Wednesday 12-09-15

I guess someone final told her what her job was and that she did not job that was supposed to take away rights but protect them.

"We prosecute deeds and not words," Loretta Lynch said at a press conference. | AP

Lynch recalibrates message on hateful speech

By Josh Gerstein

12/07/15 11:25 AM EST

Updated 12/07/15 11:48 AM EST

Attorney General Loretta Lynch Monday appeared to recalibrate remarks she made last week that suggested the Justice Department could investigate speech deemed hostile towards Muslims.
"Of course, we prosecute deeds and not words," she said at a press conference Monday to announce an unrelated civil rights investigation into the Chicago Police Department.
Some conservatives criticized Lynch for her comments to a Muslim civil rights group, where she lamented "the ability of people to issue hateful speech of all types from the anonymity of a screen."
Speaking to a Muslim Advocates dinner in Arlington, Va., Lynch affirmed that "this is a country that is based upon free speech." However, she went on to suggest that the Justice Department would "take action" when such speech "edges towards violence, when we see the potential to lift...that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric."
First Amendment precedents generally protect speech, even hateful speech, from punishment unless the comments are intended to incite direct action against specific individuals or in a specific place.
Lynch's comments Monday seemed to better capture that balance by focusing on those who might act out, rather than those who may be fomenting trouble.
"We always have a concern when we see the rhetoric rising against any particular group in America, that it might inspire others to violent action — and that violent action is what we would have to deal with," Lynch told journalists at Justice Department headquarters. She also urged Americans "not to give into fear" in the wake of the apparent terrorist attack in California. "So, [what] we're focused on, obviously, is protecting all of the people under the ambit of the Department of Justice."
In an interview Sunday about the San Bernardino shootings that killed 14 people, Lynch said she was "not sure" which ideology the San Bernardino shooters were driven by. However, hours later in an Oval Office address, President Barack Obama discussed the shootings and the need for the U.S. to "destroy" the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant group.
Asked by POLITICO why she was reluctant to publicly say even that the shootings were inspired by ISIL, Lynch stressed the need for investigators to keep an open mind to all possibilities.
"At this point…we’re not prepared to limit any particular ideology to what may have inspired these individuals," the attorney general said. "There are a number of groups that are on social media, looking to encourage people to commit acts of violence within the homeland, so at this point we simply do not want to rule anything out."
Nevertheless, the evidence that the husband-and-wife team were fans of ISIL appears to be growing. The female shooter, Tashfeen Malik, reportedly praised the group's leader Abu Baker Al-Baghdadi in a Facebook post at around the same time as the attack last Wednesday. And the man, Syed Rizwan Farook, shared the ideology of Al-Baghdadi, according to an interview Farook's father gave to Italian newspaper La Stampa.
Lynch also acknowledged Monday that in an effort to calm the nerves of worried Americans, she and her colleagues have been departing from the Justice Department's usual practice of being tight-lipped about the findings of investigations where no criminal charges have been leveled. Lynch and other officials have been making near-daily media appearances since the attack last Wednesday--appearances Obama appeared to encourage last week when he held an Oval Office meeting with Lynch, FBI Director James Comey and others to address the attack.
However, Justice Department policy calls on prosecutors and investigators not to comment publicly on the evidence in an investigation or on techniques investigators are using. An exception to the policy does acknowledge that comments "may need to be made" under "unusual circumstances" where matters "have already received substantial publicity, or about which the community needs to be reassured that the appropriate law enforcement agency is investigating the incident," among other factors.
Lynch said Monday this was that kind of circumstance, but signaled that the department is trying to balance the investigation's needs with the public's desire for updates.
"At this point, we are discussing the San Bernardino investigation because we want the public to be aware of how these investigations are conducted, their complexity, and the fact that they are in fact a marathon and not a sprint. So, we’re trying to keep people informed, while also maintain the integrity of investigative techniques and the like, so you do have us talking about this investigation more than we can talk about others," she said.
Another reason why officials may feel more free to talk about the California terror attack than other investigations: the two direct perpetrators were killed in a confrontation with police shortly after the shootings and investigators say they've not yet seen any indication that a broader "network" of individuals was involved in plotting the attack.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2015/12/lynch-recalibrates-message-on-hateful-speech-216488#ixzz3tjNqFn5n



This must have really hurt the media, lol.  Just to clear the air, I'm not a Trump fan at all.

