Ex-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said on Thursday the bureau made “many mistakes” in seeking Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authority to snoop on Carter Page, an aide to former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The comments were made during a CNN interview in which McCabe defended FISA’s Section 702 — which empowers the U.S. intelligence community to collect data on non-U.S. citizens abroad — as Congress debates whether to reauthorize it.

McCabe, now a CNN law enforcement analyst, responded to Trump’s call to “KILL FISA” while saying it was used to spy on his campaign, after which the House blocked consideration of a reauthorization bill just days before Section 702 sunsets.

Disgraced former FBI agent Andy McCabe: “[FISA] 702 authorities were never used in the — in the course of that investigation of Donald Trump & his campaign & some of his campaign associates. He — he may be referring to the FISA that was used — that was obtained to surveil Carter… pic.twitter.com/qI2t6hgrzG

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 11, 2024

“To be clear, no, there is no truth or accuracy in that post at all,” McCabe said, adding that “702 authorities were never used in the course of that investigation of Donald Trump and his campaign and some of his campaign associates.”

Trump “may be referring to the FISA that was obtained to surveil Carter Page. We now know there are many mistakes in that FISA. Those are all regrettable. But that is not Section 702. Totally different thing here,” McCabe said.

“My guess … is that it’s not surprising that Donald Trump is against surveillance capacity and authority for the FBI because he is someone who’s been investigated by the FBI. But, nevertheless, he is absolutely wrong on this count,” he added.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

McCabe signed an application seeking FISA authority to spy on Page, part of a chain of approval that came under fire over its partial reliance on an unverified dossier, and testified to Congress he would not have done so knowing what he learned later.

The Trump Department of Justice fired McCabe from the FBI in 2018 — hours before he was set to retire with a pension — after an inspector general report faulting him for a “lack of candor” regarding disclosures to the media.

McCabe sued over his firing in 2019, claiming his dismissal was “politically motivated and retaliatory” following his leadership in the Trump-Russia investigation, and won back his pension and other benefits in a 2021 settlement.

Some lawmakers who opposed advancing the FISA bill this week have demanded a warrant requirement for officials seeking to access data concerning U.S. citizens — ostensibly for law enforcement — that gets swept up in monitoring foreign persons.

FBI Director Christopher Wray is among those pushing to preserve FISA’s Section 702 authorities, telling Congress on Thursday they are “critical” to protecting Americans and claiming that adding a warrant requirement would be “dangerous.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) argued the FISA bill, as it stands, would not only reauthorize Section 702 for five years, but also implement reforms that would “actually kill the abuses” directed at Trump’s 2016 campaign.

After the vote on Wednesday, in which 19 Republicans joined with all voting Democrats to oppose consideration of the FISA bill, Johnson said lawmakers will “regroup” and insisted the United States “can’t allow a critical tool like this to just expire.”

​

Ex-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said on Thursday the bureau made “many mistakes” in seeking Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authority to snoop on Carter Page, an aide to former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The comments were made during a CNN interview in which McCabe defended FISA’s Section 702 — which empowers the U.S. intelligence community to collect data on non-U.S. citizens abroad — as Congress debates whether to reauthorize it.

McCabe, now a CNN law enforcement analyst, responded to Trump’s call to “KILL FISA” while saying it was used to spy on his campaign, after which the House blocked consideration of a reauthorization bill just days before Section 702 sunsets.

“To be clear, no, there is no truth or accuracy in that post at all,” McCabe said, adding that “702 authorities were never used in the course of that investigation of Donald Trump and his campaign and some of his campaign associates.”

Trump “may be referring to the FISA that was obtained to surveil Carter Page. We now know there are many mistakes in that FISA. Those are all regrettable. But that is not Section 702. Totally different thing here,” McCabe said.

“My guess … is that it’s not surprising that Donald Trump is against surveillance capacity and authority for the FBI because he is someone who’s been investigated by the FBI. But, nevertheless, he is absolutely wrong on this count,” he added.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

McCabe signed an application seeking FISA authority to spy on Page, part of a chain of approval that came under fire over its partial reliance on an unverified dossier, and testified to Congress he would not have done so knowing what he learned later.

The Trump Department of Justice fired McCabe from the FBI in 2018 — hours before he was set to retire with a pension — after an inspector general report faulting him for a “lack of candor” regarding disclosures to the media.

McCabe sued over his firing in 2019, claiming his dismissal was “politically motivated and retaliatory” following his leadership in the Trump-Russia investigation, and won back his pension and other benefits in a 2021 settlement.

Some lawmakers who opposed advancing the FISA bill this week have demanded a warrant requirement for officials seeking to access data concerning U.S. citizens — ostensibly for law enforcement — that gets swept up in monitoring foreign persons.

FBI Director Christopher Wray is among those pushing to preserve FISA’s Section 702 authorities, telling Congress on Thursday they are “critical” to protecting Americans and claiming that adding a warrant requirement would be “dangerous.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) argued the FISA bill, as it stands, would not only reauthorize Section 702 for five years, but also implement reforms that would “actually kill the abuses” directed at Trump’s 2016 campaign.

After the vote on Wednesday, in which 19 Republicans joined with all voting Democrats to oppose consideration of the FISA bill, Johnson said lawmakers will “regroup” and insisted the United States “can’t allow a critical tool like this to just expire.”

​[[{“value”:”

Ex-FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe said on Thursday the bureau made “many mistakes” in seeking Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) authority to snoop on Carter Page, an aide to former President Donald Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The comments were made during a CNN interview in which McCabe defended FISA’s Section 702 — which empowers the U.S. intelligence community to collect data on non-U.S. citizens abroad — as Congress debates whether to reauthorize it.

McCabe, now a CNN law enforcement analyst, responded to Trump’s call to “KILL FISA” while saying it was used to spy on his campaign, after which the House blocked consideration of a reauthorization bill just days before Section 702 sunsets.

Disgraced former FBI agent Andy McCabe: “[FISA] 702 authorities were never used in the — in the course of that investigation of Donald Trump & his campaign & some of his campaign associates. He — he may be referring to the FISA that was used — that was obtained to surveil Carter… pic.twitter.com/qI2t6hgrzG

— Tom Elliott (@tomselliott) April 11, 2024

“To be clear, no, there is no truth or accuracy in that post at all,” McCabe said, adding that “702 authorities were never used in the course of that investigation of Donald Trump and his campaign and some of his campaign associates.”

Trump “may be referring to the FISA that was obtained to surveil Carter Page. We now know there are many mistakes in that FISA. Those are all regrettable. But that is not Section 702. Totally different thing here,” McCabe said.

“My guess … is that it’s not surprising that Donald Trump is against surveillance capacity and authority for the FBI because he is someone who’s been investigated by the FBI. But, nevertheless, he is absolutely wrong on this count,” he added.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

McCabe signed an application seeking FISA authority to spy on Page, part of a chain of approval that came under fire over its partial reliance on an unverified dossier, and testified to Congress he would not have done so knowing what he learned later.

The Trump Department of Justice fired McCabe from the FBI in 2018 — hours before he was set to retire with a pension — after an inspector general report faulting him for a “lack of candor” regarding disclosures to the media.

McCabe sued over his firing in 2019, claiming his dismissal was “politically motivated and retaliatory” following his leadership in the Trump-Russia investigation, and won back his pension and other benefits in a 2021 settlement.

Some lawmakers who opposed advancing the FISA bill this week have demanded a warrant requirement for officials seeking to access data concerning U.S. citizens — ostensibly for law enforcement — that gets swept up in monitoring foreign persons.

FBI Director Christopher Wray is among those pushing to preserve FISA’s Section 702 authorities, telling Congress on Thursday they are “critical” to protecting Americans and claiming that adding a warrant requirement would be “dangerous.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) argued the FISA bill, as it stands, would not only reauthorize Section 702 for five years, but also implement reforms that would “actually kill the abuses” directed at Trump’s 2016 campaign.

After the vote on Wednesday, in which 19 Republicans joined with all voting Democrats to oppose consideration of the FISA bill, Johnson said lawmakers will “regroup” and insisted the United States “can’t allow a critical tool like this to just expire.”

“}]] 

The post Fired Top FBI Official Concedes ‘Many Mistakes’ In Trump FISA Scandal appeared first on Spin Politico.

Kate Middleton surpassed husband Prince William and is now the most popular royal in the United Kingdom following her unexpected cancer announcement on March 22.

A new British YouGov poll — taken between February and April — shows that at the start of February, the Prince of Wales led the rest of the royals as the most favored member of the family, with 77%, followed by the Princess of Wales with 74%.

However, those numbers switched by the start of April after Middleton’s prerecorded video message to the world announcing she’s battling cancer discovered after she underwent “major abdominal surgery” in January. Princess Kate now leads the pack with 76%, followed by her royal husband with 73%, the poll showed. Princess Anne gets the title of third most favored royal with 71%, beating out King Charles III, who scored 63%, the poll noted.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are mentioned much further down the poll as some of the least favored royals, with the Duke of Sussex getting 31% favorability, beating out his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, with only 26% of the vote. The two did manage to beat out scandal-ridden Prince Andrew, who only got a favorability of 6% from those polled in the nation.

It is unclear from the information provided how many people were polled for the survey.

Kate Middleton is now the UK’s most popular royal

Kate: 76% positive view (+6 since Jan)
Prince William: 73% (-1)
King Charles: 63% (=)
Prince Harry: 31% (+3)
Meghan: 26% (+3)
Prince Andrew: 6% (-1)https://t.co/jBYkmSliM7 pic.twitter.com/11ZaEsyRTL

— YouGov (@YouGov) April 9, 2024

In the heartfelt video Princess Kate posted in March, she said, “It has been an incredibly tough couple of months for our entire family, but I’ve had a fantastic medical team who have taken great care of me, for which I am so grateful.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“In January, I underwent major abdominal surgery in London, and at the time, it was thought that my condition was non-cancerous,” she added. “The surgery was successful. However, tests after the operation found cancer had been present.”

“My medical team therefore advised that I should undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy, and I am now in the early stages of that treatment,” Middleton continued. “This of course came as a huge shock, and William and I have been doing everything we can to process and manage this privately for the sake of our young family.”

Princess Kate said it has not only taken time for her to recover from major surgery so she can start the chemo, but it’s also taken them “time to explain everything” to their three children, “George, Charlotte, and Louis in a way that is appropriate for them, and to reassure them that I am going to be OK.”

The message came after weeks of speculation about Princess Kate’s health after being completely absent from public events following the surgery in January.

​

Kate Middleton surpassed husband Prince William and is now the most popular royal in the United Kingdom following her unexpected cancer announcement on March 22.

A new British YouGov poll — taken between February and April — shows that at the start of February, the Prince of Wales led the rest of the royals as the most favored member of the family, with 77%, followed by the Princess of Wales with 74%.

However, those numbers switched by the start of April after Middleton’s prerecorded video message to the world announcing she’s battling cancer discovered after she underwent “major abdominal surgery” in January. Princess Kate now leads the pack with 76%, followed by her royal husband with 73%, the poll showed. Princess Anne gets the title of third most favored royal with 71%, beating out King Charles III, who scored 63%, the poll noted.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are mentioned much further down the poll as some of the least favored royals, with the Duke of Sussex getting 31% favorability, beating out his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, with only 26% of the vote. The two did manage to beat out scandal-ridden Prince Andrew, who only got a favorability of 6% from those polled in the nation.

It is unclear from the information provided how many people were polled for the survey.

In the heartfelt video Princess Kate posted in March, she said, “It has been an incredibly tough couple of months for our entire family, but I’ve had a fantastic medical team who have taken great care of me, for which I am so grateful.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“In January, I underwent major abdominal surgery in London, and at the time, it was thought that my condition was non-cancerous,” she added. “The surgery was successful. However, tests after the operation found cancer had been present.”

