Connect with us

Fox News Legal Analyst Asks If San Bernardino Attack Was ‘A Literal War On Christmas?’ (Video)

Published

on

This may be the most masterful execution of Fox News talking points ever. 

One Fox News legal analyst has done the impossible: meld the war on terror with the war on Christmas.

Speaking about Wednesday’s attack in San Bernardino that left 14 dead and another 21 injured, Peter Johnson Jr. Thursday morning made sure to tell his colleague, “Fox & Friends” co-host Steve Doocey, that he didn’t “want to come to any hasty conclusions at this point” – and then dove in head first.

The case has “cardinal characteristics, cardinal fingerprints of terrorism,” Johnson shared. “Is this a typical workplace violence attack, or is this a Jihadi Jane and Joe?,” he posited.

Johnson then ginned up his audience, tossing out all sorts of details, some true, some false, in an attempt to create fear.

“The potential for online radicalization, a man who may have been love-lorn, going to Saudi Arabia and then bringing back a highly-trained pharmacist wife. Is this the beginnning of green card jihad in America? These are the questions that we’re asking but we don’t have answers for,” Johnson offered up.

“Is this a man who needs a wife, and then brings back someone and starts a terrorist cell, unbeknownst to his whole career and life as an American in the United States?,” Johnson posed.

No law enforcement official has called the husband and wife team suspected on Wednesday’s carnage a “terror cell.”

And then, Doocey mentioned that in an old dating profile of Farook, he had mentioned he liked “target practice,” so Johnson turned the operative word around, as if it were used as a code word: “Could he have been targeted?”

Johnson went on to claim that “politically, it’s a firebomb for the White House to admit that it was a terror attack, or that there was a homegrown ISIS terrorist with another foreign national who committed this. The political implications are disturbing for this president.”

Which, of course, is false, and law enforcement officials at every level – local, state, and federal – have insisted they will “go where the facts take us.”

“I don’t want to come to any hasty conclusions at this point,” Johnson claimed, “but if you look at the dots, if you start to connect them in a way that’s rational and reasonable — and not political — based on simple things we know about terrorism, simple things we know about criminal justice then it leads inescapably to that one horrible conclusion: terror.”

“Is it based on politics? Is it based on religion? Is it based on hate? Is it a literal war on Christmas?”

For his part, ironically, Doocey wondered if Wednesday’s attack would be “whitewashed” by the Obama administration as workplace violence, rather than as terrorism. Ironic in that most of Fox News did not want to classify Friday’s terror attack on a Planned Parenthood as terrorism.

Johnson suggested that if Wednesday’s attack were “whitewashed,” it could affect Americans’ safety, as if a label would change anything.

Watch:

 

EARLIER:

More Mass Shootings Than Days: Right Now Is Exactly The Time To Politicize Gun Violence

San Bernardino Shooting: NY Daily News Slams GOP ‘Cowards’ Who ‘Hide Behind Meaningless Platitudes’

Twitter Explodes Against Pro-Gun Politicians Offering ‘Thoughts And Prayers’ On Shooting

 

Image: Screenshot via Fox News
Hat tip: David Edwards at Raw Story

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

‘Unequivocally False’: USDA Slammed for Claim It Can’t Fund SNAP Benefits During Shutdown

Published

on

The U.S. Department of Agriculture says contingency funds cannot be used to pay SNAP benefits to about 42 million people, despite its own prior guidance that points to “Congressional intent.” The USDA also says that states that choose to cover those costs will not be reimbursed when the shutdown is lifted.

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program “has contingency funds that could cover about two-thirds of the shortfall, which Democrats and liberal-leaning groups are calling on the administration to tap,” Axios reported. “But the USDA issued a one-page memo Friday saying the fund is only for true emergencies ‘like hurricanes, tornadoes, and floods, that can come on quickly and without notice.'”

Axios also called Friday’s guidance “the latest salvo in a string of memos and legal opinions designed to pressure Democrats into approving a ‘clean CR,’ or continuing resolution, to fund the government.”

READ MORE: ‘I Don’t Know—He Was Recommended’: Trump Struggles to Justify Latest Pardon

Additionally, Axios reported, a Center for American Progress (CAP) analysis Thursday “argued Trump has a legal obligation to continue funding SNAP, and accused him of cruelty.”

“The Trump administration has spent the entire year endangering the food security of millions of Americans,” CAP’s analysis stated. “From terminating funding used to purchase food for schools and food banks to passing the largest cuts in SNAP history, the administration has made it clear that its goal is to take food away from hungry families—and that sentiment is extending to the USDA’s approach to the shutdown.”

But according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), a now-deleted USDA shutdown “Lapse of Funding” memo states that the General Counsel of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) “provided a letter to USDA” that states “there is a bona fide need to obligate benefits for October – the first month of the fiscal year – during or prior to the month of September,” which would guarantee that funds be available for SNAP benefits.

READ MORE: ‘Amateur Historian’ Mike Johnson Hails Trump’s Ballroom as ‘Greatest’ White House Upgrade

“In addition,” the memo stated, “Congressional intent is evident that SNAP’s operations should continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds that can be used for State Administrative Expenses to ensure that the State can also continue operations during a Federal Government shutdown.”

CBPP President Sharon Parrott, a former OMB official, said in a statement on Thursday that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ “claim that the Trump Administration is unable to deliver November SNAP benefits during a shutdown is unequivocally false.”

“In fact,” Parrott said, “the Administration is legally required to use contingency reserves — billions of dollars that Congress provided for use when SNAP funding is inadequate that remain available during the shutdown — to fund November benefits for the 1 in 8 Americans who need SNAP to afford their grocery bill.”

