Modern day genocide, right here in the United States

As defined, genocide is the intentional action to systematically eliminate an ethnic, 
national,  racial or religious group.

We don't hear much about genocide today, it is a barbarism of the past only found 
in parts of the world where totalitarian regimes successfully extinguish select groups.

The last place you'd expect to find genocide is in the United States, as our governance
is representative of all people, not just the privileged.

But, although not overt what is happening to Black American is recognizable as their 
race, culture, nationalism and a sense of belonging is gradually being destroyed.

Although not reported its obvious when you visit Black communities and see what the
media refuses to acknowledge. about 13% of the American population has become 
isolated from the rest of our nation, which is not only inexcusable but contemptible.

By any measuring stick Black Americans are paying the heaviest price whenever our 
economy is bad. But, even with good economies they still suffer.  They have the highest
rate of  poverty, abortions, unemployment, education, health problems and public jobs
and government assistance. 

No group of Americans should have to carry the heaviest of loads in these categories. Its
no wonder the discontent is high among Blacks.

Some may argue this is not 'genocide', but when you destroy people with the failures of
government no other word qualifies.  It stealthy permeates throughout every Black 
community, fostered by inferior public education and politicians who profit on the very 
hardships they caused, supported with divisive media reporting!

The latest divide in Black communities is the one between law enforcement and residents
who believe the police are a threat rather than a source of protection. This opinion is not 
new, its an outgrowth of a dark past when law enforcement was not above racist abuses.  

But, that was forty years ago and today every major Black community has completely
integrated police departments so false media reports of racial tension is not based on
actual interaction, only deliberate conjecture.

Enter Black Lives Matter, an offshoot of the New Black Panther Party, self proclaimed 
Black civil rights group that is riding the racist cops issue however far it will take them,
no matter the lie it is!  

Unlike the 60s when some cities went up in flames and calm was pleaded from all, this
group seeks to destroy whatever good relationship there is  between law enforcement 
and  Black communities, even with encouraging Blacks to kill cops!

This is not new, race-baiting provocateurs have been poisoning the minds of the under-
educated for decades, using lies to project a false narrative to a gullible people whose 
own dire circumstances make them susceptible to any persuasive argument!

This is why I call this genocide, it has captured people, twisted them to believe the 
country is against them  no matter any evidence to prove otherwise. They may not be
killed, but within them their spirits have been destroyed.

The culmination came last week when police in Dallas were dispatched to protect 
a protest march and were ambushed and five cops were assassinated. 

A country crosses a line when murder is the 'answer'. it should never be.

What is needed is an end to the genocide, replaced with a sense of belonging, with 
children getting educated not indoctrinated, where abortions are viewed as the
destruction of a people's future not 'elected surgeries',  where young men want to
behave like men, outreach replaces handouts and civic pride means civic duty. 

Its time for all Americans to appreciate the first name our country was given, United! 


Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

The hypocrisy of the Left. again on full display

"Morale outrage" is the political gift that keeps on giving and was on full display
in February when the NC General Assembly nullified the Charlotte city ordinance
which forced businesses to allow  transgenders to use bathrooms and locker room
of their choosing.


The moral outrage came in the form of businesses and celebrities publicly condemning
the action by the state, even refusing to do business or make appearances in NC
as Bruce Springstein and Pay Pal plan to do.

Aside from saying "good riddance" to those who do not respect state law, I suggest
these outraged businesses and celebrities go a step further.

For example, one business,Wells Fargo, should not only criticize the state, it should
also close every one of their offices in cities which do not have an transgender access
ordinance as Charlotte did.

As for celebrities, like Bruce Springstein.  He should cancel his tours in cities that
also do not have a similar access ordinance.

That would be putting their moral outrage front and center, not a publicity grabbing
stunt with minimal cost.

On the horizon is the decision the NBA will make, whether of not to have its All-Star
game in Charlotte. Again, let see the selectivity of the Commissioner Silver, in pondering
what to do. For Silver to concern himself with NC self-governing and not review whether
any of the other thirty cities have transgender access ordinance displays the same hypocrisy



Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

NATO allies concerned Trump will be our next president

No matter what Donald Trump says there will be controversy, mostly due to misstating
his intention.

