All Things Democrat

The First Honest Reporting on Why the Corporate Media Keeps the Benghazi “Scandal” Going

Posted on Sunday, May 12, 2013 by Doug Marquardt

If you’ve been reading Kevin Drum at Mother Jones, you know that he has a knack for cutting through the bullshit. His article on the bruised egos in the press corps that continue to drive the “Benghazi scandal”, still dissecting statements a full eight months after the incident and praying there is a scrap of meat on that dead horse’s bones, is a prime example (with my emphasis):

If Benghazi continues to have legs, it won’t be because Fox is hyping it. They’ve been hyping it for eight months now. It won’t be because the initial talking points were wrong. We’ve known that since the end of last September. It won’t be because there were military assets on the night of the attacks that could have been used but weren’t. This is the “stand down” conspiracy theory, which keeps morphing into something new whenever the old version is debunked, and it’s long since been thoroughly hashed out. It won’t be because references to al-Qaeda were removed from the final draft of the talking points. David Petraeus explained that last November. And it won’t be because we learned that the editing of the talking points involved some squabbling between State and CIA. Nobody over the age of five is surprised or scandalized by that.

No, it will be because the small group of reporters who are credentialed to the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room feels aggrieved that the press secretary told them something to their faces that concealed a bit of unseemly bureaucratic squabbling. It doesn’t matter if the subject matter itself was important. In this case, it wasn’t: the nickel version is that the State Department objected to the CIA adding a sentence making sure everyone knew they had warned about possible attacks beforehand, a statement that was both gratuitous and off subject. But trivial or not, Carney misled the reporters in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room about this, and that makes it personal.

Never underestimate the power of a press corps that suddenly decides the story is personal. It may be a while before they let go of this.

I have a news flash for these reporters in the press corps; you’re pathetic, self-absorbed, wannabes in a dying industry. You, and your equals at Fox News (don’t pretend you’re any different), actually believe that spending time reporting on politics makes you a “political expert”. Many of you so-called “experts” receive continuous, on-air praise from your younger colleagues for no other reason than you simply became old on-the-job. That makes you someone with years of experience reporting on the experts; nothing more. Would years of reporting on medicine make you a doctor?

You “White House correspondents” spend the better part of your day examining every word, every sigh, every facial expression of the President and his staff, hoping that today will be the day that you’re not scooped on breaking news by the low-budget bloggers driving your old-world, brick-n-motar news outlets out of business. Most of the time you make shit up, like “Democrats are scared to death of this candidate running …”. Really? Name them. Talk about lying. That’s the real scandal – a press corps so lazy that they make it up as they go.

And the level of their arrogance is astounding. One wrong word from the President and stock markets collapse, consumer confidence falls, an international incident begins, but you are shocked when someone in a leadership position doesn’t give you the exact, rough draft version of events, and you want it NOW! On top of that, the President has to worry about the lunatic fringe, so-called patriots (actually, the Constitution says they are traitors) who are continuously threatening an armed revolution of the U.S. and hoping there’s someone crazy enough to fire the first shot so they can join the glorious battle and “take back” their country from the secret Muslim, socialist dictator. This President has been fighting fires and dodging bullets from day one, successfully repairing the damage done to this country and to the world by the previous administration, the banks and Wall Street despite planned (on day 1) and executed obstructionism by Republicans. But nooooooooooo … the Administration massaged the statements so the CIA and the State Department didn’t look like a bunch of frickin’ high schoolers in a childish spat, so now your feelings are hurt and you’re going to punish them by helping the lunatic fringe drag-out this non-scandal. Face it, you’re no longer journalists, you’re frickin’ tabloid reporters.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Barack Obama, Central Intelligence Agency, Conspiracy Theories, Politics, Republican Scandals, State Department, The Media | Tagged barack obama, Benghazi, cia, mother jones, State Department, washington press corps

sign-in options

Join the discussion at All Things Democrat, sign-in with disqus, facebook, twitter and googleplus

Inhofe Brings Up “The I Word”, Should Resign By His Own Standard

Posted on Sunday, May 12, 2013 by Ken

Rusty Humphries (of World Net Daily) interviewed Senator James Inhofe (Crazy, Ok.) and Inhofe brought up “the I word.” The Inhofe I word was not a reference to his own name, the color indigo, industry, the fact that he is an idiot, the nation of India etc etc etc… He was musing on the possibility that President Obama may be Impeached over Benghazi:

“People may be starting to use the I-word before too long…(snip)

“To send Susan Rice out to lie to the American people is one thing that’s going to go down in history, that’s never going to be forgotten.”

