I bet officers wish all arrests were this easy! (Via LIVELEAK)
...Eezy Peezy - 1,2,3
A Costco store called 911 to suspected shoplifters Wednesday, March 14 at 5:30 p.m. Loss prevention officers told police they recognized the suspects from a previous shoplifting incident. The suspects ran out the fire exit last time.
When officers arrived on scene, they noticed a black Toyota backed up to those same fire doors. An 18-year-old woman was at the wheel. They blocked the car from leaving. Police figured the shoplifters were repeating their previous theft, so they waited outside the emergency exit.
At 6:04 p.m., a 30-year-old man and a 21-year-old woman kicked the doors open. They exited the building with stolen property in their hands only to find police mere feet away.
Police booked the 18-year-old woman and the 21-year-old woman for investigation of theft. They booked the 30-year-old man for investigation of robbery. Officers found a 7-inch knife on the male suspect.
After further investigation, it was discovered that the suspects allegedly stole from another Costco earlier that same day. The stolen property is valued at $2,200.
As news and excited reactions pour down the collective American brainstem in a semi-rigorous attempt to make sense of Andrew McCabe‘s firing, one liberal legal expert and constitutional law professor is simply not there for partisan response efforts.
Instead, it appears McCabe’s ouster was in line with the law and he should probably be thankful he’s not facing criminal charges for the behavior that led to said ouster.
George Washington University School of Law Professor Jonathan Turley predicted McCabe’s firing some time ago. Turley discussed the firing today in an interview with CNN‘s Michael Smerconish.
First, Turley moved to dismiss widespread liberal accusations that McCabe’s firing was some sort of heavy-handed political payback by the Trump administration. Rather, Turley said, McCabe’s firing was a suggestion originally made by an Obama appointee–and therefore a suggestion Jeff Sessions simply could not ignore.
Turley noted:
[McCabe’s firing] was justified in the sense that these were career officials–at the Office of Professional Responsibility–that made this recommendation which is exceedingly rare. In fact, it’s unprecedented for someone in this position. These are not political appointees. The OPR, quite frankly, is not viewed as a particularly aggressive office. So, all of that makes this a relatively rare sanction coming from career officers. They clearly concluded that McCabe misled them–and that he misled them on one of the core issues they were investigating, not a collateral issue.
Smerconish then launched into an anecdote about his own past experience with the Department of Justice’s Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) and stressed that the OIG was not really the type of government agency likely to succumb to political pressure. Turley agreed.
He said, “Everyone that I know of speaks highly of [Inspector General and Obama appointee Michael] Horowitz–he’s viewed as completely highly apolitical. This office is, as you note, insulated like a Sherman tank from any outside forces. What’s fascinating about the way this has all unfolded is not its outcome. I first said when I heard of the report and its recommendation that I thought it was a given that he would be fired. It would be very surprising for Sessions to turn down this type of rare recommendation from the career staff. After all, he followed a recommendation from career staff to recuse himself–and I think rightfully so.”
Then Turley got to his broader point about criminality. He said:
What’s going to create an issue going forward is whether there will be a criminal referral. Michael Flynn was indicted for making a false statement to investigators. Now, it’s true that they were looking at him for other crimes as well. But there will be some that will argue, “Why would you indict Michael Flynn, but a deputy FBI director is just worried about his pension, not prison?”
As Turley pointed out, Flynn’s indictment was entirely the result of Flynn’s own super-poor decision to lie about his otherwise legal behavior. Flynn was allowed to meet with Russians. That’s not currently a crime. Back-channel communications happen all the time and are completely aboveboard. Flynn did it to himself by lying about his lawful behavior after the fact.
…A group of offended moonbats promptly got up and stormed out, one of them grousing in the lobby that “Even the women in there have been brainwashed.” Women who believe that men tend to be taller have been “brainwashed.” Only those who embrace liberal ideology in all of its absurdity think for themselves…. (MOONBATTERY)
Keep in mind that this movement won’t even allow atheistic, evolutionary biology to proceed on it’s own path.
At least eight people have been injured after a malfunctioning ski lift threw people from their seats at a ski resort in Georgia.
Skiers and snowboarders were forced to jump from the faulty chairlift on Friday as their seats hurtled backwards down the mountain, with some people falling from carriages at speed, in what one witness likened to “a scene from a Final Destination film”.
Videos of the accident at Gudauri resort in Georgia show a pile-up of broken and twisted chairs at the bottom of the lift as bystanders scream at people to jump.
Ryan Wilkinson, 24, from Kent, was queuing at the bottom of the lift with a group of friends when he saw the incident happen. He said the ski lift had been closed for repairs all week, but reopened on Friday morning.
