Police officer soothes toddler with lullaby after deadly car crash
by Ann Colwell
(CNN) When a paramedic handed police officer Nick Struck a weeping toddler soaked in gasoline at the scene of a deadly car crash in Brighton, Colorado, his fatherly instincts kicked in.
Struck did the same thing he does when his own 2-year-old daughter is upset. He began to softly sing “Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star.”
Somewhere in one of the lullaby’s verses, a bystander snapped a photograph of Struck and the child. Her family’s white SUV lies upside down in the grassy field behind the two. A paramedic is seen treating another passenger in the background.
Struck, holding the barefoot girl on his hip, points at something outside the frame. The child holds the fingers of one hand in her mouth, and clings to Struck’s shoulder with the other.
BuzzFeed’s Ben Smith, Editor-In-Chief, responds on the one year anniversary of the release of the so-called “Trump Dossier.” It’s all, of course, proper and warranted.
This is from the NYTimes.com, written by Ben Smith in the opinion section.
Exactly one year ago BuzzFeed published what’s now known simply as “the dossier”: a set of reports put together by a former British intelligence officer named Christopher Steele during the 2016 presidential campaign. The 35-page dossier suggested that the Russian government had both compromised and colluded with President-elect Donald Trump.
Our choice to publish the dossier was greeted by outrage from two sources. Journalistic traditionalists didn’t like the idea of sharing an unfiltered, unverified document with the public, whatever the caveats and context. NBC’s Chuck Todd told me on air, “You just published fake news.” Mr. Trump agreed. He described CNN’s reporting on the dossier as “fake news” and called BuzzFeed a “failing pile of garbage.”
But a year of government inquiries and blockbuster journalism has made clear that the dossier is unquestionably real news. That’s a fact that has been tacitly acknowledged even by those who opposed our decision to publish. It has helped journalists explain to their audience the investigation into Russian influence on the 2016 election. And Mr. Trump and his allies have seized on the dossier in their efforts to discredit the special counsel leading the investigation, Robert Mueller.
Because the dossier is specious. It is theoretical. It is unconfirmed and, further, disavowed. Contested. It is not a clear given. Persons specifically mentioned within its pages have proven that what was attributed to them was physically impossible and hence a bald-faced lie. Mueller has an agenda — as he is a good and proven friend and ally of James Comey — and has somehow magically found the only legal team in DC employing nothing but Demorats and those with anti-Trump agendas. Peter Strzok anyone? DC is literally festooned with attorneys. They’re a dime a dozen. Yet Mueller could only hire those who are Demorats? Ahem. Uh, yeah.
Further, the investigation by Mueller was spurred by an illegal action via another individual with “hurted feewings” and a personal revenge agenda, James Comey.
Without the dossier, Americans would have found it difficult to understand the actions of their elected representatives and government officials. Their posture toward Mr. Trump was, we now know even more comprehensively than we did in January 2017, shaped by Mr. Steele’s report. The Russia investigation, meanwhile, didn’t turn out to be some minor side story but instead the central challenge to Mr. Trump’s presidency.
Correct. Because Leftists like yourself made it so. What we are lacking, however, is something quite necessary in a civilized society and a nation given to the rule of law. That is commonly called evidence.
When we published the dossier, we knew a lot: We knew that it had been written by the former head of the Russia desk at Britain’s main foreign intelligence agency, a man whose job had made him a leading source on Russian espionage. We knew that key members of the Senate — Harry Reid, the Nevada Democrat, and John McCain, the Arizona Republican — had acted on its contents. We had also learned that intelligence officials had briefed President Barack Obama and President-elect Trump on the dossier, and that the F.B.I. was already looking into it.
Hold up on that car wash. Harry Reid had an obvious agenda as does John McCain. McCain, presidential loser in 2008. McCain, who threatened to change his (R) to a (D) because he wasn’t sufficiently revered by the ‘phants.
McCain didn’t just “act” on the contents. This teeny-weeny bit from Breitbart.com:
Fusion GPS Admits They Used John McCain to Pass Anti-Trump Dossier to Obama-Era Intel Agencies
by Aaron Klein
EILAT, Israel — The founders of the controversial opposition research firm Fusion GPS admitted that they helped the researcher hired to compile the infamous, largely discredited 35-page dossier on President Donald Trump to share the document with Sen. John McCain.
Imagine that. I wrote about the very same thing back in January of 2017, a year ago. Far before anyone else. Please read my blog post here. Also read the buttressing attribution here.
