Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.
I’ve got the usual clever, thought-provoking political commentary in my illustrated edition, but I’ve also got a huge amount of insanely logical silly stuff.
The advent of the internet means that ordinary people like me can loudly criticize Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, and the Times‘ ridiculous 1619 project.
(If you prefer listening to reading, the companion podcast is embedded below, or you can listen to it at Libsyn or at Apple podcasts. I’m trying to make a go of my podcast so, if you like it, please share it with your friends and on social media. Giving it good ratings helps too.)
An internet world lets ordinary people praise Israel. It’s very hard to cast ones mind back to a pre-internet era when traditional news outlets were the only game in town and news was on a day-to-day cycle. In today’s world, the fact that two junior Congresswomen were denied admission to Israel has received 24/7 coverage in the old-line news media (television and what we still call “print,” even though it’s really internet). In addition, politicians — especially Leftists — have spoken about it steadily, flooding Twitter with their opinions.
Here are the basic outlines: Rashida Tlaib (D-Palestine) and Ilhan Omar (D-Somalia) have consistently and openly demonized both Israel and Jews. Among other things, both have actively pushed the Boycott, Divest, and Sanction movement, which seeks to destroy Israel economically. Of course, those who argue that this is an appropriate activity because of Israel’s alleged human rights abuses have not pushed a BDS movement against any other country that has provably violated human rights. The same people behind BDS are horrified that Trump would use economic sanctions against China, never mind that China’s human rights abuses against its own people are legion and that its economic abuses are terribly damaging to Americans here at home.
Anyhoo, Tlaib and Omar planned to travel on the taxpayers’ dime to visit Israel. Oh, wait! I misspoke. They planned to travel on the taxpayers’ dime to visit a place called Palestine: [Read more…]
Not only is she a squirrely character, Elizabeth Warren’s plans are openly socialist — and socialism’s history proves how dangerous this is for Americans.
(If you prefer listening to reading, the companion podcast is embedded below, or you can listen to it at Libsyn or at Apple podcasts. I’m trying to make a go of my podcast so, if you like it, please share it with your friends and on social media. Giving it good ratings helps too.)
It seems that Elizabeth Warren has had a sudden polling surge in Iowa:
A new Iowa Starting Line-Change Research poll shows the senator opening up a commanding lead in the Iowa Caucus. Warren was the top pick of 28% of likely Iowa Caucus-goers in the poll, an 11-point lead over the nearest competitor. Joe Biden and Bernie Sanders were both tied for second with 17% each. Pete Buttigieg came in fourth at 13% and Kamala Harris has the backing of 8%.
Given the undistinguished field in which she finds herself, Warren could conceivably ride this bump to a nomination, so I figured I’d say a few words about her. First, as always when I talk about Warren, let me explain that I’m completely biased. I had her as a banking law professor before she realized that she could use her family mythology about her high cheekbones as proof of a distant Native American heritage as leverage for a professorship at Harvard.
Back in the day, Warren was just another professor. In class, I found her confusing, because she had a habit of starting on thought B before finishing thought A. (Confession: I was often confused at law school, but I found her more confusing than most of my professors.) I therefore often found myself in Warren’s office. There, she was friendly, soft spoken . . . and still confusing.
My animus towards her comes from the fact that she assured me certain things wouldn’t be on the final exam . . . yet they were. If memory serves me, I managed to pull a middle to high “B” in the class, which certainly didn’t scar my subsequent legal career, so my dislike for her isn’t rooted in some sort of “she ruined my life” emotion. I just really dislike soft-spoken liars who are boring and confusing teachers.
The next time I heard about Warren was when I discovered she was gaining national celebrity by pointing out the obvious: Affluent people will flock to regions that have reputations for offering good public K-12 schooling, thereby driving up real estate prices. I think a lot of people without Harvard credentials could have figured that one out. If I had been Warren’s teacher, I would have given her an “A” for self promotion and an “F” for original thought. As it was, I was actually kind of impressed that she’d managed to take an unoriginal mind and marginal teaching skills, and go so far.
