investigation into Ukrainian corruption. He hasn’t proven — nor can the Democrats prove — this wasn’t going to be an actual investigation into corruption in Ukraine, which was a serious problem. Don’t expect them to prove this, since they have no intention of doing so. They’re perfectly happy with leaving things as they are.
This is why Republicans should be happy Ted Cruz is around. As much as I love the Texas Republican, even I’ll admit this much: He’s not traditionally likable in the way a politician is. This is not a guy who’s going to give a stump speech full of bromides like, “I love this country! I love the opportunity it provides! I love freedom! I love apple-rhubarb pie, a good football game and big-headed babies! I love my wife! Almost as much as I love America!”
This is a man whose attempt at that sort of humanization is to remind us at every opportunity that he loves “The Princess Bride.” Which, don’t get me wrong, is an amazing movie, but Hollywood has made plenty of other acerbic films that work on multiple levels in the 33 years since that movie debuted and maybe displaying some love for at least one of them might have helped his cause.
Forget that. Ted Cruz isn’t that kind of politician. What he does better than anyone else in the upper chamber is not only dissect logical fallacies but also manage to make the formal logic behind those fallacies accessible and engaging to the average voter.
This isn’t a surprise. Not only is Cruz an accomplished debater and litigator, this is how he got within spitting distance of the Republican nomination in 2016 in spite of the fact America was tired — long before the Iowa caucuses — of the Princess Buttercup references.
But again, never mind. Ted Cruz will take you apart. He will dismantle your argument, do it in a profoundly organized way and do it in a way a fifth-grader can understand. That’s not the easiest way to win an election, and yet he was essentially the last man standing not named Donald Trump.
Moreover, now that Trump’s been impeached and Adam Schiff is essentially the prosecution, one gets the feeling Cruz’s specific skill set is very likely to come in handy.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Pro-Life Woman Confronts Pete Buttigieg at Televised Town Hall

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg on Sunday indicated that pro-life Democrats seeking moderation in the party ’ s platform language about abortion should not get their hopes up .
The former mayor of South Bend , Indiana , took questions during a Fox News town hall in Claremont , New Hampshire , on Sunday night .
One question for Buttigieg came from pro-life Democrat Kristen Day .
“ I am a proud , pro-life Democrat , ” Day said .
“ So , do you want the support of pro-life Democratic voters ?
There are about 21 million of us @ @ @ @ @ @ @ support more moderate platform language in the Democratic Party to ensure that the party of diversity and inclusion really does include everybody ?
” Buttigieg responded that he respected Day but did not agree .
TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe Bryant Speaks Out “ I ’ m not going to try to earn your vote by tricking you , ” he said .
“ I am pro-choice , and I believe that a woman ought to be able to make that decision .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ opinion that you and I have is one that we come by honestly .
… “ The best I can offer is that if we can ’ t agree on where to draw the line , the next best thing we can do is agree on who should draw the line , and in my view , it ’ s the woman who ’ s faced with that decision in her own life.
” When host Chris Wallace asked Day if she was OK with that answer , she said she was not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the second part of my question , ” she said , “ and the second part was , the Democratic platform contains language that basically says that we don ’ t belong , we have no part in the party because it says abortion should be legal up to nine months , the government should pay for it .
… “ In 1996 and several years after that , there was language in the Democratic platform that said that we understand that people have very differing views on this issue but we are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and therefore we welcome you — people like me — into the party so we can work on issues that we agree on.
” Day asked if he would be open to language in the party ’ s platform saying “ our party is diverse and inclusive and we want everybody.
” Buttigieg didn ’ t directly answer her but made it clear he believes almost all abortions should be legal .
“ I support the position of my party — that this kind of medical care needs to be available to everyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wade framework that holds that early in pregnancy there are very few restrictions and late in pregnancy there are very few exceptions , ” he said .
The comment earned Buttigieg some criticism on Twitter .
The 2016 Democratic platform said Democrats “ will support sexual and reproductive health and rights around the globe .
In addition to expanding the availability of affordable family planning information and contraceptive supplies , we believe that safe abortion must be part of comprehensive maternal and women ’ s health care and included as part of America @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Day mentioned , the party platform in 1996 was more welcoming of pro-life views , saying , “ The Democratic Party is a party of inclusion .
We respect the individual conscience of each American on this difficult issue , and we welcome all our members to participate at every level of our party.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg on Sunday indicated that pro-life Democrats seeking moderation in the party’s platform language about abortion should not get their hopes up.
The former mayor of South Bend, Indiana, took questions during a Fox News town hall in Claremont, New Hampshire, on Sunday night.
One question for Buttigieg came from pro-life Democrat Kristen Day.
“I am a proud, pro-life Democrat,” Day said. “So, do you want the support of pro-life Democratic voters? There are about 21 million of us. And if so, would you support more moderate platform language in the Democratic Party to ensure that the party of diversity and inclusion really does include everybody?”
Buttigieg responded that he respected Day but did not agree.
“I’m not going to try to earn your vote by tricking you,” he said. “I am pro-choice, and I believe that a woman ought to be able to make that decision.
“I know that the difference of opinion that you and I have is one that we come by honestly. …
“The best I can offer is that if we can’t agree on where to draw the line, the next best thing we can do is agree on who should draw the line, and in my view, it’s the woman who’s faced with that decision in her own life.”
When host Chris Wallace asked Day if she was OK with that answer, she said she was not.
Do you think the Democratic Party has gone too far in its embrace of abortion rights? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (583 Votes) No: 1% (4 Votes)
“He didn’t answer the second part of my question,” she said, “and the second part was, the Democratic platform contains language that basically says that we don’t belong, we have no part in the party because it says abortion should be legal up to nine months, the government should pay for it. …
“In 1996 and several years after that, there was language in the Democratic platform that said that we understand that people have very differing views on this issue but we are a big tent party that includes everybody and therefore we welcome you — people like me — into the party so we can work on issues that we agree on.”
Day asked if he would be open to language in the party’s platform saying “our party is diverse and inclusive and we want everybody.”
Buttigieg didn’t directly answer her but made it clear he believes almost all abortions should be legal.
“I support the position of my party — that this kind of medical care needs to be available to everyone, and I support the Roe v. Wade framework that holds that early in pregnancy there are very few restrictions and late in pregnancy there are very few exceptions,” he said.
The comment earned Buttigieg some criticism on Twitter.
Pete Buttigieg just told a pro-life, Democrat *woman* she has no place in today’s Democrat Party. All she asked for was a recognition there is diversity of thought on the issue and that it be put in the platform language. He said no and told her to deal with it. — Katie Pavlich (@KatiePavlich) January 27, 2020
Such callous narrow-mindless is 1) so wrong (on the merits and given the beautiful, now past Democrat legacy of defending the little guy) and 2) giving away a key component of an election-winning voter base. https://t.co/KXM66LhkfB — MarjorieDannenfelser (@marjoriesba) January 27, 2020
WATCH → Pro-Life woman asks Pete Buttigieg if there’s room for her in the Democrat Party. He doubled down on the Dems’ extreme agenda of government-funded abortions up to the moment of birth. This radical Democrat Party may not welcome #ProLife voters, but Republicans will! pic.twitter.com/KCmfL8q3Hu — Steve Scalise (@GeauxScalise) January 27, 2020
The 2016 Democratic platform said Democrats “will support sexual and reproductive health and rights around the globe. In addition to expanding the availability of affordable family planning information and contraceptive supplies, we believe that safe abortion must be part of comprehensive maternal and women’s health care and included as part of America’s global health programming.”
As Day mentioned, the party platform in 1996 was more welcoming of pro-life views, saying, “The Democratic Party is a party of inclusion. We respect the individual conscience of each American on this difficult issue, and we welcome all our members to participate at every level of our party.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--CNN Fails Miserably in Attempt To Blame Shooting on Lax Gun Laws