When Trump says he wants fair trade with China, it is twisted and reported he wants
a trade war.  When he says he wants to keep out Muslims "until we know what we
are doing", it becomes "Trump is anti Muslim".

This has been the pattern for over a year, yet Trump has prevailed and remains
competitive despite the advantages Hillary Clinton has.

One point to address is that Trump troubles our NATO allies.  He has stated NATO
members need to pay more than they currently contribute to this defense alliance.

The media reports Trump is demanding other NATO members contribute more,
but do not report that state of NATO funding in recent years.

All NATO members are required to pay two percent of their 'economic output' for
defense. Unfortunately, of the twenty-eight members, only five meet  the threshold,
meaning 23 members are not meeting the goal, or pay nothing.
 
To fully appreciate what Donald Trump is saying, one nation out of the twenty-eight
members pays over 70%, the United States!

This is the reason Trump has said, "members of NATO have to pay more"
 


Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

Reach your own conclusion, if Hillary lied...

Listening carefully to FBI Director Comey presentation

on his department's investigation of Hillary Clinton's

private email server and his refusal to recommend an

indictment I thought with all I learned occurred would

reached a different conclusion 

We heard the word "intend" as the key. the 'fork in the

road'  Comey took that exonerated Hillary Clinton

What we did not hear him mention, actions taken were 

anything but usual, and lead a 'reasonable' prosecutor 

to do what Comey would not. Indict!

What were these "actions taken"?

1. Start with a private server in Clinton's home. detached

from the security the Federal govt. requires.

2. The deletion of all 30,000 email on server AND 

physical destruction of a perfectly good piece of 

computing equipment, the hard drive! 

Has anyone  reading this ever deleted entire contents 

AND hardware?

3. The IT professional contracted to setup the server,

refused to testify before Congressional hearing, even

using the Fifth Amendment 125 times!

There also happens to be 'left field' element, the word

'intent' that gained the attention of people who thought

an indictment was forthcoming.

Was it a coincidence President Obama made reference

to 'intent' when he said, “Hillary Clinton would never

intentionally put America in any kind of jeopardy.”

I offer these points as "circumstantial  evidence"  and 

does not require the 'intent' Comey cannot find.

As defined, 'Circumstantial evidence' is evidence that relies 

on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact.

It appears Comey did not consider this route since he 

made no mention in his presentation. 

Note:

Circumstantial evidence is used in criminal courts to establish guilt or innocence through reasoning.

With obvious exceptions (immature, incompetent, or mentally ill individuals), most criminals try to avoid generating direct evidence. Hence the prosecution usually must resort to circumstantial evidence to prove the levels of "purposely" or "knowingly." The same goes for tort feasors in tort law, if one needs to prove a high level of mens reato obtain punitive damages.

One example of circumstantial evidence is the behavior of a person around the time of an alleged offense. If someone was charged with theft of money and was then seen in a shopping spree purchasing expensive items, the shopping spree might be circumstantial evidence of the individual's guilt.

In fact, the only time the word circumstancial came up was when FBI Director Comey was question by Congress this week.

So, for those who say, " I don't know if she knew and lied", remember Hilary's criticism of Gen. Petraeus
before a Senate committee. She indirectly accused him of lying when she said,  it would take “a willing suspension of disbelief.”

To belief Hillary Clinton was honest, innocent and trustworthy is deserving of the same response she

gave Gen. Petraeus, it requires “a willing suspension of disbelief.”

-


Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

Does President Obama really care about his "legacy"?

I received the following written by  Sylvia Thompson, a black conservative writer, whose 
aim is to counter the liberal spin on issues pertaining to race and culture.  Ms. Thompson 
is a copy editor by trade currently residing in Tennessee.
  

This is what she has to say about Obama's "legacy"...   

To the many gullible souls out there who truly think that Barack Hussein Obama is "legacy building" in his all-out assault on America ,  I implore you to bow out of the conversation because you are not seeing clearly.