“My medical team therefore advised that I should undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy, and I am now in the early stages of that treatment,” Middleton continued. “This of course came as a huge shock, and William and I have been doing everything we can to process and manage this privately for the sake of our young family.”

Princess Kate said it has not only taken time for her to recover from major surgery so she can start the chemo, but it’s also taken them “time to explain everything” to their three children, “George, Charlotte, and Louis in a way that is appropriate for them, and to reassure them that I am going to be OK.”

The message came after weeks of speculation about Princess Kate’s health after being completely absent from public events following the surgery in January.

​[[{“value”:”

Kate Middleton surpassed husband Prince William and is now the most popular royal in the United Kingdom following her unexpected cancer announcement on March 22.

A new British YouGov poll — taken between February and April — shows that at the start of February, the Prince of Wales led the rest of the royals as the most favored member of the family, with 77%, followed by the Princess of Wales with 74%.

However, those numbers switched by the start of April after Middleton’s prerecorded video message to the world announcing she’s battling cancer discovered after she underwent “major abdominal surgery” in January. Princess Kate now leads the pack with 76%, followed by her royal husband with 73%, the poll showed. Princess Anne gets the title of third most favored royal with 71%, beating out King Charles III, who scored 63%, the poll noted.

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are mentioned much further down the poll as some of the least favored royals, with the Duke of Sussex getting 31% favorability, beating out his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, with only 26% of the vote. The two did manage to beat out scandal-ridden Prince Andrew, who only got a favorability of 6% from those polled in the nation.

It is unclear from the information provided how many people were polled for the survey.

Kate Middleton is now the UK’s most popular royal

Kate: 76% positive view (+6 since Jan)
Prince William: 73% (-1)
King Charles: 63% (=)
Prince Harry: 31% (+3)
Meghan: 26% (+3)
Prince Andrew: 6% (-1)https://t.co/jBYkmSliM7 pic.twitter.com/11ZaEsyRTL

— YouGov (@YouGov) April 9, 2024

In the heartfelt video Princess Kate posted in March, she said, “It has been an incredibly tough couple of months for our entire family, but I’ve had a fantastic medical team who have taken great care of me, for which I am so grateful.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“In January, I underwent major abdominal surgery in London, and at the time, it was thought that my condition was non-cancerous,” she added. “The surgery was successful. However, tests after the operation found cancer had been present.”

“My medical team therefore advised that I should undergo a course of preventative chemotherapy, and I am now in the early stages of that treatment,” Middleton continued. “This of course came as a huge shock, and William and I have been doing everything we can to process and manage this privately for the sake of our young family.”

Princess Kate said it has not only taken time for her to recover from major surgery so she can start the chemo, but it’s also taken them “time to explain everything” to their three children, “George, Charlotte, and Louis in a way that is appropriate for them, and to reassure them that I am going to be OK.”

The message came after weeks of speculation about Princess Kate’s health after being completely absent from public events following the surgery in January.

“}]] 

The post Kate Middleton Surpasses Husband Prince William As Most Popular Royal appeared first on Spin Politico.

Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner stopped former Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) cold, chastising him during a Thursday morning appearance for referring to Hamas terrorists as simply “bad people.”

Faulkner voiced her surprise at the fact that Murphy — a combat paratrooper and the first Iraq War veteran to serve in Congress — would not use harsher terms to describe the terrorists who had slaughtered more than 1,200 Israelis on October 7 and routinely used Palestinian children as human shields.

“We absolutely need to understand that he is in a vise, in a sense, because we have to bring Hamas to justice,” Murphy said of President Joe Biden, acknowledging the fact that even members of his own party were pressuring Biden to push back harder on Israel.

“We have to make a priority of the 130 hostages, including Americans. We gotta get them there. And so, the debate really isn’t really about bringing them to justice — and by the way, Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. They are bad people,” he said.

“The problem is, is that on the other side, and this is why people are upset with the uncommitted vote, is the fact that there’s been 32,000 innocent folks that are not part of Hamas that have been killed,” Murphy continued, citing the death toll provided by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry.

Faulkner cut in then, rebuffing the former congressman for his use of the term “bad people.”

“You know what, describing Hamas — and you served in the military — so, it boggles my mind why you would describe them simply as ‘bad people.’ They put babies in ovens. They tortured women. And those women who were raped —” she said.

“I can’t say what I really want to say about them ’cause we’re on TV,” Murphy protested, interrupting.

“You can say whatever you want,” Harris replied.

“Well, I don’t want to curse,” from Murphy.

“Well, we can say the truth without cuss words,” Faulkner suggested, adding, “The women who were raped, who survived, were not even believed by the United Nations for months. This is more than just the vise on the other side or some bad people who’ve done some things. By the way, that 130 plus number, my heart is with you, my heart and prayers are with those families, but yesterday, Hamas said they probably couldn’t come up with 50 to meet the release agreement. I don’t know if that means the rest are dead, they can’t find them, they’ve sold them off to Islamist Jihad and these other groups. We are playing with the devil here. So that’s what’s on one side. … It seems like an easy thing to do as an ally. If [Biden] wants to struggle as a human being that sounds like personal time.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

WATCH:

​

Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner stopped former Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) cold, chastising him during a Thursday morning appearance for referring to Hamas terrorists as simply “bad people.”

Faulkner voiced her surprise at the fact that Murphy — a combat paratrooper and the first Iraq War veteran to serve in Congress — would not use harsher terms to describe the terrorists who had slaughtered more than 1,200 Israelis on October 7 and routinely used Palestinian children as human shields.

“We absolutely need to understand that he is in a vise, in a sense, because we have to bring Hamas to justice,” Murphy said of President Joe Biden, acknowledging the fact that even members of his own party were pressuring Biden to push back harder on Israel.

“We have to make a priority of the 130 hostages, including Americans. We gotta get them there. And so, the debate really isn’t really about bringing them to justice — and by the way, Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. They are bad people,” he said.

“The problem is, is that on the other side, and this is why people are upset with the uncommitted vote, is the fact that there’s been 32,000 innocent folks that are not part of Hamas that have been killed,” Murphy continued, citing the death toll provided by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry.

Faulkner cut in then, rebuffing the former congressman for his use of the term “bad people.”

“You know what, describing Hamas — and you served in the military — so, it boggles my mind why you would describe them simply as ‘bad people.’ They put babies in ovens. They tortured women. And those women who were raped —” she said.

“I can’t say what I really want to say about them ’cause we’re on TV,” Murphy protested, interrupting.

“You can say whatever you want,” Harris replied.

“Well, I don’t want to curse,” from Murphy.

“Well, we can say the truth without cuss words,” Faulkner suggested, adding, “The women who were raped, who survived, were not even believed by the United Nations for months. This is more than just the vise on the other side or some bad people who’ve done some things. By the way, that 130 plus number, my heart is with you, my heart and prayers are with those families, but yesterday, Hamas said they probably couldn’t come up with 50 to meet the release agreement. I don’t know if that means the rest are dead, they can’t find them, they’ve sold them off to Islamist Jihad and these other groups. We are playing with the devil here. So that’s what’s on one side. … It seems like an easy thing to do as an ally. If [Biden] wants to struggle as a human being that sounds like personal time.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

WATCH:

​[[{“value”:”

Fox News anchor Harris Faulkner stopped former Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) cold, chastising him during a Thursday morning appearance for referring to Hamas terrorists as simply “bad people.”

Faulkner voiced her surprise at the fact that Murphy — a combat paratrooper and the first Iraq War veteran to serve in Congress — would not use harsher terms to describe the terrorists who had slaughtered more than 1,200 Israelis on October 7 and routinely used Palestinian children as human shields.

“We absolutely need to understand that he is in a vise, in a sense, because we have to bring Hamas to justice,” Murphy said of President Joe Biden, acknowledging the fact that even members of his own party were pressuring Biden to push back harder on Israel.

“We have to make a priority of the 130 hostages, including Americans. We gotta get them there. And so, the debate really isn’t really about bringing them to justice — and by the way, Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. They are bad people,” he said.

“The problem is, is that on the other side, and this is why people are upset with the uncommitted vote, is the fact that there’s been 32,000 innocent folks that are not part of Hamas that have been killed,” Murphy continued, citing the death toll provided by the Hamas-controlled Gaza Health Ministry.

Faulkner cut in then, rebuffing the former congressman for his use of the term “bad people.”

“You know what, describing Hamas — and you served in the military — so, it boggles my mind why you would describe them simply as ‘bad people.’ They put babies in ovens. They tortured women. And those women who were raped —” she said.

“I can’t say what I really want to say about them ’cause we’re on TV,” Murphy protested, interrupting.

“You can say whatever you want,” Harris replied.

“Well, I don’t want to curse,” from Murphy.

“Well, we can say the truth without cuss words,” Faulkner suggested, adding, “The women who were raped, who survived, were not even believed by the United Nations for months. This is more than just the vise on the other side or some bad people who’ve done some things. By the way, that 130 plus number, my heart is with you, my heart and prayers are with those families, but yesterday, Hamas said they probably couldn’t come up with 50 to meet the release agreement. I don’t know if that means the rest are dead, they can’t find them, they’ve sold them off to Islamist Jihad and these other groups. We are playing with the devil here. So that’s what’s on one side. … It seems like an easy thing to do as an ally. If [Biden] wants to struggle as a human being that sounds like personal time.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

WATCH:

“}]] 

The post Fox News Anchor Isn’t Satisfied When Former Congressman Self-Censors, Calls Hamas ‘Bad People’ appeared first on Spin Politico.

After voting for President Joe Biden in 2020, one Michigan voter told MSNBC that he’s had it with Biden’s failure to address the real economic issues that impact the American people on a daily basis.

Identified only as “Omar,” the man was part of a focus group of “undecideds” brought in to discuss the 2024 election and issues that might sway him in one direction or another — and he appeared to agree with the others in the group when it came to their feelings on Biden and the economy.

At one point, he and the others were asked whether they believed they were personally better off under Biden’s economy or under former President Donald Trump’s economy, and every single one of them said they’d be better off with Trump.

WATCH:

Raise your hand if you think President Trump’s policies on the economy would be better for your family pic.twitter.com/5WqShG0mlZ

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) April 10, 2024

But then the group was presented with a follow-up question: “Is there anything Joe Biden could do or say between now and the time you vote that would make you feel differently about feeling that his policies would not be as good for your family on the economy, or are you pretty much decided that Trump’s policies would be better for the economy?”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

WATCH:

Voters sound off on Biden and his failed economy:

“He doesn’t even take accountability at all … he’s in denial that it’s happening!”

“He’s gaslighting literally everyone.” pic.twitter.com/1DGFQkGuf4

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 11, 2024

One of the women responded first, saying that she didn’t feel like Biden was even addressing the economy in any real way.

“I feel like he doesn’t even take accountability for what’s — at all, with what’s going on. And not even accountability, like he’s in denial that it’s happening!” she said.

“The point is Biden needs to hear the people,” Omar added. “Because when he’s talking about the economy doing stellar, he’s talking about the stock market, he’s not looking at homelessness or joblessness, he’s not … thinking about how much it costs to go to the grocery store. And he’s gaslighting literally everyone in the process.”

“And Omar, you voted for Joe Biden last time,” the moderator prompted for clarification.

“Yeah,” Omar confirmed that he had.

​

After voting for President Joe Biden in 2020, one Michigan voter told MSNBC that he’s had it with Biden’s failure to address the real economic issues that impact the American people on a daily basis.

Identified only as “Omar,” the man was part of a focus group of “undecideds” brought in to discuss the 2024 election and issues that might sway him in one direction or another — and he appeared to agree with the others in the group when it came to their feelings on Biden and the economy.

At one point, he and the others were asked whether they believed they were personally better off under Biden’s economy or under former President Donald Trump’s economy, and every single one of them said they’d be better off with Trump.

