HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » laserhaas » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 34 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: Mon Apr 21, 2008, 01:12 PM
Number of posts: 2,606

About Me

Love BB, Laser Tag, Poker (Tournaments only). Work with Occupy camps. Willing to help you in your fight for justice (let's discuss it).

Journal Archives

O'Reilly's Continues Gett'n Off 'Scot Free', Including Sexual Harassment.

Yesterday, upon DU's LBN forum, the facts about Fox News Bill O'Reilly physically assaulting his wife, was discussed, at some length. In that thread (as the title does state about O'Reilly's daughter being a witness) it was revealed to U.S. by RawStory via Gawker that "O’Reilly was accused of physically assaulting ex-wife in front of daughter".

From our thread about the daughter being an eye witness to O'Reilly's possible crime, the general consensus of the comment parties (including yours truly), is that O'Reilly is a tool (as if we needed any further proof).

It was also proffered, by various parties - that (unfortunately) O'Reilly the tyrant, will probably get away with it all 'Scot Free'. This shouldn't be the case of one, no matter how powerful, doing such, if there's a history of abuse. It is one thing to have a single aberrant act of behavior (a faux pas - so to speak). It is another to have a publicly documented history of abuses.

Question is - Do any New York City/ State authority have the chutzpah to investigate O'Reilly.

It is important to ask such a question - not only due to the fact that we despise Bill O'Reilly - but because he is unequivocally a menace to society. For, if the public sees that Faux Bully Bill can get away with physically mistreating his wife, then it is likely to embolden other ebol bullies to believe they can do the same.

And that ain't right!

Additionally, as moi's previous LBN thread (here) makes note of, Bill O'Reilly history includes him trying to get his wife excommunicated from the Catholic Church.

Then there's a prior case of O'Reilly sexually (reprehensibly) harassing a Fox producer.

Furthermore, while doing what is IMO possibly nefarious abuse of power and undue influence over the New York City Police, O'Reilly tried to have his wife's new cop boyfriend put under the microscope (possibly as an act of vengeance).

Below the ug mug pic of O'Reilly, let's take a look at the previous sexual harass by Bill the Abuser.

O’Reilly Sexual Harassment Case Fox Wants You To Forget

As you may have notice by the link within the title of this part, it is an actual piece from the 2014 actual AntiMedia story "The Bill O’Reilly Sexual Harassment Case Fox News Wants You To Forget About". The reason this issue is important, as noted above, is due to the fact that it clearly demonstrates that Bill O'Reilly is a possible menace to others.

More to the point, the story has purported details of tapes by the former Fox producer Andrea Mackris (pic above from New York Mag.com (here), who (reportedly) sued O'Reilly for $60,000,000.00; as a result of sexual harassment that began in 2002 and continued to 2004.

Of the many excerpts in the AntiMedia item, it provides details of O'Reilly's lewd repulsiveness. Like this one, where Andrea Mackris warned O'Reilly he should be careful of who he propositioned;

and then he threatened that O'Reilly and Fox News would abuse and destroy!

Direct from the AntiMedia story;

NOPE, the redacted/ blacked out part is not under my control. They did it. (I'm just as curious as you are, as to what is being hidden). Be that as it may, there's much I'm not posting here that you can see for yourself from the (purportedly) recorded conversations of O'Reilly to Mackris.

This one is the cleanest - but shows Bill to be the mad sex hunter - using the phone as his key-way. As noted by Lou Colagiovanni of AntiMedia.org, of one of many of the purported conversations that was recorded by Andrea and allowed to be excerpted into the court record.

Bill O'Reilly reportedly said that;

AntiMedia also provides a YouTube parody of Bill O'Reilly calling to have sex with Conan O'Brien;

Of course vile pile Bill will say that he's just a target. That everyone's out to get him and these stories are all just fabrications. That his wife should be glad he sought out sex with others and gave her piece of mind.

He also may point out the fact that he paid off the former producer, just to spare his family any more shame and exposure, to the public. However, as I'm a former executive of a once biggie company, who also handled over 1000 other troubled companies - I know Bill's other secret.


When you're on top of the mountain, it is true that you "may" become a target. For most of us in the real world of doing the work that tools like O'Reilly faux'ly spin around, there's such thing as D&O insurance (Director's and Officers). This usually insulates both the company and parties from having to pay legal costs and settlements.

Sooner or later, Bill will have himself exposed more

----------------------------------- (if he hasn't gone somewhere and done such already).

I'm just sayin.........

O’Reilly accused of physically assaulting ex-wife in front of daughter

Source: Raw Story quoting additional source Gawker

A source said Maureen McPhilmy, who was recently awarded custody of the couple’s two children, testified during a New York family court hearing that O’Reilly attacked her at their Manhasset home, reported Gawker.

The source said a forensic examiner testified that O’Reilly’s 16-year-old daughter claimed she saw her father drag her mother down a staircase by the neck, unaware the girl was watching.

McPhilmy began dating a Nassau County police detective after the separation, and Gawker reported that O’Reilly called in a favor after raising money for the department and got an internal affairs investigation launched against the new boyfriend.

O’Reilly tried to have his former wife excommunicated from the Roman Catholic Church in 2013, according to another Gawker report.

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/05/bill-oreilly-accused-of-physically-assaulting-his-ex-wife-in-front-of-their-daughter/

Will Fox News Protect O'Reilly Now

In the Governor Siegelman case, the Alabama activists kept after the obvious wayward Judge Fuller = who was finally compelled to step down from the bench, for his assault upon his wife.

Will Fox News continue to protect their number jewel, even after this disgrace?