The disclosure raises questions about whether McCain knew that the information he delivered to the intelligence community was actually an opposition document reportedly funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
McCain’s office did not reply yesterday to a Breitbart News request for comment on the matter.
Let’s make no mistake. McCain is all about McCain. Prototypical GOP EstabliHack. Quintessential. The source of the word RINO.
Back to Ben Smith.
We didn’t discount the arguments against publishing salacious allegations — which reporters do all the time in covering lawsuits, internal investigations or reports like Mr. Steele’s. And we understand why President Trump’s supporters remain furious at the airing of a disturbingly vivid unproven allegation about encounters with prostitutes.
But we never bought the notion, made by the traditionalists, that a main threat to journalism is that journalists might be too transparent with their audience. Keeping the reporting process wrapped in mystery only helps those who oppose the free press. This is why The New York Times posts leaked audio recordings, and why news organizations routinely publish raw court documents underlying their articles.
Of course you discounted the arguments. You published the entire thing. Disingenuous at best, lying outright at worst, Ben.
You admit that the dossier is an “unproven allegation.” Your own words.
Best practices for “standard journalism” historically, until the 70s, was at minimum two sources and, best yet, three sources. Others say that for every positive source there should be a negative source. That standard is now out the door. Completely. “Anonymous” sources are, even at major papers, sufficient. Depending upon the agenda, they are the best. Allegations. Hints. Rumors. All fair game in today’s American Media Maggot landscape.
We strongly believed that publishing the disputed document whose existence we and others were reporting was in the public interest.
Define “the public interest.” I dare you. Define pornography. Define proper. Define free speech. According to Leftists that varies. Depending upon the prevailing political prairie winds, tidal pull, sunspots, solar flares.
Since we published, the public has learned a great deal more about how seriously the F.B.I. took the dossier. The F.B.I., CNN reported, used the dossier to justify its effort to spy on an American citizen, and reimbursed Mr. Steele for some of his expenses. The BBC reported that the dossier was a “road map” to the F.B.I. investigation. Fox News recently reported that a top Department of Justice official met with Mr. Steele during the 2016 campaign. And on Tuesday, the public was given a glimpse, in the release of secret testimony, into the fierce battle between Senate Democrats and Republicans over the dossier and how the F.B.I. made use of it during the 2016 campaign.
Wait. Did Ben Smith just say that the “dossier” was utilized by the FBI to justify a FISA warrant request in order to surveil the Trump campaign prior to the election?
Yes. Confirming everything I have suspected up to this point. Thanks Ben. This is an astounding, amazing revelation. Is anyone listening or reading? Does anyone care? Do you Grok the implications of this? Confirmation of a soft coup upon a potential sitting administration? Early? Prior to the actual election? And continuing post-election?
As the seriousness of the Russia investigation has become clearer, the pro-Trump line has shifted from dismissing the dossier to stressing its role in the investigation: The dossier, some of Mr. Trump’s defenders now say, played too big a part, given that a portion of Mr. Steele’s funding came from political enemies of Mr. Trump, including the Democratic National Committee. “Are we in the midst of a major criminal investigation against the president of the United States as a result of this dodgy dossier?” asked Tom Fitton, a Trump ally, on “Fox & Friends” recently.
Because Leftists, Demorats and the American Media Maggots continue to stress the role in the investigation. Yes. The dossier was a major component in a fated, illegal and conspiratorial, false application for a FISA warrant in order to destroy the Trump campaign.
While Mr. Trump’s camp dismiss the dossier as malicious fiction or pure political opportunism, some elements have been corroborated. For example, that the Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort hid payments for his work in Ukraine, as federal authorities have alleged; that the Russian diplomat Mikhail Kalugin was withdrawn suddenly from the United States; and that Mr. Trump sought, but never consummated, business deals in Russia.
Odd. Now Manafort is suing Robert Mueller. From TheHill.com:
Manafort sues Mueller, challenging scope of Russia investigation
by Katie Bo Williams
Former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort is suing the Department of Justice and special counsel Robert Mueller in an attempt to kneecap the federal probe into alleged coordination between the campaign and Russia during the 2016 election.
In a court filing on Wednesday, lawyers for Manafort argue that the order establishing Mueller’s investigation is overly broad and not permitted under Justice Department regulations.
Mueller should be ordered to stop investigating any of Manafort’s conduct that doesn’t relate to his time as campaign chair, the suit says, and the appointment itself should be declared invalid.
