All errors should be reported to DonSurber@gmail.com

Thursday, January 26, 2017

Eliot Ness would like a word with you, media

Self-appointed constitutional scholars in the media have determined that President Trump's tweet decrying the criminal carnage in Chicago is a threat to the foundation of liberty.

Such drama queens.

Trump tweeted:
If Chicago doesn't fix the horrible "carnage" going on, 228 shootings in 2017 with 42 killings (up 24% from 2016), I will send in the Feds!
Somehow this became interpreted as Trump sending in the 82nd Airborne and tanks.

From Fox News:
The ability of the federal government to wade into state affairs is deliberately limited as the founders intended, but there are options available to the president.
“Send in the feds” may bring to mind sending troops into Chicago. However, the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits the federal government from deploying troops to deal with a local matter. The Act was passed to end the use of federal troops to police state-level elections in former Confederate states.
However, there are exceptions. President Eisenhower in 1957 sent in the 101st Airborne into Little Rock, Arkansas to quell the civil rights unrest there.
Whoa.

Where did that come from?

Nowhere in that tweet does he mention the military.

Trump knows history. He knows that in 1929, President Hoover sent Eliot Ness and the Untouchables from the Department of Treasury to crack down on the organized crime that was behind the criminal carnage in Chicago then.

This likely is what Trump means.

But in their childish effort to bring down Donald Trump, these idiots in the media constantly distort, exaggerate, and yes, lie.

By the way, the 101st did not go into Little Rock to enforce local law, but rather to uphold a federal court order integrating Central High.

EVIL.

@@@

Please read "Trump the Press," in which I skewer media experts who wrongly predicted Trump would lose the Republican nomination. "Trump the Press" is available as a paperback, and on Kindle.

It covers the nomination process only. The general election will be covered in a sequel, "Trump the Establishment."

For an autographed copy, email me at DonSurber@GMail.com

Be deplorable. Follow me on Twitter.

20 comments:

  1. Without fake news the fake stream media would be a massive void.
    libby

    ReplyDelete
  2. If Capone had've just returned that library book on time, the Feds would not have been required.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Didn't Obama already send the Feds into Chicago to intimidate the police and force them into a consent decree? Where were the critic then?

    ReplyDelete
  4. One thing PDJT (President Trump) can do is send in a team from the Community Relations Service office of the DoJ. Obama used the CRS to foment trouble and racial animosity in the aftermath of civil unrest in places like Ferguson MO, but PDJT can put them into Chicago to look over Rahm Emanuel's shoulder. That would serve as a warning the civil rights division of the Dept. of Justice is watching the city government very closely for civil rights violations and that federal indictments of city officials would be considered if the city failed to get its serious crime problem under control.

    ReplyDelete
  5. No, he didn't mention the military, but that's what whoever wrote that thought it meant, or might mean.
    Extrapolating beyond the facts/data at hand can get one in trouble.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Surber: "This likely is what Trump means." How would you know Surber? Don, do you really think Trump was thinking of Ness and 1929 when he made that tweet? Weird.

      This is where a free press - even with its many flaws - is crucial now more than ever, especially when a vague, yet thinly=veiled threatening text is sent by the POTUS.
      Put it this way Surber: If Hillary was elected, put out a tweet saying she is going to send in the Feds to [wherever]and refused to elaborate, you would be going berserk, demanding clarification. So what's the difference here? Oh, forgot, you are blindly loyal to the "R" and not the "USA"

      Delete
    2. Oh, another brave "anonymous." Hope Soros is paying you well! (If not, you're really a loser, aren't you!)

      When Don Surber says, "This likely is what Trump means," it is his opinion based upon careful, long-time study of the man in question. So far, his track record is better than any of the "Free" press (who are actually almost all Democrat operatives with bylines, as Glenn Renolds like to say.)

      If you'd like to mitigate your ignorance, you might start with "Trump the Press," which covers these topics quite thoroughly. Or, you can stay ignorant; I'm pretty sure which one you'll choose to do- but I'd be delighted if you proved me wrong!