“The lift stopped for a minute. There is a language barrier with the Georgians, so we didn’t know what was happening. Then it started reversing backwards slowly, then it got quicker. There was a guy in the office smashing on a machine and shouting who seemed powerless to stop it,” he said……
The question is — if given a chance to have some time with these kids — what would I do to try and counter these actions? They are based on cultural myths passed on by parents, uncles, and the like. In other words, how would you begin to counter these myths? FIRST the actions, then some thoughts.
Students at Antioch High School in Nashville, Tennessee, tore down the Stars and Stripes during a walkout over gun violence. CHANNEL 4 in Chicago has more on the violence.
Here are the Chicago students being allowed out of school for 17-minutes:
Here is expanded footage of the walkout protesters trashing the Chicago Walmart pic.twitter.com/lnVsp8h9sD
I would start a reading club and meet weekly to discuss the issues in the book we would be currently reading. My first book I would have us read is Out Of America: A Black Man Confronts Africa. At some point I would have the kids listen to the audio chapter from Thomas Sowell’s book regarding slavery. Of course during this time one would be befriending and involved in a loving support of positive outcomes based in truth. As Christians, we should gravitate towards truth in outcomes in all things. Another study and discussion of a topic is the broken home. Something Larry Elder confronts in his own discussion with his father: Dear Father, Dear Son: Two Lives… Eight Hours. There are many resources to counter bad thinking on my page regarding RACIAL MYTHS… but the problem in the inner cities will continue as long as the family is broken and the blame is laid at the feet of historical myths and lies.
In a lecture from Stephen Hawkings (who holds the Lucasian Professor of Mathematics, Einstein’s chair) at a lecture given to a university crowd in England entitled “Determinism – Is Man a Slave or the Master of His Fate.” He discussed whether we are the random products of chance, and hence, not free, or whether God had designed these laws within which we are free. In other words: do we have the ability to make choices, or do we simply follow a chemical reaction induced by millions of mutational collisions of free atoms?
Stephen Hawking is quoted as saying the following:
Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing
However, what the people who support scientism do is often get categories mixed up. Something that needs explanation itself and exists in spatial time relation needs an explanation itself. For instance, Irtiqa comments after pointing out the above quote:
…he is already postulating the existence of gravity and the laws that will lead to the creation and evolution of the universe. Shouldn’t we ask about the origin of gravity and all features of the universe? Many of us scientists and thinkers doubt that full explanations of everything can be complete and self-contained, with no need for a metaphysical principle like God.
While I have not read the book, nor plan to, it seems that Dr. Hawking is defining gravity as something other than a function of the mechanics of the cosmos. Perhaps he’s placing gravity outside of the dimensions like theists place God outside the universe? IN which case it is atheism of the gaps theory. Not to mention that M-Theory itself, if true, doesn’t explain anything away, it just adds more parameters that need explanation. The Blaze has some good insight on this, one can be found by both an atheist and theist dealing with Hawking’s new book:
Another video follows, but, an ex-atheist deals a bit with what is being discussed herein. Here is Dr. Antony Flew’s conversion reasoning:
“My whole life has been guided by the principle of Plato’s Socrates: Follow the evidence, wherever it leads.” After chewing on his scientific worldview for more than five decades, Flew concluded, “A super-intelligence is the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature.” Previously, in his central work, The Presumption of Atheism (1976), Flew argued that the “onus of proof [of God] must lie upon the theist.” However, at the age of 81, Flew shocked the world when he renounced his atheism because “the argument for Intelligent Design is enormously stronger than it was when I first met it.”
Okay, another video (you may need to avert your eyes from his “crazy” eyes):
Dr. Craig, given that, in the past, in its quest for simplicity physics has often discovered previously unsuspected connections between seemingly unrelated constants like electromagnetic constants and the speed of light and given that, in his 1997 lectures at Harvard University, physicist Ed Witten said that most of the recent string theories have no free parameters, that is, no variable constants in the model––all the constants just follow from the mathematical structure of the theory itself, O.K.?––given that, don’t you think it’s even probable that future discoveries in physics will reduce, or even completely eliminate, these seemingly strange improbable coincidences that you appeal to, to give evidence for God’s creation and tweaking of constants in the human universe?
Dr. Craig Responds:
No, I don’t see any reason to think that that’s probable at all, though I would like to hear more about Witten’s claim with respect to string theory. I’m not aware that that’s a feature of that model––that it eliminates all need for fine–tuning. I would very surprised to hear that were the case. I mean what you’re really talking about is a so–called “Theory of Everything.” But what that would ultimately show would be that the laws of physics are not really just physical laws at all but, somehow, they’re logically necessary, which, I think, strikes me as extremely counter–intuitive, that this is the only possible universe that could exist. So from what I’ve read, I think that the idea of ultimately finding some sort of a “Theory of Everything” is really a fantasy. I think we’re always going to be stuck with a certain amount of contingency that just is put in at the beginning.
