Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel Reflects on Florida School Shooting

In the aftermath of the Parkland Florida School Shooting, Broward County Sheriff Scott Israel has been front and center in attacking the NRA and demanding more gun control.  

As facts began to show that local law enforcement ignored many red flags about Nikolas Cruz (including 36 police contacts about him) and Broward County did nothing before the atrocity, Sheriff Israel sought to deflect responsibility. Sheriff Israel had no qualms about throwing the School Resource Officer under the bus for not engaging and killing  the shooter.  But as hard questions about the performance of his office were raised, Sheriff Israel refused to take responsibility.

Florida legislators circulated a petition for Sheriff Israel to be suspended, which 73 legislators signed. Governor Rick Scott (R-FL) declared that he would not summarily suspend Sheriff Israel before an investigation. 

Sheriff Israel's strident face saving, however,  may well have inhibited the seemingly bullet proof push for stringent gun control measures imposed in reaction to the Stoneman Douglass High School shooting.

Jake Tapper on Political Infighting

Ted Cruz on Donald Trump's Injudicious Jibes on a Sitting Judge

Presumptive Republican Presidential nominee Donald Trump is involved in a civil case of fraud concerning the so called Trump University. The trial will be heard under Judge Gonzalo Curiel in Federal District Court November 2016. 

As Trump was poised to begin his general election campaign, Trump kept bringing up this pending litigation, citing that Judge Curiel was MEXICAN (despite the inconvenient truth that the judge was born in INDIANA and had a history as a federal prosecutor of going after the Mexican drug cartels). 

In a follow-interview with CNN's Jake Tapper on State of the Nation, Trump continually claimed that Curiel was Mexican and could not be impartial because Trump claims that he want to build a wall to prevent illegal immigration.

Trump subsequently questioned whether a Muslim judge could hear matters about "The Donald". As this judicial bias controversy was roiling, Trump Spokeswoman Katrina Pierson also implied that women judges may be biased too

Thus Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) was among the first Republican to note the inappropriateness of Trump's judicial jibes.

Well, if Trump feels that Judge Curiel is not impartial, then why not make a legal motion for the Judge to recuse.  For that matter, why did Trump's legal staff (since he always hires the best) allow Curiel to be transferred to the case in the first place.

Normally, when there is a motion for a judge to be withdrawn, there must be concrete proof of bias. To the public, Trump just smears the judge as being "Mexican" (which is incorrect).  If Trump's attorney file a motion on such racial grounds, there is standing case law that will immediately be rejected and the attorneys may be sanctioned.

But the Paralepsis Politician may calculate that it is better to smear in the court of public opinion, in which judicial ethics restrain Judge Curiel from directly defending himself.  Trump does have a history of filing specious libel suits, which have little legal merit but sufficiently sully the target.  

Trump certainly used the same strategy in besmirching the reputation of Senator Cruz regarding his eligibility to run for President in 2016.  Trump kept repeating that Cruz was not a natural born citizen, hence was ineligible to become President  Even though Trump was one of the few individuals who had standing to successfully file the case, Trump was content to impugn Cruz in the court of public opinion without doing anything of legal consequence.  Once Trump had eliminated Cruz as being a threat, all the vitriol was considered inconsequential.

No wonder Senator Cruz was not willing to carry Trump's water on this judicial jibe which was replete with racism. 

Donald Trump Rallies Violence?

Part of Donald Trump's leitmotif during the 2016 Republican Presidential Nomination race is to tap into the anger of the so called "Silent Majority" by inspiring large celebrity styled campaign rallies.

Trump revels at being politically incorrect and pugnacious, so he does not suffer fools lightly for protesters who dare to counter-demonstrate at his events.  The problem with such truculent tactics is that it rubs off on his fanatical supporters.

During the Miami Republican Debate, CNN moderator Jake Tapper questioned Trump about violence which has been bubbling up at his recent rallies.

Instead of immediately distancing himself from crazies at campaign rallies, Trump first feigns ignorance, then demonizes the disruptive dissidents then denies that he did anything.

Tapper pushed back on Trump's tacit tolerance of the violence by pointing out several instances which Trump egged on or encouraged his followers to give the unwanted guest an abusive adieux.




While it can be claimed that Trump says that he does not condone violence at rallies, his justifications impeach that assertion.  Moreover, after the debate, Trump told ABC News that: "The audience swung back [on Trump disrupters]...what we need to see a bit more of."