READ MORE: Alabama Republican Ties School Enrollment Drop to ‘Dissatisfaction’ With LGBTQ Content

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Alabama Republican Ties School Enrollment Drop to ‘Dissatisfaction’ With LGBTQ Content

Published

on

An Alabama state GOP lawmaker says expanding the current “Don’t Say Gay” law would stop the record drop in school enrollment.

State Rep. Mack Butler of Rainbow City has filed legislation to expand the “Don’t Say Gay” law, first passed in 2021, from K-5 classrooms to all public school grades, according to the Alabama Reflector:

“Butler said in an interview Wednesday the bill is meant to help public schools focus on educating students and claimed that the recent enrollment decline partially comes from parents who are unsatisfied with LGBTQ content in schools. Alabama public officials have not said that was a reason for the drop in the K-12 population.”

Rep. Butler added, “as you’re seeing with the decreased enrollment, and a lot of it’s the CHOOSE Act and the virtual school or home schooling, but there absolutely is a dissatisfaction with what we’re doing, and I see this as helping public education get them back to their actual core charge.”

READ MORE: Pentagon’s Acceptance of Anonymous $130M ‘Gift’ Tied to Trump’s ‘Friend’ Raises Red Flags

The “Don’t Say Gay” legislation would “prohibit classroom instruction or discussions related to gender identity or sexual orientation from being provided to public school students in prekindergarten through twelfth grade.”

It would “prohibit public preK-12 teachers and education employees from displaying a flag or insignia relating to sexual orientation or gender identity on school property,” and “prohibit public preK-12 teachers and education employees from referring to a student by pronouns inconsistent with the student’s biological sex at birth.”

The Reflector also reported that the “Alabama Legislature in the last five years has passed several laws targeting LGBTQ+ people, including the original ‘Don’t Say Gay’ law passed in 2021 and a ban on gender-affirming medical care for transgender youth the following year.”

According to BillTrack, Butler also has sponsored legislation prohibiting “schools and public libraries from presenting or sponsoring drag performances,” a bill requiring the Ten Commandments to be displayed in all public schools, a bill requiring the “broadcast of the Star-Spangled Banner” weekly, and several bills related to religious exemptions for vaccine requirements.

READ MORE: ‘Pay to Play’: Trump Ballroom Donors List Draws Concern and Condemnation

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Pentagon’s Acceptance of Anonymous $130M ‘Gift’ Tied to Trump’s ‘Friend’ Raises Red Flags

Published

on

Questions are swirling after the U.S. Department of Defense confirmed it has accepted an anonymous gift of $130 million to help pay the troops during the federal government shutdown. President Donald Trump earlier this week told reporters a “friend” of his offered to cover the soldiers’ salaries. Reportedly, the Pentagon is limited in what private gifts it can receive and how they may be used.

“By the way, a man, a friend of mine,” the President said on Thursday, “a friend of mine, a man that’s great — I’m not gonna use his name unless he lets me do it.”

“He called us the other day,” Trump continued, “and he said, ‘I’d like to contribute any shortfall you have because of the Democrats’ shutdown. I’d like to contribute, personally contribute, any shortfall you have with the military, because I love the military, I love the country, and any shortfall, if there’s a shortfall, I’ll contribute it.'”

“And today, he sent us a check for $130 million.”

READ MORE: Dr. Oz Slammed After Saying Goal of Health Care System Is to Boost GDP by ‘Trillions’

On Friday, Defense Department Chief Pentagon Spokesman Sean Parnell confirmed the payment, according to PBS NewsHour’s Nick Schifrin:

“On October 23, 2025, the @DeptofWar accepted an anonymous donation of $130 million under its general gift acceptance authority.  The donation was made on the condition that it be used to offset the cost of Service members’ salaries and benefits. We are grateful for this donor’s assistance after Democrats opted to withhold pay from troops.”

Bloomberg News reported that the “donation is President Donald Trump’s latest maneuver to seize greater control of government functions amid the shutdown, which has stretched into its fourth week.”

Questions immediately arose.

Defense One reporter Meghann Myers noted, “donors of amounts over $10,000 need to be vetted for conflicts of interest. Hard to do if the donor is anonymous. Or is the donor known to the Pentagon and they have agreed to withhold their identity?”

READ MORE: ‘Pay to Play’: Trump Ballroom Donors List Draws Concern and Condemnation

Bloomberg reported, “While individuals can make unconditional gifts to the US Treasury, they’re credited to the general fund or used to pay down the national debt. The money can’t be spent without a congressional appropriation — and it’s that lack of an appropriation that has shut down the government.”

Former Republican Congressman Adam Kinzinger added, “The US spends roughly $16 billion per month on pay for the troops. So the idea that $130 million has somehow kept the DOD pay afloat is odd.”

Bloomberg also noted that the “$130 million total would only cover a small portion of the payroll for the nation’s roughly 1.3 million active-duty military members — averaging about $100 per person.”

The U.S. military is allowed to accept private donations, but only for “military schools, hospitals, libraries, museums, cemeteries and similar institutions, and to help service members and civilian employees who are wounded or killed in the line of duty, and their families,” Bloomberg noted.

Former U.S. diplomat Brett Bruen commented, “This doesn’t just raise major ethical concerns, it raises serious security concerns. Our military should be benefiting from or beholden to no one other than the American people.”

READ MORE: ‘Racist on Its Face’: Top Democrat Blasts Trump’s ‘Truly Vile’ New Policy

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.