Here's the Gawker story (with a much more apropos story title IMO) - that

"Bill O’Reilly Accused of Domestic Violence in Custody Battle"

an acquaint on Facebook

already figured out the Fox Doth Spin

They'll claim it was a new exercise for strengthening the neck.

Unlike · Reply · 1 · 1 hr

This picture immediately above, is from the Gawker and this (link here) pertains to the issue of O'Reilly seeking revenge against the police officer who dated O'Reilly's ex.

Can we blame her for dating an authority figure with some hopes of power against Bill?

just sayin.....

It is worth putting up this Keith Olbermann piece (don't you just love his initials K.O. v O'Reilly - so apropos) - that was provided in the comment section by DU'r "spooky3" referencing a thread on Olbermann by DU'r "Fred Sanders" via The Grumpy Pundit video below.

K.O. knocks out O'Reilly for his bull Chit - starting at time stamp 2:39

UPDATE - Sort of (retroactively)

Turns out that Fox News that is always willing to Abuse (a neat little quip from a commenter below) - has other O'Reilly bad faith issues it would like you to forget about. Including sexual harassment of a former Fox Producer.

It seemed to lengthy to add to this LBN thread (let me know if the consensus is otherwise - please). So I posted a General Discussion piece that has some apparent proof of deviant behavior of O'Reilly. If, but for no other reason, you have to view the thread's ending Youtube video, where Conan O'Brien feigns he was sexually harassed by a Bill O'Buser phone call.

This is the link and thread title.

O'Reilly's Continues Gett'n Off 'Scot Free',
Including Sexual Harassment.

Haas v Romney v Holyfield: Friday Night Doubling Dinging

Willard Mitt Romney is displaying more reported likable charm in 2 minutes of air time, in his promo about fighting Evander Holyfield tonight - than during his entire POTUS campaigns. Be that as it may, I'm hoping Holyfield doesn't actually have a real ring "flash back"; which results in him knocking Pitten's out.

Cause the REAL dinging of Mitt Romney is coming from the deal I made today.

One has to remember that we came far to close to have oligarch, Robber Baron, Willard Mitt Romney for President of the United States. If he and Bain Capital had made it into the White House (on his white horse) - they would have made what Bush & Cheney did to U.S. - look like child's play.

Thankfully, Democrats showed up and voted President Barack Obama back in.

Romney's Real Friends and Fellow Fighters.

This fight, as are most things in life with Mitt Romney, is rigged. He bribes his way out of trouble much. Heck, he may even bribe Holyfield to be knocked out (all in the good name of charity - of course).

His real chums are criminals. Polaroid was seized by the feds; but sold in a sham auction back to Paul Traub's clients (and then Traub was immediately made partner). Mitt's Bain Capital is partners with Goldman Sachs in loans to Fingerhut, just right before the FBI raided Tom Petters Ponzi (Petters is the little picture, immediately above). Then, in the way of all bribery issues, all of sudden dear old Fingerhut wasn't seized by the FBI or the Receiver. Strange this is, Paul Traub was involved, as Fingerhut used to be listed as home office of 655 Third Ave (attorney Paul Traub's law firm office for Traub Bonacquist & Fox).

From this link (here) - we get the follow details.

RETAILING/DISTRIBUTION Investment: $55.9 million Pct. of total: 43.3% Fingerhut Direct Marketing Inc., Eden Prairie Bain Capital Ventures, Battery Ventures, Brookside $55.9 million Provides private-label and brand-name International Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co.,

Paul Traub was also partners with another fraudster (Marc Dreier of Dreier LLP law firm). That's Traub and Marc Dreier's picture above (Dreier on the left and Paul Traub on the right). Who all were part of the scheme, along with Goldman Sachs and Bain Capital - to steal and KILL our public company of eToys.

PROOF Mitt is Linked to Frauds

Just so you can read the above allegations from someone's pen, other than mine - here's the link to the Federal Receiver over the Tom Petters Ponzi, pointing out (after he knew Romney was going to lose) - in June 2012 - that Paul Traub was the controller of Tom Petters Ponzi, partners with Marc Dreier and that they were involved in eToys.

Petters Ponzi Federal Receiver Names Traub as Controller of the Ponzi

And here is the proof that Paul Traub worked for Mitt Romney's Stage Stores; just before they stole eToys

Romney Knocking Himself Out

Truth be told, Mitt has been the punching bag of yours truly, for over a dozen years now. It's not like moi has any power, it's just the hubris of the man knows no bounds.

Since 2001, Romney and his friends have left a paper trail of evidence that any 6th grade child could put Mitt in prison with. Problem is, when one has hundreds of millions of dollars and the potential for POTUS still lingering around your name, not many have the guts to through the knock out punch.

That's okay, I'm here to finish the job. Even if he gives all his money away (that really is in the billions - which is the REAL reason he won't show his taxes) - sooner or later - the knock out punch of Willard Mitt (the pits) Romney, is going to come.

He hasn't been in the ring with me yet; but I just made a deal that means more fights are coming.

Ding - DING

Obama 1995: POTUS To Be - Activist Eternally

There are many problems in America. We have a brutal police state with racism a core issue. Also, there's Wall Street Fraud and the 90 Day Deadline of Eric Holder looming large, with justice most likely remaining unrequited. Then there's the military complex refusing to downsize, attacks on privacy, Social Security and worse. It is hard to look upon President Barack Obama for resolution, as we Liberals showed some displeasure at the man; and let the Republicans take over both the Senate and the House.

However, believe it or not, President Obama is our lord and can be our savior!

In the video below, there's 55 minutes of the real man. You will see a calm, confident guy who made a career, from long ago, on doing political activism as he grasped for hope and believed America can change.