Many media commentators heaped praise on Trump for utilizing a soft spoken approach and not hurling crude insults at his opponents during the Miami GOP Debate. Yet the paralepsis politician continues to play the media, by implying something without saying it, albeit in without typical bluster or bombast.

Was the Trump pussy footing around distancing himself from David Duke in 2016 because the man who has the self proclaimed best memory did not recall what white supremacists groups are or because they were a small slice of useful idiots to vote in the SEC dominated Super Tuesday? How about Trump touting authoritarian exertions of strength by Putin and the Chinese Red Army repressing the Tiannamen Square protests, yet claiming that he did not endorse the actions?

Is this the "new normal" in the American polity?

Post Scriptus 03/13/2016  After reports that Moveon.org and Bernie Sanders supporters were the groups which shut down the Trump Rally at the University of Illinois-Chicago, Trump tweeted a taunt and threat:

Il Duce Donald?

The 2016  Republican Presidential Primary have flummoxed politicos for turning rewriting the rules of campaigns.  Manhattan Mogul Donald Trump has soared to the top of the heap amongst the GOP without expending much for paid media by having celebrity styled rallies, constantly attacking his opponents and ripping down the party which he is seeking to lead, generating gobs of earned media through outlandish outbursts and capitalizing on social media.

But he who rises by the sword can also perish by the sword.  Trump Twitter account has been quite active after the Houston GOP debate.  However, it appears as if the Donald was doing some drunk tweeting (though Trump professes never to touch alcohol unless it's in a communion cup) by virtue of the odd orthography when insulting Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), calling him a "chocker" and typing "honer".  Well, occasional typos or misspelling are par for the course when quickly texting on mobile devices. But forwarding fascist phrases is less excusable.

On Sunday morning, the @realDonaldTrump account re-tweeted a Darwinesque political pearl of wisdom.

However, Trump (or his staff) did not carefully scrutinize the social media sharing.  The account was @IlDuce2016, which is a parody account created by a snarky political blogger.  Oops. Those who wish to Dump Trump quickly took notice of the unforced error and sought to educate the electorate.

Trump supporters can spin this as a conspiracy or another one off mistake.  But considering the subject matter and Trump's unprincipled populism, it does reveal the Trump campaign's druthers. And as the sympathy for a strongman sinks in, it may be another ceiling of support for those who are committed to the Constitution rather than favoring Populist bromides.

Furthermore, Trump is embroiled in a controversy concerning KKK inspired endorsements.  Ex-Klansman David Duke has expressed support for Donald Trump, though not formally endorsing "the Donald".  On CNN's State of the Union, Jack Tapper asked three times if Trump would condemn or reject Duke's support.




Trump refused to do so on camera (but to be fair, a Trump PR flack did distance himself from Duke).  What is telling is Trump claimed no knowledge of Duke or his controversial KKK background.  This is contrary to his own history.  When Trump was contemplating a Presidential run in 2000, Trump condemned the Reform Party for being associated with David Duke.

The unmoored approach to issues which the Trump campaign takes, the inclination to attack journalists who do not lick spit polish his boots and the Can Do spirit of making the trains run on time without reference to constitutional powers makes comparisons to Duke or Il Duce pretty damning to Americans who appreciate having a democratically elected Constitutional Republic.


UPDATE: 02/29/2016 After a day of bad press and being ridiculed on the campaign trail for now disavowing David Duke and KKK support for his candidacy, Donald Trump affirmative disavowed David Duke's support. Trump blamed the kerfluffle on having a bad ear piece for Tapper interview.  Sure.  Just like the IlDuce retweet, it's just technical difficulties.

Outrageous Obama Incivility

President Obama with Senior Advisor Dan Pfeiffer

As the new fiscal year looms without a budget passed, and the debt ceiling debate on the horizon, the Obama Administration ought to be building ad hoc coaltions to prevent the United States going off the fiscal cliff.  Yet when President Obama's Senior Advisor Dan Pfeiffer went on CNN's "The Lead with Jake Tapper", the White House pressed a bombastic bric-a-brac against Republicans.

Having an Obama  senior spokesman call Republican opponents "suicide bombers" is beyond the pale of civil political discourse coming  from the White House.  These verbal bomb throwing  through the auspices of the Oval Office neither builds Congressional coalitions vital for governing (as opposed to campaigning) and this infelicitous  and incindiary analogy shows a shocking lack of civility.  In the same day, Obama White House Press Secretary Jay Carney dredged up birther barbs to mock Republicans for wanting to defund Obamacare.