      Delete
    3. S'funny as I was thinking 'Robert Stack' when I first read DJT's Tweet.
      You're kind of an A-hole sort aren't you anonymous. You dis Don's name in a derogatory context all the while hiding behind anon, and this isn't the first time.
      I don't think anyone at this blog minds dissenting opinion...its the attitude thing.
      You get your entertainment for free here so attempt a respectful discourse or go home.

      Sam C

      Delete
    4. Oh yes, the "attitude thing." The names Obama, Hillary and other non-Rs have been called on this blog by posters is infinitely worse than anything I have ever directed at Surber or any other poster. Spare me the civil discourse lecture. But you are correct about one thing: This blog is true entertainment.

      Delete
    5. I guess Don must REALLY be getting somewhere now that he's getting lefty trolls commenting here. I hate to say it Don, but they'll probably be writing nasty reviews about your stuff on Amazon next. Lefties remind me of my cat when I don't change her kitty litter weekly.....poops on the floor and stinks up the joint!
      -Fred

      Delete
  6. Maybe they are trying to forget the weaponized Obama DOJ(?).

    Naw.

    Right out of the mouth of a previous ChiTown PD chief this AM...It's Obama's recent DOJ "patterns and practice" edicts that have handcuffed the Chicago PD getting the thugs off the street and keeping those felonies from transforming to misdemeanors.

    ReplyDelete
  7. With all respect to Don and President Trump, Chicago is not and should not be a federal gubmint problem. The voters of that cesspool elected the gubmint they asked for and deserve. Let them rot in it until they wake up and smell the coffee.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Do we know that? We know who counted the votes. We don't know who cast the votes or in what cemetery they reside.

      Delete
  8. The Feds could be the National Guard. Unless Trump calls the violence in Chicago a national emergency and federalized the state NG, the governor has to approve it. After the riots of 1968 in Wilmington, DE, the NG was called in by the governor. The NG was there for 9 months and for the politicians it was a very unpopular occupation. Not sure of the inner city's public's opinion. My Uncle was a top sergeant then in the full time NG and said his people backed up the cops in any situation that may become violent. A 50 cal on a Jeep can change minds.
    Unless the city's agreement with the ACLU is revoked, the police are not effective nor proactive. Any person they talk to has to be documented, meaning patrol time is reduced.
    Just think how a business would lose productivity if each employee had to document the conversations they had with each person they encountered during the day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think the NG is the first thing that comes to mind, unless full scale rioting breaks out, but the DoJ can start looking into whether the level of crime is sufficient to raise the issue of civil rights violations. If the city is not doing enough to protect its citizens against widespread crime, then their civil liberties are being jeopardized. A suit in Federal court might be the first step toward getting a consent decree to place the Chicago police department under Federal court jurisdiction and supervised by a Master who's appointed by the court.

      Delete
  9. The Feds could be the National Guard. Unless Trump calls the violence in Chicago a national emergency and federalized the state NG, the governor has to approve it. After the riots of 1968 in Wilmington, DE, the NG was called in by the governor. The NG was there for 9 months and for the politicians it was a very unpopular occupation. Not sure of the inner city's public's opinion. My Uncle was a top sergeant then in the full time NG and said his people backed up the cops in any situation that may become violent. A 50 cal on a Jeep can change minds.
    Unless the city's agreement with the ACLU is revoked, the police are not effective nor proactive. Any person they talk to has to be documented, meaning patrol time is reduced.
    Just think how a business would lose productivity if each employee had to document the conversations they had with each person they encountered during the day.

    ReplyDelete
  10. If you want to read what is going on in Chicago from the viewpoint of the cops a good read is Second City Cop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And follow that up with stats on Chicago violence on heyjackass.com

      Delete
  11. Instapundit is right, he's gaslighting the press. Even Fox news got trolled.

    This is SO much fun. I've put a microwave and a mini-fridge next to my recliner and laid in a supply of Orville. Bring it on, Don!

    ReplyDelete
  12. Attach a federal prosecutor like a leech to each and every Chicago politician and track down their ties to the gangs that do the killings.

    ReplyDelete