WATCH:

But then the group was presented with a follow-up question: “Is there anything Joe Biden could do or say between now and the time you vote that would make you feel differently about feeling that his policies would not be as good for your family on the economy, or are you pretty much decided that Trump’s policies would be better for the economy?”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

WATCH:

One of the women responded first, saying that she didn’t feel like Biden was even addressing the economy in any real way.

“I feel like he doesn’t even take accountability for what’s — at all, with what’s going on. And not even accountability, like he’s in denial that it’s happening!” she said.

“The point is Biden needs to hear the people,” Omar added. “Because when he’s talking about the economy doing stellar, he’s talking about the stock market, he’s not looking at homelessness or joblessness, he’s not … thinking about how much it costs to go to the grocery store. And he’s gaslighting literally everyone in the process.”

“And Omar, you voted for Joe Biden last time,” the moderator prompted for clarification.

“Yeah,” Omar confirmed that he had.

​[[{“value”:”

After voting for President Joe Biden in 2020, one Michigan voter told MSNBC that he’s had it with Biden’s failure to address the real economic issues that impact the American people on a daily basis.

Identified only as “Omar,” the man was part of a focus group of “undecideds” brought in to discuss the 2024 election and issues that might sway him in one direction or another — and he appeared to agree with the others in the group when it came to their feelings on Biden and the economy.

At one point, he and the others were asked whether they believed they were personally better off under Biden’s economy or under former President Donald Trump’s economy, and every single one of them said they’d be better off with Trump.

WATCH:

Raise your hand if you think President Trump’s policies on the economy would be better for your family pic.twitter.com/5WqShG0mlZ

— Trump War Room (@TrumpWarRoom) April 10, 2024

But then the group was presented with a follow-up question: “Is there anything Joe Biden could do or say between now and the time you vote that would make you feel differently about feeling that his policies would not be as good for your family on the economy, or are you pretty much decided that Trump’s policies would be better for the economy?”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

WATCH:

Voters sound off on Biden and his failed economy:

“He doesn’t even take accountability at all … he’s in denial that it’s happening!”

“He’s gaslighting literally everyone.” pic.twitter.com/1DGFQkGuf4

— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 11, 2024

One of the women responded first, saying that she didn’t feel like Biden was even addressing the economy in any real way.

“I feel like he doesn’t even take accountability for what’s — at all, with what’s going on. And not even accountability, like he’s in denial that it’s happening!” she said.

“The point is Biden needs to hear the people,” Omar added. “Because when he’s talking about the economy doing stellar, he’s talking about the stock market, he’s not looking at homelessness or joblessness, he’s not … thinking about how much it costs to go to the grocery store. And he’s gaslighting literally everyone in the process.”

“And Omar, you voted for Joe Biden last time,” the moderator prompted for clarification.

“Yeah,” Omar confirmed that he had.

“}]] 

The post ‘He’s Gaslighting Literally Everyone’: 2020 Biden Voter Has Had It With The President appeared first on Spin Politico.

Daily Wire host Matt Walsh addressed the recent abortion ruling in Arizona during a Wednesday interview with conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, and lamented that Republicans seem to be running away from pro-life victories after the monumental 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Walsh sat down with the Turning Point USA founder on “The Charlie Kirk Show” and was asked his thoughts on some conservative politicians not embracing the pro-life position, especially after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that an 1864 law could go into effect protecting unborn babies from nearly all abortions in the state.

“What we’re being told right now is that the way to win elections is to moderate your position on abortion, is to be at least a little bit pro-abortion,” Walsh said, but added that this strategy among Republicans was nothing new.

“Those of us who have been in the pro-life movement for a long time know that … this is not a new thing, it’s not a new insight,” Walsh continued. “This is what the Republican Party has been saying my entire life. They’ve been insisting that the only way to win elections is to basically forfeit the pro-life position to some extent.”

Walsh added that some Republicans are inconsistent with their arguments when they say abortion laws should be determined by the states, but then oppose laws, such as the one in Arizona that bans abortion.

“If your kind of way to navigate this is to say ‘well make it states’ rights,’ then what happens when a state does outlaw [abortion], if you turn around and oppose that too, well then it appears you’re just pro-abortion,” he said.

.@MattWalshBlog to @charliekirk11 on some Conservative politicians’ fake pro-life stance: “What we’re being told right now is that the way to win elections is to moderate your position on abortion, [and] to be at least a little bit pro-abortion.” pic.twitter.com/pEkrYUB8qR

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) April 10, 2024

After the Arizona Supreme Court decision, Republicans such as former President Donald Trump and Arizona GOP Senate candidate Kari Lake said they oppose the nearly total abortion ban. Trump, the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential race, told reporters on Wednesday that the 1864 Arizona law goes too far, adding, “That will be straightened out.”

“As you know it’s all about state’s rights. It’ll be straightened out. I’m sure that the governor and everybody else are going bring it back to within reason, and that’ll be taken care of, I think, rather quickly,” Trump said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

Lake, along with Rep. David Schweikert (R-AZ) who are both running in tight races, also said they oppose Tuesday’s abortion ruling.

Walsh said the Left is far better at capitalizing on political and cultural victories than the Right is.

“Rather than doing what the Left does, which is when they get a victory, they gloat about it, they celebrate, and then they immediately look for ‘what can we do next?’ … ‘what’s the next victory?’ They’re never satisfied, and instead, what we’ve done on the Right — in many corners anyway — is we’ve responded by [being] embarrassed by the victory. We don’t want to talk about it,” Walsh said.

“We seem to be disappointed that it happened because it’s politically inconvenient,” he continued. “And we’re now retreating, kind of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, which I think is one of the essential differences between the Right and the Left.”

Democrats, who are seeking to make abortion a main issue in the election, have already attempted to connect the Arizona law to Trump’s policies and fire up their base to show up and vote for the president in November. The Biden campaign said the 160-year-old Arizona abortion law “is now enforceable because Trump ended Roe.”

During Walsh’s interview with Kirk, the Daily Wire host, who is now a highly respected judge, also discussed his new comedy court series “JUDGED by Matt Walsh,” which premiered on Tuesday night.

​

Daily Wire host Matt Walsh addressed the recent abortion ruling in Arizona during a Wednesday interview with conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, and lamented that Republicans seem to be running away from pro-life victories after the monumental 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Walsh sat down with the Turning Point USA founder on “The Charlie Kirk Show” and was asked his thoughts on some conservative politicians not embracing the pro-life position, especially after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that an 1864 law could go into effect protecting unborn babies from nearly all abortions in the state.

“What we’re being told right now is that the way to win elections is to moderate your position on abortion, is to be at least a little bit pro-abortion,” Walsh said, but added that this strategy among Republicans was nothing new.

“Those of us who have been in the pro-life movement for a long time know that … this is not a new thing, it’s not a new insight,” Walsh continued. “This is what the Republican Party has been saying my entire life. They’ve been insisting that the only way to win elections is to basically forfeit the pro-life position to some extent.”

Walsh added that some Republicans are inconsistent with their arguments when they say abortion laws should be determined by the states, but then oppose laws, such as the one in Arizona that bans abortion.

“If your kind of way to navigate this is to say ‘well make it states’ rights,’ then what happens when a state does outlaw [abortion], if you turn around and oppose that too, well then it appears you’re just pro-abortion,” he said.

After the Arizona Supreme Court decision, Republicans such as former President Donald Trump and Arizona GOP Senate candidate Kari Lake said they oppose the nearly total abortion ban. Trump, the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential race, told reporters on Wednesday that the 1864 Arizona law goes too far, adding, “That will be straightened out.”

“As you know it’s all about state’s rights. It’ll be straightened out. I’m sure that the governor and everybody else are going bring it back to within reason, and that’ll be taken care of, I think, rather quickly,” Trump said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

Lake, along with Rep. David Schweikert (R-AZ) who are both running in tight races, also said they oppose Tuesday’s abortion ruling.

Walsh said the Left is far better at capitalizing on political and cultural victories than the Right is.

“Rather than doing what the Left does, which is when they get a victory, they gloat about it, they celebrate, and then they immediately look for ‘what can we do next?’ … ‘what’s the next victory?’ They’re never satisfied, and instead, what we’ve done on the Right — in many corners anyway — is we’ve responded by [being] embarrassed by the victory. We don’t want to talk about it,” Walsh said.

“We seem to be disappointed that it happened because it’s politically inconvenient,” he continued. “And we’re now retreating, kind of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, which I think is one of the essential differences between the Right and the Left.”

Democrats, who are seeking to make abortion a main issue in the election, have already attempted to connect the Arizona law to Trump’s policies and fire up their base to show up and vote for the president in November. The Biden campaign said the 160-year-old Arizona abortion law “is now enforceable because Trump ended Roe.”

During Walsh’s interview with Kirk, the Daily Wire host, who is now a highly respected judge, also discussed his new comedy court series “JUDGED by Matt Walsh,” which premiered on Tuesday night.

​[[{“value”:”

Daily Wire host Matt Walsh addressed the recent abortion ruling in Arizona during a Wednesday interview with conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, and lamented that Republicans seem to be running away from pro-life victories after the monumental 2022 Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.

Walsh sat down with the Turning Point USA founder on “The Charlie Kirk Show” and was asked his thoughts on some conservative politicians not embracing the pro-life position, especially after the Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that an 1864 law could go into effect protecting unborn babies from nearly all abortions in the state.

“What we’re being told right now is that the way to win elections is to moderate your position on abortion, is to be at least a little bit pro-abortion,” Walsh said, but added that this strategy among Republicans was nothing new.

“Those of us who have been in the pro-life movement for a long time know that … this is not a new thing, it’s not a new insight,” Walsh continued. “This is what the Republican Party has been saying my entire life. They’ve been insisting that the only way to win elections is to basically forfeit the pro-life position to some extent.”

Walsh added that some Republicans are inconsistent with their arguments when they say abortion laws should be determined by the states, but then oppose laws, such as the one in Arizona that bans abortion.

“If your kind of way to navigate this is to say ‘well make it states’ rights,’ then what happens when a state does outlaw [abortion], if you turn around and oppose that too, well then it appears you’re just pro-abortion,” he said.

.@MattWalshBlog to @charliekirk11 on some Conservative politicians’ fake pro-life stance: “What we’re being told right now is that the way to win elections is to moderate your position on abortion, [and] to be at least a little bit pro-abortion.” pic.twitter.com/pEkrYUB8qR

— Daily Wire (@realDailyWire) April 10, 2024

After the Arizona Supreme Court decision, Republicans such as former President Donald Trump and Arizona GOP Senate candidate Kari Lake said they oppose the nearly total abortion ban. Trump, the leading candidate in the 2024 presidential race, told reporters on Wednesday that the 1864 Arizona law goes too far, adding, “That will be straightened out.”

“As you know it’s all about state’s rights. It’ll be straightened out. I’m sure that the governor and everybody else are going bring it back to within reason, and that’ll be taken care of, I think, rather quickly,” Trump said.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

Lake, along with Rep. David Schweikert (R-AZ) who are both running in tight races, also said they oppose Tuesday’s abortion ruling.

Walsh said the Left is far better at capitalizing on political and cultural victories than the Right is.

“Rather than doing what the Left does, which is when they get a victory, they gloat about it, they celebrate, and then they immediately look for ‘what can we do next?’ … ‘what’s the next victory?’ They’re never satisfied, and instead, what we’ve done on the Right — in many corners anyway — is we’ve responded by [being] embarrassed by the victory. We don’t want to talk about it,” Walsh said.

“We seem to be disappointed that it happened because it’s politically inconvenient,” he continued. “And we’re now retreating, kind of snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, which I think is one of the essential differences between the Right and the Left.”

Democrats, who are seeking to make abortion a main issue in the election, have already attempted to connect the Arizona law to Trump’s policies and fire up their base to show up and vote for the president in November. The Biden campaign said the 160-year-old Arizona abortion law “is now enforceable because Trump ended Roe.”

During Walsh’s interview with Kirk, the Daily Wire host, who is now a highly respected judge, also discussed his new comedy court series “JUDGED by Matt Walsh,” which premiered on Tuesday night.