On Monday , gun rights advocates gathered peaceably in Richmond , Virginia — as they had for years , mind you — but according to the liberal media , this year was supposed to be different , with white nationalists and neo-Nazis with guns and dreams of Charlottesville 2.0 dancing around in their heads like poisonous sugarplums .
Nothing happened , but that didn ’ t actually stop the sensationalist headlines .
Perhaps one of the most egregious things to come out of the Monday rally was the strange juxtaposition of a shooting in a Kansas City , Missouri , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ On Sunday , two people were killed and fifteen more were injured in the bar shooting before an armed guard took the shooter out .
It didn ’ t take long for chyrons like this to appear on CNN : TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe Bryant Speaks Out The gun rally ended eventually , however , so there had to be a new angle .
This time , it was that the suspected gunman in Kansas City — Jahron Swift , a 29-year-old @ @ @ @ @ @ @ lot after the shooting , according to CNN — should have been in prison on a gun charge but was let go by a change in the law .
Well , finally , we ’ ve discovered a form of criminal justice reform that CNN can ’ t get behind .
Even in that , however , they failed miserably .
“ Court records show that Swift had two weapons charges in 2016 and 2017 , ” CNN reported .
“ The 2016 charge was for unlawful use of a weapon and marijuana @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Swift was charged in 2017 with unlawful concealed carry , which could have revoked his probation on the previous charge and increased his chances of going to prison , Mike Mansur , the Jackson County prosecutor spokesman , told CNN .
“ However , the second charge came as Missouri legislature adopted measures that permitted concealed weapons being carried without a permit.
” “ I can ’ t say that he would have been imprisoned but I can say that the change in the law assured that he would be free because that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
However , the Washington Free Beacon noted that CNN had “ obfuscated ” the facts behind the shooting — which , as it turns out , had nothing to do with lax gun laws .
“ CNN published a report Wednesday saying Swift likely would have gone to prison over a weapons charge if not for the state ’ s 2017 permitless carry law .
However , the report obfuscated the date of Swift ’ s charge to suggest the law let him off the hook for it , ” the Free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but CNN left a few critical details out .
“ Swift was not on probation at the time of his second arrest , as the report insinuates , and he received a drug felony charge in addition to the weapons charge allegedly nullified by the state ’ s gun laws , ” the Free Beacon reported .
“ Swift was arrested following an August 2015 traffic stop in which he was caught with five grams of cocaine , more than $ 1,100 in cash , and a .45 caliber semiautomatic handgun .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ controlled substance and unlawful use of a weapon .
“ CNN ’ s report failed to mention Swift ’ s possession of cocaine .
A permitless carry law would not have impacted Swift ’ s weapons charge , as Swift was in possession of both a weapon and a felony controlled substance.
” In short , there was no way he should have had a gun .
Missouri ’ s laws had nothing to do with it .
Swift was legally barred from possessing a firearm no matter what the laws in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ all .
As the Free Beacon noted , the problem may have been liberal leniency as opposed to a conservative defense of gun rights .
Jackson County , where these charges were levied , is also well-known for giving felons probation .
A Kansas City Star report stated that Jackson County “ gave twice as many probation sentences for second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter as all of the state ’ s other circuit courts combined from 2009 to 2013.
” The CNN story has since been clarified to note that the law took @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , mention that Swift could not legally own a firearm .
In a way , the juxtaposition of the Kansas City shooting and the gun rights protest in Richmond was actually more apropos than it might seem at first glance , although not for the reasons that CNN felt it was .
In Richmond , thousands of people who legally possessed firearms assembled peacefully without incident and were demonized .
Over much of the coverage , a chyron informed viewers of a deadly shooting in which the alleged killer didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a firearm but had one anyway .
Politicians were blamed for a law that applied to legal gun carriers which had nothing to do with the crime that was committed .
No apologies were given .
At least in CNN ’ s case , it seems , no apologies were deemed necessary .
This is the problem with the gun debate in America .
It ’ s not just that we ’ re talking past each other .
It ’ s that one side refuses to even acknowledge that the laws they blame @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for the deaths they ’ re blaming them for .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

On Monday, gun rights advocates gathered peaceably in Richmond, Virginia — as they had for years, mind you — but according to the liberal media, this year was supposed to be different, with white nationalists and neo-Nazis with guns and dreams of Charlottesville 2.0 dancing around in their heads like poisonous sugarplums.
Nothing happened, but that didn’t actually stop the sensationalist headlines.
Perhaps one of the most egregious things to come out of the Monday rally was the strange juxtaposition of a shooting in a Kansas City, Missouri, bar with the goings-on in Richmond.
On Sunday, two people were killed and fifteen more were injured in the bar shooting before an armed guard took the shooter out.
It didn’t take long for chyrons like this to appear on CNN:
While characterizing a march on Richmond by masked men, heavily armed and wearing paramilitary gear, as just a “peaceful 2A rally,” far-right outlet repeatedly annoyed by reminders that gun violence claims scores of new victims daily. https://t.co/cQvn3eTUjj — Glenn Craven (@GlennCraven) January 21, 2020
The gun rally ended eventually, however, so there had to be a new angle.
This time, it was that the suspected gunman in Kansas City — Jahron Swift, a 29-year-old who was found dead in a parking lot after the shooting, according to CNN — should have been in prison on a gun charge but was let go by a change in the law.
Do you think CNN has an anti-gun agenda? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 100% (472 Votes) No: 0% (0 Votes)
Well, finally, we’ve discovered a form of criminal justice reform that CNN can’t get behind. Even in that, however, they failed miserably.
“Court records show that Swift had two weapons charges in 2016 and 2017,” CNN reported.
“The 2016 charge was for unlawful use of a weapon and marijuana possession, according to court records. Swift was charged in 2017 with unlawful concealed carry, which could have revoked his probation on the previous charge and increased his chances of going to prison, Mike Mansur, the Jackson County prosecutor spokesman, told CNN.
“However, the second charge came as Missouri legislature adopted measures that permitted concealed weapons being carried without a permit.”
“I can’t say that he would have been imprisoned but I can say that the change in the law assured that he would be free because that charge went away,” Mansur said.
However, the Washington Free Beacon noted that CNN had “obfuscated” the facts behind the shooting — which, as it turns out, had nothing to do with lax gun laws.
“CNN published a report Wednesday saying Swift likely would have gone to prison over a weapons charge if not for the state’s 2017 permitless carry law. However, the report obfuscated the date of Swift’s charge to suggest the law let him off the hook for it,” the Free Beacon reported Sunday.
Not only that, but CNN left a few critical details out.
“Swift was not on probation at the time of his second arrest, as the report insinuates, and he received a drug felony charge in addition to the weapons charge allegedly nullified by the state’s gun laws,” the Free Beacon reported.
“Swift was arrested following an August 2015 traffic stop in which he was caught with five grams of cocaine, more than $1,100 in cash, and a .45 caliber semiautomatic handgun. He was charged with possession of a controlled substance and unlawful use of a weapon.
“CNN’s report failed to mention Swift’s possession of cocaine. A permitless carry law would not have impacted Swift’s weapons charge, as Swift was in possession of both a weapon and a felony controlled substance.”
In short, there was no way he should have had a gun. Missouri’s laws had nothing to do with it. Swift was legally barred from possessing a firearm no matter what the laws in the state were.
That wasn’t all. As the Free Beacon noted, the problem may have been liberal leniency as opposed to a conservative defense of gun rights.
[firely_poll]
Jackson County, where these charges were levied, is also well-known for giving felons probation.
A Kansas City Star report stated that Jackson County “gave twice as many probation sentences for second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter as all of the state’s other circuit courts combined from 2009 to 2013.”
The CNN story has since been clarified to note that the law took effect in 2017. It does not, however, mention that Swift could not legally own a firearm.
In a way, the juxtaposition of the Kansas City shooting and the gun rights protest in Richmond was actually more apropos than it might seem at first glance, although not for the reasons that CNN felt it was.
In Richmond, thousands of people who legally possessed firearms assembled peacefully without incident and were demonized. Over much of the coverage, a chyron informed viewers of a deadly shooting in which the alleged killer didn’t have the legal right to possess a firearm but had one anyway. Politicians were blamed for a law that applied to legal gun carriers which had nothing to do with the crime that was committed.
No apologies were given. At least in CNN’s case, it seems, no apologies were deemed necessary.
This is the problem with the gun debate in America.
It’s not just that we’re talking past each other. It’s that one side refuses to even acknowledge that the laws they blame couldn’t have even been responsible for the deaths they’re blaming them for.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Missouri House Will Investigate Dem State Auditor Over Alleged Political Bias