Dr. Craig continues elsewhere to zero in on this “M-Theory” model (A thorough scouring of this can be found here where this was excerpted from, Beyond the Big Bang):
Ekpyrotic Models
We come finally to the extreme edge of cosmological speculation: string cosmology. These models are based on an alternative to the standard quark model of elementary particle physics. So-called string theory (or M-theory) conceives of the fundamental building blocks of matter to be, not particles like quarks, but tiny vibrating strings of energy. String theory is so complicated and embryonic in its development that all its equations have not yet even been stated, much less solved. But that has not deterred some cosmologists from trying to craft cosmological models based on concepts of string theory to try to avert the beginning predicted by standard Big Bang cosmology.
The most celebrated of these scenarios in the popular press has been the so-called ekpyrotic scenario championed by Paul Steinhardt.[xvi] In the most recent revision, the cyclic ekpyrotic model, we are asked to envision two three-dimensional membranes (or ‘branes’ for short) existing in a five-dimensional space-time (Fig. 9). One of these branes is our universe. These two branes are said to be in an eternal cycle in which they approach each other, collide, and retreat again from each other. It is the collision of the other brane with ours that causes the expansion of our universe. With each collision, the expansion is renewed. Thus, even though our three-dimensional universe is expanding, it never had a beginning.
[…no picture supplied in original post…]
Now apart from its speculative nature the ekpyrotic scenario is plagued with problems.[xvii] For example, the Horava-Witten version of string theory on which the scenario is based requires that the brane on which we live have a positive tension. But in the ekpyrotic scenario it has a negative tension in contradiction to the theory. Attempts to rectify this have been unsuccessful. Second, the model requires an extraordinary amount of ad hoc fine turning. For example, the two branes have to be so perfectly aligned that even at a distance of 1030 greater than the space between them, they cannot deviate from being parallel by more than 10-60. There is no explanation at all for this extraordinary setup. Third, the collapsing and retreating branes are the equivalent of a 4-D universe which goes through an eternal cycle of contractions and expansions. In this sense, the cyclic ekpyrotic model is just the old oscillating model writ large in five dimensions. As such, it faces exactly the same problem as the original: there is no way for the universe to pass through a singularity at the end of each cycle to begin a new cycle and no physics to cause a non-singular bounce. Finally, even if the branes could bounce back, there is no means of the physical information in one cycle being carried through to the next cycle, so that the ekpyrotic scenario has been unable to deliver on its promises to explain the large-scale structure of the observable universe. These are just some of the problems afflicting the model. It is no wonder that Andrei Linde has recently complained that while the cyclic ekpyrotic scenario is ‘very popular among journalists,’ it has remained ‘rather unpopular among scientists’ (Linde 2002: 8).
But let all that pass. Perhaps all these problems can be somehow solved. The more important point is that it turns out that, like the chaotic inflationary model, the cyclic ekpyrotic scenario cannot be eternal in the past. In September of 2001 Borde and Vilenkin, in cooperation with Alan Guth, were able to generalize their earlier results on inflationary models in such a way to extend their conclusion to other models. Specifically, they note, ‘Our argument can be straightforwardly extended to cosmology in higher dimensions,’ specifically brane-cosmology.[xviii] According to Vilenkin, ‘It follows from our theorem that the cyclic universe is past-incomplete’,[xix] that is to say, the need for an initial singularity has not been eliminated. Therefore, such a universe cannot be past-eternal.
Summary
With each successive failure of alternative cosmogonic theories to avoid the absolute beginning of the universe predicted by the Standard Model, that prediction has been corroborated. This beginning of the universe, of space and time themselves, reveals the contingency of the universe. The universe is evidently not necessarily existent, as Hume suggested, since it is not eternal, and therefore its existence does cry out for explanation. It is no longer sufficient to dismiss this problem with a shrug and a slogan, ‘The universe is just there, and that’s all.’
Of course, in view of the metaphysical issues raised by the prospect of a beginning of the universe, we may be confident that the quest to avert such a beginning will continue unabated.[xx] Such efforts are to be encouraged, and we have no reason to think that such attempts at falsification will result in anything other than further corroboration of the prediction of a beginning. In the meantime, the beginning cannot be wished away. Given its origin ex nihilo, the demand why the universe exists rather than nothing presses insistently upon us.
Here is Dr. Craigs presentation (2hrs, 21 minutes long):
(BTW, they were saying McCabe would be fired, later in the day he was.) Sean Hannity has some guests on the show that are on the leading edge of breaking the illegalities open regarding the Trump witch hunt.