“}]] 

The post Matt Walsh Decries Republicans ‘Retreating’ From Major Pro-Life Victories Following Overturning Of Roe appeared first on Spin Politico.

Legendary Hollywood star Sir Anthony Hopkins talked about landing his latest role in the Biblical thriller “Mary” — and opened up about the kinds of roles he’s been interested in as his career has progressed.

Filming for the coming-of-age film has wrapped in Morocco, with the 86-year-old actor playing the power-driven royal alongside new Israeli actress Noa Cohen as Mary, Deadline magazine reported.

“At this time of my life, I’m drawn to the challenge of complex scripts,” Hopkins told the outlet. “As well, the level of the detail given to this production with extraordinary sets, props and costumes — makes me proud to be a part of this.”

Described as a biblical thriller, the movie takes on Mary’s story following the miraculous conception of her child and her being forced into hiding thanks to King Herod, the outlet noted.

“King Herod’s relentless drive to maintain power at any cost ignites the murderous pursuit of the newborn child that he believes is a threat to his reign on the throne,” a description from the outlet read. “The film sees the young Mary and Joseph on the run and having to hide their baby, Jesus, at all costs.”

EXCLUSIVE: Filming has recently wrapped in Morocco on under-the-radar biblical thriller ‘Mary,’ starring Oscar winner Anthony Hopkins as King Herod and emerging Israeli actress Noa Cohen as Mary https://t.co/OAxJEDFlN2

— Deadline Hollywood (@DEADLINE) April 10, 2024

“Mary” is produced by Mary Aloe, founder of Aloe Entertainment, and directed by DJ Caruso. The original screenplay was written by Timothy Michael Hayes after consulting with various religious leaders like bishops, priests, baptist pastors, and rabbis, along with biblical scholars and theologians, the outlet noted.

Aloe said, “Hopkins was primed to play King Herod the Great. He embodied this historical figure of a king who was steeped in mental illness and greed with such great ferocity.”

Caruso shared his vision for the film and said, “I want to give the world a portrayal of the real human Mary. Her story has a lesser-known beginning; it is profoundly worthy of being told.”

“Portraying her from birth through childhood and presenting her as a human being with apprehensions and fears will be a celebration of everything inspiring and gut-wrenching about her journey,” he added. 

Pastor Joel Osteen — who’s also involved in promoting and marketing the film — said, “What drew me to this project was how the script represents a real breakthrough in the telling of Mary’s story. It draws the audience into her incredible journey in becoming one of the most influential women in all of history.”

​

Legendary Hollywood star Sir Anthony Hopkins talked about landing his latest role in the Biblical thriller “Mary” — and opened up about the kinds of roles he’s been interested in as his career has progressed.

Filming for the coming-of-age film has wrapped in Morocco, with the 86-year-old actor playing the power-driven royal alongside new Israeli actress Noa Cohen as Mary, Deadline magazine reported.

“At this time of my life, I’m drawn to the challenge of complex scripts,” Hopkins told the outlet. “As well, the level of the detail given to this production with extraordinary sets, props and costumes — makes me proud to be a part of this.”

Described as a biblical thriller, the movie takes on Mary’s story following the miraculous conception of her child and her being forced into hiding thanks to King Herod, the outlet noted.

“King Herod’s relentless drive to maintain power at any cost ignites the murderous pursuit of the newborn child that he believes is a threat to his reign on the throne,” a description from the outlet read. “The film sees the young Mary and Joseph on the run and having to hide their baby, Jesus, at all costs.”

“Mary” is produced by Mary Aloe, founder of Aloe Entertainment, and directed by DJ Caruso. The original screenplay was written by Timothy Michael Hayes after consulting with various religious leaders like bishops, priests, baptist pastors, and rabbis, along with biblical scholars and theologians, the outlet noted.

Aloe said, “Hopkins was primed to play King Herod the Great. He embodied this historical figure of a king who was steeped in mental illness and greed with such great ferocity.”

Caruso shared his vision for the film and said, “I want to give the world a portrayal of the real human Mary. Her story has a lesser-known beginning; it is profoundly worthy of being told.”

“Portraying her from birth through childhood and presenting her as a human being with apprehensions and fears will be a celebration of everything inspiring and gut-wrenching about her journey,” he added. 

Pastor Joel Osteen — who’s also involved in promoting and marketing the film — said, “What drew me to this project was how the script represents a real breakthrough in the telling of Mary’s story. It draws the audience into her incredible journey in becoming one of the most influential women in all of history.”

​[[{“value”:”

Legendary Hollywood star Sir Anthony Hopkins talked about landing his latest role in the Biblical thriller “Mary” — and opened up about the kinds of roles he’s been interested in as his career has progressed.

Filming for the coming-of-age film has wrapped in Morocco, with the 86-year-old actor playing the power-driven royal alongside new Israeli actress Noa Cohen as Mary, Deadline magazine reported.

“At this time of my life, I’m drawn to the challenge of complex scripts,” Hopkins told the outlet. “As well, the level of the detail given to this production with extraordinary sets, props and costumes — makes me proud to be a part of this.”

Described as a biblical thriller, the movie takes on Mary’s story following the miraculous conception of her child and her being forced into hiding thanks to King Herod, the outlet noted.

“King Herod’s relentless drive to maintain power at any cost ignites the murderous pursuit of the newborn child that he believes is a threat to his reign on the throne,” a description from the outlet read. “The film sees the young Mary and Joseph on the run and having to hide their baby, Jesus, at all costs.”

EXCLUSIVE: Filming has recently wrapped in Morocco on under-the-radar biblical thriller ‘Mary,’ starring Oscar winner Anthony Hopkins as King Herod and emerging Israeli actress Noa Cohen as Mary https://t.co/OAxJEDFlN2

— Deadline Hollywood (@DEADLINE) April 10, 2024

“Mary” is produced by Mary Aloe, founder of Aloe Entertainment, and directed by DJ Caruso. The original screenplay was written by Timothy Michael Hayes after consulting with various religious leaders like bishops, priests, baptist pastors, and rabbis, along with biblical scholars and theologians, the outlet noted.

Aloe said, “Hopkins was primed to play King Herod the Great. He embodied this historical figure of a king who was steeped in mental illness and greed with such great ferocity.”

Caruso shared his vision for the film and said, “I want to give the world a portrayal of the real human Mary. Her story has a lesser-known beginning; it is profoundly worthy of being told.”

“Portraying her from birth through childhood and presenting her as a human being with apprehensions and fears will be a celebration of everything inspiring and gut-wrenching about her journey,” he added. 

Pastor Joel Osteen — who’s also involved in promoting and marketing the film — said, “What drew me to this project was how the script represents a real breakthrough in the telling of Mary’s story. It draws the audience into her incredible journey in becoming one of the most influential women in all of history.”

“}]] 

The post Anthony Hopkins Addresses New Role: King Herod In Biblical Thriller ‘Mary’ appeared first on Spin Politico.

Last year, a man in his mid-20’s named Dexter Reed was charged with three counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked “Firearms Owners Identification Card,” which is required in the state of Illinois before you can possess a weapon or ammunition. Because no one really spends time in jail in Illinois anymore, Reed was free on pretrial release for these felony charges as recently as this past March.

It goes without saying that at that point, any functioning member of society who somehow found himself charged with these crimes would try to lay low for a bit. Maybe they’d keep their illegal guns at home, for example. But Dexter Reed did not choose that approach because he’s not a functioning member of society. Instead, in March, Reed went for a drive in an SUV wearing a ski mask and carrying a firearm. 

That’s when police say they noticed that Reed was breaking yet another law: he wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. Instead of cooperating with the traffic stop, this is what happened. I’m going to show two angles of this incident from police body cams. The second body cam is from an officer who was shot as this unfolded. Watch:

It’s clear from this footage that Dexter Reed is wearing a ski mask and he’s not cooperating with the officers. They tell him to unlock the door and stop rolling up the windows, and he refuses for quite some time. Then the officers see something that clearly puts them in fear of their life. They back up, and shots begin ringing out. One officer is hit in the wrist, and he survives.

According to the Chicago Sun Times: “Alderman Brian Hopkins, chairman of the City Council’s Public Safety Committee, said he’s been told 26-year-old Reed fired 11 shots through his car window in what Hopkins called ‘an attempt to kill police officers.’ An empty gun was recovered at the scene, Hopkins said. “He fired 11 rounds at these police officers before he was eventually killed.”

As of now, police are still investigating this shooting. But Chicago’s Civilian Office of Police Accountability has determined that the evidence “appears to confirm” that Reed fired the first shot. And the video by itself shows that pretty clearly.

WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show

One social media user on Twitter, the account “Expose Them,” synced up footage from two of the body cams that Chicago police have released. The top bodycam is the one I just showed of the officer who got hit. The other bodycam is from a third officer on the scene. You can see that the first officer gets hit before the other officers fire:

The footage is pretty clear evidence that the officers defended themselves. They should end the discussion entirely. But that hasn’t happened, because even before these body cams were released, professional agitators engaged in a concerted effort to turn Dexter Reed into a martyr.

A former Chicago mayoral candidate and BLM activist named Ja’Mal Green began posting on social media this weekend that the footage would show an “execution.” He also “warned” about possible riots, which of course is exactly what Ja’Mal Green wants to happen.

And Green’s strategy appears to be working, at least so far.

This week crowds turned up outside a police station to heckle officers and make some of the most strained arguments imaginable. Watch:

So they’re saying the cops couldn’t possibly have known whether he was breaking the seat belt law, because he was driving with heavily tinted windows, which is also against the law.

Apparently in BLM circles this is seen as a sort of checkmate, even though they’ve just provided an additional reason why police would have wanted to pull this guy over.

And then they argue that there’s no need for “armed officers” to enforce seat belt laws. Well, apparently there is, especially in a city like Chicago — because you never know when someone who’s not wearing a seatbelt might be out of jail on a felony gun charge, still packing heat and wearing a ski mask and ready to shoot at you for no reason.

All of that is irrelevant anyway. Even if they had no reason to pull him over — which they did — it still obviously doesn’t justify him shooting at the cops. You don’t get to shoot at the cops if you disagree with their reason for stopping you. I’ve been pulled over for seatbelt violations before. I found it annoying. I never considered murder as a response.

But the push to portray Dexter Reed as a victim continues anyway, because none of this is really about the facts. Alleged academics are getting involved, too. An English professor at Amherst named “Frank Leon Roberts” wrote on social media:

His name was Dexter Reed. Murdered in broad daylight by the Chicago Police Department. 96 shots in 41 seconds. 26 years old. His crime: not having his seatbelt on. This is America. Defund and abolish the police.

A few hours after the professor wrote that tweet, he deleted it and erased his entire Twitter account, maybe because it was a little too ridiculous — even by the standards of Amherst. But it wasn’t too absurd for the corporate press. They’ve also done everything they can to portray the police as the aggressors here.

Here’s how the Washington Post covered Dexter Reed’s traffic stop, for example. The headline reads: “Police fire 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing Black man during traffic stop.”

So there’s nothing in there about what Dexter Reed did during the traffic stop. There’s no mention of the fact he opened fire on police officers. In fact, if you read the story, you won’t find any mention of Dexter Reed shooting his handgun until the eighth paragraph of the story. That’s not an exaggeration. They just ignore it until eight paragraphs in.

Instead, here’s what the Washington Post talks about first. This is from the beginning of their article. It’s as emotional and over-the-top as they possibly could have done it:

Dexter Reed’s mother remembers the last time she saw her son alive. …. ‘He was just riding around in his car,’ Dexter’s mother, Nicole Banks, [said] on Tuesday, as she broke down in tears. ‘They killed him.’

