Good News: D.C. Poster Cop For The Gender Confused Is A Pervert

In most situations, if an employee acted in this manner they would be terminated. And, potentially, the justice system would become involved and press charges

DC’s Transgender Cop Poster Child Turns Out To Be A Pervert

A transgender police officer in Washington, D.C., who has repeatedly been praised as a community role model has also quietly been reprimanded for improper sexually-tinged antics with underage police interns.

In a story published Thursday night, NBC4 News profiled Jessica Hawkins as a police officer who “helps build trust in [the] D.C. community” due to his work on an LGBT outreach unit. Hawkins, who previously went by Billy, is biologically male but identifies as a woman, and publicly transitioned two years ago.

Hawkins has been praised again and again in articles. But, see, there’s a wee bit of a problem

But a new report by local D.C. station Fox 5 shows another, more disturbing side of Hawkins that hasn’t appeared in profiles. According to the report, Hawkins has repeatedly landed in hot water because of his conduct around interns for D.C.’s police department.

“Sgt. Hawkins showed the interns a ‘homemade video of her having sex with 4 men while she was intoxicated,’” Fox’s report says. Another complain filed against Hawkins accused him of taking under-21 interns to an Arlington gay bar, where she helped them buy alcohol and laughed at one intern’s possession of a fake ID.

Hawkins has voluntarily shown inappropriate pictures to other interns, and doesn’t dispute the allegations against him, admitting that they are correct. The D.C. police are supposedly “investigating” this conduct through the disciplinary review division, yet, Hawkins is still on duty after being briefly suspended. This has been going on for over seven weeks.

If you took underage people to a bar and got them in, what would happen to you? As a police officer, he laughed at the fake ID used by one, instead of arresting that person. He’s further admitted to purchasing and drinking alcohol on duty and at the station. There are also charges of bias in her policing, giving preference to LGBT people.

What will the result be? Most likely, this will be whitewashed and swept quietly under the rug. This doesn’t mean that straight people can’t be perverts. They certainly can. But, here we see the double standards in dealing with the gender confused. Even if the D.C. police decide to crack down, they know that the Typical Activists will pitch a fit.

Read: Good News: D.C. Poster Cop For The Gender Confused Is A Pervert »

If All You See…

…is a world suffering from extreme rainfall from motor vehicle carbon pollution, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is Raised On Hoecakes, with a post on Irony and whiny liberals.

Read: If All You See… »

Washington Post Aghast That Trump Picked Guy Who Doesn’t Follow “Settled Science”

With apoplectic editorials like this, Trump definitely picked the right guy to head the EPA

A man who rejects settled science on climate change should not lead the EPA

THE WEEK started with a hopeful sign for those concerned about climate change: Former vice president Al Gore met with Donald Trumpfor about 90 minutes on Monday, leading some to believe that the president-elect might be ready to accept facts and evidence. By the end of the week, however, Mr. Trump had selected Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt (R) to lead the Environmental Protection Agency.

Mr. Pruitt wrote this in National Review in May: “Global warming has inspired one of the major policy debates of our time. That debate is far from settled. Scientists continue to disagree about the degree and extent of global warming and its connection to the actions of mankind. That debate should be encouraged — in classrooms, public forums, and the halls of Congress. It should not be silenced with threats of prosecution. Dissent is not a crime.”

Obviously, saying that people should be able to debate and continue doing science and dissent are major Thoughtcrimes and Wrongthink.

Dissent, indeed, is not a crime, and acknowledging the uncertainties in climate forecasts is reasonable. But rejecting or playing down the near-unanimous warnings of experts, which are based on decades of substantial and continually accumulating evidence and suggest vast implications for future generations, should disqualify a nominee from leading an expert agency charged with making science-based decisions. Among scientists there is virtually no dissent from the conclusion that human activity — the burning of fossil fuels, which releases heat-trapping gases that stay in the atmosphere — is leading to planetary warming, and that the coming changes pose severe risks.