The term legacy carries positive connotations of something bequeath that is to the receiver's benefit. Everything that Barack Hussein Obama does is calculated to destroy America , which he despises.  This man no more cares about legacy than he fears being properly prosecuted by the white political leaders whose responsibility it is to remove him from office.

I focus on white leaders, because whites are still in the majority and they fill the majority of political offices.  If the majority of political operatives were of some other ethnicity, I would lodge my complaint against that group.  Ethnicity is an issue only because Obama is half-black and he uses that fact to intimidate guilt-conflicted white people.  Otherwise, he would have been impeached and likely in prison for treason by now.
 
Barack Hussein Obama's sole aim has been, since he first entered politics and continues as he winds down this presidency, the complete destruction of America as it was founded.
 
It is an insult to the intelligence of all Americans who must listen to elitist pundits on Fox news and elsewhere, and political drones in either party endeavor to make Obama's behavior fit a pattern of normalcy.  Attributing his destructive policies to "legacy building" is either self-delusion on the part of the people who make that claim or cowardliness.
 
This is my take.
 
Obama's  nuclear deal with Iran has nothing to do with legacy but rather to enable a Muslim nation to wage nuclear war with America and Israel the two nations that he most despises.  Does anyone wonder why Russians praise Vladimir Putin despite what the rest of the world might think of him?  Putin cares about his country, that's why.
 
Obama despises the American military because traditionally it has been a mainstay of America 's strength, and our strength infuriates him.
 
Imposition of a polluting homosexual, anti-Christian agenda upon the military ranks destroys unit cohesion and literally terrorizes male members with the prospect of sodomy rape.  Such rapes have increased since the forcing of open homosexuality in the ranks, against the will of a majority of members I might add.  Couple that with an infiltration of women, for whom all standards of strength must be reduced, and Obama attains his goal of emasculating and demoralizing the forces.
 
He could not care less about a legacy of making the forces more diverse.  Besides, President Truman diversified the military as much as it should be when he integrated it.  Obama's objective is its destruction.
 
Obama reopened relations with Cuba because Cuba is Communist.  Legacy is not his concern here either, but rather to scuttle America 's attempts to keep Communist influence out of the Americas .  That Cuba has major issues with human rights does not matter.  Like his Marxist African father before him, he despises the West and all that it represents.
 
Obama lawlessly declares open borders and amnesty for illegal aliens, because he wants to overrun America with third-world people who bring little more than dependency with them.  This tactic not only does not ensure a legacy, but rather it guarantees the eventual conversion of America itself into third-world status, if it is allowed to continue.
 
Bill Clinton started the travesty of increasing the numbers of third-world immigrants at the expense of culturally more suited immigrants from European and European-influenced nations, but Obama has taken the trend to lawless, destructive extremes.  He is fully aware that many of these invaders have no intention of assimilating.
 
It is only the outcry of a majority of Americans that holds back this hateful invasion scheme, and Donald Trump's entry onto the political scene to oppose that scheme is a saving grace for our nation.
 
These are but a few instances of behavior that display the loathsome character of Barack Hussein Obama.  And he is allowed to roam freely through the American landscape poisoning and polluting as he goes, sure in the realization that no one will stop him because he is "black."
 
The day that we no longer have to hear the prattle about his "legacy building" will not be soon enough for me.
 
Many, many Americans are thoroughly fed up with Barack Obama and the spineless crop of political leaders who ignore his criminality.  It is yet unknown whether Republicans will ever garner the backbone to become a true opposition party and hold him accountable.  Promising signs are the House conservatives' getting rid of establishment types John Boehner and Kevin McCarthy as House Speaker and Speaker hopeful, respectively, and Donald Trump's entry into the 2016 presidential race with enough money and testicular fortitude to tell the Establishment and the Left where to shove it.
 
Should these positive trends not continue and the 2016 election cycle yield no movement to counter all the harm that Barack Obama has done to this nation, I think there will be massive disruption.  Those folks in the National Rifle Association ads currently running on television seem very serious to me, and that is a good thing. 

Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

The "War on Cops", by Heather Mac Donald.

If you were shocked with the "ambush" of police officers in Dallas
leading to the "assassination" of five of them you might find this
interview with Heather MacDonald author of  "The War on Cops"
important, perhaps even essential to understand fully what is

occurring across our country.

Mac Donald presents the depth of the problem and the failure of
government at all levels to reduce crime in the most dangerous
communities in our country.

Before reading the transcript put aside everything you heard from
the media and politicians. Digest what Ms. Mac Donald has learned
from her research that must be part of any discussion going forward.

Please pass along to others who share concerns of the treat criminal

behavior plays in our most at risk communities.

The transcript of the interview.

Host:  The war on cops has now come to Dallas, Texas.  The war on police has come
to Dallas, Texas. Let me introduce Heather Mac Donald, who has a book out.  S
he's a scholar, Manhattan Institute, and a prolific writer.  And her most recent book is:
The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe.
Not just the cops, but particularly the cops.

Her research has produced some incredible statistics, and I want you to hear it from her.
So she has graciously consented to come back and she joins us now.  Heather, thanks
for making time today.  I really appreciate it.

MAC DONALD: It's an honor talking to you twice in 24 hours.

Host: I don't want to steal your thunder, but I want to review some of the things that you
said yesterday.  I went back to the transcript of the interview.  Let me run through some
of these things before you elaborate.

You said you could end all police shootings tomorrow, both lethal and nonlethal and justified
and unjustified, and it would have a negligible effect on the astronomical rate at which blacks
die by shootings.  And then there was this:

The Justice Department under Obama came out with a report in March of 2015, a little over
a year ago, that found that black and Hispanic officers were actually far more likely to shoot 
unarmed black suspects under what's known as threat mis-perception, the false belief
that the suspect is armed.  That happens much more than with white officers, who are less
likely to engage in that type of threat misperception.

Then there was a study by the New York Police Department. The former acting director of the
National Institute of Justice found that black officers in the New York Police Department 
were 3.3 times more likely to use their guns at shooting scenes than white officers.

Officers are more hesitant about shooting armed black suspects than armed white suspects
to the point where now there's a risk that officers are hesitating so long that they may put their
own lives at risk.  The Black Lives Matter, that is all about white officers attacking blacks, is
simply not true.    Please begin...

MAC DONALD:  Well, President Obama lied to the nation last night, and he embraced the
Black Lives Matter myth that there is a racist war by white officers against black civilians in
this country.

And we see the results, there's no government agency more dedicated to the proposition
that Black Lives Matter than the police. Proactive policing has saved tens of thousands of
minority lives since the mid‑ 1990s.

And now police officers are backing off.  They've been backing off before the Dallas
assassinations under the assault of hatred that is being spewed at them on the streets.

But above all in the mainstream media by activists and by politicians from the White House
on down, they're backing off of proactive policing, and crime is going up astronomically,
as much as 90 percent in cities with large black populations. After Dallas shootings, officers
are going to be even more reluctant to engage.  And the result is going to be more carnage.

MAC DONALD:  Well, it's politics and it's also ideology.  There's an ideology that's taken hold
of universities, has taken hold of elite establishments, committed to the myth of endemic
white racism.  And you're right, there have been bad shootings, police shootings.

The Walter Scott shooting in North Charleston was very bad. Laquan McDonald shooting in
Chicago.  These were appalling incidents of police negligence and likely criminality. But those
are not representative of this nation's police forces.  They are more professional than ever
before and they are dedicated to saving black lives.

MAC DONALD:  Let's look at some of the numbers.  I know numbers are sometimes tough
over the radio, but a larger proportion of white and Hispanic homicide deaths are the 
results of police killings than black homicide deaths.  That is, 12 percent of all whites
and Hispanics who die of homicide are killed by police officers vs. 4 percent of all blacks,
homicide victims, are killed by police officers.

So if we're going to have an Anti‑Cop Lives Matter movement it would make more sense to
call it White and Hispanic Lives Matter.