This is the footage they’re referencing:

So Reed’s mother is out at press conferences crying and fainting on camera. I’m sure she is legitimately distraught given that her child was killed. But as always, there is no self-analysis, no moment of honest reflection where she wonders how she raised a child who would throw his life away for no reason during a traffic stop. Instead she blames the cops — and the lawsuit, I’m sure, will be close behind. And the Washington Post decides to lead with this, instead of an accurate description of what happened during the traffic stop.

It’s hard to think of a more deliberately dishonest way to frame the actions of an attempted cop-killer. And just for good measure, the Post puts a giant photo of Dexter Reed at some graduation ceremony from 5five years ago at the top of the article. They leave off his mug shot from his felony firearms arrest. This is the way it always goes with BLM martyrs. You never see graduation photos of anyone who makes the news for any reason — unless it’s a black guy killed by the cops.

On Twitter, a writer named Daniel Friedman pointed out the history of this tactic. It began after Michael Brown was shot ten years ago after fighting with a cop and trying to take his gun. Media outlets went on Brown’s Facebook, and then they used unflattering photos of Brown flashing gang signs in their coverage.

As Friedman writes, “Black Twitter reacted angrily. They said that the media was using images of Brown that stereotyped him. There was a trending hashtag “#if they gunned me down” of college students or professionals posting pictures of themselves looking like thugs in solidarity with Brown.”

So the media relented and swapped out the thug photos for graduation photos. And they’ve been doing that ever since.

In this case, the Washington Post wasn’t alone in whitewashing Reed’s actions. CNN ran a similar headline that made no mention of Dexter Reed shooting at officers: “96 shots fired in a fatal traffic stop. Here’s what the bodycam footage shows.” The AP reported, “Deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises serious questions about use of force.”

It’s almost comical when you picture the editors carefully trying to construct these headlines so that they don’t mention the elephant in the room. It’s like imagining someone trying to describe the maiden voyage of the Titanic without saying anything about the whole iceberg thing.

But I’d be remiss if I mocked the media’s ridiculous coverage of this episode without mentioning the Daily Mail. They chose to portray Dexter Reed as an “aspiring broadcaster.” So he’s not an attempted cop killer — he’s the next Tom Brokaw apparently:

On Tuesday, Chicago Police released footage of the March 21 encounter which showed them firing 96 shots at Reed, even as he lay motionless on the ground outside his vehicle. The aspiring broadcaster’s death has reignited conversations around excessive police force against black people, though officers maintain Reed opened fire first.

At least they get around to suggesting that the officers were defending themselves. So there’s that. It’s easy to laugh at how absurd this is, but there’s a point to it. BLM and their allies in the media are desperate to find a new George Floyd before the election. They know Democrats stand a very real chance of losing power in November. So they’re using the same tactics they did four years ago.

George Floyd, we were told, wasn’t a home invader, thief and drug addict. They told us he was a “Gentle giant” trying to “Get his life back on track.” Now we’re expected to believe that Dexter Reed is also some misunderstood pillar of the local community, instead of the degenerate he is. The plan is to cause riots, terrify everyone into voting the way they want, and force a “national reckoning on race” to promote more of their mediocre allies into positions of power. And they plan to accomplish all of that by lying about a dead thug.

This is a strategy we’re seeing more and more often as the election approaches. Last October, for example, the media tried to incite riots over the shooting death of Leonard Cure — a man who tried to kill a police officer on camera during a traffic stop. There’s no dispute about this. It’s on tape. Watch:

After seeing that footage, here was the Washington Post headline: “Deputy fatally shoots man who served 16 years for wrongful conviction.” The article begins: “Leonard Cure, who was exonerated in 2020, was killed by a Georgia sheriff’s deputy during a traffic stop Monday … The deputy used a Taser and a baton before shooting Cure.”

The Post didn’t get around to mentioning that Cure tried to murder the deputy until 14 paragraphs into the story. And even then, they describe it as carefully as they can. They say Cure was “forcefully grappling with the deputy and pushing the deputy’s head back with his hand.” That’s the Post’s way of saying that he was trying to choke the officer to death. And of course, Ben Crump came out and declared that Cure had been shot simply for being black.

That effort didn’t catch on in quite the way the media and BLM activists had hoped. So now they’re trying again. And they will continue to try until one of two things happen. Either they get the riots they want and terrorize millions of people into voting for Democrats out of fear — or, for once, normal, sane people stand up and say what’s obvious. And that’s the fact that Dexter Reed and Leonard Cure and all of these BLM “heroes” are the dregs of society. They are not role models and they are not victims. They are, in fact, the cause of many serious problems that cities like Chicago are experiencing right now. That’s the only message that can put an end to these riots before they start, and avert a repeat of the pillaging we saw in 2020. It happens to be a message that most Americans believe, even if they’re afraid to say it. But as unpleasant as it may be, it’s time we started saying it.

​

Last year, a man in his mid-20’s named Dexter Reed was charged with three counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked “Firearms Owners Identification Card,” which is required in the state of Illinois before you can possess a weapon or ammunition. Because no one really spends time in jail in Illinois anymore, Reed was free on pretrial release for these felony charges as recently as this past March.

It goes without saying that at that point, any functioning member of society who somehow found himself charged with these crimes would try to lay low for a bit. Maybe they’d keep their illegal guns at home, for example. But Dexter Reed did not choose that approach because he’s not a functioning member of society. Instead, in March, Reed went for a drive in an SUV wearing a ski mask and carrying a firearm. 

That’s when police say they noticed that Reed was breaking yet another law: he wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. Instead of cooperating with the traffic stop, this is what happened. I’m going to show two angles of this incident from police body cams. The second body cam is from an officer who was shot as this unfolded. Watch:

It’s clear from this footage that Dexter Reed is wearing a ski mask and he’s not cooperating with the officers. They tell him to unlock the door and stop rolling up the windows, and he refuses for quite some time. Then the officers see something that clearly puts them in fear of their life. They back up, and shots begin ringing out. One officer is hit in the wrist, and he survives.

According to the Chicago Sun Times: “Alderman Brian Hopkins, chairman of the City Council’s Public Safety Committee, said he’s been told 26-year-old Reed fired 11 shots through his car window in what Hopkins called ‘an attempt to kill police officers.’ An empty gun was recovered at the scene, Hopkins said. “He fired 11 rounds at these police officers before he was eventually killed.”

As of now, police are still investigating this shooting. But Chicago’s Civilian Office of Police Accountability has determined that the evidence “appears to confirm” that Reed fired the first shot. And the video by itself shows that pretty clearly.

WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show

One social media user on Twitter, the account “Expose Them,” synced up footage from two of the body cams that Chicago police have released. The top bodycam is the one I just showed of the officer who got hit. The other bodycam is from a third officer on the scene. You can see that the first officer gets hit before the other officers fire:

The footage is pretty clear evidence that the officers defended themselves. They should end the discussion entirely. But that hasn’t happened, because even before these body cams were released, professional agitators engaged in a concerted effort to turn Dexter Reed into a martyr.

A former Chicago mayoral candidate and BLM activist named Ja’Mal Green began posting on social media this weekend that the footage would show an “execution.” He also “warned” about possible riots, which of course is exactly what Ja’Mal Green wants to happen.

And Green’s strategy appears to be working, at least so far.

This week crowds turned up outside a police station to heckle officers and make some of the most strained arguments imaginable. Watch:

So they’re saying the cops couldn’t possibly have known whether he was breaking the seat belt law, because he was driving with heavily tinted windows, which is also against the law.

Apparently in BLM circles this is seen as a sort of checkmate, even though they’ve just provided an additional reason why police would have wanted to pull this guy over.

And then they argue that there’s no need for “armed officers” to enforce seat belt laws. Well, apparently there is, especially in a city like Chicago — because you never know when someone who’s not wearing a seatbelt might be out of jail on a felony gun charge, still packing heat and wearing a ski mask and ready to shoot at you for no reason.

All of that is irrelevant anyway. Even if they had no reason to pull him over — which they did — it still obviously doesn’t justify him shooting at the cops. You don’t get to shoot at the cops if you disagree with their reason for stopping you. I’ve been pulled over for seatbelt violations before. I found it annoying. I never considered murder as a response.

But the push to portray Dexter Reed as a victim continues anyway, because none of this is really about the facts. Alleged academics are getting involved, too. An English professor at Amherst named “Frank Leon Roberts” wrote on social media:

His name was Dexter Reed. Murdered in broad daylight by the Chicago Police Department. 96 shots in 41 seconds. 26 years old. His crime: not having his seatbelt on. This is America. Defund and abolish the police.

A few hours after the professor wrote that tweet, he deleted it and erased his entire Twitter account, maybe because it was a little too ridiculous — even by the standards of Amherst. But it wasn’t too absurd for the corporate press. They’ve also done everything they can to portray the police as the aggressors here.

Here’s how the Washington Post covered Dexter Reed’s traffic stop, for example. The headline reads: “Police fire 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing Black man during traffic stop.”

So there’s nothing in there about what Dexter Reed did during the traffic stop. There’s no mention of the fact he opened fire on police officers. In fact, if you read the story, you won’t find any mention of Dexter Reed shooting his handgun until the eighth paragraph of the story. That’s not an exaggeration. They just ignore it until eight paragraphs in.

Instead, here’s what the Washington Post talks about first. This is from the beginning of their article. It’s as emotional and over-the-top as they possibly could have done it:

Dexter Reed’s mother remembers the last time she saw her son alive. …. ‘He was just riding around in his car,’ Dexter’s mother, Nicole Banks, [said] on Tuesday, as she broke down in tears. ‘They killed him.’

This is the footage they’re referencing:

So Reed’s mother is out at press conferences crying and fainting on camera. I’m sure she is legitimately distraught given that her child was killed. But as always, there is no self-analysis, no moment of honest reflection where she wonders how she raised a child who would throw his life away for no reason during a traffic stop. Instead she blames the cops — and the lawsuit, I’m sure, will be close behind. And the Washington Post decides to lead with this, instead of an accurate description of what happened during the traffic stop.

It’s hard to think of a more deliberately dishonest way to frame the actions of an attempted cop-killer. And just for good measure, the Post puts a giant photo of Dexter Reed at some graduation ceremony from 5five years ago at the top of the article. They leave off his mug shot from his felony firearms arrest. This is the way it always goes with BLM martyrs. You never see graduation photos of anyone who makes the news for any reason — unless it’s a black guy killed by the cops.

On Twitter, a writer named Daniel Friedman pointed out the history of this tactic. It began after Michael Brown was shot ten years ago after fighting with a cop and trying to take his gun. Media outlets went on Brown’s Facebook, and then they used unflattering photos of Brown flashing gang signs in their coverage.

As Friedman writes, “Black Twitter reacted angrily. They said that the media was using images of Brown that stereotyped him. There was a trending hashtag “#if they gunned me down” of college students or professionals posting pictures of themselves looking like thugs in solidarity with Brown.”

So the media relented and swapped out the thug photos for graduation photos. And they’ve been doing that ever since.

In this case, the Washington Post wasn’t alone in whitewashing Reed’s actions. CNN ran a similar headline that made no mention of Dexter Reed shooting at officers: “96 shots fired in a fatal traffic stop. Here’s what the bodycam footage shows.” The AP reported, “Deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises serious questions about use of force.”

It’s almost comical when you picture the editors carefully trying to construct these headlines so that they don’t mention the elephant in the room. It’s like imagining someone trying to describe the maiden voyage of the Titanic without saying anything about the whole iceberg thing.

But I’d be remiss if I mocked the media’s ridiculous coverage of this episode without mentioning the Daily Mail. They chose to portray Dexter Reed as an “aspiring broadcaster.” So he’s not an attempted cop killer — he’s the next Tom Brokaw apparently:

On Tuesday, Chicago Police released footage of the March 21 encounter which showed them firing 96 shots at Reed, even as he lay motionless on the ground outside his vehicle. The aspiring broadcaster’s death has reignited conversations around excessive police force against black people, though officers maintain Reed opened fire first.