“By ignoring the boundaries of the jurisdiction granted to the Special Counsel in the Appointment Order, Mr. Mueller acted beyond the scope of his authority. Mr. Mueller’s actions must be set aside,” the filing states.
Manafort, whom Mueller is prosecuting on tax fraud and money laundering charges, is also suing Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who issued the order in May appointing Mueller as special counsel.
That appointment, according to Manafort’s lawyers, was “arbitrary, capricious, and not in accordance” with a law governing the implementation of federal regulations — in this case, the regulation that allows for the appointment of a special counsel.
Ben Smith continues.
Mr. Steele also reported, in pages submitted just 11 days after a Russian lawyer reportedly promised Mr. Trump’s aides negative information on Hillary Clinton during a meeting in Trump Tower, that “the Kremlin had been feeding Trump and his team valuable intelligence on his opponents, including Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.”
Wait. Isn’t that what oppo research is all about? And why the Demorats have been doing that for years against Republicans to no one’s chagrin? Oppo research illegal? Unlawful? Please.
“Valuable intelligence” is in the eye of the reader. It’s only “valuable” if it’s true. Perhaps that is what the Leftist feared most?
But wait, there’s more. If you haven’t larfed yet you’ll larf at this.
“One large portion of the dossier is crystal-clear, certain, consistent and corroborated,” a C.I.A. veteran, John Sipher, wrote recently. “Russia’s goal all along has been to do damage to America and our leadership role in the world.”
Well fuck me. I never saw that coming. Up until Trump considered becoming president, the Russians and, before them, the Soviets were always our best friends. Right?
Yes. Leftists and the American Media Maggots are in truth that stupid. Demorats knew it all along. Millennials and GenZ’rs are incredible and willing dupes.
For all these reasons, the chorus of criticism of our decision to publish has faded. I haven’t had a single person approach me to say, “I wish I hadn’t read the dossier, and wish I had less insight into the forces at play in America.” Do you feel that way? Does anyone?
Nope. Because it continues to provide insight into your skewed and clear agenda.
If it isn’t a Demorat thought or idea, it isn’t valid.
Simple as that.
It is you, Ben Smith, who continues to emphasize the moribund status of US journalism.
And you wonder why you bleed readers and advertisers.
Steven Bannon, formerly of Breitbart.com and againformerly of Breitbart.com, has gone from bomb-throwing conservative to a guy who just makes me say “what the hell, dude?”
This all stems, of course, from the new book by author Michael Wolff entitled “Fire and Fury” which was released on January 5th. In the book Steve Bannon was interviewed and quoted a number of times. Let me make this clear up front, however, as I’d care to disavow two things I’ve heard mentioned from other folks on a number of social platforms.
This book was not written by Steve Bannon and ghosted by Wolff;
It is not about Bannon himself but about Trump’s past year in the White House.
That said, Steve Bannon is quoted widely on its pages. But let’s back up a bit. Vanity Fair published a December 21st article about Bannon:
“I HAVE POWER”: IS STEVE BANNON RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT?
by Gabriel Sherman
On a whirlwind tour around the globe, Trump’s former aide and alter ego reveals what really went down in the White House, his unfettered thoughts on Javanka, his complicated relationship with his erstwhile boss—and his own political ambitions.
Bannon’s core message—a clueless, corrupt ruling class (many of whom, of course, reside in blue states) has sold out American workers to a hegemonic China, and it’s up to a vanguard to take our country back before the world tips toward cataclysm—is the same, whether he’s speaking to Alabamian Roy Moore voters or Chinese dissidents. But he adjusts his vocabulary to fit his audience—here in Tokyo, he was in full prophetic mode.
On the whole I don’t overall disagree but would expand much past China. And I would include politicos on both sides of the aisle working at disassembling way too many working class or middle class individuals. Even more disappointing when done by what I term Republican EstabliHacks.
When he left the White House in August, Bannon said, “the Trump presidency that we fought for, and won, is over.” In private, Bannon told people he was disillusioned with Trump’s shambolic governing style. Trump, in turn, sees Bannon as a self-promoter. “The president views Steve as just a guy who works for him,” a White House official said.
While the two men harbor contempt for each other that can ignite into rage, they can’t quit each other, either. Since Bannon left the West Wing, he’s had five phone calls with Trump, most initiated by the president, according to the White House official. “The few conversations Steve and the president have had since he was fired this summer have primarily been opportunities for Steve to beg for his job back,” said the White House official. A Bannon spokesperson countered, “anyone around Steve since he left the White House can see he is very happy now out of the White House!”