Let us just consider the premise that government officials lying to the American people constitutes grounds for impeachment. Senator Inhofe stands on very shaky ground if he is the one insisting that another official maintain any standard for even minimal honesty which anyone with the google machine can easily prove he makes a mockery of. To wit!

Inhofe is a leader in the global warming denial movement. In an effort to make it seem as if this is a controversial issue in the scientific community Inhofe has issued a list of “scientists” who are skeptics of man caused global warming. The original list has seen several expansions with the current iteration having over 1000 names.

The problem with that list is that it contains all sorts of “scientists” who have no background in climate science. The list is heavily populated by economists, t.v. weathermen, and even actual climate scientists who believe in global warming and have requested to be removed from the list, which requests have not been heeded.

One example of a “scientist” on the Inhofe list is an inventor who does believe that mankind is causing global warming, but it does not matter because nanotechnology will make carbon based energy obsolescent within 20 years. That is an extremely optimistic outlook, but it does not equal global warming denial by a scientist .

There is a noticeable correlation between the “scientists” on Inhofe’s list and the “scientists” listed by the Discovery Institute (a conservative think tank that is heavily involved in the push to teach creationism in science classes) as skeptics of Darwinism. Evidently, being a right wing “scientist” like a weatherman or economist will get your name added to all sorts of lists to support unscientific belief in fields you have no expertise in, other than your wrongheaded ideological outlook.

The Inhofe list is an ongoing falsehood perpetrated upon the American people to forward an anti-scientific outlook on global warming. In manufacturing a controversy where none actually exists, Inhofe is perpetuating a lie that is far more damaging to this nation than any version of talking points Susan Rice may have taken to the Sunday talk shows.

Inhofe’s current position on climate science is one big lie, which he admitted in an interview with Rachel Maddow.

“I was actually on your side of this issue when I was chairing that committee and I first heard about this. I thought it must be true until I found out what it cost.”

The cost has no bearing on the truth of the matter. Either it is or it is not true. If you know something to be true, then discover that understanding leads to some sort of expense, that does not make the original understanding untrue. Turning into a raging opponent of the truth based upon the cost only makes Inhofe an admitted liar.

One could write a book detailing the what for’s and why not’s of Inhofe’s dishonesty to the American people. In fact that last link is an instant classic in unthinking, self acknowledged deception. A transcript of TRMS where Maddow destroys Inhofe’s conspiracy on the Obama administration supposedly buying excessive amounts of ammunition. Inhofe asserts that “he knows for a fact” and in the very same sentence says “there is no downside if I’m wrong on this.”

Suffice to say having Inhofe be the torchbearer on impeachment based upon lying to the American people defines the word ironic. Maybe he will take heed of his own standard for honesty when it comes to who is or is not worthy of holding office, and resign.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Barack Obama, Climate Change, Conspiracy Theories, Energy Policies, Politics, Rachel Maddow, Republican Propaganda Machine, Stars of the GOP | Tagged Rusty Humphries, Senator James Inhofe, The Discovery Institute

sign-in options

Inconvenient Truths on the IRS “Targeting” Teabagger Groups

Posted on Sunday, May 12, 2013 by Doug Marquardt

The radical right, in full scandal mode, is now talking presidential impeachment over the IRS targeting teabagger groups that claimed tax-exempt status (in addition to Benghazi, and whatever the next news item will be). Their implication is that the President directed the IRS to monitor those groups. As usual, there are so many things they don’t understand about the situation:

The only connection President Obama has to the IRS is that they’re both part of the federal government. There is no evidence, whatsoever, to back the claim that this was directed by the White House. To say that this president is responsible for virtually every federal government head and their actions is utter nonsense.
The head of the IRS division that overseas tax-exempt groups, Lois Lerner, is a Bush appointee, not a Democrat and not someone with a relationship with the President.
All tax-exempt groups should be monitored, because too many groups are being given tax-exempt status. At a time when the radical right is simultaneously whining about the debt and deficits and fighting all attempts to raise revenues, it makes no sense to give political groups tax-exempt status. Religious groups, yes. Charities, yes. Political groups and superPacs provide no benefit to the greater good, like religious groups and charities. We can’t keep giving tax-exempt status to everyone who forms a group.