That link? It goes to NASA, which then cites the utterly discredited Cook et al “consensus” “study.” If this is what the Warmists at the Washington Post want to cite as ‘consensus” on science, well, then, looks like they are utterly disqualified from discussing the subject.

But rejecting settled science strikes us as being in a different category. The Senate should probe Mr. Pruitt’s position on climate change. If he explicitly or implicitly rejects the scientific consensus, that would be justification to vote no. If, on the other hand, he acknowledges the risks facing the globe, lawmakers should ask what Mr. Pruitt would be prepared to do as the nation’s chief environmental officer to combat them.

When you read things like that, you should wonder what they’re hiding, and why they want to shut down scientific inquiry. And just how much like a cult this is.

Read: Washington Post Aghast That Trump Picked Guy Who Doesn’t Follow “Settled Science” »

Cruz, DeSantis To Introduce Term Limits Bill To Drain The Swamp

Senator Ted Cruz and Representative Ron DeSantis have an op-ed up in the Washington Post, explaining the steps needed to actually drain the swamp

If Republicans really want to drain the swamp, here’s how to do it

On Election Day, the American people made a resounding call to “drain the swamp” that is modern Washington. Yet on Capitol Hill, we seem mired in the same cycle of complacency: The game hasn’t changed, and the players remain the same. Thankfully, there’s a solution available that, while stymied by the permanent political class, enjoys broad public support: congressional term limits.

During the presidential campaign, Donald Trump called for enacting term limits, and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) has endorsed the idea. As soon as the 115th Congress convenes, both of us will move to restore accountability among the entrenched Washington establishment by introducing a constitutional amendment to limit the number of terms that a member of Congress can serve to three in the House and two in the Senate.

Passing term limits will demonstrate that Congress has actually heard the voice of the people.

In an age in which partisan divisions seem intractable, it is remarkable that public support for congressional term limits is strong regardless of political affiliation — huge majorities of rank-and-file Republicans, Democrats and independents favor enacting this reform. Indeed, according to a Rasmussen survey conducted in October, 74 percent of likely voters support establishing term limits for all members of Congress. This is because the concept of a citizen legislature is integral to the model of our democratic republic.

They go on to note that the Founders, who declined to add term limits at the time, were very concerned with the creation of a Political Aristocracy, what Cruz and DeSantis refer to as a “permanent political class” and “political careerism”, and they are exactly correct. I remember a few years ago when two Senators, one a Democrat, one a Republican, were lauded and celebrated in the Senate for each having taken over 25,000 votes. That’s despicable. No one should spend that long in a political position. They should spend a short time as a publicly elected servant, then go home to live under the laws they passed.

The rest goes on to describe more reasons for term limits, well worth the read, and worth the support. You may not like Ted Cruz, but, The People on both sides of the political aisle support term limits.

One thing I’ll mention again, if they want to drain the swamp, the 17th Amendment needs to be repealed at the same time, restoring the Federalist notion that State general assemblies should vote on their Senators, meaning that the Senators are beholden to their states, not their parties.

Read: Cruz, DeSantis To Introduce Term Limits Bill To Drain The Swamp »

Obama Begs Republicans Not To Repeal His Failing Healthcare Law

If it was working so well, would it need to be repealed and replaced?

(The Hill) President Barack Obama on Saturday lauded the Affordable Care Act as a Republican-controlled Congress looks forward to its repeal.

During his weekly White House address, Obama encouraged Americans who don’t currently have healthcare to enroll in the program, and said that he wants to “build on the progress we’ve made” with the law.

Would that be the “progress” where costs are rising dramatically, service is restricted, deductibles make the insurance almost unusable for so many, medical facilities and doctors not accepting it, and insurers are dropping out? Among other issues? That progress?

“Whether or not you get insurance through the Affordable Care Act, that’s the health care system as we now know it,” Obama said. “Because our goal wasn’t just to make sure more people have coverage – it was to make sure more people have better coverage. That’s why we want to build on the progress we’ve made – and I’ve put forth a number of ideas for how to improve the Affordable Care Act.”