But now Warren is socialist political candidate and I don’t just dislike her, I worry that the media, helped along with the Leftists in Silicon Valley, could actually propel her to the White House. The fact that Warren has attacked the social media giants is irrelevant. When push comes to shove, if she’s the candidate, they’ll do everything they can to get her into the White House. Once there — God forbid! — Warren might prove herself a more competent and effective administrator than Obama when it comes to imposing socialism on America.
So I guess it’s time to revisit the attacks I made on socialism back in 2016, when it looked like Bernie had a chance, before Hillary’s Super Delegates and other fixers told him to stand down and be quiet. Back then, I created a little Blogger site I named “I Don’t Like Bernie, Because….” I put up four posts there before it became apparent that Bernie would be marginalized, at which point I stopped posting there and returned to my regularly scheduled attacks on Hillary here at the Bookworm Room.
To the extent that Elizabeth Warren is open about her socialism (does she even bother to call it “Democratic Socialism”?), I’m going to import here almost wholesale my post about the history and horrors of socialism. I know you can find better posts on the internet and better books in the library, but this one is mine, it’s what I’ve got, and I’m going with it: [Read more…]
With Bruce Ohr’s 302’s and Kathleen Kavalec’s memo available, the full picture of the agency machinations behind RussiaGate looks just like a coup.
If the FBI and DOJ undertook the Trump Russia collusion investigation without probable cause, then the question becomes whether it was a coup by the government with a thumb on the scale, or simply a series of honest mistakes. We finally have enough information in the public realm to answer that question — and it’s not looking like a series of honest mistakes.
Recently, the administration released the Bruce Ohr Form 302’s and a memo that Kathleen Kavalec sent to the FBI. These documents clarify whether the FBI and DOJ made criminal misrepresentations and material omissions in the 2016 and 2017 Verified Applications they submitted to the FISA Court for warrants to surveil Carter Page and effectively, through him, the Trump administration.
The documents establish that the government made errors in the four applications for a FISA warrant. Those errors, standing alone, do not mean that anyone in government committed a crime. But if the FBI Supervising Special Agent (SSA) and the other signatories knowingly falsified or knowingly made omissions of material facts before the Court, then this was a crime — and by extension, an attempted coup.
Whether government agents possessed culpable levels of knowledge depends on what they knew or should have known and when they knew it. The recently released Bruce Ohr 302’s and the Kathleen Kavalec memo go a long way to establishing what they knew — and what they refused to know. This memorandum summarizes that information.
As you read, green text highlights recently released information from Bruce Ohr and/or Kathleen Kavalec. That is just to make it easier to see where this information fits into the larger mosaic. At the end of the post, you’ll find a timeline through the FISA warrants in 2017, along with links for reference. [Read more…]
An excerpt from Andrew McCarthy’s new book, Ball of Collusion, lays out the reality of the attempted coup against Trump.
There really was a collusion plot. It really did target our election system. It absolutely sought to usurp our capacity for self-determination. It was just not the collusion you’ve been told about for nearly three years. It was not “Donald Trump’s collusion with Russia.”
Here is the real collusion scheme: In 2016, the incumbent Democratic administration of President Barack Obama put the awesome powers of the United States government’s law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus in the service of the Hillary Rodham Clinton presidential campaign, the Democratic party, and the progressive Beltway establishment. This scheme had two parts: Plan A, the objective; and Plan B, a fail-safe strategy in case Plan A imploded — which all the smartest people were supremely confident would never, ever happen . . . which is why you could bet the ranch that it would.
Plan A was to get Mrs. Clinton elected president of the United States. This required exonerating her, at least ostensibly, from well-founded allegations of her felonious and politically disqualifying actions.
Plan B was the insurance policy: an investigation that Donald Trump, in the highly unlikely event he was elected, would be powerless to shut down. An investigation that would simultaneously monitor and taint him. An investigation that internalized Clinton-campaign-generated opposition research, limning Trump and his campaign as complicit in Russian espionage. An investigation that would hunt for a crime under the guise of counterintelligence, build an impeachment case under the guise of hunting for a crime, and seek to make Trump un-reelectable under the guise of building an impeachment case. . . .
Do read the whole excerpt at NRO. That is a perfect summary of what has happened to our nation over the past three years.
A political riptide is carrying Leftists and NeverTrumpers further from reality on myriad important issues — and Trump is holding the only life preserver.