A top Missouri Democrat is being examined for charges of bias after Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said an audit of his time as Missouri ’ s attorney general was being manipulated for political reasons .
State Auditor Nicole Galloway , who is running for governor , was informed of the upcoming review last week by Republican Rep. Robert Ross , chairman of Missouri ’ s House Special Committee on Government Oversight , according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch .
Ross said that if the allegations prove true , it would damage the credibility of Galloway and the office she currently @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an extreme breach in the confidence the people of Missouri place in the role of your office , ” he said in a letter to Galloway , according to the Post-Dispatch .
“ As a member who relies heavily on the findings of fact-based , unbiased audits that are meant to be performed by your office , ” Ross wrote , “ I am concerned by the recent claim that political ramifications were considered in altering the conclusion of one of your recent audits.
” TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Bryant Speaks Out In a letter responding to a draft of the audit , Hawley ’ s attorney , Brian Barnes , said the lead investigator altered the audit ’ s conclusions .
“ The lead auditor assigned by Nicole Galloway to this case , Pam Allison , discussed altering the audit ’ s conclusions in order to make the audit appear more critical of Mr. Hawley or his office , ” Barnes wrote .
“ On August 20 , 2019 , Ms. Allison learned from the Attorney General ’ s Office that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that anyone working with or for Attorney General Hawley had violated any confidentiality agreements or otherwise engaged in misconduct .
“ In an email to colleagues in the Auditor ’ s Office that same day ( but which she inadvertently sent to the Attorney General ’ s Office ) , Ms. Allison wrote : ‘ I ’ m thinking I ’ ll just drop the confidentiality paragraph in the report and beef up the personal email/personal calendar section.
’ “ Such alteration of a state audit is deeply inappropriate , unethical , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ That this misconduct was committed while the auditor was herself conducting a political campaign for governor only underscores the impropriety.
” Hawley Lawyer Letter by The Western Journal on Scribd Noting that charges against Hawley were part of the 2018 campaign in which he unseated then-Sen. Claire McCaskill , a Democrat , the letter added , “ During the pendency of this audit , Nicole Galloway announced her candidacy for Governor and hired McCaskill ’ s campaign manager , David Kirby , a political operative , as a senior state employee in her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a senior level , of a political operative who personally promoted the very attacks against Mr. Hawley that Galloway was supposed to be independently reviewing is deeply inappropriate and potentially unethical .
Additionally , it calls into question whether state resources were used for political gain.
” Hawley published an email chain of the comments on his Twitter account .
Michael Moorefield , Galloway ’ s chief of staff , responded to Ross on Thursday , according to the Post-Dispatch .
Pursuant to state law , he said , “ the Auditor ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ work or content of an ongoing audit .
As such , the representative from our office will be legally bound to comply with the aforementioned statutes during his or her testimony before the committee.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A top Missouri Democrat is being examined for charges of bias after Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said an audit of his time as Missouri’s attorney general was being manipulated for political reasons.
State Auditor Nicole Galloway, who is running for governor, was informed of the upcoming review last week by Republican Rep. Robert Ross, chairman of Missouri’s House Special Committee on Government Oversight, according to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
Ross said that if the allegations prove true, it would damage the credibility of Galloway and the office she currently holds.
“This allegation would constitute an extreme breach in the confidence the people of Missouri place in the role of your office,” he said in a letter to Galloway, according to the Post-Dispatch.
“As a member who relies heavily on the findings of fact-based, unbiased audits that are meant to be performed by your office,” Ross wrote, “I am concerned by the recent claim that political ramifications were considered in altering the conclusion of one of your recent audits.”
In a letter responding to a draft of the audit, Hawley’s attorney, Brian Barnes, said the lead investigator altered the audit’s conclusions.
“The lead auditor assigned by Nicole Galloway to this case, Pam Allison, discussed altering the audit’s conclusions in order to make the audit appear more critical of Mr. Hawley or his office,” Barnes wrote. “On August 20, 2019, Ms. Allison learned from the Attorney General’s Office that there was no factual basis for concluding that anyone working with or for Attorney General Hawley had violated any confidentiality agreements or otherwise engaged in misconduct.
Do you think the Missouri state auditor is guilty of misconduct in this case? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 96% (236 Votes) No: 4% (11 Votes)
“In an email to colleagues in the Auditor’s Office that same day (but which she inadvertently sent to the Attorney General’s Office), Ms. Allison wrote: ‘I’m thinking I’ll just drop the confidentiality paragraph in the report and beef up the personal email/personal calendar section.’
“Such alteration of a state audit is deeply inappropriate, unethical, and potentially a violation of state law. That this misconduct was committed while the auditor was herself conducting a political campaign for governor only underscores the impropriety.”
Hawley Lawyer Letter by The Western Journal on Scribd
Noting that charges against Hawley were part of the 2018 campaign in which he unseated then-Sen. Claire McCaskill, a Democrat, the letter added, “During the pendency of this audit, Nicole Galloway announced her candidacy for Governor and hired McCaskill’s campaign manager, David Kirby, a political operative, as a senior state employee in her office.
“The involvement, at a senior level, of a political operative who personally promoted the very attacks against Mr. Hawley that Galloway was supposed to be independently reviewing is deeply inappropriate and potentially unethical. Additionally, it calls into question whether state resources were used for political gain.”
Hawley published an email chain of the comments on his Twitter account.
What is going on here? Is the Auditor’s office independent or is it just a giant political campaign? Is it legal to change conclusions of a state audit for political gain? Read for yourself https://t.co/UFgjsEYaIZ — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) January 14, 2020
What is going on here? Is the Auditor’s office independent or is it just a giant political campaign? Is it legal to change conclusions of a state audit for political gain? Read for yourself https://t.co/UFgjsEYaIZ — Josh Hawley (@HawleyMO) January 14, 2020
Michael Moorefield, Galloway’s chief of staff, responded to Ross on Thursday, according to the Post-Dispatch.
Pursuant to state law, he said, “the Auditor’s office is prevented from discussing the work or content of an ongoing audit. As such, the representative from our office will be legally bound to comply with the aforementioned statutes during his or her testimony before the committee.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Washington Post Reporter Suspended Over Her Response to Kobe Bryant’s Death

A Washington Post reporter who tweeted about past rape accusations concerning Los Angeles Lakers legend Kobe Bryant after his death on Sunday has been suspended by the newspaper .
Reporter Felicia Sonmez had tweeted a link to a 2016 Daily Beast story about the 2003 allegations .
She later deleted the tweet .
“ National political reporter Felicia Sonmez was placed on administrative leave while The Post reviews whether tweets about the death of Kobe Bryant violated The Post newsroom ’ s social media policy , ” Washington Post managing editor Tracy Grant said in a statement , according to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ poor judgment that undermined the work of her colleagues , ” Grant said .
On Twitter , some speculated that Sonmez was suspended for showing the contents of her inbox in one tweet , which would have displayed the names of those communicating with her .
TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe Bryant Speaks Out Sonmez tweeted a link to the article with no caption .
After Twitter had a meltdown over her tweet , she followed up with her thoughts .
“ Well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 10,000 people ( literally ) who have commented and emailed me with abuse and death threats , please take a moment and read the story –which was written 3+ years ago , and not by me .
“ Any public figure is worth remembering in their totality even if that public figure is beloved and that totality is unsettling .
That folks are responding with rage & threats toward me ( someone who didn ’ t even write the piece but found it well-reported ) speaks volumes about the pressure people come under @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” she wrote .
In another since-deleted tweet , she wrote , “ As an addendum : Hard to see what ’ s accomplished by messages such as these .
If your response to a news article is to resort to harassment and intimidation of journalists , you might want to consider that your behavior says more about you than the person you ’ re targeting , ” according to Business Insider .
RELATED : Kobe Bryant 's Faith Helped Him Through His Toughest Times Twitter was merciless in attacking Sonmez , while @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and his 13-year-old daughter Gianna were among those killed when a helicopter in which they were passengers crashed Sunday afternoon .
In the 2003 case Sonmez cited , Bryant was charged with sexual assault and false imprisonment .
A civil lawsuit was also filed , which was later settled .
The case was never tried .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