A 2000+ page bill, years to implement it, and people do not have better coverage. Anyhow, his idea seems to be to implement a government option. Seriously, what else has he proposed?

The president then criticized the Republican effort to repel and replace the law, stating that such a political move would erase all progress that has been made toward securing a better healthcare system in America.

“Now Republicans in Congress want to repeal the whole thing and start from scratch – but trying to undo some of it could undo all of it. All those consumer protections – whether you get your health insurance from ObamaCare, or Medicare, or Medicaid, or on the job – could go right out the window,” he said.

In other words, Obama is scaremongering with some prognostication because his signature legislation is on the chopping block because it’s failing, a bill that only Democrats voted for, and did so over the objections of the majority of Americans.

“One new study shows that if Congress repeals Obamacare as they’ve proposed, nearly 30 million Americans would lose their coverage. Four in five of them would come from working families. More than 9 million Americans who would receive tax credits to keep insurance affordable would no longer receive that help. That is unacceptable,” Obama said.

So, how do 30 million lose coverage when only 20 million (at least, those who signed up, we aren’t really getting numbers on those that actually pay their premiums) joined? Funny how Obama wasn’t worried when millions were losing their insurance they liked when this bill went into effect. Why was that not acceptable?

Here’s the thing: Democrats have continued to lose elections ever since Obamacare was passed. And now, they no longer control Congress nor the White House, and Trump will (hopefully) nominate a good Originalist for the Supreme Court. The Era Of Obama can be wiped away. As Obama himself stated, elections have consequences. If Obama and the Dems didn’t want this to happen, they should have crafted a better bill that actually worked.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Obama Begs Republicans Not To Repeal His Failing Healthcare Law »

Fake News/TDS: Trump Has Blocked Women From Protesting Day After Inauguration

Oh my God, this is horrendous! What a horrible person! Let’s first start with this other lunacy from Salon’s abortionista Amanda Marcotte

With fake news spiraling out of control, what can real people do?

Fake news is a big deal. Recent research suggests that the proliferation of conspiracy theories and other urban legends, vaguely disguised as real news and disseminated widely on social media, played a significant role in helping elect Donald Trump as president.

Well, what can they do? Avoid Salon, for starters (of course, it’s just too much fun reading these wackadoodles), who engage in a bit of fake news themselves (shocking!) and Trump Derangement Syndrome

Women’s March on Washington barred from protesting Donald Trump inauguration
Trump’s Presidential Inauguration Committee has blocked access to the landmark Lincoln Memorial in D.C.

That’s a pretty specific headline and subhead, is it not? How about paragraphs 1 and 2?

Protesters who plan to descend on Washington in the days surrounding President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration next month will find themselves barred from the nation’s most famous public protest site.

The National Park Service, on behalf of the Presidential Inauguration Committee, filed a “massive omnibus blocking permit” securing much of the National Mall, Pennsylvania Avenue, the Washington Monument and the Lincoln Memorial for Trump’s inauguration festivities, The Guardian reported on Thursday.

So, sorta the NPS?

The temporary ban mostly affects a planned march from the Lincoln Memorial to the White House on Jan. 21, 2017, the morning after Trump’s inauguration. The morning after the election, organizers began the  Women’s March on Washington, which leaders say is an intentional nod to Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s 1963 civil rights march at the Lincoln Memorial.

How dare Trump! Ah, but we eventually find out deep into the article, after most moonbats have tuned out and started tweeting in High Dudgeon

But organizers ran into permitting issues early in the planning process. The Park Service issues permits for protests on a first-come, first-serve basis and other protests had already received permits before the women’s march organizers applied. Now, the massive omnibus blocking permit has blocked at least a dozen other groups from protesting in the days after Trump’s inauguration.

So, they took to long, and the NPS said “nope.” So, not Trump’s fault?