Obama was granted the privilege to discover who he was, as head of the Harvard Law Review; which resulted in a book that forced Michele Obama to sacrifice the first 2 years of her marriage to a most absent husband.

The results of who he was and what he was doing, couldn't have possibly been known to him, at that time. President Obama displayed his charm, his consistency and his keen intellect, long before he would become one of THE most powerful men in the world.

He is real, his activism is real. He was a Civil Rights attorney, when there was no money in it. And, believe it or not, way back then, Barack Obama had faith in America and the possibility that things might change for the better.

Caucasian Americans are established at forgiving themselves
(having the most practice at such)!

Then not yet even as Senator Obama, he spoke of his knowledge of Malcom X, Doctor Martin Luther King and how it was, growing up as a mix breed. How the publisher paid for his visit Africa and Kenya, Of his taking Michele there, to his father's village, where the kids pointed at Michele saying;

"Look - there's a white woman"!

You have before you, 55 minutes of the realm man. One who wasn't seeking any election. Just a guy trying to look at racism in America and address his multicultural roots.

Soft spoken, considerate, engaging and very smart, this was President Barack Obama in the making; and hopefully he will return to his Civil Rights activism in 2017. For he will always be President Barack Obama. And, like Jimmy Carter doing his projects, the POTUS can utilize who he is to continue to make a difference.

I believe he will and adore him even more, after seeing this video of the real guy.

Who, by the way, at time stamp 54:59, sees the real America way too!
(you'll have to watch the entire video, to grasp what is so apropos of the time stamp).

As he said so candidly, he has a thing that rhymes with bucket list;
and for one, I hope that is to arrest racism in America.

Many mornings, I'm ashamed to wake up white......

Youtube video above - is by City View 22 - station.

For those of the Caucasian kind, who (unlike moi) have no hopes of ever giving up their belief in white supremacy.... here's a pic for you - everlasting...

Brought to you by "A Womyn's Worth" Blog linking to the apropos

Nothing hurts the ruling WASP society more - than a POTUS Obama
(who, by the very success of his 2 elections as President - Helped beat down racism

N'est-ce pas! )


We all have a right -- indeed a duty -- to question smelly "official" narratives

One of the key teachings to any Detective, is that you go straight and hard after anything labeled a "coincidence".

Too many in the Bin Laden saga - to ignore.


Let's say, arguendo, all the reports of how Osama Bin Laden was killed are true. That Seal Team 6 flew in and wammo bamo - the job was done.

Amazing how they then claim to bury Osama at sea - with no proof to you or me.


Then, wammo bamo - suddenly Seal Team 6 is dead - TOO!

Placed in a shoddy helicopter and (purportedly) brought down by lucky Q'dy shot.

Are your "coincidence" alarm bells going off yet?




Then how about this glaring coincidence.

When the military gathered the next of kin together (bad idea big gov - your goal is to keep U.S. apart - as easy to muster/ corner) - they told the families of the Heroes that;

"Your sons are not coming home - we made the decision to cremate them"

The official (utter Bull Chit story) is that the bodies were burned beyond recognition.



But one parent was shown a picture of his son on the ground - with NO burns

Facts vs. Fiction: Assange Never Raped Anyone

As a victim of sexual abuse when young, where no one would listen to me and those I trusted with the details called me "punk" (in the most demeaning way) I'm well versed on the side of the vex upon victims. One can even argue that it's worse for a boy to talk about being raped - than it is for a girl by a guy.

Too often, unrequited sexual abuse sagas leads to cases of suicide (see Tree Climbers - here).

That being said, nothing gets in the craw of victims of sexual abuse, more than someone making up fabrications of being abused, in order to gain some selfish advantage. Where there are cases of people making up crap against rich guys, just to get over. Or a team of players at a school. And the girl who stayed out all night long and blamed her bo (who didn't satisfy her) or someone not even involved, so she wouldn't be punished.

All falsehoods make it harder for REAL victims to achieve justice and closure!

IF You really want to see the facts in print and such compared to the propaganda, then the best place is the website "EXTRADITING ASSANGE".

This particular website can be labeled bias, if you so choose to say, as it details the falsities by David Allen Green and the political prosecution of Julian Assange - in Detail.

At the very bottom of the Justice for Julian Assange - EXTRADITING web page (lengthy) - it has a fact by fiction comparison that should put to rest all the manure out there.

That is, of course, unless you're hell bent to condemn a man!

The 2 Swedish Girls in Question

accused Julian Assange of Rape

That's right, ladies and gentlemen, most of U.S. (and the world actually) are being duped by main stream (lame) media; chiefly propagandized by David Allen Green. For it is a fact that this whole case was started, when one of the girls went to the police and asked if she could compel Julian Assange to give a blood test (to check for STD's).

You can, if you care about the facts, even if you, arguendo, ignore the glaring Rove issues and that the U.S. Government is after Julian Assange in connection with Private Manning (or have you totally bought into the B.S. that big gov doesn't desire to nail Assange - being totally obtuse to what has happened to Manning) - simply look at the Swedish public records (that our main stream never reports).


The original prosecutor closed the Julian Assange case and a politico (Claes Borgström) and others took the case away from the original prosecutor and launched a campaign to "Q U E S T I O N" Julian Assange.

That's right, this whole case is about "questioning" - Assange is NOT charged any crime!

Asked on various occasions how an investigation could be restarted even though the complainants did not allege rape, Claes Borgström stated that neither woman is a lawyer, therefore neither woman can tell whether she was raped or not.


I don't know about you - but I sure as hell know when I've been violated!

Here's the verbatim from (this) Swedish source;

Interviewer: But did not at first say that she had been raped.

Borgström: Yes, but she is not a lawyer.