A Washington Post reporter who tweeted about past rape accusations concerning Los Angeles Lakers legend Kobe Bryant after his death on Sunday has been suspended by the newspaper.
Reporter Felicia Sonmez had tweeted a link to a 2016 Daily Beast story about the 2003 allegations. She later deleted the tweet.
“National political reporter Felicia Sonmez was placed on administrative leave while The Post reviews whether tweets about the death of Kobe Bryant violated The Post newsroom’s social media policy,” Washington Post managing editor Tracy Grant said in a statement, according to The Wrap.
“The tweets displayed poor judgment that undermined the work of her colleagues,” Grant said.
On Twitter, some speculated that Sonmez was suspended for showing the contents of her inbox in one tweet, which would have displayed the names of those communicating with her.
Reports say Sonmez was not suspended by the Washington Post for her initial tweet about Kobe Bryant, but for a follow up tweet that contained a screenshot of her inbox which included the names of senders. https://t.co/X4Be2s1XSu — Alex Salvi (@alexsalvinews) January 27, 2020
Sonmez tweeted a link to the article with no caption.
After Twitter had a meltdown over her tweet, she followed up with her thoughts.
“Well, THAT was eye-opening. To the 10,000 people (literally) who have commented and emailed me with abuse and death threats, please take a moment and read the story –which was written 3+ years ago, and not by me.
Was the Post correct to suspend this reporter? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 55% (460 Votes) No: 45% (384 Votes)
“Any public figure is worth remembering in their totality even if that public figure is beloved and that totality is unsettling. That folks are responding with rage & threats toward me (someone who didn’t even write the piece but found it well-reported) speaks volumes about the pressure people come under to stay silent in these cases,” she wrote.
In another since-deleted tweet, she wrote, “As an addendum: Hard to see what’s accomplished by messages such as these. If your response to a news article is to resort to harassment and intimidation of journalists, you might want to consider that your behavior says more about you than the person you’re targeting,” according to Business Insider.
My guess is Felicia won’t mind since people are forever marked by their worst mistake. https://t.co/Pew8jwnN0D — Matthew Keys (@MatthewKeysLive) January 26, 2020
Twitter was merciless in attacking Sonmez, while others rose to her defense.
Felicia Sonmez should be fired. To tweet something like that just hours after him and his daughter passed is disgusting. She is a horrible human being for doing something like that. #FireFeliciaSonmez — Dustin Driscoll (@DJLaker54) January 27, 2020
Truly appalling that Felicia Sonmez received death threats in response to this. You need to adjust your moral compass if you’re more enraged about somebody failing to worship at the cult of celebrity than you are about rape. #KobeBryant https://t.co/34H3OtjPjo — lafabfemmefeline ✋? (@lafabfeline) January 27, 2020
Woman who claims to be a feminist digs knife into 3 little girls, a newly bereaved mother/wife and a dead person who can’t defend themselves. Is hugely surprised at response. Gets suspended from job. No doubt is outraged and managing to see herself as a victim. #sonmez — Lief (@LondonQuickNote) January 27, 2020
@washingtonpost You need to fire Felicia Sonmez asap! Her tweets about Kobe Bryant after he & other victims died in a tragic helicopter crash are beyond insensitive. They are cold hearted & show no respect for his family/friends. Parents & children died today for Christ sake! — Mark Ringo (@MarkRingo12) January 26, 2020
@washingtonpost I stand with Felicia Sonmez, the journalist and survivor of sexual assault you suspended for tweeting a reminder that Kobe was accused of rape. https://t.co/T97F8MvAM8 — Snailin It (@Snailgoop) January 27, 2020
Bryant and his 13-year-old daughter Gianna were among those killed when a helicopter in which they were passengers crashed Sunday afternoon.
In the 2003 case Sonmez cited, Bryant was charged with sexual assault and false imprisonment. A civil lawsuit was also filed, which was later settled. The case was never tried.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


Forked Tongues

For more A.F .
Branco cartoons , go to WesternJournal.com/opinion/cartoons .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all @ @ @ @ @ our editorial standards .

Aldi opened its first store in the U.S. in 1976 after it was founded a decade earlier in Germany by two brothers.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Adam Schiff Says He Doesn’t Regret Paraphrasing Trump Phone Call with Ukraine

