Cirque du Jihad: Coming to a federal court near you?
My syndicated column today expands on Tuesday’s blog post about the Aafia Siddiqui terror trial debacle in New York City (see here for background/links) and what it portends for the future. Yes, I call it Cirque du Jihad. The White House and DOJ are now scrambling to cook up contingency plans for their jihadi show trials in the wake of mounting opposition to the Gitmo transfers. President Obama is still pushing to bring the Gitmo detainees into the U.S. federal court system.
But what’s happening in the Siddiqui circus can happen anywhere. Don’t let it happen in your backyard.
*Petition to ban KSM from appearing at NYC terror trias.
***
Courtroom Cirque du Jihad
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2010
Imagine this nightmare courtroom scenario: Unhinged Jew-bashing, open mockery of American soldiers, juror intimidation, and coldly calculated exploitation of U.S. constitutional protections by a suspected al Qaeda defendant. Well, there’s no need to wait for the Gitmo terror trial circuses. New York City is already getting a glimpse of the future.
Jihadi scientist Aafia Siddiqui is on trial right now in a federal Manhattan court for the attempted murder and assault of U.S. military personnel in Pakistan two years ago. She’s an accomplished Karachi-born scientist who studied microbiology at MIT and did graduate work in neurology at Brandeis University before disappearing in the wake of the 9/11 attacks.
Counterterrorism investigators connected Siddiqui and her estranged husband, anesthesiologist Dr. Mohammed Amjad Khan, to Saudi terror funders. The couple’s bank account showed repeated purchases of high-tech military equipment and apparel, including body armor, night-vision goggles, and military manuals. Her second husband, fellow al Qaeda suspect and 9/11 plot helper Ammar al Baluchi, is one of five Gitmo detainees that the Obama administration is planning to transfer to New York for trial.
Siddiqui was identified as an al Qaeda operative, financier, and fixer by no less than 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed during U.S. interrogations. Al Baluchi is KSM’s nephew. Mohammed reportedly enlisted Siddiqui in a Baltimore-based plot to bomb gas stations, fuel tanks, and bridges, and poison water reservoirs in the greater Washington, D.C. area.. Siddiqui was taken into custody in Kabul in July 2008 after attempting to shoot U.S. military interrogators and FBI agents.
Now, the savvy “Terror Mom” of three is pulling out all the stops to win a mistrial. Among her Cirque du Jihad antics:
*Demanding that jurors be genetically tested for a “Zionist or Israeli background” to ensure a fair and impartial jury of her Jew-hating peers;
*Ranting about 9/11/Israel conspiracies during voir dire;
*Screaming out loud during the testimony of U.S. Army Capt. Robert Snyder, who was in the room in Kabul when Siddiqui allegedly grabbed an M-4 rifle and proclaimed, “Allah Akbar!” and “I hate Americans! Death to America!” Before being ejected from the courtroom, Siddiqui shouted to Snyder, “You’re lying!” She also babbled about torture at a secret prison;
*And blurting out “I feel sorry for you” to the witness in front of the jury before being led out of the courtroom again.
Siddiqui’s defense team, funded in part by the Pakistani government, asserts that Lady Al Qaeda is so mentally ga-ga that she should not be allowed to take the witness stand. Bleeding-heart human rights groups have dutifully rallied around Siddiqui. She’s Mumia abu Jamal in a burqa. Indeed, her supporters have launched their own “Free Affia” campaign. But two government-retained psychiatrists, working independently, determined last year that Siddiqui’s so-called symptoms of mental illness were attributed to “malingering” and “manipulation.” The judge in the case concluded that she is competent and understands full well the charges against her.
The Crazy Jihadi tactic is in perfect sync with the al Qaeda training manual advising its operatives to claim victimhood status if arrested and put on trial. This act is also in keeping with a long tradition of terror defendants invoking the insanity card – from “20th hijacker” Zacarias Moussaoui (whose lawyers chalked up his mass-murdering ambitions to a traumatic childhood) to Fort Hood massacre Nidal Hasan (whose defense will undoubtedly play up his lonely bachelorhood).
To make matters worse, the New York Post reported this week that an “unidentified man in a white headdress” mouthed an obscenity at the Siddiqu trial and cocked his finger like a gun at two jurors. The jurors were let go; it remains unclear whether the thug in white headdress will be charged and what relation, if any, he has to Siddiqui.