Ah, the prototypical love/hate relationship. Then there was this.
In October, Bannon called an adviser and said he would consider running for president if Trump doesn’t run for re-election in 2020. Which Bannon has told people is a realistic possibility. In private conversations since leaving the White House, Bannon said Trump only has a 30 percent chance of serving out his term, whether he’s impeached or removed by the Cabinet invoking the 25th amendment. That prospect seemed to become more likely in early December when special counsel Robert Mueller secured a plea deal from former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Bannon has also remarked on the toll the office has taken on Trump, telling advisers his former boss has “lost a step.” “He’s like an 11-year-old child,” Bannon joked to a friend in November.
“He’s like an 11-year old child.” A Bannon quote. You’ll excuse me whilst I re-examine my confidence in Steve Bannon.
A prominent Republican described Bannon’s crusade as a vanity exercise doomed to fail. “I think there was a lot of rage when he was in the White House,” the Republican said. “Steve had to subsume his ego to Donald, who Steve thinks is dumb and crazy. With Steve, it’s not about building new things—it’s about destroying the old. I’m not sure he knows what he wants.”
One aside to Stevie: a few days’ growth of beard looks good on a young guy. On a guy in his 60s with jowl wattles it looks like homelessness. Hence my beard. And green military coats went out in the 70s. I wore one, for shite’s sake, because I perceived myself as cool. And it was inexpensive. Back then.
Over the weekend of May 6 and 7, Bannon was in Washington when Kushner, Ivanka, and Stephen Miller accompanied Trump to his golf club in Bedminster, New Jersey, where the decision to fire Comey was finalized. The White House announced Comey’s dismissal on the afternoon of Tuesday, May 9. Bannon was furious when he found out. “It’s the dumbest political decision in modern political history, bar none. A self-inflicted wound of massive proportions,” he later said. “Especially in light of recent news, for the country, the president’s best decision was firing James Comey. His second best decision was firing Steve Bannon, bar none,” a White House official said.
And that is where Bannon and I immediately parted. Most ricky-tick.
The truth is this: Trump’s keeping Comey was a serious mistake. I suspect this was because he was providing Comey an actual chance. Mark one into the “Political Naivete Column” for Trump. But when Comey proved himself a legal dolt in 2016 with his Hillary Speech, I was done. Trump finally did the right thing regarding Comey. However, Trump should have fired Comey about ten seconds following his inauguration.
Bannon believed the Russia collusion case was meritless, but he blamed Kushner for taking meetings during the campaign that gave the appearance the Trump team sought Putin’s help. “He’s taking meetings with Russians to get additional stuff. This tells you everything about Jared,” Bannon told me. “They were looking for the picture of Hillary Clinton taking the bag of cash from Putin. That’s his maturity level.”
Hold that thought.
As the White House sinks deeper into scandal, along with Roy Moore’s crushing defeat, it’s hard not to see Trump and Bannon as survivors huddled together on a shrinking spit of dry land. Meanwhile, with 2018 looming, even Bannon recognizes the Democrats’ growing strength. “The reason the Democrats did so well in Virginia is because they’re angry. Anger gets people to do things. I admire that,” he said.
During one conversation this fall, Bannon seemed to accept that his campaign might not succeed. But he said people are mistaken if they equate losing elections with failure. “I’m not a political operative,” he said, “I’m a revolutionary.”
Okay. When you over-value yourself. Then there was the release of the book to which I’m referencing with this post.
“Fire and Fury” by Wolff provides all the fodder necessary for the continued Leftist drumbeat of “25th Amendment” and “Impeach 45” — it thusly goes on and on.
What I didn’t know until much later in the 2016 campaign was that Mr. Bannon could be ruthless towards people with whom he disagrees. That ruthlessness continued when he entered the White House and now that he’s left the administration, Bannon’s rage is directed toward the man he helped to elect.
Donald John Trump.
What “rage”? Well, how about some quotes attributed to Bannon pulled from the book “Fire and Fury” itself?
He is particularly scathing about a June 2016 meeting involving Trump’s son Donald Jr, son-in-law Jared Kushner, then campaign chairman Paul Manafort and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya at Trump Tower in New York. A trusted intermediary had promised documents that would “incriminate” rival Hillary Clinton but instead of alerting the FBI to a potential assault on American democracy by a foreign power, Trump Jr replied in an email: “I love it.”