Despite Assange's efforts to comply with the inquiry, the prosecutor delayed the progression of the investigation. Then many strange things began to occur, including the stealing of Julian Assange's personal computers = AFTER = Sweden granted Assange permission to leave the country.

THAT's RIGHT - Julian didn't RUN away - he was granted permission!

Then - this event took place;

Assange's discussion on the phone (which happened in my presence): "They could not do this before? I have been in Sweden for six weeks. " In the journey to Berlin, Assange took four computers and his own personal baggage. The baggage and three of his computers disappeared, although his was a direct flight. Assange arrived to meet with Espresso in Berlin in the late evening (around 11 pm) without luggage, and with only one computer: a laptop which he never parts from and which travels with him on his shoulders. The episode made Assange suspicious. The three computers were never recovered. Twenty days after these events, WikiLeaks released documents on the war in Iraq (Iraq War Logs). Meanwhile, the Swedish case went on.

About Wikileaks purportedly exposing the girls

EEEEAAANNNNTTTT! - Buzz a big NO on that one too....

On the 23rd of August, at 16:40, the police released the casefile for AA's report under Freedom of Information on the Assange case. AA's name was supposed to be redacted throughout the document, and it was, throughout the body of the document. But the police failed to redact her name from the title of the document. The police are therefore the sole and effective reason that AA's privacy as an alleged victim was breached, and that her identity is known publicly.

AA gave an interview to the Swedish newspaper Aftonbladet, in which she stated that Assange is not violent, and that neither she nor SW are afraid of him. She gave this interview anonymously, and yet, when the interview was reproduced in The New York Times her full name was given out. The New York Times is therefore the effective reason that AA's name became known all over the world. From Aftonbladet:

It is completely false that we are afraid of Assange and therefore didn’t want to file a complaint. He is not violent and I do not feel threatened by him.


We know our country went to war in Iraq based upon GWB's Administration lying out their butts - massively. We also know that the tapes given out by Private Manning, through Julian Assange's Wikileaks organization, deeply embarrassed the American warring machine - Greatly!

To say that big gov and the corporate military industrial complex doesn't have an axe to grind against Julian Assange - is just plain Bull C H I T!

Of the 2 Swedish girls in question, Julian Assange was never accused of rape. One girl went to the police to ask for a blood test issue and they went "AH HAH - we got him"!

Since then, there has been mass millions of dollars (over 3 million alone, for British police to surround the Embassy) to go after Julian Assange and Wikileaks; because bad faith acts do not like being exposed...

especially by an outsider!

Here's a link with the vast, Chronological details of the Julian Assange case. Including the issues of what he reported with Wikileaks hacking and how the rape case has been a fabrication from the start.

Justice for Julian Assange

If you care about the facts and justice, you will see that this website has links upon links backing up each and every remark. This case is a fabrication by the powers that be - who are going after the person - who points out they are "corrupt" powers that be.

It is easy to get the world all in a tizzy - as is remarked/noted by the facts - that;

But the original privacy blunder by the police had happened much earlier: a matter of hours after the women visited the police on the 20th of August. Within two hours of the issuance of the arrest warrant, a reporter at the tabloid Expressen had been tipped off by SMS. The duty prosecutor, Maria Kjellstrand, was called, who illegally confirmed that there was an arrest warrant out for Julian Assange. Expressen then ran the story, and Kjellstrand was quoted in it. Within a matter of hours, the news had travelled around the world, was reported by every major English-language news outlet, and had associated Julian Assange's name with the word "rape" in over 3 million Google search results.

The arrest warrant had been issued by Kjellstrand during the interview with SW. The Chief Prosecutor Eva Finne was on holiday at the time. When she read SW's interview the next day, she canceled the arrest warrant, saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape." It has been reported by Aftonbladet that, internally, Finne has been extremely critical of the police conduct in the issuance of the warrant.

YOKO ONO AWARD to Julian Assange in 2013

Nothing tells the tale better than Yoko Ono's granting Julian Assange (poetically apropos - in absentia) 'The Courage Award'. These pictures are from Yoko Ono's tribute website to her husband John Lennon - titled

"Imagine Peace"

The 2 girls are a victim, of being caught up in the wheels of injustice that thrust them into a losing position. No matter how this case turns out, they will always have to hide from the public's scrutiny.

And that's a Dam Shame!

Believe what you want to believe. As for me, being a real victim of sexual abuse who fights such and other bad faith acts (including big gov and Mitt Romney), I know how justice REALLY works in this country...

I'm just sayin....

--------and sayin.......

------------------------ And Sayin.................

I'm SO sick of this Bull C H I T.... almost everyone is being duped.

Assange was never accused of rape (by the 2 girls).

You can't argue that the girls are LYING

--------------------- when they never stated what someone else is mouthing!

I'm going to take everyone to the FACT sheet - extraordinary;
and show the deceptions of lame stream (and David Allen Green).

Wall Street being her numero uno donors

Is too telltale to me.

Until she comes out hard against the war machines and Wall Street getting away with crimes...always

I'm for Warren, Bernie or any other.

Let's see her come out and say that "my husband made a mistake repealing Glass Steagall"

Otherwise, this seems like pandering, To me

Blue Wall Cover Ups: Gray Killed Himself

As a victim of manifest injustice it always amazes me how repetitive, verbal, reinforcing Bull Chit is able to diffuse, or even overcome - glaring truths. And yet, the proverbial 'Blue Wall of Silence', the Police Unions and the oligarch's bought & paid for media, are still trying to maintain the status quo (that non-oligarch lives don't matter), via cover ups and disinformation.

It is as if they, the powers that be, are all dumber than they believe U.S. (and the rest of the world chiming in) - to be. Anyone with common sense doesn't need a doctors education and oath to know that it is an arduous task to break your throat, much less your spine; even when it is done others.