At least they get around to suggesting that the officers were defending themselves. So there’s that. It’s easy to laugh at how absurd this is, but there’s a point to it. BLM and their allies in the media are desperate to find a new George Floyd before the election. They know Democrats stand a very real chance of losing power in November. So they’re using the same tactics they did four years ago.

George Floyd, we were told, wasn’t a home invader, thief and drug addict. They told us he was a “Gentle giant” trying to “Get his life back on track.” Now we’re expected to believe that Dexter Reed is also some misunderstood pillar of the local community, instead of the degenerate he is. The plan is to cause riots, terrify everyone into voting the way they want, and force a “national reckoning on race” to promote more of their mediocre allies into positions of power. And they plan to accomplish all of that by lying about a dead thug.

This is a strategy we’re seeing more and more often as the election approaches. Last October, for example, the media tried to incite riots over the shooting death of Leonard Cure — a man who tried to kill a police officer on camera during a traffic stop. There’s no dispute about this. It’s on tape. Watch:

After seeing that footage, here was the Washington Post headline: “Deputy fatally shoots man who served 16 years for wrongful conviction.” The article begins: “Leonard Cure, who was exonerated in 2020, was killed by a Georgia sheriff’s deputy during a traffic stop Monday … The deputy used a Taser and a baton before shooting Cure.”

The Post didn’t get around to mentioning that Cure tried to murder the deputy until 14 paragraphs into the story. And even then, they describe it as carefully as they can. They say Cure was “forcefully grappling with the deputy and pushing the deputy’s head back with his hand.” That’s the Post’s way of saying that he was trying to choke the officer to death. And of course, Ben Crump came out and declared that Cure had been shot simply for being black.

That effort didn’t catch on in quite the way the media and BLM activists had hoped. So now they’re trying again. And they will continue to try until one of two things happen. Either they get the riots they want and terrorize millions of people into voting for Democrats out of fear — or, for once, normal, sane people stand up and say what’s obvious. And that’s the fact that Dexter Reed and Leonard Cure and all of these BLM “heroes” are the dregs of society. They are not role models and they are not victims. They are, in fact, the cause of many serious problems that cities like Chicago are experiencing right now. That’s the only message that can put an end to these riots before they start, and avert a repeat of the pillaging we saw in 2020. It happens to be a message that most Americans believe, even if they’re afraid to say it. But as unpleasant as it may be, it’s time we started saying it.

​[[{“value”:”

Last year, a man in his mid-20’s named Dexter Reed was charged with three counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked “Firearms Owners Identification Card,” which is required in the state of Illinois before you can possess a weapon or ammunition. Because no one really spends time in jail in Illinois anymore, Reed was free on pretrial release for these felony charges as recently as this past March.

It goes without saying that at that point, any functioning member of society who somehow found himself charged with these crimes would try to lay low for a bit. Maybe they’d keep their illegal guns at home, for example. But Dexter Reed did not choose that approach because he’s not a functioning member of society. Instead, in March, Reed went for a drive in an SUV wearing a ski mask and carrying a firearm. 

That’s when police say they noticed that Reed was breaking yet another law: he wasn’t wearing a seatbelt. Instead of cooperating with the traffic stop, this is what happened. I’m going to show two angles of this incident from police body cams. The second body cam is from an officer who was shot as this unfolded. Watch:

It’s clear from this footage that Dexter Reed is wearing a ski mask and he’s not cooperating with the officers. They tell him to unlock the door and stop rolling up the windows, and he refuses for quite some time. Then the officers see something that clearly puts them in fear of their life. They back up, and shots begin ringing out. One officer is hit in the wrist, and he survives.

According to the Chicago Sun Times: “Alderman Brian Hopkins, chairman of the City Council’s Public Safety Committee, said he’s been told 26-year-old Reed fired 11 shots through his car window in what Hopkins called ‘an attempt to kill police officers.’ An empty gun was recovered at the scene, Hopkins said. “He fired 11 rounds at these police officers before he was eventually killed.”

As of now, police are still investigating this shooting. But Chicago’s Civilian Office of Police Accountability has determined that the evidence “appears to confirm” that Reed fired the first shot. And the video by itself shows that pretty clearly.

WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show

One social media user on Twitter, the account “Expose Them,” synced up footage from two of the body cams that Chicago police have released. The top bodycam is the one I just showed of the officer who got hit. The other bodycam is from a third officer on the scene. You can see that the first officer gets hit before the other officers fire:

The footage is pretty clear evidence that the officers defended themselves. They should end the discussion entirely. But that hasn’t happened, because even before these body cams were released, professional agitators engaged in a concerted effort to turn Dexter Reed into a martyr.

A former Chicago mayoral candidate and BLM activist named Ja’Mal Green began posting on social media this weekend that the footage would show an “execution.” He also “warned” about possible riots, which of course is exactly what Ja’Mal Green wants to happen.

And Green’s strategy appears to be working, at least so far.

This week crowds turned up outside a police station to heckle officers and make some of the most strained arguments imaginable. Watch:

So they’re saying the cops couldn’t possibly have known whether he was breaking the seat belt law, because he was driving with heavily tinted windows, which is also against the law.

Apparently in BLM circles this is seen as a sort of checkmate, even though they’ve just provided an additional reason why police would have wanted to pull this guy over.

And then they argue that there’s no need for “armed officers” to enforce seat belt laws. Well, apparently there is, especially in a city like Chicago — because you never know when someone who’s not wearing a seatbelt might be out of jail on a felony gun charge, still packing heat and wearing a ski mask and ready to shoot at you for no reason.

All of that is irrelevant anyway. Even if they had no reason to pull him over — which they did — it still obviously doesn’t justify him shooting at the cops. You don’t get to shoot at the cops if you disagree with their reason for stopping you. I’ve been pulled over for seatbelt violations before. I found it annoying. I never considered murder as a response.

But the push to portray Dexter Reed as a victim continues anyway, because none of this is really about the facts. Alleged academics are getting involved, too. An English professor at Amherst named “Frank Leon Roberts” wrote on social media:

His name was Dexter Reed. Murdered in broad daylight by the Chicago Police Department. 96 shots in 41 seconds. 26 years old. His crime: not having his seatbelt on. This is America. Defund and abolish the police.

A few hours after the professor wrote that tweet, he deleted it and erased his entire Twitter account, maybe because it was a little too ridiculous — even by the standards of Amherst. But it wasn’t too absurd for the corporate press. They’ve also done everything they can to portray the police as the aggressors here.

Here’s how the Washington Post covered Dexter Reed’s traffic stop, for example. The headline reads: “Police fire 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing Black man during traffic stop.”

So there’s nothing in there about what Dexter Reed did during the traffic stop. There’s no mention of the fact he opened fire on police officers. In fact, if you read the story, you won’t find any mention of Dexter Reed shooting his handgun until the eighth paragraph of the story. That’s not an exaggeration. They just ignore it until eight paragraphs in.

Instead, here’s what the Washington Post talks about first. This is from the beginning of their article. It’s as emotional and over-the-top as they possibly could have done it:

Dexter Reed’s mother remembers the last time she saw her son alive. …. ‘He was just riding around in his car,’ Dexter’s mother, Nicole Banks, [said] on Tuesday, as she broke down in tears. ‘They killed him.’

This is the footage they’re referencing:

So Reed’s mother is out at press conferences crying and fainting on camera. I’m sure she is legitimately distraught given that her child was killed. But as always, there is no self-analysis, no moment of honest reflection where she wonders how she raised a child who would throw his life away for no reason during a traffic stop. Instead she blames the cops — and the lawsuit, I’m sure, will be close behind. And the Washington Post decides to lead with this, instead of an accurate description of what happened during the traffic stop.

It’s hard to think of a more deliberately dishonest way to frame the actions of an attempted cop-killer. And just for good measure, the Post puts a giant photo of Dexter Reed at some graduation ceremony from 5five years ago at the top of the article. They leave off his mug shot from his felony firearms arrest. This is the way it always goes with BLM martyrs. You never see graduation photos of anyone who makes the news for any reason — unless it’s a black guy killed by the cops.

On Twitter, a writer named Daniel Friedman pointed out the history of this tactic. It began after Michael Brown was shot ten years ago after fighting with a cop and trying to take his gun. Media outlets went on Brown’s Facebook, and then they used unflattering photos of Brown flashing gang signs in their coverage.

As Friedman writes, “Black Twitter reacted angrily. They said that the media was using images of Brown that stereotyped him. There was a trending hashtag “#if they gunned me down” of college students or professionals posting pictures of themselves looking like thugs in solidarity with Brown.”

So the media relented and swapped out the thug photos for graduation photos. And they’ve been doing that ever since.

In this case, the Washington Post wasn’t alone in whitewashing Reed’s actions. CNN ran a similar headline that made no mention of Dexter Reed shooting at officers: “96 shots fired in a fatal traffic stop. Here’s what the bodycam footage shows.” The AP reported, “Deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises serious questions about use of force.”

It’s almost comical when you picture the editors carefully trying to construct these headlines so that they don’t mention the elephant in the room. It’s like imagining someone trying to describe the maiden voyage of the Titanic without saying anything about the whole iceberg thing.

But I’d be remiss if I mocked the media’s ridiculous coverage of this episode without mentioning the Daily Mail. They chose to portray Dexter Reed as an “aspiring broadcaster.” So he’s not an attempted cop killer — he’s the next Tom Brokaw apparently:

On Tuesday, Chicago Police released footage of the March 21 encounter which showed them firing 96 shots at Reed, even as he lay motionless on the ground outside his vehicle. The aspiring broadcaster’s death has reignited conversations around excessive police force against black people, though officers maintain Reed opened fire first.

At least they get around to suggesting that the officers were defending themselves. So there’s that. It’s easy to laugh at how absurd this is, but there’s a point to it. BLM and their allies in the media are desperate to find a new George Floyd before the election. They know Democrats stand a very real chance of losing power in November. So they’re using the same tactics they did four years ago.

George Floyd, we were told, wasn’t a home invader, thief and drug addict. They told us he was a “Gentle giant” trying to “Get his life back on track.” Now we’re expected to believe that Dexter Reed is also some misunderstood pillar of the local community, instead of the degenerate he is. The plan is to cause riots, terrify everyone into voting the way they want, and force a “national reckoning on race” to promote more of their mediocre allies into positions of power. And they plan to accomplish all of that by lying about a dead thug.

This is a strategy we’re seeing more and more often as the election approaches. Last October, for example, the media tried to incite riots over the shooting death of Leonard Cure — a man who tried to kill a police officer on camera during a traffic stop. There’s no dispute about this. It’s on tape. Watch:

After seeing that footage, here was the Washington Post headline: “Deputy fatally shoots man who served 16 years for wrongful conviction.” The article begins: “Leonard Cure, who was exonerated in 2020, was killed by a Georgia sheriff’s deputy during a traffic stop Monday … The deputy used a Taser and a baton before shooting Cure.”

The Post didn’t get around to mentioning that Cure tried to murder the deputy until 14 paragraphs into the story. And even then, they describe it as carefully as they can. They say Cure was “forcefully grappling with the deputy and pushing the deputy’s head back with his hand.” That’s the Post’s way of saying that he was trying to choke the officer to death. And of course, Ben Crump came out and declared that Cure had been shot simply for being black.

That effort didn’t catch on in quite the way the media and BLM activists had hoped. So now they’re trying again. And they will continue to try until one of two things happen. Either they get the riots they want and terrorize millions of people into voting for Democrats out of fear — or, for once, normal, sane people stand up and say what’s obvious. And that’s the fact that Dexter Reed and Leonard Cure and all of these BLM “heroes” are the dregs of society. They are not role models and they are not victims. They are, in fact, the cause of many serious problems that cities like Chicago are experiencing right now. That’s the only message that can put an end to these riots before they start, and avert a repeat of the pillaging we saw in 2020. It happens to be a message that most Americans believe, even if they’re afraid to say it. But as unpleasant as it may be, it’s time we started saying it.