POWERLINE sets up the following video of Hillary 2020:
Somewhere in the last day or two I happened across an article online somewhere speculating that Hillary Clinton will be the Democratic nominee again in 2020, because she’s the ultimate victim (of Russian hacking, Trump’s mendacity, whatever), and since the Democrats prize victimhood as the highest credential these days, she’s the obvious standard bearer. Plus, she’s a Clinton, with a Gollum-like fanaticism for precious power. Who can doubt that she think he third time will be the charm, even for someone so obviously charmless.
Oh please, please, can this wonderful scenario come to pass. We could look forward to more reprises of her “deplorables” remark, in this case, just now saying that she won the “forward-looking” parts of America in 2016. I just can’t understand why her message wasn’t more compelling in rural parts of America…..
S.E. Cupp (a #nevertrumper) explains her disdain for Hillary… renewed (NEWSBUSTERS):
Well, Hillary is as out of touch as ever. The former presidential nominee has never been able to hide her disdain for middle America. She once again suggested that Trump supporters are racist misogynist backward xenophobes over the weekend. And it’s been 490 days since she lost the 2016 election.
Larry Elder plays a “cultural commentator’s” (Seren Sensei) views on Bruno Mars and wonders out-loud if crazy is the new norm [adapted] — although, in more words than my own thinking. Here is the CNN story: https://tinyurl.com/y8bchm6b
But there is NO WINNING against such thinking, as “Traditional Tradesman” notes regarding Seren Sensei:
As this ludicrous article by race-baiter Seren Sensei that criticizes director Sofia Coppola for not having black people in her recent film illustrates, white directors (or, really, any white artists) face an insoluble conundrum:
If you’re a white director, and you make a movie that has no black characters, you’re racist.
If you’re a white director, and you make a movie that has black characters who are being depicted negatively, you’re racist.
If you’re white director, and you make a movie that has black characters who are being depicted positively, you’re cultural appropriating blackness and are, therefore… wait for it… racist.
So how exactly do you win this game? You don’t. You can’t……
HOT AIR comments on the Bruno Mars flap, and this is just another example of the Left cannibalizing itself:
You’re surely familiar with the “cultural appropriation” outrage running around liberal social media sites these days, right? It’s when one particular demographic group (and their inevitable supporters who take up every progressive cause on the planet) lays claim to an entire genre of performing arts and then chooses to scold anyone who isn’t “authentic” enough and dares to be creative in that field. And as I’m sure you already know, by “authentic” they refer to the color of your skin.
Another episode of this annoying kvetching broke out this week. It wouldn’t have been worth a mention were it not for the target. Rather than going after yet another white artist, this time the forces of progressive fury fixed their sights on none other than Bruno Mars. Now, to be honest here, I wouldn’t even know the man’s name had he not played at the Super Bowl a while back, but I did hear him perform there and he’s got an impressive set of pipes. But, as it turns out, he’s singing the wrong kind of music.
[…..]
…video of the racially charged attack… and excerpts…
[…..]
Normally this would be the end of the story. After being appropriately shamed by his progressive betters, the artist would shuffle up to a microphone to deliver some sort of apology and then slink off stage, promising to try to do better. (Or at least that’s how it works if they are marketing their work to a largely liberal audience.)
But this time it played out differently. In short order, some of the people who you might have expected to be “offended” started defending Mars. This included R&B singer Charlie Wilson.
He’s absolutely right. And when we reach the point where you see me agreeing with Shaun King you need to go outside and look for four horsemen riding in the sky.
For his part, Bruno Mars stayed out of it. But the WaPo notes that he previously proclaimed his appreciation for the black roots of much of the music being performed today.
“When you say ‘black music,’ understand that you are talking about rock, jazz, R&B, reggae, funk, doo-wop, hip-hop, and Motown. Black people created it all. Being Puerto Rican, even salsa music stems back to the Motherland,” meaning Africa, Mars told Latina magazine last February. “So, in my world, black music means everything. It’s what gives America its swag.”
Here comes the long division part of the analysis, so buckle up, campers. Bruno Mars, racially, “was born in Honolulu to a half-Puerto Rican and half-Ashkenazi Jewish and a Filipino mother.” So what do these easily aggrieved geniuses think he should be performing? Only Puerto Rican tunes played on Filipino instruments at luaus and bar mitzvahs? And as for Mars himself, he’s previously staked out rock, jazz, R&B, reggae, funk, doo-wop, hip-hop, and Motown as all being “black music.” (At least until the mob came for him, anyway.) So I take it this panel thinks that white people should only perform country music and Asians should be restricted to… what? K-pop?
In some excellent Tweets (chirp; chirp; chirp; chirp) Larry lays out the hypocrisy of the Left in regard to Trump’s consensual “Stormy affair” and Democrats concern over fellow Democrat predators.
