Month: August 2019

Opinion/Analysis: There was collusion – but not involving Trump

There really was a collusion plot. It really did target our election system. It absolutely sought to usurp our capacity for self-determination. It was just not the collusion you’ve been told about for nearly three years. It was not “Donald Trump’s collusion with Russia.” Here is the real collusion scheme: In 2016, the incumbent Democratic administration of President Barack Obama put the awesome powers of the United States government’s law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus in the service of the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, the Democratic Party, and the progressive Beltway establishment. This scheme had two parts: Plan A, the objective; and Plan B, a fail-safe strategy in case Plan A imploded — which all the smartest people were supremely confident would never, ever happen … which is why you could bet the ranch that it would. Plan A was to get Clinton elected president of the United States. This required exonerating her, at least ostensibly, from well-founded allegations of her felonious and politically disqualifying actions. Plan B was the insurance policy: an investigation that Donald Trump, in the highly unlikely event he was elected, would be powerless to shut down. An investigation that would simultaneously monitor and taint him. An investigation that internalized Clinton-campaign-generated opposition research, limning Trump and his campaign as complicit in Russian espionage. An investigation that would hunt for a crime under the guise of counterintelligence, build an impeachment case under the guise of hunting for a crime, and seek to make Trump not reelectable under the guise of building an impeachment case. Upon becoming President Obama’s secretary of state, Hillary Clinton improperly set up a private, non-secure system for email communications. It featured her own personal server, stored in her home and, later, maintained by a private contractor. Secretary Clinton used this private email system for all of her official State Department communications, notwithstanding that doing so (a) violated government regulations (which, as the department head, she was responsible for enforcing); (b) violated governmental record-keeping and record-production obligations imposed by federal law; and (c) made it inevitable — due to the nature of her responsibilities — that streams of classified information would flow through and be stored in the non-secure system. This lack of security meant that top-secret intelligence — some of it classified at the highest levels, some of it involving Clinton’s communications with the president of the United States and other top national-security officials — became accessible to people who were not cleared to see it. Accessible not just to those lacking security clearance but also to hostile actors, including foreign intelligence services and anti-American hackers. When asked, nearly two years after leaving office, to surrender copies of her emails (by an Obama State Department under pressure from congressional investigators and Freedom of Information Act claimants), Clinton caused tens of thousands of her emails to be destroyed. Not just deleted. Destroyed. As in: purged with a special software program (“BleachBit”) designed to shred electronic documents. The aim was to prevent their being recovered. Ever. By anyone. In all, Clinton undertook to destroy over 30,000 emails, even though some of them had been demanded by congressional subpoena. And this would not be a Clinton story if we failed to note that, in the time-honored family tradition, Hillary lied her head off about the substance of the destroyed emails: We were to believe that, in thousands upon thousands of email exchanges, one of the busiest public officials and most obsessively political creatures on the planet had lolled her days away gabbing about yoga routines, family vacations, and her daughter’s wedding. President Obama took care of undermining any prosecution for her mishandling of classified information. He had a deep interest in doing so: He had knowingly communicated with his secretary of state through the private system, and he had misled the public about it — claiming to have learned about Clinton’s private email practices from news reports, like everyone else. All of that could be neatly buried in two steps. First, invoke executive privilege (without calling it that — too Nixonian) to seal the Obama–Clinton emails from public view. Second, ensure that the Clinton-emails case would never be prosecuted: If Clinton was never accused of criminal conduct, then Obama’s role as a minor participant would not become evidence in a criminal case. In April 2016, on national television, the president made clear that he did not believe an indictment should be filed against former Secretary Clinton, who, by then, was the inevitable