(If you prefer listening to reading, you can find the podcast at the bottom of this post, at LibSyn, or at Apple Podcasts. And if you like the podcast or the post, please share.)
How much do you know about riptides? For those who don’t know anything about them, they’re currents that run in narrow channels perpendicularly away from the shoreline. There you are, just swimming along happily in the ocean when you realize that you’ve been pushed dangerously far from the shore. If you panic, you start pushing back against the riptide, exhausting yourself.
The way to save yourself — assuming that’s still possible — is to swim perpendicularly to the riptide. That is, instead of swimming towards the shore, which is an impossibility if the riptide is strong, you have to swim parallel to the shore, breaking out of the rip tide. Only then, if you have strength left, can you head back to the land. But as I said, the real danger is the fact that riptides can be subtle things that gently, relentlessly, and imperceptibly leave you in tremendous danger.
The Democrats and NeverTrumpers in my world are finding themselves caught in the riptide of Leftist politics. I need a little personal history here to explain.
I grew up in a completely Democrat world. My family, most of their friends, my educational institutions, the communities in which I lived as a lawyer and a parent — all Democrat. I ought to have drifted along in those waters endlessly, without ever realizing that they were getting dangerously polluted.
What saved me was that I knew Israel. I knew Israel because my parents lived there during the British mandate period, during the Israeli War of Independence (in which they participated), and after Israel gained her independence. I knew it because I’d visited Israel. And I knew it because I knew lots and lots of Sabras — that is, native Israelis, whether blood relatives or friends. Moreover, growing up in a less heated time, I also knew lots of Arabs, both Christian and Muslim, all of whom were lovely people and good friends. Add to that the fact that I’m a history major and had a very solid foundation in both Western and Middle Eastern history, going back to the Biblical era, and it was the one subject about which you could not lie to me. [Read more…]
I really had meant to avoid Jeffrey Epstein cartoons, but I found so many of them, I couldn’t resist — plus more clever and funny stuff to start your week.
America is a divided country in part because half of Americans live in a fantasy land, predicated on fear and gossip, and entirely unrelated to reality.
In today’s fantasy land, our beliefs about Jeffrey Epstein are the only things binding America today.
(This is a companion post to the No. 7 Bookworm Room Podcast, which is embedded at the bottom of this post, or which you can find at Libsyn or at “>Apple Podcasts. If you like the podcast, please spread the word.)
I finally realized why I’ve been having such a hard time blogging (and podcasting) for the past few days. It’s because there’s nothing going on. Despite the 24-hour news cycle, the non-stop screaming from the Left, and the insanity of social media, nothing of note has happened in the world. Nothing at all. Instead, we’re getting made up headlines intended to convince credulous people — by which I mean most of the people amongst whom I’ve lived for the past several decades — that the world is coming to an end.
And that’s not an exaggeration. These people really do believe that Trump is a colorful amalgam of Satan, Hitler, the KKK Grand Wizard, and some hysterical television evangelist who wants to kill gays. That there is no evidence to support any of those claims is entirely irrelevant. Let me walk you through some of the madness.
Exhibit A is a little video that comes up every time I open Twitter. It doesn’t matter that I don’t follow Kirsten Gillibrand. It doesn’t matter that this was posted over 22 hours ago. And it doesn’t matter that this is not news. It’s the top of my Twitter feed no matter what:
This is not easy to watch.
But the face of this little girl, crying for her father who was taken from her in an ICE raid, is not something we can turn away from. Americans need to know the pain this administration is inflicting on families.
This president has no morality. pic.twitter.com/lg6GtN5mnk
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) August 10, 2019
It also doesn’t matter that it was President Obama who separated families and put kids in cages.
The stunning thing about this bathetic crying child video is that the Left is advocating an entirely new standard here: If you commit a crime and have children, it’s wrong for you to be arrested or punished for your crime.
The unspoken caveat, of course, is that this applies only if you’re in this country illegally. If you’re a born and raised American, whether white, black, or Hispanic, and you commit a crime, the fact that you have children is irrelevant. You should have thought of that before you ran afoul of the law. But not if you’re in this country illegally, taking jobs from Americans, getting free education for your kids, and getting free healthcare, if only by showing up in the ER when you can’t pay. Then, children are your “get out of jail free” card.