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said Sunday that he has no regrets about his so-called parody of President Donald Trump ’ s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky .
During an interview with the California Democrat on NBC ’ s “ Meet the Press , ” host Chuck Todd asked if he regretted his opening statement on the phone call at the center of Trump ’ s impeachment , in which Schiff offered a fictionalized version of Trump ’ s words .
Trump fired off his opinion of the interview on Twitter .
TRENDING : Biden @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lives To Get Him Elected “ Sleepyeyes Chuck Todd of Meet the Corrupt Press , just had a ‘ totally ’ softball interview with conman Adam Schiff , never even calling Shifty out on his fraudulent statement to Congress , where he made up ALL of the words of my conversation with the Ukrainian President !
FAKE NEWS , ” the president said .
“ After having been exposed as a fraud and corrupt , can anyone , including Sleepyeyes Chuck Todd of Fake @ NBCNews , continue to listen to his con @ @ @ @ @ @ @ repeatedly objected to Schiff ’ s remarks at an Intelligence Committee hearing in September , which put words in Trump ’ s mouth that made it seem as though the president was demanding a quid pro quo from Zelensky on the call .
“ We ’ ve been very good to your country .
Very good .
No other country has done as much as we have .
But you know what , I don ’ t see much reciprocity here , ” Schiff said , playing the part of Trump during the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Blasts Dems for Using 'Completely Out of Place ' Quote from Founding Father Against Trump “ I hear what you want .
I have a favor I want from you , though and I ’ m gon na say this only seven times , so you better listen good .
I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent , understand ?
Lots of it … on this and on that , ” Schiff said .
“ I ’ m gon na put you in touch with people and not just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ na put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States … Bill Barr .
He ’ s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him and I ’ m gon na put you in touch with Rudy .
You ’ re gon na love him , trust me .
You know what I ’ m asking , so I ’ m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways .
And by the way , don ’ t call me again @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you ’ ve done what I asked , ” Schiff said .
The comment was brought up Saturday as Trump ’ s lawyers started making their case to the Senate .
“ That ’ s fake , ” deputy White House counsel Mike Purpura said Saturday in Trump ’ s impeachment trial , according to The Hill .
“ That ’ s not the real call .
That ’ s not the evidence here.
” Schiff was one of the main speakers last week as House Democrats sought to make their case against @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Meet the Press ” interview Sunday , he attacked Senate Republicans for their position that the Senate should not call additional witnesses beyond those called when the House moved quickly to pass articles of impeachment against Trump last month .
“ I think they ’ re deathly afraid of what witnesses will have to say , ” Schiff said .
“ And so their whole strategy has been deprive the public of a fair trial .
They don ’ t frame it that way , but that ’ s in essence it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ burden , though , with that because the American people understand what a fair trial is .
A fair trial requires witnesses .
A fair trial does not consist of the person who is charged agreeing with the judges to deprive the prosecution from being able to make a case.
” Republican Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York offered a rebuttal to such claims Friday on Twitter .
The Senate was scheduled to reconvene the impeachment trial at 1 p.m. EST Monday .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff said Sunday that he has no regrets about his so-called parody of President Donald Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
During an interview with the California Democrat on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” host Chuck Todd asked if he regretted his opening statement on the phone call at the center of Trump’s impeachment, in which Schiff offered a fictionalized version of Trump’s words.
Schiff replied with one word: “No.”
Trump fired off his opinion of the interview on Twitter.
“Sleepyeyes Chuck Todd of Meet the Corrupt Press, just had a ‘totally’ softball interview with conman Adam Schiff, never even calling Shifty out on his fraudulent statement to Congress, where he made up ALL of the words of my conversation with the Ukrainian President! FAKE NEWS,” the president said.
Sleepyeyes Chuck Todd of Meet the Corrupt Press, just had a “totally” softball interview with conman Adam Schiff, never even calling Shifty out on his fraudulent statement to Congress, where he made up ALL of the words of my conversation with the Ukrainian President! FAKE NEWS — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 26, 2020
“After having been exposed as a fraud and corrupt, can anyone, including Sleepyeyes Chuck Todd of Fake @NBCNews, continue to listen to his con?” he continued.
After having been exposed as a fraud and corrupt, can anyone, including Sleepyeyes Chuck Todd of Fake @NBCNews, continue to listen to his con? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 26, 2020
Trump has repeatedly objected to Schiff’s remarks at an Intelligence Committee hearing in September, which put words in Trump’s mouth that made it seem as though the president was demanding a quid pro quo from Zelensky on the call.
Rep. Adam Schiff illegally made up a FAKE & terrible statement, pretended it to be mine as the most important part of my call to the Ukrainian President, and read it aloud to Congress and the American people. It bore NO relationship to what I said on the call. Arrest for Treason? — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 30, 2019
“We’ve been very good to your country. Very good. No other country has done as much as we have. But you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here,” Schiff said, playing the part of Trump during the phone call.
“I hear what you want. I have a favor I want from you, though and I’m gonna say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand? Lots of it … on this and on that,” Schiff said.
Do you think Schiff undermined his case by putting words in the president's mouth? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (1726 Votes) No: 1% (10 Votes)
“I’m gonna put you in touch with people and not just any people. I’m gonna put you in touch with the Attorney General of the United States … Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him and I’m gonna put you in touch with Rudy. You’re gonna love him, trust me. You know what I’m asking, so I’m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again; I’ll call you when you’ve done what I asked,” Schiff said.
The Ukraine Call Transcript was so damning that Adam Schiff had to completely rewrite it and make up quotes that weren’t in it.pic.twitter.com/bkB6RxLFjV — Benny (@bennyjohnson) September 26, 2019
The comment was brought up Saturday as Trump’s lawyers started making their case to the Senate.
“That’s fake,” deputy White House counsel Mike Purpura said Saturday in Trump’s impeachment trial, according to The Hill. “That’s not the real call. That’s not the evidence here.”
Schiff was one of the main speakers last week as House Democrats sought to make their case against Trump to the Senate.
During his “Meet the Press” interview Sunday, he attacked Senate Republicans for their position that the Senate should not call additional witnesses beyond those called when the House moved quickly to pass articles of impeachment against Trump last month.
“I think they’re deathly afraid of what witnesses will have to say,” Schiff said. “And so their whole strategy has been deprive the public of a fair trial. They don’t frame it that way, but that’s in essence it.
“They have a very heavy burden, though, with that because the American people understand what a fair trial is. A fair trial requires witnesses. A fair trial does not consist of the person who is charged agreeing with the judges to deprive the prosecution from being able to make a case.”
Republican Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York offered a rebuttal to such claims Friday on Twitter.
Schiff Claim #1: He blocked GOP questions of witnesses in the House, bc we were asking “Who is the whistleblower, because we want to punish him?” FACT: If you read through all of the transcripts, you will not find that question asked once. — Lee Zeldin (@RepLeeZeldin) January 25, 2020
Schiff Claim #6: There was no evidence that the President was concerned about “burden sharing”. FACT: OMB’s Mark Sandy testified that the reason he was told why the President placed a hold on aid to Ukraine was that he was concerned about other countries paying their fair share. — Lee Zeldin (@RepLeeZeldin) January 25, 2020
The Senate was scheduled to reconvene the impeachment trial at 1 p.m. EST Monday.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Trump, WH Hit Back Hard on Bolton Book Claims – ‘Timing Is Very, Very Suspect’

As a story published in The New York Times on Sunday night opened new questions about the impeachment case against President Donald Trump , Trump and his White House team wasted no time in striking back — on social media and on television .
And the theme was clear — the alleged revelations in The Times report came at a strikingly good time to boost sales for former National Security Adviser John Bolton ’ s White House memoir : Amazon preorders of “ The Room Where It Happened ” became available shortly after The Times ’ story broke .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is very , very suspect , ” White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham told Fox News ’ “ Fox & Friends ” on Monday , noting that it came right after the president ’ s defense team in his Senate impeachment trial had just scored huge points against the Democratic case .
“ Our team just went on Saturday and … it ’ s very clear the president did nothing wrong , and then suddenly this manuscript has magically appeared in the hands of The New York Times making very , very big claims @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe Bryant Speaks Out According to The Times , Bolton ’ s book claims that Trump told Bolton directly that he was holding up military aid to Ukraine until the country ’ s president agreed to an investigation that could hurt former Vice President Joe Biden ’ s bid to unseat Trump in the 2020 election .
The Times report contained no quotes from the manuscript itself .
The fact that Amazon preorders for Bolton ’ s book became available just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ headlines Sunday just made it all a little too convenient , Grisham said .
Trump himself , in a tweet Sunday night shortly after the Bolton story broke , was just as adamant .
If The Times ’ account of Bolton ’ s book was true , the president said , “ it was only to sell a book.
” Bolton left the White House on Sept. 10 under disputed circumstances — He maintains he resigned , while Trump has said Bolton was fired .
But it ’ s worth noting that , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ news coverage at the time , most of the accounts mentioned his disagreements with Trump over foreign policy matters as they related to Afghanistan , Iran , Russia or North Korea — just about any country other than the one that ’ s making the headlines now — Ukraine .
( The Times ’ account of Bolton ’ s removal , for instance , never mentioned the word “ Ukraine.
” ) Yet , after the Adam Schiff-led Democrats put on a dismal showing last week in the Senate impeachment trial of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it seemed likely this week that a Senate acquittal was all but inevitable , the Trump-hating Times comes out with a story that features Ukraine prominently as a cause of Bolton ’ s discontent with his White House days .
It ’ s a story that couldn ’ t help but boost Bolton ’ s book sales , hinder the president ’ s defense in the Senate trial — and lead to histrionics from easily excitable Trump political opponents such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer .
And it broke with almost exquisite @ @ @ @ @ @ @ could to maximum damage to the White House politically and revive what was widely considered a faltering Democratic offensive .
Sure , it could be a coincidence , and every word in The Times report could be gospel truth ( for the first time during the Trump administration ) .
But the timing , as Grisham put it , is “ very , very suspect.
” And timing , as they say , is everything .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards @

Timing is everything.
As a story published in The New York Times on Sunday night opened new questions about the impeachment case against President Donald Trump, Trump and his White House team wasted no time in striking back — on social media and on television.
And the theme was clear — the alleged revelations in The Times report came at a strikingly good time to boost sales for former National Security Adviser John Bolton’s White House memoir: Amazon preorders of “The Room Where It Happened” became available shortly after The Times’ story broke.
“I think the timing of all this is very, very suspect,” White House spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham told Fox News’ “Fox & Friends” on Monday, noting that it came right after the president’s defense team in his Senate impeachment trial had just scored huge points against the Democratic case.
“Our team just went on Saturday and … it’s very clear the president did nothing wrong, and then suddenly this manuscript has magically appeared in the hands of The New York Times making very, very big claims,” Grisham said.
According to The Times, Bolton’s book claims that Trump told Bolton directly that he was holding up military aid to Ukraine until the country’s president agreed to an investigation that could hurt former Vice President Joe Biden’s bid to unseat Trump in the 2020 election.
The Times report contained no quotes from the manuscript itself.
The fact that Amazon preorders for Bolton’s book became available just as The Times story was hitting the headlines Sunday just made it all a little too convenient, Grisham said.
Watch the latest video at foxnews.com
Trump himself, in a tweet Sunday night shortly after the Bolton story broke, was just as adamant.
If The Times’ account of Bolton’s book was true, the president said, “it was only to sell a book.”
…transcripts of my calls with President Zelensky are all the proof that is needed, in addition to the fact that President Zelensky & the Foreign Minister of Ukraine said there was no pressure and no problems. Additionally, I met with President Zelensky at the United Nations… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 27, 2020
…(Democrats said I never met) and released the military aid to Ukraine without any conditions or investigations – and far ahead of schedule. I also allowed Ukraine to purchase Javelin anti-tank missiles. My Administration has done far more than the previous Administration. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 27, 2020
Bolton left the White House on Sept. 10 under disputed circumstances — He maintains he resigned, while Trump has said Bolton was fired.
But it’s worth noting that, though Bolton’s departure received extensive news coverage at the time, most of the accounts mentioned his disagreements with Trump over foreign policy matters as they related to Afghanistan, Iran, Russia or North Korea — just about any country other than the one that’s making the headlines now — Ukraine. (The Times’ account of Bolton’s removal, for instance, never mentioned the word “Ukraine.”)
Do you think the Bolton book story will lengthen the Senate impeachment trial? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 28% (209 Votes) No: 72% (526 Votes)
Yet, after the Adam Schiff-led Democrats put on a dismal showing last week in the Senate impeachment trial of a president they loathe, and just as it seemed likely this week that a Senate acquittal was all but inevitable, the Trump-hating Times comes out with a story that features Ukraine prominently as a cause of Bolton’s discontent with his White House days.
It’s a story that couldn’t help but boost Bolton’s book sales, hinder the president’s defense in the Senate trial — and lead to histrionics from easily excitable Trump political opponents such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
And it broke with almost exquisite timing — at a moment when it could to maximum damage to the White House politically and revive what was widely considered a faltering Democratic offensive.
Amazing how this happened immediately after The New York Times ran their story, almost like it was coordinated to promote book sales! This tweet from Stelter was posted 25 minutes ago: pic.twitter.com/PXxWOyLJQu — Ryan Saavedra (@RealSaavedra) January 27, 2020
Sure, it could be a coincidence, and every word in The Times report could be gospel truth (for the first time during the Trump administration).
But the timing, as Grisham put it, is “very, very suspect.”
And timing, as they say, is everything.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Turkish Gov’t Will Debate Law Allowing Child Rapists To Go Free If They Marry Their Victims

In his seminal 1996 book “ Clash of Civilizations , ” political scientist Samuel Huntington argued for the existence of so-called cleft civilizations — countries torn between two modes of being .
For instance , Ukraine could be torn between a part of the population wanting to engage with the West and another part wanting to turn toward Russia .
Pre-split Sudan was torn between the Muslim north and the predominantly Christian south .
And , perhaps most ominously , there was Turkey .
While led by a largely Western-leaning secular government for decades , in recent years , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Islamic government .
The regime of Recep Tayyip Erdogan has tilted toward the Islamic side of things in a major way , attempting to consolidate its power as much as possible .
However , few have realized just how far down the wrong path the Ankara government has been going in recent years .
The wake-up call might be a new piece of legislation that would allow child rapists to go free if they can manage to marry their victims .
TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The legislation , which was first debated by parliament on 16 January , would give men suspended sentences for child sex offenses if the two parties get married and the age difference between them is less than 10 years , ” The Guardian reported Thursday .
“ Opposition parties and women ’ s rights groups have been quick to point out that the bill in effect legitimises child marriage and statutory rape in a country where the legal age of consent is 18 , ” the report said .
The ruling Justice and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bill four years ago but the “ bill sparked outrage at home and internationally , ” the U.K. outlet reported .
This time , however , the party was able to pass the bill despite the worldwide outrage generated by the legislation .
“ In 2016 , the government introduced a [ similar ] draft law on amnesty for child abuse perpetrators .
All women stood against it and the bill was withdrawn after our protests , ” Fidan Ataselim , the general secretary of the activist group We Will Stop Femicide , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ dare to try again , we will fight against it again , ” she said .
It ’ s not as if this wasn ’ t already a problem in Turkey , mind you .
As the U.N. Children ’ s Fund noted in a report , “ Despite the rising average age of marriage , child marriage remains an on-going challenge in Turkey and reflects a pattern of gender inequality that reinforces stereotypical roles for girls and curtails their education , compromises their health , and exposes them to the risk of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Mail reported that the bill would be voted upon by the end of the month .
While “ marry your rapist ” clauses aren ’ t unique — they exist in numerous countries , as a 2017 NPR report showed — a number of countries are closing them .
RELATED : BBC 's Wildly Misleading Headline Smears Trump by Fabricating Genocide Comment He Never Made Such laws in Lebanon , Jordan and Tunisia have been ended after protests .
Turkish officials , as usual , were paragons of sensitivity during the 2016 debate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ married before reaching the legal age .
They just don ’ t know the law , ” former Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım said then , according to The Guardian .
Justice Minister Bekir Bozdağ said during the 2016 debate that cases of sexual battery involving minors were “ unfortunately a reality , ” according to The Guardian .
However , he said , that didn ’ t mean the men who perpetrated them were “ rapists or sexual aggressors.
” Unfortunately , in some Muslim countries , child marriage can be a sad @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a conservative interpretation of sharia argue that Islam permits child marriage as the Quran specifies that girls can be married upon reaching maturity , which conservative scholars define as puberty , ” the Council on Foreign Relations notes .
Furthermore , hyper-conservative Muslims will often point to the fact that the prophet Muhammed married one of his 11 wives , Aisha , when she was between the ages of 6 and 9 .
That being said , the general consensus is that Muhammad ’ s marriage to Aisha was a political move designed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s father , Abu Bakr , one of the most influential early converts to Islam , at a time when arranged child marriages were not uncommon .
( European royalty engaged in arranged marriages for youngsters , too .
Consummation did not happen until the children had grown . )
It wasn ’ t because he had raped Aisha and needed to marry her in order to keep himself out of a Turkish jail .
Turkey , at one point , seemed like a perfect example of a Huntington “ cleft ” @ @ @ @ @ @ @ potential candidate to join the European Union .
Now , it ’ s turned back around again and is running the other way .
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