In this case, it appears to have taken several to get the job done.

As par for the course, in line with people shooting themselves in squad cars with handcuffs behind their back (and even another case yesterday, of a gal purportedly shooting at police - after being detained and tossed in a squad car), now we have the culprits proffering the absurd premise that Freddie Gray broke his own throat and spine (this goes beyond inane).

Proof of insanity, is the ("pure") WaPo msm reporting of a witness to Gray's self mutilation (here).


Today, the Washington Post is defending its action, stating that it simply reported from the facts within a Police report. But the FACT of the matter is, WaPo was being part of the disinformation blame game. As the title from WaPo tells a specific tale...

Stating - influentially - that;

Prisoner in van thought Gray was ‘trying to injure himself

This title is not one of journalist integrity. NOPE, it is one that seeks to sway the opinion through the only absurd premise oligarch geniuses can hope to utilize, to save their supremacist arses. As is corroborated by the f----k'n sick, KKK title to WaPo's picture that states;

Residents clean up from the looting and fires
that plagued parts of the city Monday
after the funeral for Freddie Gray.

Beyond the fact that we can't put the photo here and link to it (because the repugish' tards proffer to "sell" the photo), the subtitle to the picture is not of rioters or riot acts; but of protesters marching.

Also, as a techy, I look for the meta information and such, to see what the IT geniuses at WaPo are utilizing for their hierarchy, based on keywords an such. In this particular case, though the title is "Prisoner in van though Gray was 'trying to injure himself', the actual web link of the story also corroborates the malicious intent of WaPo's slant on the story - that;


Are you pissed off enough yet? Does the charges coming quickly (for once) quell your anxieties? Are you like me and wonder what GZ, Staten Island, Ferguson, Fullerton Kelly Thomas thingy is going to transpire - this time - to make ALL the charges go away?

Well then, take a look at the verbatim words of the Washington Post that;

BALTIMORE — A prisoner sharing a police transport van with Freddie Gray told investigators that he could hear Gray “banging against the walls” of the vehicle and believed that he “was intentionally trying to injure himself,” according to a police document obtained by The Washington Post.

The prisoner, who is currently in jail, was separated from Gray by a metal partition and could not see him. His statement is contained in an application for a search warrant, which is sealed by the court. The Post was given the document under the condition that the prisoner not be named because the person who provided it feared for the inmate’s safety.

Do you see that is says the prisoner "could not see him" due to a metal partition? Does it ring with you that the van made "3" stops. And that one of them is claimed to have placed Gray in leg irons?

Did you notice the remark that;

The third stop was to put the other prisoner — a 38-year-old man accused of violating a protective order — into the van. The van was then driven six blocks to the Western District station. Gray was taken from there to a hospital, where he died April 19.

Not only are there contradictory remarks (such as that Gray was put back on the seat "without" restraints), but there's also the note that Gray asked for medical help at the point of the second stop.


We simply can't say it any better than the sign above says (pic from a WordPress Blog titled "DearKitty1" {that had an original story - HERE}). It doesn't matter what crime you did (though the recent reports by the prosecutor is stating that Gray was not guilty of any thing worthy of being arrested - in the first place) - one doesn't deserve to be injured by police - simply because they consider you the enemy.

DearKitty1 WordPress Blog states under "Politics, Racisim and Anti-Racisim" that;

“We have a clear message,” organizer Brock Satter told the Boston Globe at a 500-person rally in Boston. “We’re gonna demand the government indict the killers of Freddie Gray. If you want peace, if you want calm, jail the killers of Freddie Gray.”

Gray’s death has been compared with those of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri; Eric Garner in Staten Island, New York; and Walter Scott in North Charleston, South Carolina. All were unarmed black men who died during confrontations with police.

Erica Garner, Eric Garner‘s daughter, spoke at the New York rally. She told protesters that she had attended Gray’s funeral on Monday and understood — but did not endorse — the violence. “We need to change this for the next generation,” Garner added, according to Black Youth Project tweets. “This has to stop now.”

The aunt of Akai Gurley, who was fatally shot by police in Brooklyn, New York, in November, was also in attendance, according to MSNBC reporter Amanda M. Sakuma.

Putting WaPo, Police Thugs & Oligarchs On Notice

In case you killer cops, power mongers, bought out media and oligarchy haven't noticed, we of the world - The Citizenry - aren't swallowing your babbling Bull Chit any more. Your bought and paid for main stream media - matters less and less. We, the citizens of the world, get the truth out faster than you can think up your bull chit.

If you think the people are out of control, you are right. For your control means U.S. swallowing babbling, repetitive, reinforcing manure and calling it cake & ice cream. As is purely evident by the world wide response to the absurdity of a person winding up with a broken spine (for NO apparent reason); you have lost your ability to control U.S. with your brutality.

Soon, your wars are going to face the same amount of protest.

And, if you think such isn't true, as for your designs to remove this prosecutor and wind up with a not guilty verdict. That's not going to bode well.

I'm just sayin..........

One of the neatest Tweets out this week (that I'm having a trouble finding) is the remark some white snob made in a public area - that what would young kids using the term nigg'ahs ...say - if Martin Luther King was standing next to them.

To which the young man responded -

------------------------ "If your people hadn't killed him - maybe we would know"!