“}]] 

The post The Media Nominates Their New George Floyd appeared first on Spin Politico.

Legacy media outlets have drawn criticism over their framing of an incident in Chicago where a 26-year-old man was killed by police after he fired at officers who had pulled him over for a traffic stop last month, according to an initial investigation and body camera footage.

Dexter Reed was killed after police pulled him over for a traffic stop in Chicago on March 21 after officers said he was not wearing a seatbelt. When officers attempted to speak with him, Reed locked himself in his vehicle and gunfire broke out leading officers to run away from the vehicle. According to the preliminary investigation from the civilian-operated Chicago Office of Police Accountability, Reed fired at the officers first, injuring one of them and shooting at least 11 times at them.

The police accountability report said that a “review of video footage and initial reports appears to confirm that Mr. Reed fired first, striking the officer and four officers returned fire.”

Footage released from the incident shows police officers walking up to Reed in his vehicle and asking him to roll down his windows. Reed does not immediately respond, but eventually, he does and an officer asks him what he is doing. He then locks the door and rolls up the window, ignoring the commands of the officer to unlock and open the door. Then gunfire breaks out and two officers can be seen running from the car for cover as they are shot at. Reed was killed after officers responded to the gunfire.

Just in: part of more than 30 videos released this morning by @COPA_Chicago related to the “exchange of gunfire” resulting in the death of Dexter Reed last month. (Graphic)

NOTE: This is a segment of the video. The full video and all COPA materials are available here:… pic.twitter.com/73JeSAgtQd

— CWBChicago (@CWBChicago) April 9, 2024

While much of the media coverage has focused on how many shots responding officers fired at Reed and complaints of excessive police force, little attention has been paid to indications that Reed fired at police first.

The Washington Post headline read, “Police fire 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing Black man during traffic stop,” the Associated Press ran with “Deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises serious questions about use of force,” and USA Today had, “Seat belt violation ends with Black man dead on Chicago street after cops fired nearly 100 bullets.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

The Post did not mention that investigators believe Reed fired first until the eighth paragraph while the AP leaves out that detail until the seventh paragraph. Both outlets also did not mention that Reed was facing three counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked FOID card, according to NBC Chicago.

Conservative commentators were quick to criticize media coverage of the incident, arguing legacy outlets were trying to foment unrest.

The crucial fact that Reed fired on police officers first, injuring one, is not even mentioned until 8 paragraphs into the @washingtonpost article by @GuinnessKebab (Jennifer Hassan). This is how the article begins, with a dishonest & inflammatory narrative that police were just… pic.twitter.com/04xt4EgfC8

— Christina Pushaw (@ChristinaPushaw) April 10, 2024

It takes six paragraphs for the @AP to mention that Dexter Reed fired at the officers first. Eight for the @washingtonpost in their article.

The articles base their reporting on the findings of Chicago’s COPA, a citizen oversight board that has authority to review “All… https://t.co/tCGfBDoL2t

— Bryan Griffin (@BryanDGriffin) April 11, 2024

Chicago Police are still reviewing the shooting, as is the civilian police review board, to determine whether the shooting was justified or not.

​

Legacy media outlets have drawn criticism over their framing of an incident in Chicago where a 26-year-old man was killed by police after he fired at officers who had pulled him over for a traffic stop last month, according to an initial investigation and body camera footage.

Dexter Reed was killed after police pulled him over for a traffic stop in Chicago on March 21 after officers said he was not wearing a seatbelt. When officers attempted to speak with him, Reed locked himself in his vehicle and gunfire broke out leading officers to run away from the vehicle. According to the preliminary investigation from the civilian-operated Chicago Office of Police Accountability, Reed fired at the officers first, injuring one of them and shooting at least 11 times at them.

The police accountability report said that a “review of video footage and initial reports appears to confirm that Mr. Reed fired first, striking the officer and four officers returned fire.”

Footage released from the incident shows police officers walking up to Reed in his vehicle and asking him to roll down his windows. Reed does not immediately respond, but eventually, he does and an officer asks him what he is doing. He then locks the door and rolls up the window, ignoring the commands of the officer to unlock and open the door. Then gunfire breaks out and two officers can be seen running from the car for cover as they are shot at. Reed was killed after officers responded to the gunfire.

While much of the media coverage has focused on how many shots responding officers fired at Reed and complaints of excessive police force, little attention has been paid to indications that Reed fired at police first.

The Washington Post headline read, “Police fire 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing Black man during traffic stop,” the Associated Press ran with “Deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises serious questions about use of force,” and USA Today had, “Seat belt violation ends with Black man dead on Chicago street after cops fired nearly 100 bullets.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

The Post did not mention that investigators believe Reed fired first until the eighth paragraph while the AP leaves out that detail until the seventh paragraph. Both outlets also did not mention that Reed was facing three counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked FOID card, according to NBC Chicago.

Conservative commentators were quick to criticize media coverage of the incident, arguing legacy outlets were trying to foment unrest.

Chicago Police are still reviewing the shooting, as is the civilian police review board, to determine whether the shooting was justified or not.

​[[{“value”:”

Legacy media outlets have drawn criticism over their framing of an incident in Chicago where a 26-year-old man was killed by police after he fired at officers who had pulled him over for a traffic stop last month, according to an initial investigation and body camera footage.

Dexter Reed was killed after police pulled him over for a traffic stop in Chicago on March 21 after officers said he was not wearing a seatbelt. When officers attempted to speak with him, Reed locked himself in his vehicle and gunfire broke out leading officers to run away from the vehicle. According to the preliminary investigation from the civilian-operated Chicago Office of Police Accountability, Reed fired at the officers first, injuring one of them and shooting at least 11 times at them.

The police accountability report said that a “review of video footage and initial reports appears to confirm that Mr. Reed fired first, striking the officer and four officers returned fire.”

Footage released from the incident shows police officers walking up to Reed in his vehicle and asking him to roll down his windows. Reed does not immediately respond, but eventually, he does and an officer asks him what he is doing. He then locks the door and rolls up the window, ignoring the commands of the officer to unlock and open the door. Then gunfire breaks out and two officers can be seen running from the car for cover as they are shot at. Reed was killed after officers responded to the gunfire.

Just in: part of more than 30 videos released this morning by @COPA_Chicago related to the “exchange of gunfire” resulting in the death of Dexter Reed last month. (Graphic)

NOTE: This is a segment of the video. The full video and all COPA materials are available here:… pic.twitter.com/73JeSAgtQd

— CWBChicago (@CWBChicago) April 9, 2024

While much of the media coverage has focused on how many shots responding officers fired at Reed and complaints of excessive police force, little attention has been paid to indications that Reed fired at police first.

The Washington Post headline read, “Police fire 96 shots in 41 seconds, killing Black man during traffic stop,” the Associated Press ran with “Deadly Chicago traffic stop where police fired 96 shots raises serious questions about use of force,” and USA Today had, “Seat belt violation ends with Black man dead on Chicago street after cops fired nearly 100 bullets.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

The Post did not mention that investigators believe Reed fired first until the eighth paragraph while the AP leaves out that detail until the seventh paragraph. Both outlets also did not mention that Reed was facing three counts of aggravated unlawful use of a weapon and one count of possession of a firearm with a revoked FOID card, according to NBC Chicago.

Conservative commentators were quick to criticize media coverage of the incident, arguing legacy outlets were trying to foment unrest.

The crucial fact that Reed fired on police officers first, injuring one, is not even mentioned until 8 paragraphs into the @washingtonpost article by @GuinnessKebab (Jennifer Hassan). This is how the article begins, with a dishonest & inflammatory narrative that police were just… pic.twitter.com/04xt4EgfC8

— Christina Pushaw (@ChristinaPushaw) April 10, 2024

It takes six paragraphs for the @AP to mention that Dexter Reed fired at the officers first. Eight for the @washingtonpost in their article.

The articles base their reporting on the findings of Chicago’s COPA, a citizen oversight board that has authority to review “All… https://t.co/tCGfBDoL2t

— Bryan Griffin (@BryanDGriffin) April 11, 2024

Chicago Police are still reviewing the shooting, as is the civilian police review board, to determine whether the shooting was justified or not.

“}]] 

The post Media Bury Key Detail About Police Shooting Of Man Facing Gun Charges appeared first on Spin Politico.

We’ve been told by virtually every major media outlet that we are now in a soft landing, that inflation has started to decline, that the economy continues to sail along. 

But nobody is feeling like that.

This has been the big, perplexing question for Democrats. Why is it that the economy is so amazing, but nobody actually feels like the economy is so amazing?

One reason is that, contrary to popular opinion, we have not yet defeated inflation. Just yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported:

Stubborn inflation pressures persisted in March, derailing the case for the Federal Reserve to begin reducing interest rates in June and raising questions over whether it can deliver cuts this year without signs of an economic slowdown.

The consumer-price index, a measure of goods and services prices across the economy, rose 3.5% in March from a year earlier, the Labor Department said Wednesday. That was a touch higher than economists had forecast and a pickup from February’s 3.2%. So-called core prices, which exclude volatile food and energy categories, also rose more than expected on a monthly and annual basis.

This drove the stock market down roughly 500 points. It also meant that bond yields started to go up.

The bottom line is that inflation continues to run almost twice what it is supposed to be running. Year over year, the inflation rate is supposed to be about 2%, and it’s currently running at 3.5%. When that is added onto the giant inflationary bubble from 2021 and 2022, prices are up roughly 20% for most Americans.

WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show

Joe Biden’s economy has not made up those wage losses. Politico is sounding the alarm: 

President Joe Biden has been presiding over a good news economy for the past year, with strong growth, low unemployment and falling inflation. 

But that good news is reaching its limits. 

The cost of living rose faster than expected in March, with prices up 3.5 percent from a year ago, according to the latest consumer price index report. And that likely means that Biden will have to live with high interest rates well into an election year, with investor hopes fading fast for a Federal Reserve rate cut in June.

The Federal Reserve has kept those interest rates pretty high by at least the last ten years of standards. That means money is less easy. That means IPOs are less easy. Finding money to actually fund your start-up is less easy. Loans are not as easy to come by.

Typically, that presages some sort of economic slowdown; when interest rates are increased, inflation is supposed to come down — but markets are also supposed to be impacted. An interest rate increase is supposed to drive down prices. That’s the purpose of the interest rate increase: to drive down prices. And that usually comes along with an economic cooling.

But if the economy is super-heated, that does not happen, and we’ve poured so much money into the economy in 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023, that the economy doesn’t seem like it’s going to slow down anytime soon.

You can make the case that it used to be supply chain problems that had driven the prices to exorbitant highs, but the supply chain problems — even though they’re still there in places like the Red Sea — are not nearly what they were during the pandemic. Yet inflation rates are still clocking in far too high.

Even CNN is admitting inflation is moving in the wrong direction, noting the latest consumer price report shows prices up 3.5% over the same period last year. 

Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary under Bill Clinton, previously predicted there would be a massive inflationary cycle after 2020. People laughed at him because we hadn’t had a massive inflationary cycle in the United States for 40 years. But he was right.

Everybody is feeling it. Consumers are not confident in their ability to make on-time debt payments because interest rates are so high; if you get behind on your bills, it is very difficult to repay all of that.

All of this is very bad for Biden. When a connection is made between a staggering economy with a completely atrocious foreign policy and a president who is no longer with us, that is a bad indicator for a reelection effort.

​

We’ve been told by virtually every major media outlet that we are now in a soft landing, that inflation has started to decline, that the economy continues to sail along. 

But nobody is feeling like that.

This has been the big, perplexing question for Democrats. Why is it that the economy is so amazing, but nobody actually feels like the economy is so amazing?

One reason is that, contrary to popular opinion, we have not yet defeated inflation. Just yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported:

Stubborn inflation pressures persisted in March, derailing the case for the Federal Reserve to begin reducing interest rates in June and raising questions over whether it can deliver cuts this year without signs of an economic slowdown.