Fact is that over 6,000 blacks die of homicide each year, more than white and Hispanic
homicide victims combined, even though blacks are 13 percent of the nation's population.

And the reason they are dying of homicide at a rate six times higher than whites and
Hispanics combined is because they commit homicide at eight times the rate higher than
whites and Hispanics combined.  That type of crime disparity means that when the police
are trying to save lives, they are in minority neighborhoods confronting people engaged
in drive‑by shootings, killing children.

In the last 72 hours in Chicago there's been about four children under the age of eight who
have been shot.  One boy shot in the back on Father's Day. A 3‑year‑old boy was shot.
He's now paralyzed for life. That's who police are trying to protect. Given the disparities
in crime rates the police cannot  help but be in minority neighborhoods where they're
confronting violent and resisting suspects and sometimes officers themselves will have to
use force to protect themselves and protect innocent bystanders.

Host:  You've just alluded to something highly politically incorrect. You've given numbers,
hard evidence, on what is called black-on-black crime.

MAC DONALD:  Rush, here's another very politically incorrect fact, and I don't want to
racialize policing, people should not.  If we're going to talk about race and policing, let's
talk about cop killings.

Over the last decade, black males made up 40 percent of all cop killers, even though they're
six percent of population.  It turns out that a police officer is 18-and-a-half times more likely 
to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is likely be killed by an officer.

Police were running towards the shooting scene in Dallas last night as they run towards
shooting scenes in inner cities on a daily basis to try and protect children.  We don't know the
names of these black children who have been killed because the Black Lives Matter activists
don't care to talk about it.

In Cleveland in September of 2015, three children under the age of five were murdered by
drive-by shootings, leading the police chief there, who happens to be black, to break down in
tears and say everybody protests when a cop is shot.

Why aren't we out here protesting when we shoot each other?  That is the big mystery of our
time. And again President Obama last night only fanned fires of hatred by putting out his
usual lies that the criminal justice system is racist.  It is not.  It responds to crime in order
to try to protect lives, not to take them.

MAC DONALD:  It is so appropriate that the Black Lives Matter movement took off on the
basis of the Michael Brown shooting in Ferguson, which as you say, was a hoax continued
to venerate Michael Brown as a martyr to police brutality, which is also a hoax, because the
entire movement is based on a lie.

It is simply not the case that the police are disproportionately shooting black males when you
take violent crime into account.  And for President Obama to give that movement any credibility
when it is now threatening law and order itself, we'rre at risk of attacking the foundation of
civilization if this type of hatred continues.

What happened in Dallas is an extreme version of what officers experience every day. It's
why we  have seen a 17 % increase in homicides last year in the 56 largest cities.

An almost unprecedented one-year spike in homicides because officers are backing off of 
proactive policing, because I hear this from officers across the country, and I was contacted
two weeks ago by several Dallas officers who were talking about their reluctance to engage in
proactive policing, because when they get out of their cars now, and this is happening across
the country, officers in inner-city  areas  find themselves surrounded by hostile jeering crowds,
sticking cell phones right in the officer's face.

It's not a question of standing on the curb, filming an incident. It's a question of interfering with
an arrest scene, going in and refusing to obey orders.  

As a Chicago cop told me several weeks ago when I was out there, he's never seen 
such hatred directed at officers in his 20 years in policing.  He said this is an almost 
undoable  job now.

And, the lives that are being lost in this crime spike, Baltimore is now at its highest per capita
homicide rate in its history, are overwhelmingly black lives.  But if this continues we're going
to return to the situation of the 1960s and 1970s, people fleeing cities because lawlessness
was out of control.

Host:  What would you say if somebody asked you how to deal with this in the inner city or
African-American community. How would you approach them?  How would you get your
message to them?

MAC DONALD:  I would try something absolutely unique in this area which is truth.  I think
when the Black Lives Matter movement has been allowed to thrive by a deliberate ignorance
-- cultivated ignorance -- about the problem of black crime, that you cannot understand police
activity without understanding patterns of crime.  And the media has basically suppressed any
knowledge about how bad things are in inner cities. So I would start by giving the data on black
crime that explains why officers  are in inner-city neighborhoods trying to save lives.