Would you answer a jury summons knowing you could end up sitting in front of a jihadi sympathizer on the loose mentally painting a target on your forehead? And would you trust the White House ringmasters and Justice Department terror-coddlers to protect you from harm?
These suspects belong in controlled military tribunals, not federal courtrooms that are being turned into al Qaeda p.r. platforms. The O.J. Simpson spectacle of a smirking murder suspect, preening defense attorneys, a showboating judge, and the judicial process run amok on cable TV 24/7 was bad enough. The 1993 World Trade Center bombing trial, which gave the bin Laden network a multi-million-dollar, tax-subsidized legal team, free translation services, personal dry-cleaning services, race-baiting defense witnesses, and access to information that was allegedly used by jihadists to evade surveillance, was even worse.
The specter of 10 or 15 or 20 Siddiqui-style courtroom carnivals – at a cost of at least $1 billion to taxpayers – threatens to throw our civilian courtroom system into complete chaos. America can’t afford to clown around with national security.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Latest Addition to the Super Bowl Counterterrorism Squad: Hot Dog Vendors
February 3, 2012 07:53 PM by Doug Powers
45 Comments
Fast and Furious showdown: Holder/Obama defend bloody culture of contempt; Update: Fortress Holder, Stonewall City; vid clips added, Dems advise, “Don’t answer”
February 2, 2012 09:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
158 CommentsAttention: Obama’s coming to Arizona, Ground Zero of his Fast and Furious debacle
January 23, 2012 02:08 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 CommentsObama heads to Disney World to push looser visa policies
January 17, 2012 01:14 PM by Michelle Malkin
95 Comments
The Year in Obama Scandals — and Scandal Deniers
December 28, 2011 12:04 PM by Michelle Malkin
122 Comments
The Brian Terry Memorial Act passes
December 15, 2011 06:08 PM by Michelle Malkin
21 CommentsThe murder of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry: One year ago today
December 14, 2011 11:11 AM by Michelle Malkin
70 Comments
Holder, Blago, Richardson: Triangle of Sleaze
December 9, 2011 09:05 AM by Michelle Malkin
125 CommentsCapitol Hill hearing/vote watch: Holder, Corzine, Cordray; Update Holder: Nobody lied; Corzine: Don’t know where $ went; F&F impeachment?; Issa turns up heat; Holder “possibly” will clean house; vids added
December 8, 2011 09:41 AM by Michelle Malkin
157 Comments
Categories: Ally McBeal approach,Eric Holder,Gitmo,Homeland Security,Islam
Redstate
» Morning Briefing for February 14, 2012Pundit & Pundette
» Bishop Jenky, Nicki Minaj, and the "98%"Sister Toldjah
» Obama’s new budget is a bad jokeJustOneMinute
» We Hear From The Department Of Good Ideas And False Choices
They really want to have it in the US—I nominate the following:
Madison, WI
Beverly Hills, CA
San Francisco, CA
Skokie, IL
Falls Church, VA
Berkley, CA.
Obama is either naive or maniacal. Either way, he is wrong to bring these enemy combatants to our shores.
what I think he and this administration are doing is trying to punish the former administration in a public forum and let the enemy get all our secrets when it comes to how we fight (?) the war on terror…put them all at GITMO and try them as enemy combatants in military tribunals!!!!
How in the name of heaven do these people qualify for American justice?!?! They are less than “military” combatants, recognizing no laws but their own. The only justice they qualify for is found on page 7.62. Hang ‘em high!
New York voted for Eric Holder’s boss-let New York work it out. Other than that saboteurs and non uniformed combatants should be summarily shot under the Rules of Land Warfare. But as for New York Obama did campaign on giving these people civilian trials under the Bill of Negative Rights did he not? All the Nation stood with NYC after the attack but soon they went back to their Bloomberg/weenie ways; they are too concerned with transfat and salt in the diet to worry about terrorism. Let New York handle it.
National Security issues? These Leftist thugs are determined to gut all our defenses-they are citizens of the world. Prepare to defend yourselves. The shepple of NYC decided to not defend themselves but to wait for help and die.