After the near assassination of former Representative Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ 8th) in January, 2011, President Obama made a grandiose speech at the Together We Thrive rally  in Tucson which memorialized the fallen in  the atrocity where President Obama proclaimed:

But at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized -– at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who happen to think differently than we do -– it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we’re talking with each other in a way that heals, not in a way that wounds.  

President Obama then rightfully noted that a "more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation."  So how do Dan Pfeiffer's inflamatory remarks against ideological opponents fit into this call for civility?

Perhaps President Obama gave himself a waiver on civility.  After all, President Obama's 2012 re-election campaign persisted on an unsubstantiated insuniation that Republican Presidential Nominee Governor Mitt Romney (R-MA) was a felon for alleged misrepresentations when he was at Bain Capital.  Political campaigns ain't beanbag, so rough and tumble rhetoric is not out of the ordinary, particularly for a politician who can not win without smearing his opponent.  But governing is different than campaigning.

While Pfeiffer's smear of his opponents as suicide bombers is outrageous and unwise, it is not the only example of inflamatory accusations that have the imprimatur of Obama's Oval Office. Democrat Congressional leaders such as House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA 8th) and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) have been wont to refer to uncooperative Conservative Republican legislators as "Arsonists".  Senior Obama White House Advisor Dan Pfeiffer echoed this arsonist accusation and kidnappers comparison against Republicans.  Or progressive radio host Thom Hartman who compared Senator Ted Cruz's  (R-TX) filibuster to "Taliban-styled suicide bombings".   Kind of sounds like the Obama White House talking points were passed out.

These slanderous characterizations from the Obama White House give Democrats surrogates in the Lamestream Media license to copy scurrilous phrases.  This was quickly spread by  MSNBC's Chris Matthews did when the former Democrat staffer turned broadcaster asked  Representative Scott Perry (R-PA 4th) why the Republicans want to hold the country "hostage".

The Obama Administration seems intent to demonize and try to delegitimize their opponents, ala Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals. But Pfeiffer, Pelosi and Reid are not alone in voicing vitrolic language against idelogical opponents.  Senator John McCain referred to Senator Cruz and Senator Rand Paul as "wacko birds", while Congressman Peter King  critiqued Senator Cruze as a crazy, fraudster and suicidal.  While these invectives abrogate Reagan's Eleventh Amendment, they are not as vial as a voice of the President of the United States in a time of real Islamist jihadi terrorism comparing Republicans to suicide bombers. 

It sounds like the White House communication staff need to take a crash course at the National Institute for Civil Discourse.   After all, the NICD launched a website "YourWordsCount.org" which reminds readers of Lady Mary Wortley Montagu's word of wisdom: "Civility costs nothing and buys everything."   But that would also mean that they would be reminded of dear leader Obama's quote:

You and I, as citizens, have the obligation to shape the debates of our time – not only with the votes we cast, but with the voices we lift in defense of our most ancient values and enduring ideals. Let each of us now embrace, with solemn duty and awesome joy, what is our lasting birthright. With common effort and common purpose, with passion and dedication, let us answer the call of history, and carry into an uncertain future that precious light of freedom.

So much for shaping the future in an uplifting way.

In the aftermath of the Tucson shooting, the elite Liberal media were quick to lambast Tea Party Conservatives, particularly former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, for  dangerous symbolism on  pamplets which "targeted" politcally vulnerable  Democrat districts like Giffords' with crosshairs.  Ironically, the Democrat Congressional Camapign Committee used bullseyes for their targeted districts.    But as Chris Plante would put it: "If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all."

From a partisan political perspective, the Obama Administration's beyond the pale references to Republicans clearly demonstrates that the Obama White House does not want to deal and is pushing to peg Republicans with any blame for a government shutdown.  They may be calculating their strategy premised on the 1995-1996 government shutdowns which allegedly hurt Republicans (even though that was not demonstrated at the ballot box).   But according to the latest Pew Poll, both Democrats and Republicans would be blamed for a government shutdown.

In the scheme of things, political blame is inconsequential compared to the quantum corsening of civil discourse that has been displayed by White House operatives Dan Pfeiffer and Press Spokesman Jay Carney. Such uncivil exchanges are unworthy of authority in this Constitutional Republic.