Democratic presidential nominee. Obama explained that, in his considered judgment, Clinton meant no harm to national security. Plus, the intelligence involved, though technically categorized as “classified,” was not really, you know, the super-secret stuff — “There’s ‘classified,’” Obama scoffed, “and then there’s classified.” It was a classic Obama straw man. The criminal provisions pertinent to Clinton’s case did not require proof of intent to harm the United States, only that she was trusted with access to intelligence and nevertheless mishandled it, either intentionally or through gross negligence. Moreover, no one was accusing Clinton of trying to damage national security. That is a different, more serious criminal offense that was not on the table. It was as if Obama were claiming that a bank robber was somehow not guilty of the bank robbery because she hadn’t murdered anyone while committing it. There was no way on God’s green earth that the Obama Justice Department was ever going to authorize a prosecution involving conduct that would embarrass the president. Nor was it ever going to indict Obama’s former secretary of state — certainly not after Obama, revered by Democrats and pundits as a first-rate lawyer, had pronounced her not guilty, had provided a legal rationale for exoneration, and had endorsed her as his successor. Wonder of wonders: The “no intent to harm the United States” rationale President Obama had glibly posited in insisting Clinton had done nothing wrong was echoed in the ensuing months by his subordinates. Justice Department officials leaked to their media friends that Clinton was unlikely to be charged because there was scant evidence of intent to harm the United States. Meanwhile, very shortly after Obama’s public statements about Clinton’s case, FBI director James Comey and his closest advisers began drafting remarks exonerating Mrs. Clinton. Over a dozen critical witnesses, including Clinton herself, had not yet been interviewed. Salient evidence had not yet been examined. No matter. With the end of the story already written, the rest was just details. When Director Comey finally announced that Clinton would not be indicted, his rationalizations were indistinguishable from Obama’s. Thus “exonerated,” the former first lady was on her way to the Oval Office — this time as president. Or so she thought — as did the Obama White House, the Justice Department, the State Department, the FBI, the intelligence agencies, every progressive activist from Boston Harbor to Silicon Valley, and every political pundit from the Beltway to the Upper West Side. Alas, there was just one problem — a problem the president and his myrmidons could not fix for Mrs. Clinton. That problem was Mrs. Clinton. As would have been manifest to less politicized eyes, she was an atrocious candidate. Clinton was the same fundamentally flawed, deeply dishonest, broadly unpopular candidate she had been in 2008, when she couldn’t convince Democrats to support her. You may recall this as the reason there was a President Barack Obama in the first place. You say, “Hey, wait a second. Donald Trump was fundamentally flawed, deeply dishonest, and broadly unpopular, too.” Maybe so, but if hammering away at an opponent’s malignance is the path to victory, shouldn’t you perhaps nominate a candidate who doesn’t mirror his defects? The only differences between the “It’s My Turn” Senator Hillary! of 2008 and the “Stronger Together” Secretary Clinton who expected a 2016 coronation was that she now had hanging around her neck the Benghazi debacle, a desultory tenure as secretary of state, a shades-of-2008 inability to convince Democrats that she was the preferable candidate (this time, not in comparison to a charismatic young progressive, but to a 75-year-old self-proclaimed socialist who had joined the Democratic party about five minutes before announcing his presidential aspirations), whispers that her health was deteriorating, and an email scandal that smacked of both national-security recklessness and rules-don’t-apply-to-me arrogance — precisely the kind of controversy that reminded Americans of how exhausting the last scandal-plagued Clinton administration had been. The Obama administration’s exoneration gambit came up snake-eyes because of Clinton herself. Democrats can con themselves (and attempt to con everyone else) into believing that her failure is due to Vladimir Putin’s perfidy or Trump’s demagoguery. In the real world, though, Clinton lost because of her epic shortcomings. That loss made it inevitable that the Obama administration’s exploitation of counterintelligence powers to monitor the opposition party’s presidential campaign would come to light. That made it imperative to promote the notion that there had been a Trump–Russia scheme worth investigating — a dark cloud of suspicion that would straitjacket and shorten the Trump presidency. The collusion narrative.

