Can anyone explain how a Ca sheriff got a Ca judge to write a seizure warrant for an out of state business over a purely civil matter, or why all 4 officers had any authority whatsoever that far out of their single county jurisdiction?

Lol. I’M narrow minded?!? ROTFLMFAHS!!!

Who told you that?! They lied.

Wiki-Five House Committees (Armed Services, Foreign Affairs, Intelligence, Judiciary, and Oversight and Government Reform) initiated their own inquiries soon after the attack. The Republicans on these five House Committees delivered an interim report to the Members of the House Republican Conference on April 23, 2013. The interim report, which contains the conclusions of the Republican majority staff, signed only by the five Republican chairmen of those committees and stated "This staff report has not been officially adopted by the Committee on Armed Services, the Committee on Foreign Affairs, the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, or the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence and therefore may not necessarily reflect the views of their Members," was critical of the Obama Administration's actions before, during, and after the attack. Among dozens of findings, the report states that:

"Senior State Department officials knew that the threat environment in Benghazi was high and that the Benghazi compound was vulnerable and unable to withstand an attack, yet the department continued to systematically withdraw security personnel"
The "[Obama] Administration willfully perpetuated a deliberately misleading and incomplete narrative that the attacks evolved from a political demonstration caused by a YouTube video."
"... after a White House Deputies Meeting on Saturday, September 15, 2012, the Administration altered the talking points to remove references to the likely participation of Islamic extremists in the attacks. The Administration also removed references to the threat of extremists linked to al-Qa'ida in Benghazi and eastern Libya ..."
"The Administration deflected responsibility by blaming the IC [intelligence community] for the information it communicated to the public in both the talking points and the subsequent narrative it perpetuated."
Democrats on the five committees criticized the report, which they said had been written without Democratic input, as a "partisan Republican" work that was "unnecessarily politicizing our national security".

Also “ Democrats on the committee certainly say this was political and politically constructed. They say there were many witnesses whose testimony wasn't released because it supported the administration and particularly supported Hillary Clinton.”

There were 8 Benghazi investigations, 7 of which were only done as political attacks on Clinton to hurt her presidential run, admitted by McCarthy and others on tape. That’s why, even though their Republican led investigations found no wrongdoing he called it a win against Clinton because the accusations hurt her politically.

You get what you call one point of view because one side, the anti democracy pro-sedition side, refuses to testify, ignores subpoenas, and hides and destroys evidence….the same “side” that boycotted the investigations and refused to authorize a non partisan outside investigation, then whined they weren’t being allowed to participate…the treason side….your side.
They have absolutely been able to present another side…under oath. Trump has an open invitation, as do all his co-conspirators that ignored subpoenas. They refuse, or are incapable.
There have been plenty of Trump officials who did give their point of view, and every one has said Trump was clearly attempting a coup, knew he lost the election early, knew his plots were absolutely illegal, and many quit on Jan 6 when it became obvious he was willing to violently attack America and his own VP intentionally to retain power by any means.
You know this, you just hope someone else is as dumb as you act and can be fooled into believing your nonsense that this is a partisan politically motivated hatchet job, not an investigation into the worst attack against America on the mainland since the Southern Insurrection (otherwise known as the civil war).

Love how you blame everyone else but these kids parents.

I've just gleaned the YT comments no raciest statements. I see 1 ifffy statement .



This is heartbreaking to think these babies are part of our futures. This is depressing to see how these babies are allowed to talk and act towards adults/authority.


The child is just imitating what he sees around him and acts out.



Just think one of us will be privileged enough to be robbed and murder by these future criminals. Thank you greatest ally!


Dangerous even when young.

Instead of preschool, they should be in pre-jail.


They'll grow up to be very productive citizens I'm sure.


If you think this is bad you should see how they talk to females.


Lord have mercy on our souls! These children are barely school age where are their parents or guardian?

Jaw dropping. While there is very little speaking this video says so much! You have to wonder what kind of nightmare their lives are.

Kid's got a bright future.



That child is an innocent soul, ready to soak-up like a sponge whatever is taught to him; if it's loving kindness or hateful abuse, he will show the world what he's learned. Parents must be proud to have put this innocent human on a path that will surely ruin him.



But as narrow minded as you are...Im sure you will single this out..


I'm baffeled as to why people insist these creatures can live on equal terms with humans.


100 comments and 1 or 2 bad and you little racist mind blankets all comments.

Sad you you see only bad. Most likely a result of bad parenting .

You should try online therapy . You really need help

https://www.talkspace.com/

I’m shocked to find out you may be correct…they don’t seem to have the authority to do more than make security suggestions, directly ignoring direct orders is problematic.

Yep…not true at Parkland, wasn’t true here. There were DOZENS of “good guys with guns” milling around outside, and 19 inside, not one even tried to help, some assaulted students, parents, and teachers, but not the shooter.

Edit: 19 officers were inside, on the other side of the door while children were being shot to death for 45 minutes…during which time they heard the screams of children being shot to death, they received multiple calls from inside the classroom explaining that there were multiple dead kids, multiple still living children, and more being shot with every call, yet they did absolutely nothing but wait. They claim today that they decided he was a barricaded suspect and there was no time pressure to stop him despite being able to hear children being murdered just feet away from where they stood with their thumbs up their asses.
It now seems, according to today’s story from police (a story that changes with every telling) even the tactical team from border police was on scene almost 40 minutes before they went in.