With all the obstructionism, hateful rhetoric, and now talk of impeachment, Teapublicans are opening up a can of worms that will come back to haunt them. Democrats are watching and learning from every nasty thing these right-wing baggers do; what works and what doesn’t. When the President was elected, Dems (and much of the world) wanted Obama to take legal action against Bush and Cheney for the lies they told, their fabricated intelligence, and the rush to their illegal war in Iraq that lead to the deaths of thousands, but Obama showed them mercy and let them off the hook. Do baggers really think we’re going to forget the way they’ve treated Obama? Are they really that stupid? Sooner or later, the radical right will perfect voter suppression and election fraud and put a Republican back in the White House. With the changing demographics, they may only have one more shot. Then it will be our turn to push for non-stop impeachment. Based on the actions of the last Republican President and the current group of Teapublicans, we’ll have more than enough evidence to get it done. So keep it up, baggers. Payback’s a bitch.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Barack Obama, Republicans | Tagged barack obama, impeachment, irs, tea party

sign-in options

Just Come Out and Say it, Already!

Posted on Saturday, May 11, 2013 by Mike Persley

This week’s amendments to the Senate’s Immigration-reform bill came flying out like fireworks on the Fourth of July. Senator Jeff Sessions (R-Ala) offered up 49 amendments alone, including one that would require immigrants to prove they have held an average annual income four hundred percent higher than the federal poverty line for the ten-plus years in registered provisional immigrant status in order to qualify for legal permanent resident status.

To put this in perspective, the current Senate bill, proposed by the so-called “Gang of Eight” senators, already requires undocumented immigrants to show either an average income of 125 percent above the poverty line or consistent employment during their time as a registered provisional immigrant. For an individual, the federal poverty line is $11,490, meaning an undocumented immigrant would need an average income of about $14,360 or higher to become a legal permanent resident under the bill as originally written.

Sessions amendment would raise that individual income to $45, 960 or more!

Senator Mike Lee (R-Utah) himself posted 23 amendments, including one that would allow undocumented immigrants to be lawfully employed, but only as domestic workers. Lee’s amendment would exempt undocumented immigrants working as “cooks, waiters, butlers, housekeepers, governessess, maids, valets, baby sitters, janitors, laundresses, furnacemen, care-takers, handymen, gardeners, footmen, grooms, and chauffeurs of automobiles for family use” from prohibitions against “unlawful employment” for undocumented immigrants.

Its unclear how well the two amendments would mesh if they were to pass. After all, how many ”cooks, waiters, butlers, housekeepers, governessess, maids, valets, baby sitters, janitors, laundresses, furnacemen, care-takers, handymen, gardeners, footmen, grooms, and chauffeurs of automobiles for family use” consistently make over the $45, 960/yr. required for them to receive citizenship? Maybe that’s the point.

Republicans are so bad at this! They can’t even pretend well that they care at all about the plight of undocumented immigrants, even when the future of their party relies on it. Even the most casual observer does not find it hard to recognize that when a Republican cries that offering up a pathway to citizenship (even one with quite a few strings attached) to our undocumented immigrants would lead to an increased burden on our welfare system, add little to our economy, would take away jobs from native-born Americans, and would create incentives for future illegal border crossings, he is really just sweating profusely, anxiously hoping to avoid watching his America turn into his greatest fear, the “European socialist state”. In his mind, white voters equal capitalism, the puritan work ethic, and individual initiative. Voters of color, however, equal massive state intervention, an ever increasing welfare state, and the end of the Republican party.