The meeting was revealed by the New York Times in July last year, prompting Trump Jr to say no consequential material was produced. Soon after, Wolff writes, Bannon remarked mockingly: “The three senior guys in the campaign thought it was a good idea to meet with a foreign government inside Trump Tower in the conference room on the 25th floor – with no lawyers. They didn’t have any lawyers.
“Even if you thought that this was not treasonous, or unpatriotic, or bad shit, and I happen to think it’s all of that, you should have called the FBI immediately.”
Bannon went on, Wolff writes, to say that if any such meeting had to take place, it should have been set up “in a Holiday Inn in Manchester, New Hampshire, with your lawyers who meet with these people”. Any information, he said, could then be “dump[ed] … down to Breitbart or something like that, or maybe some other more legitimate publication”.
Bannon: ‘They’re going to crack Don Junior like an egg on national TV
Donald Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon has described the Trump Tower meeting between the president’s son and a group of Russians during the 2016 election campaign as “treasonous” and “unpatriotic”, according to an explosive new book seen by the Guardian.
Bannon, speaking to author Michael Wolff, warned that the investigation into alleged collusion with the Kremlin will focus on money laundering and predicted: “They’re going to crack Don Junior like an egg on national TV.”
Yes, we all know that Trump removed Bannon from the White House in August of last year. A war between Bannon and White House Chief of Staff John Kelly? Perhaps. But the book and the quotes smell like nothing more than a high and hearty “fuck you” to Bannon’s former employer. Well said and well played. Until perhaps you come to regret it. Is Bannon Brutus? Is he Dr Strangelove? Is he Jesus incarnate? Is he Colonel Kurtz? It varies on whom you ask.
Fire and Fury: Inside the Trump White House, reportedly based on more than 200 interviews with the president, his inner circle and players in and around the administration, is one of the most eagerly awaited political books of the year. In it, Wolff lifts the lid on a White House lurching from crisis to crisis amid internecine warfare, with even some of Trump’s closest allies expressing contempt for him.
And like it or not, Steven Bannon rolled perfectly into the hands of author Michael Wolff. Whose agenda at least temporarily coincided with that of Bannon’s.
Let’s just cut to the chase for a moment. Here’s what I think happened: Bannon both vented and got played royally. Bannon was angry and ready to spew — which he did. You’ll note that at no time since has he walked any of the comments back with anything remotely resembling vehemence. I can only conclude he can’t argue their veracity.
People have emotions. I get it. They’re not gods; they’re human.
According to Wolff in his book, about Bannon:
“You realise where this is going,” he (Bannon) is quoted as saying. “This is all about money laundering. Mueller chose [senior prosecutor Andrew] Weissmann first and he is a money-laundering guy. Their path to fucking Trump goes right through Paul Manafort, Don Jr and Jared Kushner … It’s as plain as a hair on your face.”
Last month it was reported that federal prosecutors had subpoenaed records from Deutsche Bank, the German financial institution that has lent hundreds of millions of dollars to the Kushner property empire. Bannon continues: “It goes through Deutsche Bank and all the Kushner shit. The Kushner shit is greasy. They’re going to go right through that. They’re going to roll those two guys up and say play me or trade me.”
Not really what I’d call “supporting your guy.”
Those quotes and the furor surrounding the book caused President Trump to issue this official response:
Statement from the President of the United States
Steve Bannon has nothing to do with me or my Presidency. When he was fired, he not only lost his job, he lost his mind. Steve was a staffer who worked for me after I had already won the nomination by defeating seventeen candidates, often described as the most talented field ever assembled in the Republican party.
Now that he is on his own, Steve is learning that winning isn’t as easy as I make it look. Steve had very little to do with our historic victory, which was delivered by the forgotten men and women of this country. Yet Steve had everything to do with the loss of a Senate seat in Alabama held for more than thirty years by Republicans. Steve doesn’t represent my base—he’s only in it for himself.
Steve pretends to be at war with the media, which he calls the opposition party, yet he spent his time at the White House leaking false information to the media to make himself seem far more important than he was. It is the only thing he does well. Steve was rarely in a one-on-one meeting with me and only pretends to have had influence to fool a few people with no access and no clue, whom he helped write phony books.
We have many great Republican members of Congress and candidates who are very supportive of the Make America Great Again agenda. Like me, they love the United States of America and are helping to finally take our country back and build it up, rather than simply seeking to burn it all down.