Essentially, this same thing happened in 2008 for Obama’s coronation, and, too a lesser degree, for his 2012 inauguration.

As a sidebar here, the big issue post-inauguration is that the area is considered a construction zone, though, lord knows why it takes up to March 1 to clean it up….oh, right, government…., so, it would unsafe for anyone to demonstrate, so, blocked, because, if anything happened, they could sue. So, being ultra-litigious and overly cautious are things that Progressives love, especially when it empowers Government. Here? Hoist. Petard.

Read: Fake News/TDS: Trump Has Blocked Women From Protesting Day After Inauguration »

If All You See…

…is a carbon pollution created deluge, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is White House Dossier, with a post on Trump seeming more like the president than the president.

Read: If All You See… »

Good News: Trump’s EPA Head Pick Is Worse Than You Think

Worse, that is, if you are a member of the Cult of Climastrology, but, hey, the pick of Scott Pruitt will afford Warmists the extra ability to jump in their fossil fueled vehicles to go protest fossil fuels, plus, we know Lefties love living in apoplexy

Scott Pruitt, Trump’s Climate-Denying EPA Pick, Is Worse Than You Think

Every scientist not on the corporate dole is upset about Scott Pruitt, Donald Trump’s pick to head the Environmental Protection Agency.

This would be all those on the Public Dole.

Like Betsy DeVos, who wants to destroy public education, and Jeff Sessions, who wants to destroy the Voting Rights Act, Pruitt is against the very laws he will soon be in charge of enforcing.

He’s going to Destroy The Environment!!!!!

Now the shoe is on the other foot. Now it’s arch-conservatives who will be controlling the EPA, with exactly the same level of authority as the environmentalists who preceded them.

And make no mistake: Pruitt’s nomination is historic. No one has ever headed the EPA with his level of anti-science, anti-environmental record, which includes multiple lawsuits against the EPA intended to prevent the EPA from doing its job. Which is now supposed to be his job. He is also a state attorney general with no experience managing an organization like the EPA (budget: $7.7 billion), no scientific background, and close ties to the very industries he is supposed to be regulating.

Doom! This little unhinged Snowflake names 5 things that Pruitt will damage, but, this is typical asinine hysteria. The only thing Pruitt has been consistent on destroying are Hotcoldwetdry regulations. He has no record of wanting to destroy actual clean air, clean water, and clean land regulations. He certainly does want to reign in the consistent over-reaches and tyranny of the EPA. Nor can the article cite any sources to back up it’s hysteria that Pruitt will do what the article is proposing.

Read: Good News: Trump’s EPA Head Pick Is Worse Than You Think »

Mass Attorney General Maura Healey Really Doesn’t Want To Be Questioned On Her Climate Change Fascism

Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey is one of the leaders in the assault on Exxon, demanding all their documents in a stunning abuse of power in order to silence dissenters from the Cult of Climastrology. Exxon has sued her and the others involved, and she really doesn’t want to cooperate and transparent herself

(Inside Climate News) Without waiting for a ruling by a federal judge in Texas who has consistently sided with ExxonMobil, Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey has filed an appeal to block her deposition scheduled for Tuesday.

Healey explained in a motion filed Thursday with the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals that a stay is warranted because the judge who issued the deposition order has refused to properly consider her arguments and has not ruled on her pending motion to stay her deposition.

That judge, U. S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade, had earlier sided with Exxon in its request to depose Healey. He said he suspected the attorney general’s climate fraud investigation of the company may be biased. (snip)

At the same time Healey appealed the deposition order, she also filed an appeal to toss out Exxon’s entire case that seeks to block her investigation.

The Warmists like Healey are more than happy to demand everything from companies, but, are very unhappy when the Public demands the same from them.

“Requiring the Attorney General to explain her investigatory rationale at this stage would make a shambles of the investigation and stifle her gathering of facts,” according to the motion to dismiss the case.