While the Washington Post fails to print a retraction and embarrasses itself even further (when its attempt to smear campaign died instantly), doing a two step out of its own manure pie with its new story titled "Those stories that Freddie Gray had a preexisting spinal injury are totally bogus";

let's, instead take a look at Norm Chomsky's reasons why

"Black Lives Matter"

Arguing Warren Can't Win, Oppresses Absurdly

Let hateful, spiteful mud slinging begin; but only after proper debate with verifiable, true/ factual documentations. Yes, yours truly wants Mass. Senator Elizabeth Warren to run, even if we have to draft her. The notion that Senator Warren shouldn't run because she can't win - is ABSURD! And anything/ anyone arguing she shouldn't do it because Hillary is running is oppressive and un-democratic.

Let's look at the FACTs apropos - below....after a brief word from another sponsor

Here's what MoveOn.org's PETITION has to say about Elizabeth Warren running for POTUS.

Elizabeth Warren is a fighter for working people and a champion for the middle class. And at this time of historic inequality, we need her to run for president.

Warren is uniquely suited to take on the tough challenges our country faces: income inequality, a skewed playing field, the middle class and working people constantly getting "chipped, squeezed, and hammered" while Wall Street gets bailed out. She will stand up to the lobbyists and the corporate interests, and go all-in to give the rest of us a fighting chance.

That’s what we need right now, and it’s why we are intent on showing her she has the support she needs to run for president and win.

Making the case for/against POTUS candidate Warren

There are sooooo many things wrong with fellow Progressives going at each others throats about this issue. It actually sickens me and swells up fear within me, about being rejected by my fellow liberals, who are die-hard Hillary Clinton supporters. It's ugliness is heart wrenching. Be that as it may, I've put life and liberty on the line openly fighting Romney and helping to defeat him in the election; but I've not defeated him (yet) totally. It is my belief that with Elizabeth Warren as President of the United States, I can do so. Granted, some of you may argue this logic is bias; but I reply that all elections are voted based on bias beliefs.

Both fear and anger are ebol and suck the whammy big time.

In order to approach this properly, I'll be more verbose than usual, with each germane part of the argument broken down into it's own debate issue. This makes it easier for everyone to go to verbal civil war in the comment section, doing so on a particular point.

The following sections will address the issues moi believes to be germane.

1. Reasons for Elizabeth Warren to be POTUS.

2. Arguments Against Elizabeth Warren running to be President.

3. Comparing Hillary Clinton to Elizabeth Warren

4. Arguing IF Elizabeth Warren Can win the POTUS election.

5. Conclusion {of this thread poster}.

(pic is from "DailyBanter.com" that references "quickmeme.com"

1. Reasons for Elizabeth Warren to be POTUS.

A. Elizabeth Warren is a woman and we've never had a female President
B. She is - unequivocally - extremely popular
C. Senator Warren beat an incumbent to become 1st female Senator of Mass.
D. She is an attorney at law (who specializes/taught at Harvard of bankruptcy law)
E. Elizabeth Warren brought U.S. the CFPB (Consumer Fraud Protection Bureau)
F. The Senator is outspoken against white collar fraud and student loan racketeering
G. Mrs. Warren is "among the most cited in the field of commercial law" (Wiki)
H. Elizabeth Warren is recognized by both Law Journal & Time as top 100 influential
I. Senator is one of the leading Progressives, during her first term in office
J. Often, Elizabeth Warren, as Senator, is quick of wit to nail bull chit arguments
K. She published many works, including 2014 book "A Fighting Chance" (says almost none).
L. Elizabeth Warren has won a fight against WS forming CFPB and becoming Senator.
M. Senator remains relentless in her stances and halted raising student loan interests
N. On the issue of raising the minimum wage - she is outspoken - GReatly!
O. When her opinion isn't popular - she doesn't lie to B.S. the crowd (Israel stance)
P. Wall Street has threatened to pull Democratic funding, if she doesn't back off
Q. Every crooked player fears Elizabeth Warren being President of the United States

We can go on and on with accolades for Senator Warren to become POTUS candidate Warren; but there's more than enough here already. And need I say, that Elizabeth Warren most certainly isn't a faux candidate?!?!?!?

(pic is from Boston Globe story "Warren casts shadow on Hillary")

2. Arguments Against Elizabeth Warren running to be President.

Let's face simple facts concerning why Senator Warren should not be running for POTUS. In actuality, there are ONLY 2 major arguments against Elizabeth Warren.

A. Senator Warren is Not Hillary Clinton

B. (Based upon the logic of item number 1 {Item A.}) - Elizabeth Warren Can't Win.

If Hillary Clinton wasn't running, there would only be the question of item 2 {B.}. To both of those premises, I'm giving the following remarks and then we'll move on to the comparison (next item).

Of all the banter out there, the one argument that I find over looked (not properly addressed) is that Bernie Sanders can't win. Of the race of Sanders v Warren, I am (along with most others I talk to) hands down Senator Warren.

Getting beyond that and back to Hillary, if former Secretary of State Clinton was not running for POTUS, there can be only 1 other argument against Senator Warren doing such; and that's the absurd (out of the gate logic) that Elizabeth Warren could never possibly win.


On what basis can one argue that Elizabeth Warren could never win? Are not elections based upon popularity? If it was Warren v Bush/Romney/ Rubio/ Cruz and/or Walker or GOP anybody ---- Who are You going to Vote For?

Did Elizabeth Warren beat an incumbent Republican to become 1st female Senator of Mass.?

Was her battle against the entire RWNJ/ WS supporting establishment won, in order to create the CFPB?

As Senator, did she go about lining herself up for favorite positions; or did she come out and remain swinging against the status quo on behalf of average John/Jane Q Public?

Senator Barack Obama did not have 1/100th the popularity before he ran for POTUS - that Elizabeth Warren now enjoys. Not only has Warren been a Senator; but she has worked with Obama's Administration to create the CFPB. We will address more on this bogus notion that Warren can't win - in the section dedicated to it below. Meanwhile.....