..which we now know to be a total hoax; a complete fabrication.  Thanks to attorney Andrew C. McCarthy for this outstanding piece.  Its an excerpt from his new book: “Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig and Election and Destroy a Presidency.’  So, you’ll have to pick up a copy to read the rest of this..   Excellent!!!     🙂

Chick-fil-A ranks first in new ‘brand intimacy’ study, knocks Starbucks from top spot

When it comes to fast food, diners are most emotional about Chick-fil-A. That’s the big takeaway from a 2019 Brand Intimacy Study released by marketing agency MBLM, which measured customers’ fondness and emotional bonds toward the fast-food brands they “use and love.” The study results, released Wednesday, indicate that Chick-fil-A has achieved the strongest emotional connection with customers of any of the 15 fast-food brands studied, and has effectively knocked Starbucks out of the top spot, where it sat for the previous two years. “Chick-fil-A has gradually risen to the top of the fast-food industry in our annual study,” said Mario Natarelli, a managing partner with MBLM, in a press release. “The brand is able to connect with a wide range of customers and we expect it to continue to perform well in years to come. Others in the industry can learn from the leader in creating more robust, stronger connections with their patrons.” Other brands customers connected with strongly were Dunkin’ (No. 2) and Starbucks (No. 3). McDonald’s, Taco Bell, Subway, Wendy’s, Burger King, Chipotle and KFC rounded out the top ten. In order to arrive at its results, MBLM polled 6,200 customers in the United States, Mexico and the United Arab Emirates who earn over $35,000 per year and fall between 18 and 64 years of age. The brands also were rated by several different criteria, including how respondents felt about each in terms of indulgence (“centered around moments of pampering and gratification” that can be either occasional or frequent) and nostalgia (“memories of the past and the warm, poignant feelings”) among others. Among the study’s other interesting findings, Chick-fil-A was also found to be the favored choice for both men and women of any age, but was “particularly strong” with women and millennials. McDonald’s, on the other hand, was actually determined to be the preferred brand among those earning over $100,000. The MBLM study is just one of several the agency uses to rank the overall “brand intimacy” from companies in of a number of industries, including media, automotive, technology, travel and more. Currently, of all brands, Disney is ranked the highest. Chick-fil-A is ranked 10th overall.

Congrats to Chick-fi-A!!

Dozens of Midwest teens who reported vaping hospitalized with ‘severe lung injury,’ breathing problems

More than a dozen teens in the Midwest who reported vaping have been hospitalized with lung issues, stumping doctors who are searching for what exactly is sickening them. The Minnesota Department of Health announced Tuesday four cases of young people at Children’s Minnesota with “severe lung injury” possibly tied to vaping. The cases were announced days after Illinois health officials reported six cases and at least 12 were confirmed in Wisconsin, state health officials said. There are more under investigation. “These cases are similar to lung disease cases recently reported in Wisconsin and Illinois, though it is too early to say whether they are connected,” the Minnesota Department of Health said. Patients are reporting similar symptoms – shortness of breath, chest pain, cough, and vomiting in some cases – and some have been admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Teens across states reported using vaping devices for both nicotine and THC, the psychoactive ingredient in marijuana that produces the “high” sensation, prior to their hospitalization. In Minnesota, specifically, doctors at first thought the teens had some sort of respiratory infection – possibly pneumonia – but ruled this out after they failed to improve with treatment. In fact, according to NBC News, many of the teens treated for a respiratory infection got worse, not better. “We are deeply concerned by the severe cases of lung injury associated with vaping that we are currently seeing,” Dr. Emily Chapman, chief medical officer at Children’s Minnesota, said in a news release. “These cases are extremely complex to diagnose, as symptoms can mimic a common infection yet can lead to severe complications and extended hospitalization. Medical attention is essential; respiratory conditions can continue to decline without proper treatment.” In Wisconsin, Dr. David D. Gummin, medical director of the Wisconsin Poison Center, and professor and chief of medical toxicology at the Medical College of Wisconsin, told The New York Times officials “have no leads” to a specific substance that’s causing respiratory issues “other than those that are associated with smoking or vaping,” he said. The negative health effects associated with cigarette and cigar use have long been documented, leading to a decline in both among teens in the U.S. in recent years. In 2018, for example, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reported roughly 1 in 50 – about 1.8 percent – of middle school students said they smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days, down from 4.3 percent in 2011 and a drastic decrease from 36.4 percent in 1997 when rates “peaked after increasing throughout the first half of the 1990s,” according to the American Lung Association. But the same is not true for e-cigarette use. In 2018, nearly 1 of every 20 middle school students (4.9 percent) reported using electronic cigarettes in the past 30 days. That’s an increase from less than 1 percent in 2011. Last year, the Surgeon General of the United States, Jerome Adams, declared vaping among American teens an “epidemic.” “This is an unprecedented challenge,” Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said in response at the time. The health issues – both short and long term – of e-cigarette use are not well understood, and the U.S. Food and Drug and Administration (FDA) does not require the manufacturers of e-cigarette devices to list all the ingredients in them. “The risk here is that if people are presenting to hospital emergency rooms or urgent cares, they either may not think of vaping as something that is threatening and may not include it in their history,” Chapman told The New York Times. “Or if asked directly, they may not be comfortable sharing that.” A recent study from Yale University and Duke University found the e-cigarette liquid in Juul devices contain chemicals known as acetals. Acetals, according to the researchers, could cause lung irritation. Separately, the FDA announced last week it’s investigating 127 reports of seizures occurring after vaping. “The truth of the matter is, we have so little experience with vaping, relative to the experience we have with cigarettes and cigars. Recall how long it took us to figure out that cigarettes were linked to lung cancer,” Chapman added. “There is so much we don’t know.”