What I don’t get is how do they think they will find a jury of their peers for these scum bags in any American city?
I don’t think they could find enough terrorists in any particular American location to make up a jury. Although, they might come close in Berkeley, San Francisco, Dearborn, or any university town …
Well put, ‘Neanderthal! When one surrenders his personal safety to any one for any reason, one becomes a body waiting for a bag. The veneer of civilization is never any thicker than thin, and we all live our lives one mere breath away from eternity.
Another important piece, dead on target and perfect timing on the tail of the KSM Flying Circus getting booted from NYC yesterday. Well done Michelle.
With the security nightmares, disruption of commerce, massive expense and public opposition these “trials” will bring, it’s going to be near impossible to find a venue for them.
Gitmo and military tribunals are looking better and better, eh Barry?
I have no doubt in the ability of our court system to find enough jurors to free ANYBODY, no matter how horrible the crime. There are a LOT of stupid, USA-hating, freedom-hating idiots out there.
I, unfortunately, beg to differ. With Clown General Holder goose-stepping to the tune of “Obama Uber Alles”, and Tightrope Secretary Geitner printing money like “missing child” fliers, we can–in a financial sense anyway–afford this.
In any other sense, though, we can’t afford this. Unless it finally ignites the armed revolution this country is teetering on the brink of NEEDING.
Rope is cheap- String them up. They are unlawful combatants, they aren’t even entitled to a trial, any kind of trial.
Sorry, cr@p like her gets the single bullet to the brain trial.
Let’s see if Holder, that weasel, has enough sense to back down and move the trial. Trouble is, it belongs at Gitmo. Let’s see, we could send this bunch to Chicago, or Hawaii, or wherever BHO claims home status or nativity. No, I’m not suggesting we look at his birth certificate to see where that is…
Would you answer a jury summons knowing you could end up sitting in front of a jihadi sympathizer on the loose mentally painting a target on your forehead? And would you trust the White House ringmasters and Justice Department terror-coddlers to protect you from harm?
The whole point here is to put the USA on trial – and to let the enemy know our methods and operations so that next time they’ll be more successful.
“Don’t blame me, I voted for the American!”
These enemy combatants should be summarily tried and shot as spys where captured as was the case in past wars. It’s time to tell the politically correct and ACLU types to take a hike.
These scum bags are not U.S. citizens. They are not uniformed enemy prisoners of war. They are terrorist beholden to none but themselves and their bloodthirsty obsessions. Bullets are less costly than show-trials and if our panty-waist government leaders won’t do it, maybe we should.
Easy there Luigi, Madison is only a couple hours south of me. And the possibility of an acquittal/hung jury in Mad-town is all too real.
But you could get beer & brats from venders outside the courthouse, or walk down to the Parthenon for a Gyros. KSM would be quite the local celeb.
I am all for GITMO being closed, but not for the same reasons as Obama. I think they have it too good down there in a tropical setting.
If it was up to me I would open GITMO North…way up in the artic where the detainees could check and see if global warming is really melting the ice caps or not.
OT joke of the day. H/T Mike Adams.
Q: What do you call an Irish communist?
A: O’Bama.
Paddy O’Bama too? I knew his cousin Al O’Bama.
A controlled civilian trial can be done as well. I recall trials where the defendant was restrained and was even gagged. There have been trials where the defendant watched the proceedings from closed circuit TV.
Comparing this to the zoo of the OJ is not entirely accurate. Are cameras allowed in Federal Court? ARe cameras allowed in military tribunals?
And, how different would a civilian trial be from a Military Tribunal? Would the defendant still be given a taxpayer funded defense attorney? Does the site of the Military trial become less of a target, or more of a target? Can a military court issue gag orders like a civilian court?
Is the public allowed to attend a Military Tribunal as they are a civilian trial? Judges have the authority to clear the courtroom, does a military judge?
The same difficulties that confront a civilian trial, may also confront a military trial.
Right now the difference appears to be one of degrees. There are going to be issues regardless. Nope that is not a defense to hold the trial in NYC. It is an acknowledgement that we are damned if we do, and damned if we don’t. Frying pan or fire.
Moreover, who decided to have this civilian trial in the first place? The woman came into our custody in July, 2008. It wasn’t AG Holder.