In his seminal 1996 book “Clash of Civilizations,” political scientist Samuel Huntington argued for the existence of so-called cleft civilizations — countries torn between two modes of being.
For instance, Ukraine could be torn between a part of the population wanting to engage with the West and another part wanting to turn toward Russia. Pre-split Sudan was torn between the Muslim north and the predominantly Christian south.
And, perhaps most ominously, there was Turkey.
While led by a largely Western-leaning secular government for decades, in recent years, the country has been run by an increasingly Islamic government. The regime of Recep Tayyip Erdogan has tilted toward the Islamic side of things in a major way, attempting to consolidate its power as much as possible.
However, few have realized just how far down the wrong path the Ankara government has been going in recent years. The wake-up call might be a new piece of legislation that would allow child rapists to go free if they can manage to marry their victims.
“The legislation, which was first debated by parliament on 16 January, would give men suspended sentences for child sex offenses if the two parties get married and the age difference between them is less than 10 years,” The Guardian reported Thursday.
“Opposition parties and women’s rights groups have been quick to point out that the bill in effect legitimises child marriage and statutory rape in a country where the legal age of consent is 18,” the report said.
The ruling Justice and Development Party had tried to pass the bill four years ago but the “bill sparked outrage at home and internationally,” the U.K. outlet reported.
This time, however, the party was able to pass the bill despite the worldwide outrage generated by the legislation.
“In 2016, the government introduced a [similar] draft law on amnesty for child abuse perpetrators. All women stood against it and the bill was withdrawn after our protests,” Fidan Ataselim, the general secretary of the activist group We Will Stop Femicide, told The Guardian.
“If they dare to try again, we will fight against it again,” she said.
It’s not as if this wasn’t already a problem in Turkey, mind you. As the U.N. Children’s Fund noted in a report, “Despite the rising average age of marriage, child marriage remains an on-going challenge in Turkey and reflects a pattern of gender inequality that reinforces stereotypical roles for girls and curtails their education, compromises their health, and exposes them to the risk of violence and poverty.”
The U.K. Daily Mail reported that the bill would be voted upon by the end of the month.
While “marry your rapist” clauses aren’t unique — they exist in numerous countries, as a 2017 NPR report showed — a number of countries are closing them.
Such laws in Lebanon, Jordan and Tunisia have been ended after protests.
Turkish officials, as usual, were paragons of sensitivity during the 2016 debate.
“There are people who get married before reaching the legal age. They just don’t know the law,” former Prime Minister Binali Yıldırım said then, according to The Guardian.
Justice Minister Bekir Bozdağ said during the 2016 debate that cases of sexual battery involving minors were “unfortunately a reality,” according to The Guardian. However, he said, that didn’t mean the men who perpetrated them were “rapists or sexual aggressors.”
Unfortunately, in some Muslim countries, child marriage can be a sad reality.
“Some Muslims who follow a conservative interpretation of sharia argue that Islam permits child marriage as the Quran specifies that girls can be married upon reaching maturity, which conservative scholars define as puberty,” the Council on Foreign Relations notes.
Furthermore, hyper-conservative Muslims will often point to the fact that the prophet Muhammed married one of his 11 wives, Aisha, when she was between the ages of 6 and 9.
That being said, the general consensus is that Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was a political move designed to cement his relationship with the girl’s father, Abu Bakr, one of the most influential early converts to Islam, at a time when arranged child marriages were not uncommon. (European royalty engaged in arranged marriages for youngsters, too. Consummation did not happen until the children had grown.)
It wasn’t because he had raped Aisha and needed to marry her in order to keep himself out of a Turkish jail.
Turkey, at one point, seemed like a perfect example of a Huntington “cleft” society — a traditionalist culture and a potential candidate to join the European Union.
Now, it’s turned back around again and is running the other way.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Sen. Barrasso: Blood Drained from Schiff’s Face as Trump Counsel Played Damning Clip

It ’ s difficult for the blood to drain from Rep. Adam Schiff ’ s face .
In case you haven ’ t noticed — and the media seems to be perfectly willing to not pay attention — the California Democrat and chair of the House Intelligence Committee is giving President Donald Trump quite a run for his money in terms of having an orange hue .
Yet , according to Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming , the color actually managed to drain from Schiff ’ s face when confronted with his own words about the July phone call between @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To be fair , there ’ s no actual video of this , although I ’ d love to have seen it , it had to have been impressive .
You can ’ t just have normal veins to do this .
You ’ d need industrial-strength stuff that can evacuate blood from the capillaries underneath the cheeks and the chin with impressive speed .
Heck , you ’ d almost need blood vessels that can somehow reverse flow so that the blood can drain on a moment ’ s notice .
I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ face .
We ’ re not talking Ted Kennedy-level florid here , but still , you ’ d need some lightning-fast blood training capabilities .
TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe Bryant Speaks Out Just so you ’ re aware , this is the video that apparently caused Adam Schiff to take on a nearly impossible pallor : This was , viewers may remember , Schiff ’ s attempt at parodying the transcript of the call between Trump and Zelensky .
He didn ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at the time , mind you , nor is he particularly funny , which is why the joke got him into a bit of trouble .
See if you think that Schiff is hilarious : “ This is the essence of what the president communicates : ‘ We ’ ve been very good to your country , very good , no other country has done as much as we have , but you know what , I don ’ t see much reciprocity here .
I hear what you want .
“ ‘ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ you , though , and I ’ m going to say this only seven times , so you better listen good .
I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent , understand , lots of it , on this and on that .
I ’ m going to put you in touch with people — not just any people , I ’ m going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States , my Attorney General Bill Barr .
He ’ s got the whole @ @ @ @ @ @ @ him .
“ ‘ And I ’ m going to put you in touch with Rudy — you ’ re going to love him , trust me .
You know what I ’ m asking , and so I ’ m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways .
And by the way , don ’ t call me again , I ’ ll call you when you ’ ve done I asked.
’ This is in sum and character what the president was trying to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ White House deputy counsel to the president Michael Purpura and it quickly became a bit of a meme due to Schiff ’ s alleged response .
Barrasso , who said it “ completely undermined the case of the Democrats , ” also said it “ truly undermined the credibility of Adam Schiff.
” The Wyoming Republican said that when Purpura played the clip of Schiff ’ s take on the actual call , “ the blood drained from Adam Schiff ’ s face.
” If this was hyperbole , it wasn ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Here ’ s the map of the Senate floor : Given that Schiff was right up front , Barrasso could have seen the blood drain from his face and the fake tan melt off .
( Allegedly , cough cough , wink wink . )
Did this actually happen ?
We ’ ll never really know , since , despite all of the cameras in a tiny deliberative chamber , none were trained on Schiff at the time .
Barrasso isn ’ t a known prevaricator or embellisher , for one .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the issue of the strength of Schiff ’ s evidence , or lack thereof .
The Democrats have tried to paint the impeachment trial as if it were a criminal proceeding , not a political stunt .
Yet , even Schiff knows that this case wouldn ’ t hold up in a real court .
If mini-Orange Man wants to continue down this path , I can assure him that he ’ s going to have a lot more moments that end up with the blood draining from his face .
We are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

