Every time they try to dogpile on Trump, it keeps backfiring. This time? Sweden.
The same press that gave Obama’s carefully constructed lies a free pass… (did we ever bring to ‘justice’ those responsible for Benghazi like he promised? Or just that filmmaker scapegoat?
The press that gave Clintonian tactics (they have their own WORD for it!) of ‘deny and deflect’ a free pass … ‘like with a cloth?’ or ‘what difference — at this point — does it make’?
Those same people, and the lemmings on the left were THRILLED to have something to call out Trump for.
‘What’s happening last night in Sweden’.
There was no terrorist attack last night! He’s an idiot!
Actually… Trump knew EXACTLY what he was talking about. And it was relevant to what he was saying.
He was talking about Tucker Carlson’s show… which was addressing immigrant crime… in Sweden.
‘Sweden. Who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible.’
He later clarified on Twitter that he was denying ‘fake news’ claims that ‘large scale immigration in Sweden is working out just beautifully.’
That’s an opinion Peter Springaire – an investigator in Orebro’s Serious Crimes Squad who says he has 47 years’ experience on the force – might agree with, Fox News said.
…On February 3, Springaire posted a rant against criminal immigrants that began ‘I’m so f**king tired.’
Warning that his words were ‘not politically correct,’ he went on to list the crimes his team had faced that week.
They were five rapes, three counts of assault – including one against police – two drug offenses, multiple threats, extortion and attempted murder.
Then he offered a list of ‘suspected perpetrators’: ‘Ali Mohamad Mahmod, Mohammed, Mohammed Ali, again, again, again…
‘Christoffer … huh, it is true. Yes a Swedish name crept into the outskirts of a drug offense, Mohammed Mahmod Ali, again and again.’
Springaire said with the exception of the lone Swede, those criminals either had no documentation or came from a series of Islam-majority countries, naming Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Somalia.
‘Now we are only talking about Orebro,’ he added. ‘And these crimes occupy our investigative capacity to 100%. This is how it looks and has looked for the last 10-15 years.’
Of course, after he made that statement, he was investigated for ‘inciting racial hatred’.
He ‘voluntarily’ made not one, but TWO *clarifiying* statements to follow.
So, what was the real point?
Extreme vetting, as he calls it, when NOT implemented can have some pretty serious negative consequences.
Is any of this REALLY a controversial statement?
Yes, but only with a ‘gotcha’ media.