In some ways, I can hardly blame them. Create a pathway to citizenship for 11 million undocumented workers, and create 11 million new Democrats. Pander to 11 million newly legalized immigrants, and create 11 million new Democrats. The latino community is naturally liberal in the same way that big-businessmen are naturally conservative. They just simply are, and they don’t pretend to understand each other. But then why not come out and say it? What do they think people see when they hear Ann Coulter claim immigration reform would be “the end of America”? If you’re going to be racist, and you’re going to push for policy guided by that premise, at least have the balls to say so out loud.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Immigration, Politics, Racial Issues, Republicans | Tagged immigration, racial issues, senate republicans

sign-in options

Benghazi Investigation – Understand that its all about Fear of Progress, and that Equals Hatred of Democrats

Posted on Saturday, May 11, 2013 by Doug Marquardt

Benghazi – The never-ending, foaming-at-the-mouth of rabid right-wingers and the piling-on by the mainstream media. The latest talking points on the right are:

The Obama Administration did nothing wrong, per se, but the way they explained the attack was wrong, and that’s scandalous [again, they're trying to use the "2 weeks later" claim that was debunked (on video) and brought down Romney in the second debate.].
Hillary Clinton and the State Department “lied”, and that should destroy her chance to become the next president.

Its distressing that the mainstream media is joining Fox News in this witch hunt, and using the deaths of those at the location to push a House impeachment agenda. But they are the “corporate” media, after all, and where there’s a corporation there’s usually a Republican in charge. The goal of the radical right has much more to do with fear of progress and their hatred of Democrats than anything to do with embassy security. But I’ll address that later.

On Benghazi; first of all, as Mother Jones and others have reported, the most important thing to know about Benghazi is that there was no Libyan embassy or consulate. In fact, the entire thing was a CIA operation to round-up shoulder-launched missiles in Libya. Of the 30 members of the CIA Operations HQ, only 7 were State Department employees. The remaining 23 were CIA operatives, many with special ops training. The public “document dump” by that fool Darrel Issa for his investigation outed a CIA operation in Libya, and it also outed the identities of the Libyans who were working with the CIA, which could lead to their deaths. Again, there was no embassy. Its was a fake; a CIA Operations HQ. If anything, there should be an investigation of Issa; was this a deliberate leak for political purposes, as in the Valerie Plame case? Was it sheer stupidity? Should he be pulled from his House investigation position?

Second, if we go down that road to the fake embassy, House Republicans are twisting themselves in pretzels to avoid their primary culpability in the tragedy, and that is that they cut the Obama Administration’s request for embassy security funding by $459 million over 2011-2012. Clinton, head of the State Department at the time, warned Republicans that the cuts would hurt American national security, which is exactly what happened in this case. Fox News continues to help cover-up House Republicans’ role in the embassy security funding cuts.

Third, some journalists are saying that the Benghazi tragedy was followed by a tit-for-tat between the CIA and State Department, and that’s what lead to the confusion on the explanations that were given. The State Department believed that the CIA was trying to cover their ass for their botched operation, so the State Department released statements to make sure they were not blamed unfairly. I heard one member of the MSM say on cable news that that was the scandal, that the State Department “massaged” their statement for political reasons, so Clinton “lied”. This is the biggest joke of all. Every Administration since Washington has “massaged” statements for political reasons (remember Bush/Cheney???). The only time I know of when a politician released a statement without going over it to see if sounded bad was when Mark Sanford gave a 20-minute long, rambling, creepy statement about his affair with a Columbian hottie. And in this particular case, why would the State Department accept the blame for a CIA botched mission?

One last point to make regarding this entire “faux scandal” and the sheer hypocrisy of it all – Dick Cheney was very careful, and calculating, in his statement on Benghazi when he said:

When we were there, on our watch, we were always ready on 9/11, on the anniversary. We always anticipated they were coming for us, especially in that part of the world . . . I cannot understand why they weren’t ready to go.

Sounds good, and its very specific to the anniversary of 9/11. But what about all the times they were not prepared for embassy attacks and embassy staff died? As always, you can’t trust Cheney for the truth.

Finally, every Democrat can see that the radical right is just repeating what they did to President Clinton – a House impeachment in the second term of a Democratic president, based on minutia, to prevent him from getting credit for an improving economy and advancing a progressive agenda. President Obama, in spite of continuous obstruction by House Republicans and a daily dose of hateful rhetoric fed to the listeners of Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and Fox News, in spite of that the president literally saved the economy from the damage done by Republican Bankers and Wall Street traders. Obama and Clinton repaired our reputation in the world, which was no small task after Bush/Cheney and the neocons had thousands killed in an illegal war in Iraq. Obama pulled us out of that dirty war in Iraq and, by next year, we’ll be out of Afghanistan. Obama saved the auto industry and got Bin Laden. Like President Clinton, Obama is a popular president, which pisses off the radical right since their presidents are never popular.