The American Media Maggots, of course, took the Wolff ball and ran.
The American Media Maggots of all stripes confirm: President Trump is just a dolt. It’s a wonder he can walk vertically on two legs for more than a few minutes.
Under a bit of a microscope, Steve Bannon began to rethink his position. Brian Stelter — he of the 2014 Lincoln MKX grille, said:
“Donald Trump, Jr. is both a patriot and a good man. He has been relentless in his advocacy for his father and the agenda that has helped turn our country around.”
“My support is also unwavering for the president and his agenda — as I have shown daily in my national radio broadcasts, on the pages of Breitbart News and in speeches and appearances from Tokyo and Hong Kong to Arizona and Alabama.”
“President Trump was the only candidate that could have taken on and defeated the Clinton apparatus. I am the only person to date to conduct a global effort to preach the message of Trump and Trumpism; and remain ready to stand in the breech for this president’s efforts to make America great again.”
“My comments about the meeting with Russian nationals came from my life experiences as a Naval officer stationed aboard a destroyer whose main mission was to hunt Soviet submarines to my time at the Pentagon during the Reagan years when our focus was the defeat of ‘the evil empire’ and to making films about Reagan’s war against the Soviets and Hillary Clinton’s involvement in selling uranium to them.”
“My comments were aimed at Paul Manafort, a seasoned campaign professional with experience and knowledge of how the Russians operate. He should have known they are duplicitous, cunning and not our friends. To reiterate, those comments were not aimed at Don Jr.”
“I regret that my delay in responding to the inaccurate reporting regarding Don Jr has diverted attention from the president’s historical accomplishments in the first year of his presidency.”
“Everything I have to say about the ridiculous nature of the Russian ‘collusion’ investigation I said on my 60 Minutes interview. There was no collusion and the investigation is a witch hunt.”
Let’s be honest. The Trump – Bannon alliance is done. Trump doesn’t forgive and forget and neither does Bannon. Both have massive egos. The problem is that one was in a larger position of power. Bannon forgot that concept.
Then Trump did something inconceivable. He proved he’s not a dolt for an hour, live, on national television. He allowed cameras into a bipartisan meeting on immigration on Tuesday.
Of course, according to the American Media Maggots, he saved up for the past ten years to portray his seeming competence.
Let me be plain. I liked the DC “bull in a china shop” attitude of both Trump and Bannon. But when they fail to serve me I turn like an abject fickle, capricious and mercurial Elder American Taxpayer. I have seniority. And I demand response. Not next month or next year or a decade from now. Screw that. I want change ASAP and I don’t care who gets hurt in the process.
Bannon is gone. He made his bed. He had conscious choices to make. He made them. He’s dead to me. And likely to Trump as well. Yeah yeah yeah. Bannon “did this and he did that.”
But — as my bosses always evaluated me: “but what have you done for us lately?”
Make note of the names please because, after all, one of them is going to run for president as a Demorat candidate in 2020.
“The inclusion of a question on citizenship threatens to undermine the accuracy of the Census as a whole, and given this administration’s rhetoric and actions relating to immigrants and minority groups, the DOJ request is deeply troubling,” the senators wrote in a letter addressed to Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross.
For once in the life of a Demorat, would you so kindly tell the truth?
The letter went on to say the question could depress census turnout due to fear the government could use the information against participants.
“This chilling effect could lead to broad inaccuracies across the board, from how congressional districts are drawn to how government funds are distributed,” the letter reads.
There we go. The standard Mark I Model I defense attorney retort: “chilling effect.”
See my previous statement.
“Rather than preserve civil rights, as the Justice Department claims, a question on citizenship in the decennial census would very likely hinder a full and accurate accounting of this nation’s population.”
Here’s the applicable two-word phrase: avoidance maneuver.
A spokesperson for the Census Bureau said the “request will go through the well-established process that any potential question would go through.”
Speculation had swirled in recent months that the Trump administration was planning to include an immigration-related question in the census.
That is to say, the Demorats are no longer even attempting to be remotely clever. This is nothing but a naked attempt to ensure that the United States fails to capture anything even remotely close to an accurate count of the number of illegals present.
Because after all, even one, even ten, even twenty or a hundred or a thousand or 10,000 illegals reporting accurately on the census will be more precise than otherwise and tend to factually skew the statistics that Demorats trot out every year with regard to the “minimal impact illegals have” on the nation.