Yep, speak of the weaknesses of a civilian trial, but also speak of the weaknesses shared by a military tribunal, and the strengths of both.
Well….DUH… there is NO good reason to have civilian trials for these creatures. Obama actually believes that no one will notice that he is using this to attack on the “previous administration” ? …..this is the friendliest thing he could do for the terrorists (other that just letting them go) the old quote comes to mind…”the enemy of my enemy is my friend” Obama just doesn’t understand to show such weakness will not turn one terrorist, I mean.…even if he lets the whacko mullahs have their atomic bombs to “wipe Israel from the map” they will continue to attack the Infidel
OT – I’m no Peggy Noonan fan, but her piece in the WSJ today summed up the SOTU nicely. The Obama Contradiction.
RE: KSM
I’m still trying to figure out why the DOJ picked NYC in the first place. There had to have been some preliminary discussions with someone in NYC.
There are no weaknesses to a military trial for terrorists / enemy non-uniformed combatants.
Oh, wait. There is one weakness. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, the US military, and the USA won’t be the ones on trial.
Let me be clear; we wouldn’t have to worry about a trial or venue if she had been shot on sight.
They wanted it to be held in the shadow of the Twin Towers. How a hole in the ground could cast such a shadow I do not know-it must be a Chicago thing.
Since she professes to “hate Americans”, and hating based on national origin or nationality is a form of xenophobia, can’t we try her in the court of political correctness and ensure a swift, biased and irreversible outcome?
All kidding aside, kudos to Rep. Peter King for spearheading this effort. He has always been very solid on national security issues and I’m glad he took this on and has pushed the issue relentlessly.
The thought o these trials really makes me physically ill. I don’t think BO is naive about having civilian trials in NYC. I think he deliberately wants something bad (an attack of some kind) to happen during these trials.
This man does not love America.
Who do you think gave preliminary and likely off the record approval to bring it there? Governor? NYC Mayor?
Now Obama is talking about moving the trial outside of NYC, but still in civilian court. I hope these idiots remain politically tonedeaf, because the losses will keep mounting for November. I wish the Congress would vote on a Resolution condemning the decision to try these creeps in civilian court, and this way every single vote against that resolution can appear in a campaign commercial against that candidate.
If this is still held in civilian Court, then empty the court of spectators, allow no cameras and limited press, and if this scumbag keeps making outbursts, sequester her in a cell with a TV feed to the courtroom proceedings. But Im sure the ACLU would be greatly offended by all of that. Eric Holder is a mucking disgrace for doing this.
I keep wondering when Eric Holder will be resigning to spend more time with his family. His various decisions (past/recent) have been dangerous and he must/needs to go but (to lesser extent) those decisions have been great fodder for conservatives.
Or in typical arrogant Obamaworld fashion, Holder never bothered. Hey NYC, here’s what we’re gonna do. Deal with it.
Another interesting question. As I recall Holder announced this bone headed plan while Barry was in Copenhagen trying to save the planet. Was this so Obama could distance himself from it, or to take the spotlight off his GW nonsense? Or both?
Distancing yes good … Obama’s modus operandi. BHO knows (maybe doesn’t care or is too stupid to understand repercussions).
And I believe someone highup in NY was ‘consulted’ in advance and is now doing the DisDance too!
Hell folks — she will get off on a technicality and will imeediately be appointed Middle East Czar.
Texas fast lane works for me.
try them right there in d.c. if gitmo is too bush/cheney for these commies. let the bombs fall in d.c. subways and buildings. urban renewal would be a great obama legacy.
Since the AG cannot go to the restroom without the concurrence of the President, this attempt at “distancing” only provides another example of how unqualified and gutless Obama, “I vote present,” truly is.
A great idea! How about one of those deserted islands that swing out from Alaska?
The only logical place to hold all of these trials would be in the personal residences of Ginsburg, Sotomayor, Stevens, Breyer, Holder and Barack Hussein Obama!
They could hold the cases in a “round robin” fashion. I think Holder should get the first one and his wife and kids should be required to attend every day the “court” is in session.
These people are MORONS! These are illegal combatants. We have NEVER BEFORE given illegal combatants access to civilian courts. NEVER.