And beyond that, I would give voice to the many people in inner-city communities that I have
spoken to over the years that adore the cops.  I would give voice to people like Mrs. Sweeper,
a cancer amputee in the Mount Hope section of the Bronx, who told me, "Please, Jesus, send
more police."  The only time she felt safe to go into her building lobby and pick up her mail was
when the police were there because the place was otherwise colonized by teens trespassing,
smoking weed, and dealing drugs. There are thousands, millions --

MAC DONALD:  People still embrace the lie that makes them feel like they're victimized.
It's just extraordinary.

Host:  Let me quickly run something by you.  Attorney General Lynch, while we were talking
in the first hour, did a short press conference, and she said, she announced that the Dallas
attack will be investigated by the Department of Justice as a hate crime, which is noteworthy
because it's the first cop killing ever investigated as a hate crime.  What's your interpretation of that?

MAC DONALD:  Well, I think the Obama Administration may be having second thoughts about
the type of rhetoric that it's been using, because there's no question that it is fomenting hatred
out there. This is very dangerous stuff.  We're playing with fire, Rush.  The degree of racialized
rhetoric is going to take us back to the 1960s.

I think a lot of people are clueless about the degree of hatred of whites. You know what this
gunman said, that he hated white people and hated white cops, I hear that a lot in the inner
city.  We overlook it. We don't want to look at it head on.  If we continue with this discourse,
we're going to get more hate crimes.

I'm glad Loretta Lynch is willing to take this on honestly, because up to now it's completely
 politically biased understanding of who hates whom in this society, and the notion that our
 main problem here is white hatred of blacks is completely fiction.

We have every elite establishment tying itself into knots to try and admit as many black applicant
students or employees as possible. We have gone from a nation of segregation, explicit 
and invidious and horrible discrimination to true, willing colorblindness.

But there's still a constituency committed to division, and we better get a hold of this pretty
soon, because we could be back to levels of revolutionary violence that we were seeing
in the '60s.

Host:  How do you describe forcing federal guidelines on local police departments. They've
done it in over 30 communities now, including Ferguson, including Baltimore. Is it based on
assumption local cops don't know what they're doing or that they're not doing it the way
Obama wants them to do it and they're being, in a way, threatened with removal of federal
funds if they don't accept the consent decrees that are forthcoming here?  What's the upshot
of it in terms of actual policing?

 MAC DONALD:  The upshot is that policing takes the backseat to paper pushing. 
There's been no administration in recent history more anti-law enforcement than Obama's.
They've saddled more police departments with these crippling consent decrees and federal
monitors than any previous administration.

In keeping with Obama's constant drumbeat cops are racist and treat black and white people
in identical situations differently, these consent decrees send in a bunch of DOJ civil rights
attorneys that know nothing about policing and they get their hands on a bunch of cop
statistics, things like arrest statistics or pedestrian stops.

They compare it to population data and conclude that the police are racist because inevitably
the police will be making more pedestrian stops of blacks if they're trying to save lives
because in black communities is where 3-year-old children are getting shot to death in
drive-by shootings.

So they declare the police department racist and then make them fill out endless forms
of data. They  take officers off the beat to meet the Justice Department's paper pushing
requirements. The Obama Administration is now pushing a concept of implicit bias training
on officers across the country.

This is complete folly.  It is based on junk science that has been recently completely
disproven  by a study, an extremely sophisticated study out of the University of Washington
that found that cops actually hesitate longer to decide to shoot armed black suspects than
armed white suspects and are less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed
white suspects.

This recent study blows apart the pre-existing implicit bias junk science, and yet Obama Administration is demanding officers get sent to this training that is a waste of time because
officers want good tactical training.  They want help in making those crucial, cruel, anxiety-
producing split-second decisions of shoot/don't shoot.  And none of us would be able to live
under that pressure. They want that training, but implicit bias training, which is what gets
foisted on these departments is a complete waste of time.