“The only likely outcome of the discovery that the court has ordered is an improper and vexatious investigation into privileged or protected information.”

Interesting. Healey, along with her fellow AGs, want privileged and protected information, and beyond, from Exxon and lots of companies, citizens, and groups in this matter, forgetting that it is the government that must be transparent and non-dictatorial. That The People are innocent till proven guilty, and that it is illegal to go on witch hunts. That The People have rights from abusive government officials.

What will most likely happen is that the judge will deny her motions, and she may very well decline to be deposed, leading to contempt charges.

Crossed at Pirate’s Cove. Follow me on Twitter @WilliamTeach.

Read: Mass Attorney General Maura Healey Really Doesn’t Want To Be Questioned On Her Climate Change Fascism »

Duplicitous NY Times Suddenly Enthused By States Rights On Illegal Aliens

The Editorial Board of the NY Times really, really likes the notion of States and cities leading the resistance to something that hasn’t even happened in attempting to protect people who are….unlawfully present in the United States, people who decrease wages, take jobs from Americans, gum up the works at hospitals and cause emergency rooms to close, choke up the criminal justice system and prisons, commit identity fraud, kill and rape citizens, and so much more

California Looks To Lead The Trump Resistance

Nobody knows yet what Donald Trump is going to do to immigration enforcement. Only a month has passed since the election, and the president-elect is no different from the candidate: erratic, self-contradictory, hazy on principles and policies.

But states and cities that value immigrants, including the undocumented, do not have the luxury of waiting and hoping for the best. They are girding for a confrontation, building defenses to protect families and workers from the next administration.

That’s a nice bit of mental jujitsu, equating legal immigrants with illegals, proposing that Trump will go after the legals, which he has never discussed. Here’s where it gets cute, because they probably read their own previous work

Nothing in the [bills protecting illegals offered in California] would obstruct the federal government. This is not a nullification of federal laws or a rebellion against the Constitution. It’s upholding the Fourth Amendment, preventing unreasonable search and seizure, so mothers and fathers can go to work and children go to school without fear of losing one another. It’s upholding the First Amendment, so day laborers can solicit work on a sidewalk. It’s allowing the local police to keep the trust and cooperation of crime victims and witnesses, who will not fear every encounter as a prelude to deportation. (snip)

But the opposite is true: By drawing a bright line between federal immigration enforcement and local policing, the California Values Act would promote smarter, more effective law enforcement. Local officers would continue to keep the peace, and in the face of criminal threats — as validated by a warrant from a judge — would cooperate with federal agents. But if the Trump administration begins roundups of those who pose no danger, of minor offenders and noncriminals, staking out schools, churches, businesses and homes — they will not do its job for it.

Let’s jump back in time to 2010, to another NY Times editorial board piece

The Constitution Trumps Arizona

The Obama administration has not always been completely clear about its immigration agenda, but it was forthright Tuesday when it challenged the pernicious Arizona law that allows the police to question the immigration status of people they detain for local violations. Only the federal government can set or enforce immigration policy, the government said in its lawsuit against the state, and “Arizona has crossed this constitutional line.”

There is nothing terribly complicated about this principle, which is based on several aspects of the Constitution, acts of Congress, and Supreme Court decisions over the years. A patchwork of state and local immigration policies would cause havoc.

Well, the NYTEB seemed pretty clear in their notion about immigration policy, did it not? But, now that the law might actually be enforced by the Trump administration, the same NYTEB is enthused by this State’s Rights thing. They’ve done a bit of parsing in order to find a way for states and cities to blow off federal law, citing the 4th, forgetting that the law allows people to be arrested for being an illegal alien, and the 1st applies if the person is lawfully present in the U.S. or a citizen.

There’s always an excuse of duplicitous actions and thought in Liberal World.

Crossed at Right Wing News.

Read: Duplicitous NY Times Suddenly Enthused By States Rights On Illegal Aliens »

Bad Behavior has blocked 7787 access attempts in the last 7 days.