In the end, the radical right is deathly afraid of progress: marriage equality, reproductive rights, health care, opportunity for all, and shared responsibility (i.e. fair tax policy). Dems, and our agenda, are progressive. The radical right is deathly afraid of changing demographics – the growth of minorities and the inevitable status of angry white men as an American minority. Today’s minorities typically vote for Dems, and it scares the shit out of right-wingers that, someday soon, even with gerrymandering and voter suppression, they will have no chance of defeating Democrats. Their trickle-down, “voodoo economics”, tax breaks for the rich and shipping jobs to China will all be a thing of the past. This is the truth behind their Benghazi investigations. They could care less about the victims of that tragedy, or outing CIA operations and locals who work with the agency. They have a singular mission – destroy Democrats, at any cost. Their fear, their hatred of Democrats, only assures us that Dems are on the right path.

So lets all recognize what the lunatic fringe is really up-to, lets rally around the President, and know that, in the end, progress will prevail.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Darrel Issa, Hillary Clinton, National Security, Politics, Republican Scandals, Republicans | Tagged barack obama, Benghazi, bill clinton, darrel issa, Hillary Clinton, house republicans

sign-in options

Rogers For FBI Director? A Spectacularly Bad Suggestion.

Posted on Friday, May 10, 2013 by Ken

Politico reports that the FBI Agents Association, representing thousands of FBI agents, are calling for Representative Mike Rogers (R. Mi, not to be confused with Rep. Mike Rogers R. Al) to be nominated to lead the bureau when Robert Mueller leaves the post later this year.

Nominating Rogers would be a disastrous decision by President Obama for several reasons.

The FBI is a department of the Justice Department and Rep. Rogers has been a particularly vocal critic of Attorney General Eric Holder. For example in 2011 Rogers told Newsmax.tv that Holder was so out of touch with the American people that it took him almost a year and a half to heed their cry to not try terrorists in civilian courts.

Why would the president want to nominate someone to lead the FBI who thinks the attorney general is such a bonehead? Is there any worse introduction of a prospective employee to a prospective employer than “I think my future boss is a flaming idiot so when do I start?”

One sign that Rogers may not be the best fit for the Obama administration in any capacity whatever is that he thinks it is a good idea to be interviewed by Newsmax.tv, and they think it’s a good idea to interview him. This interview is not the only venture into the right wing loony bin for Rogers. Another example of Rogers being influenced by the crazy right is the letter he signed expressing concern that the administration supposedly wanted to release the blind sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman.

That letter was signed and issued after a Justice Department (where Rogers wants to draw a check) spokesman called the rumored release of the blind sheik ”utter garbage”. The rumor addressed by this letter can be traced to none other than Glen Beck’s website. That fetid swamp of fevered conservative conspiracy started it during the heat of the the presidential campaign. From there it was carried by other conservative sources until Mike Rogers and pals signed a letter expressing concern about something that has no basis in truth what so ever.

That letter is just another of the growing list of examples of the fevered imaginations of right wing conspiracy theorists being taken at face value by high ranking members of the Republican party, including Representative Rogers.

Another bad impression at a job interview would be given if the applicant were to say ”Not only do I think my future boss is a bonehead, but I disagree with the policies he and his boss are for. Where do I sign?” Examples of Rogers disagreeing with administration policy include his written critique describing the administrations handling of terror suspects as dangerous because they are being charged in U.S. criminal courts:

The extradition of senior al Qaeida member and spokesman, Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, to the United States to stand trial in criminal court underscores a dangerous desire to return to treating al Qaeda as a law enforcement problem, not a national security issue.

Then there is the Repblican party, with Rep. Rogers taking a prominent role, trying to make political hay from the Benghazi tragedy.

“Somebody was absolutely negligent in not providing the right security to the ambassador and the employees that lost their lives that day,” Rogers said. “And somebody should be held accountable for that and we shouldn’t walk away from that.”

Why don’t we start by holding the party that insisted upon cutting funds for State Department security, even after then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned those cuts to her department “would endanger the country’s national security.” Rogers is right! Someone should be held accountable for the lax security of our State Department personel. Since Secretary Clinton and other Democrats were spot on in castigating Republicans for cutting State Department Security, maybe Rogers and the rest of the Republican house caucus who voted to cut security should stop being such hypocrites about Benghazi.