Indeed..  Bottom line, vaping has many health risks; including ones that even the doctors aren’t sure about.  So, if you or anyone you know vapes, please share this article with them.  Clearly, it’s foolish to ASSume that vaping is safer than smoking cigarettes.  And, we know how risky that is.

Google’s decision to work with China, not US, ‘unprecedented’: Peter Thiel

PayPal co-founder Peter Thiel Opens a New Window. said on Sunday that his calls for the U.S. government Opens a New Window. to investigate Google Opens a New Window. are in an effort to see if there is any “foreign infiltration” at the tech Opens a New Window. giant. Thiel, a conservative who is an outlier among his peers in Silicon Valley, originally called for the federal investigation in mid-July at the National Conservatism Conference in Washington, D.C., accusing Google of working with China Opens a New Window. but not the U.S. government. The billionaire, who also sits on the board at Facebook, said Sunday that regardless of whether an American firm works with a civilian company in China, all technology is passed along to the communist nation’s military. “It’s not like the U.S., where you have different companies and different people and you have a government sector and a private sector and these things don’t always coordinate or work together,” Thiel told “Sunday Morning Futures.” “In China, these things are still tightly coordinated across the board.” In particular, Thiel said he is most concerned about Google’s sharing of its artificial intelligence called “DeepMind,” what he deems the tech firm’s “crown jewel.” DeepMind was founded in 2010 and purchased by Google four years later. The search giant opened its AI research lab in China, the same year that the nation amended its constitution to include a mandate that requires all research done inside the country to be shared with its armed forces (the People’s Liberation Army). “I think it is unprecedented in the last 100 years, or ever, that a major U.S. company refused to work with U.S. military and has worked with our geopolitical rival,” he said. “So this is not a liberal-conservative thing … this is absolutely unprecedented.” While Thiel stopped short of calling the company’s alleged links to China treasonous (though he has previously used the term regarding the same matter), he described the company’s self-image as “globalist,” “post-national” and “cosmopolitan,” adding that he believes “more that it’s incredibly insular.” The billionaire noted the first step toward making change is to talk about the issue. “This is an open secret in Silicon Valley,” Thiel said. “A lot of people think this is like kind of crazy what Google’s doing … And I sort of feel like I’m the little kid saying ‘the emperor has no clothes.’ It’s the secret hidden in plain sight.” A Google spokesperson called Thiel’s allegations “baseless” and said the company does not work with the Chinese military. “Our AI work in China is limited, with a small number of people working on global open source and education-related activities,” the spokesperson told FOX Business in a statement. “We are proud to continue our long history of work with the U.S. government, including the Department of Defense, in many areas including cybersecurity, recruiting and healthcare.” Thiel’s original comments also gained the attention of President Trump (whom Thiel supports), who said he will recommend various federal agencies, and possibly the Department of Justice, “take a look” into Google. “It’s a big statement when you say that Google is involved with China in not a very positive way for our country,” Trump, who referred to Thiel as a friend, told reporters at the White House. “So I think we’ll all look at that. I know that our other agencies will be looking at it and we’ll see if there’s any truth to it.”

And, we of course will keep on this developing story.  If Peter’s accusations are correct, then shame on Google.   That indeed would be treasonous.  We urge the Trump Administration to take a serious look into this, and then report back to we-the-people.  We need to know if Google is selling us out to the communist Chinese government and its military.

Todd Starnes: Anti-Trump Rep. Castro taught a lesson by Texas barbecue lovers who support president