Is Wall Street threatening to shut down any other candidacy?

Has that one item - Alone - earned any of your DEEP respect for Elizabeth Warren?


There is no better test of a Hillary Clinton POTUS run, to be successful, than that of her engaging in Primary debates with Senator Warren.


(pic is from HuffPo article that "Warren may not want to; but we need her to run")

3. Comparing Hillary Clinton to Elizabeth Warren

Outside of the fact that Hillary was also FLOTUS, it is almost a neck and neck run on ratings agencies about the comparison of Warren v Hillary. As seen at "Presidential-Candidates.insidegov.com", here is the ratings of Warren v Hillary - on the following issues;

DEFENSE and International Issues

Warren is rated a 6 (with 10 being most liberal) - and Hillary is rated a 7


Warren is rated a 9 ------------------------------ Hillary is rated an 8


Warren is rated an 8 --------------------------------- Clinton is rated at 9


Elizabeth Warren is a 9 ---------------------------- Hillary is an 8

Compare charts at "insidegov.com" delves into many issues germane. Including "Absolute right to gun ownership" (that both Hillary and Warren 'strongly oppose').

There's also the issues of 'Prioritize green energy' and 'Expand ObamaCare'; which are both "strongly favored" by Hillary and Warren.

Both Senator Warren and Hillary oppose the "expand free trade" agreements.

Also, it is noted that both Clinton and Elizabeth Warren "strongly favors" that 'stimulus' works over market based recovery and 'higher taxes on the rich' (both, by the way, are millionaires).

ACLU and Planned Parenthood Action Fund have Elizabeth Warren at 100% (oddly enough there's NO Congressional record compare listing such stats for Hillary). Arguably, Hillary Clinton has been at it longer than Elizabeth Warren. Clinton also has the experience of Secretary of State and being the 1st lady. As much as one can argue Hillary has more experience, the opposing banter for Warren can be that she has become stronger, in less time and done more - than Clinton - in less time.

They are (arguably) equal in popularity. One has more time on the block; but is not as strong an opponent to Wall Street as we want or need. The other fights for U.S. every chance she gets.

The only thing Elizabeth Warren doesn't have (and never will) is a husband who has already been in the White House - that is very popular among many Democrats. As for me, I like Bill Clinton; but I don't give him all the accolades of praise as most Dem's do. For one, he had the dot com era make his policies against Reagan/ G HW Bush trickle down. Dot com won for U.S.

Outside of that - there's Glass Steagall that Bill Clinton publicly announced (as he was leaving office) on such no longer being necessary.

Do you recall how that logic actually panned out?

Just sayin.................

(pic is from MoveOn.org's PETITION - pleading for Warren to Run for President

4. Arguing IF Elizabeth Warren Can win the POTUS election.

As stated above, elections are popularity contests. Beyond any reasonable doubt, for the most part, this election, is based upon the right via left. As is most times (except for our pee poor snub of Obama during mid-terms) - this election will be about HARD right against anything left.

IMO - both Hillary and Warren stand a solid chance against Any RWNJ in 2016.

This particular section is about the fact that one of the main arguments of Democrats is, Warren can't possibly win. To that remark, yours truly says BULL C H I T!

Elizabeth Warren raised $40 million from U.S. for her Massachusetts Senator race.

If, at the end of the day, are you saying that you are SO pro Hillary and against Warren - that if Elizabeth won the primary - you're NOT going to support her in the POTUS race?


Senator Barack Obama was an unknown quality. We (that's right - YOU & I) along with the entire Democratic/Progressive realm, picked the unknown Barack Hussien Obama over Hillary Clinton.

The fact of the matter is, Warren is a better speaker than Hillary!

You say it ain't so.....HOW? Every word that comes out of Elizabeth Warren's mouth is for U.S. - the average John/ Jane Doe Q Public of America. She is so outspoken against Wall Street - that they have threatened to pull funding Democrats.

THAT's extortion/blackmail - and it should make U.S. all MORE pro Warren (not less)!

Of Campaign Finance, Do you Believe Clinton will do better than Warren?

Obama didn't have industries lined up behind him, nor Wall Street (that - granted - Hillary Clinton does have; but shouldn't be bragging about such). And - yet - we were able to raise enough money and get behind him with enough Grass Roots - that he beat the well funded (super rich) John McCain.

This time around, the Koch brothers have already promised $894 MILLION dollars (nearly a Billion) to help put a Republican in office. Along with that is Fox networks and the over 100 million listeners of Rush LameBlah, Beck, Hannity etc., of Clear Channel's 800 stations (renamed iHeart).

Factually, Democrats can never hope to outspend Republicans.

It is estimated with the programming already anti Anybody from the liberal side - that we are a $3 Billion dollar underdog in raising cash this election. Midterms alone (according to Open Secrets) costs almost $4 Billion.

Simply put, there's not enough outright Liberal ownership of media to balance the scales of Fox, Romney's iHeart and the money they can raise. Hence, we are going to have to do this by the same populace, Grass Roots actions that helped Obama win the Presidency.

But We're "Drafting" Elizabeth Warren

Yes, this is true, we are attempting to "draft" Elizabeth Warren, who is upon the public stage, many times, stating she simply - flatly - won't run.

Everyone argues with me that NO drafted person can possibly win;


Let's take a look at proof to the contrary, in the form of Dwight D. Eisenhower!

Wikipedia states that;

The Draft Eisenhower movement was the first successful political draft of the 20th century to take a private citizen to the Oval Office. It was a widespread American grassroots political movement that eventually persuaded Dwight D. Eisenhower to run for President. The movement culminated in the 1952 presidential election in which Eisenhower won the Republican nomination and defeated Democrat Adlai Stevenson to become the 34th President of the United States.