9 Pieces of Documentation that Vindicate Trump’s Claim of 9/11 Muslim Celebrations

by John Nolte1 Dec 20157324

This list has been updated from 7 to 9.
UPDATE: A just uncovered CBS News report about “swarms of suspects” cheering 9/11 from rooftops has validated Trump’s “thousands” claim. 
There is nothing yet that validates Donald Trump’s claim that on that terrible September morning “thousands and thousands” of American Muslims cheered the collapse of the World Trade Center. At worst, though, the Republican frontrunner is guilty of exaggerating. The DC Media, however, has been exposed (once again) as bald-faced liars who engaged in a 14 year cover-up.
Contemporaneous reports and eyewitnesses prove once and for all that some number of Muslims did in fact celebrate the collapse of the Twin Towers. Trump was not only right on this point, but by pressing the matter he has forced the DC Media to uncover a truth they did not want to tell.
Let’s lay it out:

1. New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani

As my colleague Joel Pollak pointed out, while interviewing Giuliani Tuesday morning, left-wing CNN anchor Alisyn Camerota was very unhappy when the mayor confirmed that there were indeed Muslim celebrations on 9/11. This wasn’t the way the interview was supposed to go:

Camerota quizzed Giuliani, hoping he would say that Trump is “lying.” She was frustrated when Giuliani merely said that Trump had been “exaggerating,” and pointing out hitherto ignored examples of handfuls of Muslims celebrating in New York.
“And those weren’t just rumors, those weren’t just reports, you went out and checked them out?” Camerota said–as if the former mayor whose credibility she had hoped to exploit to bash Trump were suddenly in doubt. (Giuliani confirmed the reports.)

 

2. CNN’s Chris Cuomo

After Giuliani’s interview, an exasperated Cuomo admitted, “Were people celebrating on 9/11? Yes. Is it wrong? Yes. Should you say thousands were? No.”
 

3. MTV

Trump claimed he had seen television reports covering Muslims celebrating on 9/11. Those contemporaneous reports have now been found.
Dishonest left-wing outlets like MTV, National Journal and Mediaite are desperately spinning the revelation of these contemporaneous reports as proof  Trump lied. In a burst of Orwellian memory-holing, MTV even brought back one of the witnesses so she could recant her story 14 year later.
Nevertheless, all that spin cannot change the fact that news reports of American Muslims cheering the fall of the World Trade Center have been found.
It doesn’t matter what the witness says now, what matters is what Trump might have seen at the time, and what Trump saw were news reports on television about people in New Jersey celebrating the fall of the World Trade Center.
 

4. The Washington Post

In his lying fact check, Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler writes, “There is absolutely no evidence of the celebration cited by Trump.” Except, of course, for all the proof listed here and a contemporaneous report in his own left-wing newspaper. A report, I should add, that Kessler did not include his initial fact check. Either this Hillary Guardian tried to cover up the Washington Post report, or he just didn’t look hard enough for evidence backing Trump’s claim.
This appeared in the Washington Post on September 18, 2001:

In Jersey City, within hours of two jetliners’ plowing into the World Trade Center, law enforcement authorities detained and questioned a number of people who were allegedly seen celebrating the attacks and holding tailgate-style parties on rooftops while they watched the devastation on the other side of the river.

The report was never retracted by the Washington Post.
 

5. The New York Post

This appeared in a New York Post editorial written by Fred Siegel on September 14, 2001:

Here in New York, it was easy to get angry listening to Egyptians, Palestinians and the Arabs of nearby Paterson, N.J., celebrate as they received word of the murderous attack in New York and Washington. But Mayor Giuliani (who has been tireless and magnificent in this crisis) rightly warned New Yorker-ers that is would be wrong to take their anger our on the city’s Arab and Muslim residents. Attacks on Arab-Americans in Paterson or elsewhere are utterly indefensible.

This story was never retracted.
 

6. Radio News Reports of Muslim Celebrations

Jesse Singal at New York Magazine worked hard today to try and debunk my earlier story covering Fred Siegel’s New York Post editorial. In this so-called debunking, however, we learn that Siegel is a witness to September of 2001 radio news reports covering the Muslim celebrations. Obviously, this also buoys up Trump’s claim of news reports:

Siegel told Daily Intelligencer that he first heard about the celebrations (and the nationalities of the perpetrators) on the radio, though he couldn’t remember which station. In addition to those news reports, he said, he believes that some Muslims did celebrate because he heard it from two sources: an acquaintance from Clifton, New Jersey, and an Arab-American professor with whom he corresponded.

Not a small detail.
 

7. Legions of Witnesses

You would have to be a sap to believe everyone using social media to claim they witnessed American Muslims celebrating on 9/11. But you’d have to be a liar to dismiss all of them, as the DC Media is doing.
 
8. Former NYPD Commissioner Bernard Kerik 

–

–

9. CBS Anchor Dan Rather 
Click here and scroll to the 12:30 mark. Dan Rather, who was then anchoring the CBS Evening News, tells David Letterman of reports of witnesses who saw Muslims on rooftops celebrating.

***

Between the contemporaneous reports above and these eyewitnesses that have come out in the wake of the DC Media attempting to bury Trump,  there is now no question that some number of American Muslims celebrated 9/11.
It happened.
And for 14 years the DC Media covered this crucially important story up.
And now, thanks to Donald Trump, we know the truth.
Trump appears to have exaggerated.
The DC Media, however, lied for 14 years and continues to lie today.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism/2015/12/01/7-pieces-of-documentation-that-vindicate-trumps-claim-of-911-muslim-celebrations/