Exhibit B is the outrage over a photograph of Donald and Melania Trump with a baby that survived the shooting in El Paso: [Read more…]
In my latest podcast and in this post, I examine the myriad reasons behind mass shootings today and — surprise! — none of them have to do with guns.
I know it’s been almost a week since the terrible shootings in El Paso and Dayton, but I’m still stuck on them — perhaps because the Leftists are still using them as a reason to gut the Second Amendment without bothering to to through the constitutional amendment process. I therefore used today’s podcast to discuss the multitude of reasons behind mass shootings, none of which is the availability of guns. Guns are merely a tool nor a motivation.
(You can listen to the podcast below, or find it at Apple Podcasts or at Libsyn podcasts. Or you can read this post which, while not a verbatim transcript of the podcast, covers much the same content. As always, if you like the podcast, please share it. I’d love to have an audience share one day that actually generates ad revenues.)
The primary thing to remember is that guns are not the only means to commit mass murder. Back in 1927, an angry man used bombs to blow up a school in Bath Township, Michigan, killing 38 kids and 6 adults, and injuring at least 58 others. We know from headlines around the world that those intent upon mass murder will use knives, cars, trucks, airplanes, and bombs to kill as many people as possible.
When it comes to murder, human ingenuity is endless. The reality is that man is hardwired for violence. It is the work of civilization that has shut that limited those violent impulses. I recommend two books on that point. The first is Steven Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
So if guns are merely one avenue by which humans express their innate violence, what’s really going on now? Why are we seeing so many mass shootings? I think there are a multitude of reasons for current mass shootings some or most of which tend to be present in all the events we hear about lately. Here are my theories, in no particular order: [Read more…]
Are you smarter than a SNOPES fact-checker?
So, put yourself in the shoes of some poor shlub at Snopes who has to determine which of the following is satire from the Babylon Bee, and which is straight news reporting? Choose before clicking (or hovering with the mouse) please. This is a test.
A. Biden says “Poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.”
B. Biden Aides Forced To Use the Spray Bottle Again
C. Biden’s Latest Gaffes on Russia, Segregationists Are ‘Just the Beginning’
D. Second Democratic Debate Turns Into Tense Minimum Wage Bidding War
The bad news, if you fail the test, you may be qualified to work at Snopes.
The claim of a significant white supremacist threat (led by Trump, no less) is the latest cynical canard of a left that seeks to divide the nation into competing tribes.
Over the past weekend In El Paso, a terrorist inspired by many things, including ecology (Mother Jones characterizes the shooter as an “eco-facist”) — but not by Trump — committed a mass shooting, killing twenty and wounding twenty-six. In Dayton, Ohio, a Liewatha-supporting Antifa Satanist committed a mass shooting, killing nine and injuring twenty-seven. And unreported in the national news of the day, in Chicago, a series of murders and shootings injured fifty-two and claimed the life seven. But that was a fairly normal weekend in the Windy City. All or almost all the violence there was committed by inner-city blacks, and almost all of it was committed against inner-city blacks, so the progressive left merely yawned. And what do we hear about in the news but . . . Trump inspires mass murders by white supremacists?
Yes, as Spartacus, Fauxcohantus and Betaboy will tell you:
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) joined fellow Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke in describing President Donald Trump as a white supremacist.
The Massachusetts Democrat agreed the president was a racist, and said he had emboldened other white supremacists, in an interview with the New York Times.
Joe “they’re gonna’ put y’all back in chains” Biden, never one to be out demagogued, “on Wednesday blamed President Trump for several high-profile incidents of racial violence in the U.S., accusing the president of inspiring deadly hate crimes by embracing white nationalist extremism.” Democrat Rep. Joaquin Castro doxed contributors to Trump living in his district, saying that they needed to be shamed for being active supporters of white-nationalism and, by extension, now responsible for mass murder led by Trump. Meanwhile, MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace accused the President of seeking “to exterminate Latinos.” The Washington Examiner rolls up the many examples of how the media has become “unhinged” in their progressive bias over the shootings.
In addition, of course, there are inevitable appeals by the proggie left to repeal the Second Amendment. Never a good idea, that.