Rep. Joaquin Castro learned a very important life lesson the other day. It turns out the gun-toting, Bible-clinging Trump supporters in San Antonio don’t take kindly to a politician who disrespects their brisket. Castro, D-Texas, recently published a list of President Trump’s top San Antonio donors. He also doxed their places of employment. “Their contributions are fueling a campaign of hate that labels Hispanic immigrants as ‘invaders’,” Castro wrote on Twitter. One of the businesses the congressman targeted for political retribution was Bill Miller Bar-B-Q, one of the most popular brisket and sweet tea joints in San Antonio. For those of you north of the Mason-Dixon line, eating brisket is something of a worship experience. I’ve heard stories from the Hill Country that some Baptist churches in those parts actually serve brisket and sweet tea for the Lord’s Supper. Castro must have imagined thousands of San Antonians converging on the barbecue joints armed with torches and pitchforks, terrorizing customers in the drive-thru and staging boycotts. He must have dreamed about literally running the pit masters out of town. But there are some rules about living in the Lone Star State. You go to church on Sunday. You don’t talk bad about somebody’s momma. And you don’t mess with the brisket. The day after Castro published that hateful screed, thousands of Texans piled into their pickup trucks and drove to the nearest Bill Miller Bar-B-Q. Social media reports flooded in showing massive drive-thru lines backing up onto busy streets. Hungry customers patiently waited in lines out the door. Texas Gov. Greg Abbott tweeted a photograph of a plate piled high with barbecue noting it was a “perfect night for @BillMillerBarBQ.” Conservatives have rallied to the restaurant’s defense, much like they did when Chick-fil-A was victimized by leftist bullies over the company’s Christian beliefs. Remember that story? In my forthcoming book, “Culture Jihad: How to Stop the Left From Killing a Nation,” I urge conservatives to stand up to the militant thugs and bullies who want to destroy this nation. And we cannot allow ourselves to be intimidated by a bunch of pajama boy liberals and their pink-hat-wearing gal pals. In the days after Castro’s attempt to dox and destroy Trump supporters, something unusual happened. Instead of being afraid, conservatives decided to rise up – and fight back. “We found that our fundraising actually has gone up since the congressman tried to out those people and shame somebody for supporting President Trump,” Lara Trump told me during an interview on “The Todd Starnes Radio Show.” She said Castro’s hate-tweet was “sick and twisted.” “People don’t like this,” Lara Trump, who is the president’s daughter-in-law and a senior adviser to his reelection campaign, told me. “This is not acceptable. When has it ever been OK to harass people and try and silence them and make an effort to stop them from contributing to a political campaign just because you disagree with it?” The Republican National Committee also reports an uptick in donations after the recent attacks on Trump donors. And it’s clear to me that Americans are sending a message to political punks who think it’s OK to bully private citizens. “This isn’t how we do things in this country,” Lara Trump said. Amen! God bless Texas and God bless barbecue.

Well said, Todd.  Congressman Castro (D-TX) probably broke the law with this stunt of his.  But, regardless, it was a punk thing to do.  He’s a shameless, self-righteous, self-serving bully…and the stunt definitely backfired on him.  So, kudos to everyone in Texas who pushed back against that punk. Todd Starnes is host of “The Todd Starnes Radio Show” and “Starnes Country” on Fox Nation. He is the author of a number of best-selling books. Follow him on Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook.

San Francisco saw 150 percent spike in fentanyl-related deaths last year, report says

The number of deaths from fentanyl overdoses in San Francisco jumped by nearly 150 percent last year, according to a report by the city’s public health department made public this week. According to the San Francisco Chronicle, 89 deaths in the city were attributed to fentanyl overdoses, up from 37 deaths in 2017. By comparison, 70 people died from prescription opioid overdoses and 60 deaths were attributed to heroin overdoses. A preliminary report released in June attributed 57 deaths to fentanyl overdoses, but health officials told the Chronicle they had expected that figure to increase as the city medical examiner determined the cause of more deaths. The city has experienced an uptick in fentanyl-related deaths since 2008, when five deaths were reported. In 2010, six deaths were attributed to the drug, which killed 22 people in 2016. “It’s not a huge surprise to see this, although it’s certainly disappointing and sad to have lost this many lives in the city,” Dr. Phillip Coffin, the director of substance use research for the San Francisco Department of Public Health, told the Chronicle.“Unfortunately, there is no locality that can withstand the introduction of fentanyl without some increase in mortality.” In its legal form, fentanyl is used to treat patients recovering from surgery. However, the synthetic drug is often mixed with other drugs like heroin and cocaine in powder form for those looking to get high, KTVU reported in June. “In San Francisco, that’s how fentanyl came to us. In counterfeit pills at first a few years ago. At this point it is its own drug supply,” Kristen Marshall from the Drug Overdose Prevention & Education Project told the station. Fentanyl is a highly addictive opiate that is 100 times more potent than other prescription opioids like morphine, according to the paper. “It has taken over heroin as the number one choice for opioid,” Dr. Chris Colwell, chief of emergency medicine at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, told the station. Coffin said fentanyl has “become more and more prevalent as the opioid that people are using in San Francisco” and “is a riskier opioid compared to prescription opioids.” A Drug Enforcement Administration report said drug companies shipped billions of painkillers across America without proper oversight for several years, exacerbating the opioid crisis. The report said 76 billion oxycodone and hydrocodone pills were shipped to mostly rural and working-class communities in the Appalachian region, which has become the epicenter of the crisis.