Further north:
First polar bear: jihadist taste great
Second polar bear: jihadist less filling
Well, there’$ one difference between a military tribunal and a civilian trial – aside from the fact the US Constitution applies to citizens and not enemy combatants!
If we assume the real goal is to produce testimony of supposed CIA torture under oath in an open court room so Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld can be indicted, and it is secondary that KSM and others could have all evidence generated after their confessions quashed under the legal doctrine “fruit of the poisoned tree”, it all makes sense.
It explains Obama’s special deference to INTERPOL, they could be the ones who serve warrants on Bush and take him out of the country, sparing Obama the bad publicity of having the DoJ arrest Bush and Cheney.
Obama can decry that Bush and Cheney are on trial facing life sentences in the Hague, while pleasing his nutroot masters like George Soros.
Everything Obama does makes perfect sense if one assumes, instead of stupidity, his apparent bad decisions are made from malevolently anti-American motives.
The Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers.
I don’t think the military tribunals would have granted KSM all the rights of a US citizen, such as a requirement that he was Mirandized before making his statement, and his confession and any evidence gained as a result of his confession, since he was not advised of his rights, would not be heard in court.
It gets much harder to gain a conviction with that gone, and CIA and military sources and methods would be revealed in open court.
Not to mention the right to a trial of his peers.
And one hold out juror, whether a libtard or someone seeking a book deal, triggers a mistrial.
Both posts = heavy and good to remember. Every time I think BHO is a dolt, I need to come back to remembering that there has been nothing I’ve seen in his associations, ‘prepolitical’ past or in his current actions that reflect a love for this country.
Gee, if only we had a secure area – like a military base – in which to try them?
THIS is a scary notion. But not one I would put past Obummer.
There is no U.S. Mayor/City or Governor/State that will tolerate these trials in their backyard.
The ONLY venue that is capable of handling the risk bringing these monsters to trial is on a high security Military base.
Which is EXACTLY what Gitmo was to begin with.
___‹^›__‹(•¿•)›__‹^›___
KILROYSHERE
This is what happens when children run the government.
Your anger is misdirected. Shouldn’t you be addressing the Congress that authorized all the misperceived illegalities perpetrated by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the US Military?
Who, by the way, were only trying to protect the vital interests of the US.
So go ahead and beat your breast and rail away. Us patriots will only have to tolerate it until Akmed The Nutjob is allowed to sneak a snuke in Hillary’s snizz, and we all get to walk together into the light.
Oops, sorry, please ignore my previous post. I misread you sarcastic intent. My bad. Unless you weren’t being sarcastic, well, then I stand by my response.
FIFY!
But a boon for the security scanner business. Viola! Jobs created!
Once you get it back, shouldn’t you make sure it still fires by….
Here are some answers for you. A military tribunal has a standing gag order from my understanding.
Yes the terrorists would be provided a lawyer for free. The difference is it is a military lawyer that has a security clearance and is the only one to have access to sensitve information (i.e. top secret or secret documents). They can hire a civilian lawyer, but the civilian lawyer will not have access to the senstive information. The military would provide the needed general information without ever allowing the civilian lawyer or the terrorist to see the sources, the exact information, or revealing gathering methods.
The military tribunals are not open to the public and they do not allow cameras in the courtroom.
Not to mention convictions are far easier to gain in a military tribunal compared to a civilian trial. The standard of proof is differnet as the tribunals are based of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
Were the bullets Siddiqui fired at the soldiers real bullets or “alleged” bullets? That should be a key point that Holder will want to make as he leads the defense team for this whack job terrorist.
Keep in mind, she did this in Pakistan and shot at a US Soldier. Under what logic is she being tried in a US civilian court? Is this the new “Obama Doctine” at work?
Interesting, a Republican senator said the same thing today.
Roger that.
Wow – I hadn’t seen that.
Of course in Peggy Noonan World it’s an unnamed person apparently…
Rogue Cheddar:
Of course I was being sarcastic – I was responding to zyzzyg. Of course from his perspective it’s exactly what he wants…
It was weird, when I first read it, my anti liberal reflex kicked in where I though you railing that Boosh and company should be on trial instead. I hadn’t really looked at the name on the post. Then when I reread it, it was like (slap!) I think he meant it as sarcasm you poinyoin. Sorry, I got the Jimmy Legs on that one. Hopefully, my initial response will still sting some liberal who hopes for a War Criminal trial for Bush, Cheney , etc.