If they can do it - why can't we? - Did we not "Grass Roots" Obama to victory?

We, Democrats, hard side and medium ground alike, will be HARD behind who ever is the successful Primary nominated candidate. Even if it be Reid, Levin and/or Sanders.

Anyone saying Elizabeth Warren has no chance - is trying to rig it for Hillary;

and that ain't kosher!

(pic is from Reverb Press about Bill Maher's Million dollar offer for Warren to run)


If Hillary wasn't running, would there be ANY arguments against her? How about if Gore wanted to get back in; would you then say he shouldn't run? Are we telling Bernie not to try to run? Would you do the same to Harry Reid, Carl Levin and/or another quiet candidate popping out the woodworks?

Barack Obama came from relative obscurity, into our hearts, minds and dedication, in a fight against Hillary Clinton. He did not have 1/100th the popularity that Elizabeth Warren has today, as a Senator.

We need change - SERIOUS Change!

Have you ever seen such public demand, LONG before a campaign is to begin - with an Established choice already there - as there is for Elizabeth Warren?

The answer is a most resounding NO; especially for a Progressive candidate!

Bill Maher already has thumped the can't raise money nail, on its proverbial dam head - when he Up Front offered Elizabeth Warren, a million dollars to run.

Here's what Ian of Huffington Post wrote on this subject;

Democrats will never win by running as what Harry Truman called "phony Democrats." We can only win by contrasting what we believe and what we've done when in power with the beliefs and actions of our Republican opponents. There is no alternative. And there's no one in our party better suited to make that contrast to the American people than the woman who said this:

People feel like the system is rigged against them. And here's the painful part: they're right. The system is rigged. Look around. Oil companies guzzle down billions in subsidies. Billionaires pay lower tax rates than their secretaries. Wall Street CEOs--the same ones who wrecked our economy and destroyed millions of jobs--still strut around Congress, no shame, demanding favors, and acting like we should thank them.

And Ian then reiterated the issues of how popular Warren is, linking to DailyKos - this;

This is transcribed - in short - to be;

The Republican vision is clear: "I've got mine, the rest of you are on your own." Republicans say they don't believe in government. Sure they do. They believe in government to help themselves and their powerful friends.

Corporations are not people. People have hearts, they have kids, they get jobs, they get sick, they cry, they dance. They live, they love, and they die. And that matters. That matters because we don't run this country for corporations, we run it for people.

Then Ian of HuffPo continued to state;

That woman, of course, is Elizabeth Warren. And damn if those words don't get me excited. Many people have said this before. I'm one of them. But I'm going to say it again, because it must be said after our losses in the midterms: We need Elizabeth Warren to run for president. Whether she wins or loses, no one else can more effectively reshape the message and policy agenda of the Democratic Party, and there's no better way for her to do so than with the platform of a White House run.

Do you see how excited we were about Elizabeth Warren in 2012 election? Can anyone be legitimate in any argument that we won't be more so, when she runs for POTUS?

What do we need a Progressive POTUS for, in 2016?

The questions you have to ask yourself is - what do we really need, for 2016. Do we need just a Democrat? Or do we need a woman? Is the outspoken Warren that much different from Clinton, on women's rights, equal pay, Social Security, ObamaCare, LGBT?

On almost all issues, Hillary and Warren are the same - a l m o s t!

Where does Elizabeth Warren Stand FAR above Hillary Clinton?

Truth is, if there's any doubt in your answer, then you really have nothing but bias. For, as we ALL know (even on both right and left) that Elizabeth Warren is feared most by the Repub R{e}ich.

Wall Street can't stand - even Fears - Elizabeth Warren!

On that issue - Alone - Hillary and Warren are clearly at different ends of the spectrum. This, is in great part due to the fact that Clinton has been in D.C. many more years than Warren. Hillary was the first lady and knows that - as a politico - you have to go along to get along.

Elizabeth Warren has never been one to - go along - in order to get along!

There's no better place to test Hillary Clinton's popularity, than that of a Primary debate with Elizabeth Warren. Nor, on the flip side of the coin, is there any other place for Warren to prove her true viability - than that of debating with Hillary Clinton.

For Hillary - will pull no punches - against an opposing Warren.

I'm for Elizabeth Warren, due to the fact that Wall Street hates here and her best chance of rallying U.S. Progressive/Liberals/ Democrats behind her, is a strong platform on reigning the GOP in, along with Wall Street.

Can you say the same for Hillary?


Finally, before I release you to the POLL and video below, let U.S. take a look at another issue that most don't even dare talk about. There's this little thingy that we should never have had a Bush II in the White House (and most certainly not a Dallas Dynasty III - with Jeb). In the same accord, I'm of the very strong opine that we are opening up (setting a precedent - if you will) the issue of defeating the "No More than 2 Terms as President".

For the misogyny of our founding fathers, arguendo, never even dare consider the fact that George Washington's wife would run for President of the United States. With the history of Bush/Rove stealing elections (Romney's family owning voting machines/ stealing billions to buy media outlets like CCC/ iHeart), gerrymandering, voter blocking and money raising from Koch's, Adelson, etc., - can we ever stand such getting Barbara Bush in, or Ann Romney?

Hence, neither should we endure a world running around Bill Clinton, with his ex Sec. of State wife Hillary, now giving U.S. a Clinton Presidency Part II. For it is TOO much power in the hands of the same persons way of doing things. We've had a decade and a half, beyond the way of Bill Clinton's time. Besides, what would we call him, the POTUS 1st FMOTUS?

And let's not even get started on if/when Michele should consider....

Because there's also Joe Biden, silently waiting in the background.

I'm just sayin.........

Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 34 Next »