It’s difficult for the blood to drain from Rep. Adam Schiff’s face. In case you haven’t noticed — and the media seems to be perfectly willing to not pay attention — the California Democrat and chair of the House Intelligence Committee is giving President Donald Trump quite a run for his money in terms of having an orange hue.
Yet, according to Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, the color actually managed to drain from Schiff’s face when confronted with his own words about the July phone call between Trump and Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.
To be fair, there’s no actual video of this, although I’d love to have seen it, it had to have been impressive. You can’t just have normal veins to do this. You’d need industrial-strength stuff that can evacuate blood from the capillaries underneath the cheeks and the chin with impressive speed.
Heck, you’d almost need blood vessels that can somehow reverse flow so that the blood can drain on a moment’s notice.
I’ve seen Adam Schiff’s face. We’re not talking Ted Kennedy-level florid here, but still, you’d need some lightning-fast blood training capabilities.
Just so you’re aware, this is the video that apparently caused Adam Schiff to take on a nearly impossible pallor:
This was, viewers may remember, Schiff’s attempt at parodying the transcript of the call between Trump and Zelensky. He didn’t actually say it was a parody at the time, mind you, nor is he particularly funny, which is why the joke got him into a bit of trouble.
See if you think that Schiff is hilarious: “This is the essence of what the president communicates: ‘We’ve been very good to your country, very good, no other country has done as much as we have, but you know what, I don’t see much reciprocity here. I hear what you want.
Do you think impeachment is hurting the Democrats more than President Tump? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 99% (6558 Votes) No: 1% (50 Votes)
“‘I have a favor I want from you, though, and I’m going to say this only seven times, so you better listen good. I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people — not just any people, I’m going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my Attorney General Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him.
“‘And I’m going to put you in touch with Rudy — you’re going to love him, trust me. You know what I’m asking, and so I’m only going to say this a few more times in a few more ways. And by the way, don’t call me again, I’ll call you when you’ve done I asked.’ This is in sum and character what the president was trying to communicate.”
The clip was introduced by White House deputy counsel to the president Michael Purpura and it quickly became a bit of a meme due to Schiff’s alleged response.
Barrasso, who said it “completely undermined the case of the Democrats,” also said it “truly undermined the credibility of Adam Schiff.”
The Wyoming Republican said that when Purpura played the clip of Schiff’s take on the actual call, “the blood drained from Adam Schiff’s face.”
Conference Chairman @SenJohnBarrasso: When @realdonaldtrump‘s counsel read the transcript of the phone call and then played the video of Adam Schiff with his fictionalized made up script… The blood drained from Adam Schiff’s face as they played that video. pic.twitter.com/IYHtgJroqg — Senate Republicans (@SenateGOP) January 25, 2020
If this was hyperbole, it wasn’t necessarily hyperbole outside the realm of possibility. Here’s the map of the Senate floor:
Senator Barrasso, who wears glasses and sits toward the center of the second row on the Republican side, claimed that he saw the blood drain from Rep. Schiff’s face when confronted with his description of the Trump-Zelensky transcript. — Adam Klasfeld (@KlasfeldReports) January 25, 2020
Given that Schiff was right up front, Barrasso could have seen the blood drain from his face and the fake tan melt off. (Allegedly, cough cough, wink wink.)
Did this actually happen? We’ll never really know, since, despite all of the cameras in a tiny deliberative chamber, none were trained on Schiff at the time. Barrasso isn’t a known prevaricator or embellisher, for one. And beyond that, there’s the issue of the strength of Schiff’s evidence, or lack thereof.
The Democrats have tried to paint the impeachment trial as if it were a criminal proceeding, not a political stunt. Yet, even Schiff knows that this case wouldn’t hold up in a real court.
If mini-Orange Man wants to continue down this path, I can assure him that he’s going to have a lot more moments that end up with the blood draining from his face.
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.


westernjournal--2020-01-27--Father Arrested After Charging the Mat at Son’s Wrestling Match and Attacking His Opponent

Watching his son being slammed into a wrestling mat was more than one North Carolina parent could bear .
As a result , Barry Lee Jones , of Harrisburg , was arrested Jan. 18 and charged with simple assault and disorderly conduct , according to WGHP .
Jones was in the stands during a wrestling match between Hickory Ridge School , the school his son attends , and Southeast Guilford High School .
During the match , the Southeast Guilford wrestler slammed Jones ’ son into the mat in what the expert overseeing the match appeared to indicate , through @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , according to the North Carolina High School Athletic Association , WGHP reported .
As the two wrestlers prepared to continue their match , Jones streaked from the stands and tackled the Southeast Guilford High School wrestler , before eventually he was pulled off of the student .
TRENDING : Grieving Husband of Girls Basketball Coach Who Died in Helicopter Crash with Kobe Bryant Speaks Out Jones was taken to the Cabarrus County Jail and released on a $ 1,000 bail .
“ It ’ s very unfortunate , and it just shows @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ re just losing all decorum , ” Sharon Contreras , the superintendent of Schools for Guilford County , told WGHP .
“ I want to say that the parents from that high school wrote us a lovely letter saying they were equally appalled .
It ’ s not who they are as a community .
And I certainly apologize to the students at both high schools who experienced that , particularly the student who was attacked.
” “ We want you to know that we experienced the same nightmare WITH you yesterday @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and disbelief by the inconceivable action of one parent on a wrestler .
We don ’ t understand it nor would we ever condone it , ” the letter said .
“ Though our parents review the HRHS code of conduct in pre-season mandatory parent meetings , this parent chose to disregard the code and , for that , we are ashamed .
His action does not reflect the beliefs of the parents or the HRHS wrestling program .
To the parents of the wrestler who was tackled — we wholeheartedly apologize , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up at at youth sports events inevitably draws major publicity .
And the good students do is often overshadowed by the sometimes shocking actions of bad elements .
But the tone of the coverage of the North Carolina incident showed how unusual this incident of parental misbehavior was .
The reaction from school officials showed the incident was particularly concerning to all involved .
Leigh Hebbard , Guilford County Schools director of athletics , said in a statement that the school was “ troubled to see the assault of one of our student-athletes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ opposing team member .
“ However , ” the statement continued , “ we greatly appreciate the apology and words of support from the staff and families of the Hickory Ridge Wrestling team who have reached out to us and who share our concerns.
” We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism .
Read our editorial standards .

Watching his son being slammed into a wrestling mat was more than one North Carolina parent could bear.
As a result, Barry Lee Jones, of Harrisburg, was arrested Jan. 18 and charged with simple assault and disorderly conduct, according to WGHP.
Jones was in the stands during a wrestling match between Hickory Ridge School, the school his son attends, and Southeast Guilford High School.
During the match, the Southeast Guilford wrestler slammed Jones’ son into the mat in what the expert overseeing the match appeared to indicate, through hand signs, was an illegal move, according to the North Carolina High School Athletic Association, WGHP reported.
As the two wrestlers prepared to continue their match, Jones streaked from the stands and tackled the Southeast Guilford High School wrestler, before eventually he was pulled off of the student.
Jones was taken to the Cabarrus County Jail and released on a $1,000 bail.
“It’s very unfortunate, and it just shows a society that I feel sometimes we’re just losing all decorum,” Sharon Contreras, the superintendent of Schools for Guilford County, told WGHP.
Would you do the same thing if you were this parent? Yes No
Completing this poll entitles you to The Western Journal news updates free of charge. You may opt out at anytime. You also agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Yes: 19% (49 Votes) No: 81% (208 Votes)
“I want to say that the parents from that high school wrote us a lovely letter saying they were equally appalled. It’s not who they are as a community. And I certainly apologize to the students at both high schools who experienced that, particularly the student who was attacked.”
The incident caused a stir on Twitter.
Kid was ok after that illegal slam and the ref prob would have given him every advantage to win the match. His Dad screwed up in so many ways. Keep your cool fellow wrestling parents. — James McGowan (@jamsmcgowan) January 20, 2020
ADULTS BEHAVING BADLY….at their children’s sporting events!! A high school wrestling match in Kannapolis over the weekend going viral after witnesses say a parent charged the mat and tackled a student that was wrestling his son. Thoughts? #WakeUpCLT pic.twitter.com/b8H0CrRsCx — Rachel Lundberg (@RachelLLundberg) January 20, 2020
The Southeast Guilford High School wrestling team shared a letter from Hickory Ridge wrestling team parents.
“We want you to know that we experienced the same nightmare WITH you yesterday. We are in shock, horror and disbelief by the inconceivable action of one parent on a wrestler. We don’t understand it nor would we ever condone it,” the letter said.
“Though our parents review the HRHS code of conduct in pre-season mandatory parent meetings, this parent chose to disregard the code and, for that, we are ashamed. His action does not reflect the beliefs of the parents or the HRHS wrestling program. To the parents of the wrestler who was tackled — we wholeheartedly apologize,” the letter said.
Parents acting up at at youth sports events inevitably draws major publicity. And the good students do is often overshadowed by the sometimes shocking actions of bad elements.
But the tone of the coverage of the North Carolina incident showed how unusual this incident of parental misbehavior was.
The reaction from school officials showed the incident was particularly concerning to all involved.
Leigh Hebbard, Guilford County Schools director of athletics, said in a statement that the school was “troubled to see the assault of one of our student-athletes, reportedly by a parent of an opposing team member.
“However,” the statement continued, “we greatly appreciate the apology and words of support from the staff and families of the Hickory Ridge Wrestling team who have reached out to us and who share our concerns.”
Truth and Accuracy Submit a Correction → * Name
* Email
* Message
* All fields are required. Success! We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.