Yeah, she’s a flake. Wrote some great speeches for Reagan though, and still occasionally comes up with some good insights – like today.
Your caveat suggests you are unsure. But, OK.
OK, that is a wash. We will spend money on defending terrorists whether it is a civilian or military trial.
Unless of course the civilian lawyer seeks and recieves a clearance, which has happened. Your premise suggests that a military tribunal can go forward without presenting evidence (information). I seriously doubt that. How do you convict someone without presenting evidence?
Federal Courts do not allow cameras either. That is a wash. Any Judge at any level can clear the court room with cause.
Maybe. There have been three Military tribunals to date. Two resulted in sentences of less than one year of imprisonment for each defendant. While on the civilian side there have been hundreds of trials with a better than 90% conviction rate resulting in imprisonment of far more than a years term.
Standard of proof is different. OK. But, does that mean it is higher or lower?
I am not opposed to ripping the civilian trial. I would like both the military and civilian options to undergo the same scrutiny. What are the similarities, and what are the differences. What has actually happened in civilian trials, and what actually has happened in military tribunals.
They are just questions, and I hope that is not too much to ask.
Since you are ‘thinking’ about what the military tribunals require or grant, that means you do not ‘know’. That is OK, I don’t ‘know’ either and that is why I am asking questions.
What are the requirements for a military tribunal? What priviledges are, or are not, granted, to a defendant in a military tribunal?
As for the specifics, AG Holder publicly stated he had evidence that would not be thrown out on a technicality. We will see.
Maybe harder, but not impossible. ‘Sources and methods’ will be addressed as they arise. The attorneys will approach the bench and a decision will be made as to the potential impact of making that an issue. I suspect raising National Security as an issue will keep ‘sources and methods’ under control without revealing too much.
Not sure what you mean here, but we have a tradition of trying people using their peers, even when the defendant was a woman and could not serve on a jury, it was still called a jury of her peers. Peer simply means citizens and not an Aristocracy of trained juries.
Yes, that could happen, and then the process would begin all over again.
What happens in a military tribunal? I ask because I do not know. Does the jury have to be unanimous? Are military jurors not allowed to write books after the trial? Can liberals not serve on military tribunals?
The questions you raise about a civilian trial are appropriate to be asked about a military trial, as well.
It would be nice if Sen Graham (SC), a former JAG Officer, would spend some time slowly explaning the benefits of a military tribunal, without soliciting emotions and hyperventilating that is going on.
A simple sane argument comparing and contrasting the advantages of one over the other would be nice. No more myths, no more speculation, no more ‘thinking’, just substance and facts.
The enemy continues to be given diversity visas from the State Department. What side is the CFR filled State Department on?
Don’t worry folks the problem that Islam brings is here, and growing.
As a follow up to #79 – http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/local&id=7229328
Tariq Ramadan is the grandson of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood….
The Sec of State should be arrested and put on trial for this.
Wouldn’t it be nice if Secretary Clinton, just once, used her authority to benefit the citizens of the United States…
Fact: If not wearing a uniform when captured, she can be shot.
I agree. Substance and fact.
There are two people mentioned in the opening thread by Michelle Malkin, a married couple who are violent, hate filled, vicious Jihadi militant hate and death dealers.
Regarding that couple, the woman who studied micro biology and neurology, and the man who was an anesthesiologist are two people I would NOT trust to work on me, by virtue of their violent Jihadi ties.
They are candidates for potential murderers during a procedure, as well as potential candidates for tampering with research and lab experiments, in their related fields.
No.
If you tell me that either of these people are now assigned to a case I might be involved in as a patient, or in any other form, then I’ll have to say, “No thanks. They are crazy members of a blood, death, sadism, and hatred cult. I don’t want them any where near me!”
National security and intelligence is lost and meaningless with this current administration of fools. We have another enemy, this time it’s in the WH.
Americans are unable to see wolves in sheep’s cloathing.
SNIPPET – Quote: “But what’s happening in the Siddiqui circus can happen anywhere. Don’t let it happen in your backyard.”
DON’T LET IT HAPPEN IN YOUR BACKYARD. I agree.