There I go again… Really, what are the chances of Republicans stopping a hypocrytical attack when they think they can score some political points on the backs of a tragedy they helped create? Will I never learn?

Rogers has an A rating with the NRA. When President Obama is fighting tooth and nail to get a background check through congress why would he elevate an NRA absolutist to one of the top jobs in the Justice Department?

Rogers supports keeping Guantanamo Bay open, repealing Obamacare, voted for the Ryan Budget, voted with Republicans trying to use the debt limit to create an economic crisis in order to force more cuts in the budget, costing America our credit rating, favors lowering taxes on the wealthy…

We already know all this right? He’s a typical house Republican. In fact he is the very definition of a rank and file Republican. He has voted the Republican line 94.6% of the time. It makes absolutely zero sense for the president to nominate someone who disagrees with him upon nearly every issue to be the director of the FBI.

It will be a singularly bad decision if Obama decides to follow the suggestion of the FBI Agents Association. If they wish to be taken seriously in the future they ought to withdraw the request and submit another name. And no, they should not nominate Rudy Giuliani, or Newt Gingrich, or some other Republican stalwart who can be counted to disagree with President Obama and Eric Holder on every issue. I mean, duh!

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Barack Obama, Conservatives, Debt and Budget, Guantanamo, Gun Control, Law Enforcement, Military Matters, National Security, NRA, Politics, Republicans, Terrorism | Tagged eric holder, Hillary Clinton, Mike Rogers, Newsmax, The FBI Agents Association, The State Department

sign-in options

Chris Christie Should Have Had Surgery to Replace His Heart

Posted on Thursday, May 9, 2013 by Doug Marquardt

I’m sick to death of all the reports on Chris Christie’s lap band surgery. I don’t give a rat’s ass about his big body, his big mouth, his so-called charisma, or the way he trashes his constituents when they dare to ask a tough question. That only shows he one conservative dick among hundreds of conservative dicks holding elected office.

What I do care about is the fact that both houses of the New Jersey legislation passed a marriage equality bill in February of 2012, which is supported by 62% of New Jersey-ans, and that heartless son-of-a-bitch Christie vetoed it. Christie even had the opportunity of letting the bill pass without his signature, but he decided to stick it to the LGBT community, instead.

The 30% of Democrats who are supposedly telling pollsters that they support Christie for re-election need to know that he voted against marriage equality for all Americans. Don’t allow yourself to be fooled by his charismatic act and his photo-ops with celebrities. Just because Christie chose to be a respectful human being to our President long enough to get support for the Sandy clean-up does not mean he’s any different than his pals in the radical right. Mark my words, when the 2014 Republican primary for president begins in earnest, Christie will move hard to the right and trash Obama and Democrats with the same toxic, hate-filled language as his radical challengers.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Chris Christie | Tagged chris christie, lap-band surgery, marriage equality, presidential candidate

sign-in options

Congressional Republicans – Letting America Go Under to Hurt Obama

Posted on Thursday, May 9, 2013 by Doug Marquardt

Continue reading →

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!

Posted in Barack Obama, Politics, Republican Leaders, Republicans, Satire | Tagged barack obama, economy, gun control, NRA, republicans

sign-in options

Donald Trump: No Sympathy For Servicewomen

Posted on Wednesday, May 8, 2013 by Amanda Sheppard

No one can deny that Donald Trump has more money than brains but now he has taken a swipe at female military personnel with the following tweet Tuesday night:

This is in response to the report released this week by the Pentagon stating that in 2012 there were an estimated 26,000 sexual assaults committed within the U.S. military, a staggering 37 percent increase since 2010. The report continues on stating that as many as 70 sexual assaults may be taking place per day.

These are sickening statics and all this pompous git can say is “What did you expect?” So what is he saying then? Anytime you get men and women together you can expect to be sexually assaulted? How absurd is that?

Instead of asking “What did you expect?”, how about calling for a little human decency. Or treating others with respect. Or even, how about the fact that they signed up to protect Americans, not abuse them. And the abused should be able to “expect” justice.

www.simplesharebuttons.comLike it? Share it!