Host: Sounds like Obama Administration is presuming racism is in all of these departments
and has concocted a mechanism whereby they can prove it, not really prove it, but where
they can claim it, which is the last thing we want to do.  We want to reduce racial tension.
 They're promoting it, it seems like.

MAC DONALD:  My experience is cops are totally colorblind.  Black cops, white cops, they'll
all say, "I don't care if you're green or orange, if you're acting in a way to raise suspicions
I'm going to stop and question you."  But you're absolutely right, the Obama Administration
starts with the presumption that cops are racist.

It may be too harsh to say, as Patrick Lynch of the NYPD said of de Blasio, after
assassinations of Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos in December of 2014 by the Black Lives
Matter movement. Lynch said de Blasio, "had blood on his hands", that was an incendiary
remark. Obama's timing was not great last night in perpetuating lies of Black Lives Matter
movement demonstrably false.

Host:  With all your studies I'm sure you've encountered the sociological aspects of this.
What role, if any, does economics in the inner city play in all of this?

MAC DONALD:  Very little. Criminologists were just chomping at the bit during the 2008
recession thinking that this would prove their favorite root causes theory of crime that is driven
by economic need.  Crime continued to drop nationally through the recession to record 
lows.  And it was dropping through the first half of 2014 when it made a rapid reverse course
and began rising  after the Michael Brown hoax in Ferguson, Missouri.

The 1960s, which was really the nadir of violent crime, we had a very strong economy.  
There  is no connection.  There's people in inner city today, the good, the clean people
who completely avoid any involvement with crime.  They have no involvement with police
because, as they tell me, I'm a good person. The cops don't stop me.

That is an excuse.  People that are engaged in these mindless drive-by shootings, kids
 in Chicago right now are responsible for this year's 50 % increase in shootings 
that are killing four-year-old children, they have smartphones. 

 I mean, the teen involvement in smartphone media and social media is a godsend to police
because they can track down all these crews.  These kids are not exactly hand-to-mouth
struggle for subsistence.  And it's not the drug war either.

This is a breakdown of the family that is leaving kids without any socialization 
and  any decent role models.  They don't have fathers.

So to say it's an economic problem is completely false and you have lots of Asian immigrants
who are at much lower income than many people on welfare and their children are virtually
not involved in crime because they have two parents at home teaching them academic
discipline and respect for authority.




Share Mac Donald's research with others....


Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/

What was President Obama thinking?

Like him or not, support his policies or not, don't you 

feel a little sorry for President Obama?

Yes, he may want our country to 'transform' in ways
most Americans do not want, and yes he'll rig the
system to push "social justice" not American justice.

Yes, he flaunts the trappings of the office, and shows
indifference towards the plight of the very people he
campaigned to help.

But, what may stand larger and may emblazon his

'legacy' was one of his first, and perhaps worst 

decisions will be questioned.

Of all the people he could have chosen from many
experienced and qualified individuals the president 

chose Hillary Clinton to serve as the most powerful 

and influential position in the Executive Branch, the

Secy of State.

How many times must the First Lady have asked,

 "what were you thinking"?  naming Hillary Clinton

as his  Secy of State,

Imagine for a  minute if Obama did not choose Hillary,
of Clinton, Inc., the 'Bonnie and Clyde' of pilfering
'contributions' in the name of doing good?

Qaddafi would still be alive and Libya stable.

Whomever was named Secy. of State would have
obeyed the law by only using a secure govt. server
to protect classified information.

The security of the highest level of communication

would not have been exposed to "hostile actors" as

FBI Director James Comey referred to whomever
else may have hacked into Clinton's system.

The tens of millions the State Dept. paid to donors to

the Clinton Foundation in a quid pro quo for business
directed their way would still be in govt. coffers.

And most importantly, four brave American patriots

would still be alive.

We should all join Michelle Obama and collectively
ask the president, "What were you thinking?"

At least for him the long nightmare she brought to

the Executive Branch will soon be over. In November
I only hope it ends for the American people too! 

Please add feedback in comments section below, or email ajbruno14@gmail.com "Point of View" blog http://ajbruno14.blogspot.com/