The consumer-price index, a measure of goods and services prices across the economy, rose 3.5% in March from a year earlier, the Labor Department said Wednesday. That was a touch higher than economists had forecast and a pickup from February’s 3.2%. So-called core prices, which exclude volatile food and energy categories, also rose more than expected on a monthly and annual basis.

This drove the stock market down roughly 500 points. It also meant that bond yields started to go up.

The bottom line is that inflation continues to run almost twice what it is supposed to be running. Year over year, the inflation rate is supposed to be about 2%, and it’s currently running at 3.5%. When that is added onto the giant inflationary bubble from 2021 and 2022, prices are up roughly 20% for most Americans.

WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show

Joe Biden’s economy has not made up those wage losses. Politico is sounding the alarm: 

President Joe Biden has been presiding over a good news economy for the past year, with strong growth, low unemployment and falling inflation. 

But that good news is reaching its limits. 

The cost of living rose faster than expected in March, with prices up 3.5 percent from a year ago, according to the latest consumer price index report. And that likely means that Biden will have to live with high interest rates well into an election year, with investor hopes fading fast for a Federal Reserve rate cut in June.

The Federal Reserve has kept those interest rates pretty high by at least the last ten years of standards. That means money is less easy. That means IPOs are less easy. Finding money to actually fund your start-up is less easy. Loans are not as easy to come by.

Typically, that presages some sort of economic slowdown; when interest rates are increased, inflation is supposed to come down — but markets are also supposed to be impacted. An interest rate increase is supposed to drive down prices. That’s the purpose of the interest rate increase: to drive down prices. And that usually comes along with an economic cooling.

But if the economy is super-heated, that does not happen, and we’ve poured so much money into the economy in 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023, that the economy doesn’t seem like it’s going to slow down anytime soon.

You can make the case that it used to be supply chain problems that had driven the prices to exorbitant highs, but the supply chain problems — even though they’re still there in places like the Red Sea — are not nearly what they were during the pandemic. Yet inflation rates are still clocking in far too high.

Even CNN is admitting inflation is moving in the wrong direction, noting the latest consumer price report shows prices up 3.5% over the same period last year. 

Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary under Bill Clinton, previously predicted there would be a massive inflationary cycle after 2020. People laughed at him because we hadn’t had a massive inflationary cycle in the United States for 40 years. But he was right.

Everybody is feeling it. Consumers are not confident in their ability to make on-time debt payments because interest rates are so high; if you get behind on your bills, it is very difficult to repay all of that.

All of this is very bad for Biden. When a connection is made between a staggering economy with a completely atrocious foreign policy and a president who is no longer with us, that is a bad indicator for a reelection effort.

​[[{“value”:”

We’ve been told by virtually every major media outlet that we are now in a soft landing, that inflation has started to decline, that the economy continues to sail along. 

But nobody is feeling like that.

This has been the big, perplexing question for Democrats. Why is it that the economy is so amazing, but nobody actually feels like the economy is so amazing?

One reason is that, contrary to popular opinion, we have not yet defeated inflation. Just yesterday, the Wall Street Journal reported:

Stubborn inflation pressures persisted in March, derailing the case for the Federal Reserve to begin reducing interest rates in June and raising questions over whether it can deliver cuts this year without signs of an economic slowdown.

The consumer-price index, a measure of goods and services prices across the economy, rose 3.5% in March from a year earlier, the Labor Department said Wednesday. That was a touch higher than economists had forecast and a pickup from February’s 3.2%. So-called core prices, which exclude volatile food and energy categories, also rose more than expected on a monthly and annual basis.

This drove the stock market down roughly 500 points. It also meant that bond yields started to go up.

The bottom line is that inflation continues to run almost twice what it is supposed to be running. Year over year, the inflation rate is supposed to be about 2%, and it’s currently running at 3.5%. When that is added onto the giant inflationary bubble from 2021 and 2022, prices are up roughly 20% for most Americans.

WATCH: The Ben Shapiro Show

Joe Biden’s economy has not made up those wage losses. Politico is sounding the alarm: 

President Joe Biden has been presiding over a good news economy for the past year, with strong growth, low unemployment and falling inflation. 

But that good news is reaching its limits. 

The cost of living rose faster than expected in March, with prices up 3.5 percent from a year ago, according to the latest consumer price index report. And that likely means that Biden will have to live with high interest rates well into an election year, with investor hopes fading fast for a Federal Reserve rate cut in June.

The Federal Reserve has kept those interest rates pretty high by at least the last ten years of standards. That means money is less easy. That means IPOs are less easy. Finding money to actually fund your start-up is less easy. Loans are not as easy to come by.

Typically, that presages some sort of economic slowdown; when interest rates are increased, inflation is supposed to come down — but markets are also supposed to be impacted. An interest rate increase is supposed to drive down prices. That’s the purpose of the interest rate increase: to drive down prices. And that usually comes along with an economic cooling.

But if the economy is super-heated, that does not happen, and we’ve poured so much money into the economy in 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023, that the economy doesn’t seem like it’s going to slow down anytime soon.

You can make the case that it used to be supply chain problems that had driven the prices to exorbitant highs, but the supply chain problems — even though they’re still there in places like the Red Sea — are not nearly what they were during the pandemic. Yet inflation rates are still clocking in far too high.

Even CNN is admitting inflation is moving in the wrong direction, noting the latest consumer price report shows prices up 3.5% over the same period last year. 

Larry Summers, the former treasury secretary under Bill Clinton, previously predicted there would be a massive inflationary cycle after 2020. People laughed at him because we hadn’t had a massive inflationary cycle in the United States for 40 years. But he was right.

Everybody is feeling it. Consumers are not confident in their ability to make on-time debt payments because interest rates are so high; if you get behind on your bills, it is very difficult to repay all of that.

All of this is very bad for Biden. When a connection is made between a staggering economy with a completely atrocious foreign policy and a president who is no longer with us, that is a bad indicator for a reelection effort.

“}]] 

The post Legacy Media Says Economy Is Doing Great. Americans Aren’t Buying It. appeared first on Spin Politico.

The fictionalized biopic about the rise to stardom of former President Donald Trump, “The Apprentice,” will appear at the annual Cannes Film Festival, with audiences getting their first look at the film on Thursday.

Directed by Iranian-Danish filmmaker Ali Abbasi, the movie “The Apprentice” has been revealed to be part of the main competition at the 2024 prestigious movie festival held next month in France, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Written by Gabe Sherman, Marvel star Sebastian Stan took on the part of a young Trump before TV fame and his rise to the highest office in the land. “Succession” star Jeremy Strong landed the role of Trump’s attorney Roy Cohn with actress Maria Bakalova playing Ivana Trump and veteran actor Martin Donovan getting the part of Donald’s father, Fred Trump Sr.

In a still shared Thursday from producers, audiences got their first glimpse of Stan as a young Trump. In the photo that can be seen below, we see Strong and the “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” star sitting in the back of a car while the two appear to be having a serious conversation.

The official log-line for the movie labeled the film “a dive into the underbelly of the American empire. It charts a young Donald Trump’s ascent to power through a Faustian deal with the influential right-wing lawyer and political fixer Roy Cohn,” the outlet noted.

Donald Trump Movie ‘The Apprentice’ to Premiere at Cannes: First Look and What We Know https://t.co/Iw2EMwMaFt

— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) April 11, 2024

A description about the movie on IMBd read, “the story of how a young Donald Trump started his real estate business in 1970s and 80s New York with the helping hand of infamous lawyer Roy Cohn.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“The Apprentice” has even been suggested as one of the possible contenders for 2025 Oscars, according to Entertainment Weekly. However, there’s yet to be a confirmed release date.

According to Forbes, the former president is worth $4.6 billion as of this report, and is listed as the 697th richest person in the world. His current worth is thanks, in large part, to the Truth Social app becoming publicly traded on March 26. The site is owned by Trump Media & Technology Group.

The 77th edition of the Cannes Film Festival will run from May 14-25.

​

The fictionalized biopic about the rise to stardom of former President Donald Trump, “The Apprentice,” will appear at the annual Cannes Film Festival, with audiences getting their first look at the film on Thursday.

Directed by Iranian-Danish filmmaker Ali Abbasi, the movie “The Apprentice” has been revealed to be part of the main competition at the 2024 prestigious movie festival held next month in France, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Written by Gabe Sherman, Marvel star Sebastian Stan took on the part of a young Trump before TV fame and his rise to the highest office in the land. “Succession” star Jeremy Strong landed the role of Trump’s attorney Roy Cohn with actress Maria Bakalova playing Ivana Trump and veteran actor Martin Donovan getting the part of Donald’s father, Fred Trump Sr.

In a still shared Thursday from producers, audiences got their first glimpse of Stan as a young Trump. In the photo that can be seen below, we see Strong and the “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” star sitting in the back of a car while the two appear to be having a serious conversation.

The official log-line for the movie labeled the film “a dive into the underbelly of the American empire. It charts a young Donald Trump’s ascent to power through a Faustian deal with the influential right-wing lawyer and political fixer Roy Cohn,” the outlet noted.

A description about the movie on IMBd read, “the story of how a young Donald Trump started his real estate business in 1970s and 80s New York with the helping hand of infamous lawyer Roy Cohn.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“The Apprentice” has even been suggested as one of the possible contenders for 2025 Oscars, according to Entertainment Weekly. However, there’s yet to be a confirmed release date.

According to Forbes, the former president is worth $4.6 billion as of this report, and is listed as the 697th richest person in the world. His current worth is thanks, in large part, to the Truth Social app becoming publicly traded on March 26. The site is owned by Trump Media & Technology Group.

The 77th edition of the Cannes Film Festival will run from May 14-25.

​[[{“value”:”

The fictionalized biopic about the rise to stardom of former President Donald Trump, “The Apprentice,” will appear at the annual Cannes Film Festival, with audiences getting their first look at the film on Thursday.

Directed by Iranian-Danish filmmaker Ali Abbasi, the movie “The Apprentice” has been revealed to be part of the main competition at the 2024 prestigious movie festival held next month in France, according to The Hollywood Reporter.

Written by Gabe Sherman, Marvel star Sebastian Stan took on the part of a young Trump before TV fame and his rise to the highest office in the land. “Succession” star Jeremy Strong landed the role of Trump’s attorney Roy Cohn with actress Maria Bakalova playing Ivana Trump and veteran actor Martin Donovan getting the part of Donald’s father, Fred Trump Sr.

In a still shared Thursday from producers, audiences got their first glimpse of Stan as a young Trump. In the photo that can be seen below, we see Strong and the “Captain America: The Winter Soldier” star sitting in the back of a car while the two appear to be having a serious conversation.

The official log-line for the movie labeled the film “a dive into the underbelly of the American empire. It charts a young Donald Trump’s ascent to power through a Faustian deal with the influential right-wing lawyer and political fixer Roy Cohn,” the outlet noted.

Donald Trump Movie ‘The Apprentice’ to Premiere at Cannes: First Look and What We Know https://t.co/Iw2EMwMaFt

— The Hollywood Reporter (@THR) April 11, 2024

A description about the movie on IMBd read, “the story of how a young Donald Trump started his real estate business in 1970s and 80s New York with the helping hand of infamous lawyer Roy Cohn.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP

“The Apprentice” has even been suggested as one of the possible contenders for 2025 Oscars, according to Entertainment Weekly. However, there’s yet to be a confirmed release date.

According to Forbes, the former president is worth $4.6 billion as of this report, and is listed as the 697th richest person in the world. His current worth is thanks, in large part, to the Truth Social app becoming publicly traded on March 26. The site is owned by Trump Media & Technology Group.

The 77th edition of the Cannes Film Festival will run from May 14-25.

“}]] 

The post Trump Movie ‘The Apprentice’ Headed To Cannes; First Look Drops appeared first on Spin Politico.