*doublepromote *quality debunking of another of the right’s idiotic talking points.

I think 21 officers from that force need to be executed on the spot by grieving parents, with no charges for the shooters, and the rest fired and banned from being even unarmed security guards for life, with prison if they even attempt another job in law enforcement. This was undeniable proof that police aren’t heroes, aren’t there to protect the public, and are in reality just cowardly thugs with guns and authority that don’t step up when needed.

“To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason, and whose philosophy consists in holding humanity in contempt, is like administering medicine to the dead, or endeavoring to convert an atheist by scripture.” ― Thomas Paine

Teacher here. It's made-up-nonsense. I don't give a shit what gender or sexual orientation a kid is and im CERTAINLY not going to try to convince anyone to change anything about themselves.

That said, I'm going to acknowledge that gay/trans people exist in authorship and literature as it arises. You can't read someone like Whitman (Leaves of Grass, arguably America's greatest poet) and not come across references to sexuality either implicit or explicit. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45472/i-sing-the-body-electric

It becomes relevant in passages like this:

5
This is the female form,
A divine nimbus exhales from it from head to foot,
It attracts with fierce undeniable attraction,
I am drawn by its breath as if I were no more than a helpless vapor, all falls aside but myself and it,
Books, art, religion, time, the visible and solid earth, and what was expected of heaven or fear’d of hell, are now consumed,
Mad filaments, ungovernable shoots play out of it, the response likewise ungovernable,
Hair, bosom, hips, bend of legs, negligent falling hands all diffused, mine too diffused,
Ebb stung by the flow and flow stung by the ebb, love-flesh swelling and deliciously aching,
Limitless limpid jets of love hot and enormous, quivering jelly of love, white-blow and delirious juice,
Bridegroom night of love working surely and softly into the prostrate dawn,
Undulating into the willing and yielding day,
Lost in the cleave of the clasping and sweet-flesh’d day.

----------------------------------
Maybe a conversation like:

"'Love flesh swelling' like he's in love with some woman and they...he...?"

"Probably not, he didn't have any serious female relationships as far as I am aware."

"But the title is 'The female form'"

"Well, it's possible, but it's not likely the case that he was talking about himself being in love with a woman. This poem is in the text but he wrote many other pieces about he-himself falling into and out of love with various men and we have letters documenting those relationships with his male significant others. Although, I'm not sure what to call them because gay marriage would have been illegal at the time. He's likely writing the poem in a way where he appreciates the female form and sees men who are drawn to it like the way I appreciate watching bees act obsessively driven to the middle of flowers. I like watching Bees in action, but that doesn't mean I'm going all pollen crazy, still I appreciate it for what it is."
-------------------

This is an example of how discussion of sexuality would come up in my classroom as I imagine it. Note how I'm not trying to convince the kid I'm talking to to turn gay like it's a big game of rainbow-red-rover or something. Nevertheless, knowing the author's sexual preference in this instance informs our understanding of the piece.


My own personal theory?
The people railing against things like this are the same shitheads that can't be bothered to read ANYTHING and instead giggle and guffaw at "hurhurhurhur he hadd'a boner" where I get to live an early stage of Idocracy.

Also, I agree that the "funky stuff" shouldn't be just avoided altogether. For goodness sake, just let teachers have the difficult conversation that everyone is avoiding. Reminds me of when Peggy Hill was struggling to say "Penis" when she was assigned sex ed.

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

[author flagged as a spammer - redacted]

To save everyone the click...

Definition of Sardoodledom
Mechanically contrived plot structure and stereotyped or unrealistic characterization in drama : STAGINESS, MELODRAMA

The authors of the world's great plays are not mere tricksters in Sardoodledom
— John Mason Brown

Named for Victorien Sardou, a 1908 French playwright criticized by G. B. Shaw for the supposed staginess of his plays.

Next word: Haboob.

This is a question of Martin Hyde clearly thinking himself above the law.
This is a question of how many times has he done this and not been caught on camera?
This was clearly not the first time he tried to use his connections to threaten and bully his way out of responsibility for his own actions, just the first time it was made public. It’s not so much about this one instance, it’s about this being the man’s personality, and people with that personality should never have any authority….not one whit. If you don’t think he would abuse his power as a congressman, there’s something wrong with you.

That “apology” was extremely weak and much more of an excuse than an apology. It was him trying to say “I helped them, they owed me” and “they should have known who I was and let me go” and “it wasn’t that bad” and “see, my son is a cop, so I love and respect cops despite all evidence to the contrary”. Anyone accepting that apology never saw a problem to begin with.

I'm sure it was cleared with the necessary authorities.

Totally got this vibe as soon as I was watching the video - can't articulate exactly why but he seemed way too calm after for what had just happened; he didn't even seem to send a distress while in the plane (though the choppy editing could account for that); he jumped out of the plane with a self-stick; he made sure to land near the plane so he could recover the footage before the FAA/authorities got it; and it didn't even seem like he had tried to find a safer place to ditch the plane (or land). If this was a YT stunt he should have his balls nailed to the wall and thrown in jail. While I'm sure the chances were slim, he still could have killed someone with this stunt.