Perhaps the best take on this “white supremacist” nonsense comes from Tucker Carlson and Victor Davis Hanson
The American body politic has been sick for decades, but the current insanity may signal that the raging political infection is getting better not worse.
America needs a Dr. Pimple Popper
A friend wrote me an email in a despairing tone. He fears that the craziness we’re seeing on the Left indicates a downhill slide in America from which there is no recovery. I currently incline towards a more optimistic, although gross, viewpoint.
First off, I don’t think we can pretend that the Left hasn’t gone crazy. Exhibit A from today (emphasis mine):
Frank Figliuzzi, the former FBI assistant director for counterintelligence and a regular contributor to NBC News, told MSNBC’s Brian Williams on Monday that President Trump’s decision to fly flags at half-staff until Aug. 8 may very well be a tip of the cap to white supremacist groups. Here’s what he said:
The president’s either getting really good advice and rejecting it, or he’s getting really bad advice. We have to understand the adversary and the threat we’re dealing with, and if we don’t understand how they think, we’ll never understand how to counter them, so it’s the little things and the messaging that matters.
The president says that we will fly our flags at half-mast until August 8, that’s 8/8. Now I’m not going to imply that he did this deliberately, but I am using it as an example of the ignorance of the adversary demonstrated by the White House. The numbers 8/8 are very significant in the neo-Nazi and the white supremacy movement. Why? Because the letter ‘H’ is the eighth letter of the alphabet, and to them, the numbers 8/8 stand for ‘Heil Hitler.’
So we’re going to be raising the flag back up at dusk on 8/8. No one’s thinking about this. No one’s giving the advice, or he’s rejecting the advice.”
That is tinfoil hat crazy, yet Figliuzzi not only has been given airtime on one of America’s formerly respected major media outlets, he’s a former high level FBI employee. [Read more…]
The Second Amendment is an unalienable right; plus, even assuming for the sake of argument that Trump has racist thoughts, his principles are not racist.
For those who want to listen to the podcast, you can find it embedded below, or at this link, or (at last) you can hear it at Apple/iTunes podcasts. If you think the podcasts worthy, please share the links with your friends.
In today’s podcast, I’m still chewing over the shootings this past weekend. I leave it to others to tackle the shooters’ motives (other than just being evil people) and the media’s haste to emphasize the allegedly conservative El Paso shooter (even though he seems terribly affected by the Leftist’s climate Armageddon rhetoric) while ignoring entirely the passions driving the Leftists shooter in Dayton. Instead, I want to discuss the Second Amendment and why it matters in the context of our relationship to the government. Long-time readers will recognize this discussion, but it may be new to others.
The right to bear arms is one of our premier constitutional rights. Too many Americans take our Constitution for granted without considering its centrality, not to government, but to the individuals being governed. Unlike the various federal statutes that impose laws on the people of this land, the Constitution imposes its restrictions on the federal government itself. The predicate to these individual rights is the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
Without this acknowledgement of our unalienable status and dignity, the explicitly listed Rights in the Bill of Rights are meaningless. These unalienable rights – Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness — are the abstract foundational concepts that justify a citizen’s more concrete “right” to have spheres of activity (or inactivity) upon which the government cannot impinge.
Which gets us to the Bill of Rights. What exactly is it? I mean, we all know what’s in it, but I don’t think most people stop and really think about how important it is to them, as individuals.
The Constitution is a contract between the People (acting through their state-elected representatives) and the government. The main body of the Constitution, however, has nothing to do with the People, and everything to do with defining a functioning government. Thus, while it seeks to make sure that the executive can’t overwhelm the legislature or that the courts can’t overwhelm the executive, there’s nothing in the Constitution about whether the government as a whole, or any of its individual parts, can overwhelm the citizens under its rule.
The Founders realized in the wake of the Constitution’s ratification that creating a government is not the same as protecting the People’s unalienable under that government. If the government can “giveth” something and then “taketh it away” again, that something is not a right, it is, instead, a mere privilege. [Read more…]
If we are to remain a nation of laws, then the people who manifestly engineered a coup against duly elected President Trump need to be called to account.
Can you believe that it is 2019 and Trump has, to this moment at least, survived a coup attempt? I did not expect him to survive the onslaught. He has to be the cleanest President we’ve ever had in office. He just survived a three year investigatory equivalent of a general warrant to search anywhere for any crime — something the Bill of Rights made unlawful on December 15, 1791.