Just add this to the list of failures in San Francisco, which has been under solid Democrat party control for over half a century.  Yeah..  over half a century.  Everything from the homeless crisis there, to the drug needles in the streets and people defecating in the streets..to out-of-control crime, and now fentanyl..all due to failed public policies of Democrats who have a stranglehold on what was once a thriving and beautiful city.  And, with an over 10-1 Democrat voter registration advantage, that won’t change anytime soon.

Elizabeth Warren’s Ferguson Lie

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren yesterday tweeted: “5 years ago Michael Brown was murdered by a white police officer in Ferguson, Missouri. Michael was unarmed yet he was shot 6 times. I stand with activists and organizers who continue the fight for justice for Michael. We must confront systemic racism and police violence head on.” This is an outright lie, one day after Warren complained of the dangers of rhetoric. Michael Brown was not murdered. Michael Brown was shot by officer Darren Wilson in an act of self-defense. This is why the grand jury declined to indict Wilson for murder or manslaughter, and it was also the conclusion of the Obama administration’s Department of Justice. “Every police officer in America should be offended by Sen. Warren’s ill-informed, inflammatory tweet today,” Jeff Roorda of the St. Louis Police Officers Association told me via email. “Holding a would-be cop killer out as some sort of victim or worse yet, a hero, does no justice to the truth or to reconciliation. Her careless words disqualify her from fitness to serve impartially as commander-in-chief.” “I was a Democratic Missouri State Representative for 8 years,” Roorda also wrote. “But, I’m sick of uninformed members of my party attacking cops. It’s just wrong.” Attempts to contact Senator Warren’s campaign by phone and email were not returned.

You have a Dem with bona fide Dem creds call out Elizabeth Warren on her brazen, self-serving, anti-cop, hypocritical lie…and her office is running the other direction when asked for comment.  Gee..  What a shocker, lol.  Not!  Don’t expect this story anywhere in the dominantly liberal mainstream media..  Everything about the incident 5 years ago in Ferguson, MO (near my hometown of St. Louis), was a lie.  Remember, “Hands up, don’t shoot?”  That was a lie.  It never happened.  According to forensics and witness testimony, it never ever happened.  And, the dominantly liberal mainstream media, the Obama Administration, Eric Holder and so on made it about racism, white cop killing unarmed black victim and on and on.  ALL of it was a lie.  For those with memory problems..  A large, young, black male (Michael Brown) went into a convenience store, bullied the clerk and stole some cigars.  At the time, the liberal media called him a “gentle giant.”  The incident at the convenience store was caught on security cameras and we ALL saw played over and over again.  In spite of that, that “gentle giant”  then walked out…and walked right down a main thoroughfare in Ferguson, a municipality in north St. Louis County.  The convenience store called 911 to report the burglary, and Officer Darren Wilson, a decorated officer, was just out on patrol saw Michael Brown waking down the middle of the street..and asked him to get out of the middle of the road.  Then, the report came through on his radio and he identified the man as the robbery suspect (“big black male carrying a box of cigars”).  So, he pulled up to Michael.  That’s when it all went south.  According to witnesses, Officer Wilson’s personal account, and MULTIPLE autopsies by multiple coroners (yeah, there were actually multiple coroners), Michael Brown, who later we find out also had marijuana in his system (remember the law-abiding “gentle giant” narrative?), attacked Officer Wilson and was MUCH bigger than the officer, and went for his sidearm.  During the struggle, Officer Wilson who had already been beat by Brown (and the pics taken of the officer after the incident showed he was beat up badly), fearing for his life, shot and killed Brown.  The end.  And according to multiple witnesses, multiple autopsies, the officer’s testimony, and forensics, the officer did everything proper and by the book.  It was pure self-defense.  In fact, had the suspect been white, that’s exactly where the story would have ended and it wouldn’t have made national news.  To be clear, race had NOTHING to do with the event, until the rabid race hustlers/oportunists like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, then Pres. Obama, then AG Eric Brown, the NAACP, the agenda-driven liberal media, and on and on made it into a race issue…which ultimately resulted in some rioting.  Elizabeth Warren, and the rest of the Dems seeking the 2020 Dem Presidential nomination for their party, are using every minute they have in front of a camera to shamelessly play some type of race card to further the narrative that President Trump is a racist and white supremacist.  Of course there is no evidence to substantiate that whatsoever.  But, it’s the lie they’re repeating over and over…  And, as evidenced here, Elizabeth Warren is even stooping so low as to referring to an incident that happened YEARS before Trump even declared his presidential aspirations.  But, of course, Trump is somehow responsible for Ferguson as well..  Typical..