Unlike a criminal investigation, which benefits from Constitutional limits and protections, things were different for Trump. Beginning on July 31, 2016, when the FBI launched an investigation explicitly aimed at Trump — and right through and including the Mueller investigation, likewise explicitly aimed at Trump, — every aspect of Trump’s life, his businesses, and finances his finances was pried open under the rubric of a “counter-intelligence investigation.” That he is clean as a whistle is obvious, for we know that, had the FBI or the Mueller team found anything that could be cast as a crime, whether related to Russia or not, they would have used it to destroy Trump. After all, Mueller’s team, while pursuing their Russia counter-intelligence investigation, used evidence about fraud regarding taxi medallions, something far removed from Mueller’s mandate, to prosecute Michael Cohen.
Anti-Trump actors in the government leaked top-secret information from NSA wiretaps to the press. Mueller’s team metaphorically raped people around Trump — including Michael Flynn, George Papadopoulos and Trump’s personal attorney, Michael Cohen — to get them to give some evidence that Trump committed crimes. The Mueller investigative team actively solicited testimony adverse to Trump, unethically and seemingly without regard to whether true or false. Trump’s personal attorney was subject to a SWAT-style raid, as was Roger Stone when his arrest played out for all on CNN. At least one person, Carter Page, was subject to four separate FISA warrants — and under the two hop rule, we can safely assume that means Trump and his inner circle were spied upon as part and parcel of that warrant as well. They were spied upon under four FISA Warrants for an entire year, beginning in October 2016 and concluding in September 2017. Indeed, it is hard not to conclude that they were the real target, with Carter Page merely a convenient patsy. Strikingly, despite this total warfare, when it came to Trump, Mueller and Co. produced . . . nothing.
There is no predicate in American law or history for any of this, whether the FBI’s counter-intelligence investigation aimed at Trump, the FISA warrants, or the way in which the DOJ unlawfully authorized Mueller to conduct a criminal investigation under the guise and rules of a counter-intelligence investigation. That is, this did not start with a crime that called for an investigation. This started with an elected president whom Washington insiders both feared and disdained and they used the investigation in the hopes that they could find a crime. The only predicate to this approach can be found in the Soviet Union’s Levrentiy Beria, who famously said, “Show me the man, I’ll find the crime.” It was an abuse aimed at finding anything in Trump’s activities that could force him from office or, during the duration of the investigation, get him to make a mistake, then force him from office on a process crime.
It’s this unconstitutional, Soviet-style, bass-ackwards bullshit that allows Mueller to claim before Congress that there’s meaning to the fact that he has not not proven Trump innocent of obstruction. As others have pointed out, Mueller also failed to exonerate Trump of assassinating Lincoln). And thus do we now have half of the progressive Congresscritters calling for Trump’s impeachment on the grounds that Trump obstructed an investigation . . . that Mueller says was never “curtailed, stopped or hindered” . . . for a crime or crimes . . . that neither Trump nor anyone in his administration committed.
Folks, this is a top-down, engineered coup to overturn the 2016 election. It is not enough that the coup be defeated. We need the disinfectant of sunshine — to make public every single aspect of this attempted coup. And then we need heads on pikes, metaphorically, and people in prison, for real. Fīat jūstitia ruat cælum. Let justice be done though the heavens fall.
To that end, these are the questions I believe need to be answered: [Read more…]
The Second Amendment still protects us against the greatest killer of all: government. Our problem is nihilism, not guns, and kindness may help fix that.
I’m still struggling through this gosh-darned cold, so my energy is a bit low. I’ve done a podcast and want to throw the link up here, but you’ll have to wait a little while for the longer post and the links to other information. In brief, the point of the podcast is that, in the wake of mass shootings in Texas and Ohio, we need to remember that the Second Amendment still protects us against the greatest killer of all: government. The change in our society shouldn’t be about guns; it needs to be about morality. We’ve reverted to a neo-paganism that devalues human life, leaving us more open to mass shootings. Lastly, I suggest that simply being kind may be something of an antidote to the alienation that seems to drive some shooters.
(If the above doesn’t work, you can also find the podcast here.)
