Lion of the Blogosphere

Obama’s FBI is following Donald Trump’s advice

When Donald Trump recommended that we take out the families of terrorists, the liberals became outraged.

But isn’t that exactly what the FBI is doing with respect to Omar’s wife? Technically she may have been an “accessory” because she drove him to scout locations knowing that he was talking about jihad, but really she was just some stupid weak-willed women easily coerced by her dominant husband. Her main transgression is marrying the wrong person. But how could she have known she was marrying a future jihadist? The FBI themselves investigated Omar twice and failed to find him to be a significant terrorist threat or a criminal.

The FBI, nevertheless, is going to prosecute her to the maximum extent. Life in prison? Even the death penalty? The FBI wants to deter future terrorism. And the FBI wants revenge, and they can’t get revenge against Omar because he’s dead. Obama’s FBI is following the same moral code for which Donald Trump was condemned.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

June 15, 2016 at 11:52 am

Posted in News, Politics

10 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.


    Establishment Cucks: OMFG HOW CAN HE SAY THAT?!?!?!?!?!?!? IT’S NOT WHO WE ARE!!!

    *A month later*

    EC: Well, ok, we see how that could work, we just wish he said it nicer.

    What pisses me off about cucks is how they’re more concerned with tone, than with the fact rome is burning.

  2. Lion is missing the obvious.

    They are prosecuting her because she drove him to the club that he attacked. She abetted the crime. No one said that family members who abet terrorism should not be punished. What Trump said is that family members should be punished regardless of any evidence that they abetted a crime.


    June 15, 2016 at 1:11 pm

  3. “And the FBI wants revenge,”

    The FBI wants a scapegoat.


    June 15, 2016 at 1:21 pm

    • When I made that comment, I was thinking in terms of the FBI prosecuting someone in order to camouflage the fact that they weren’t able to prevent the attack. But I do think she bears some culpability. I also think that a terrorist is less likely to commit an attack if their families pay a price. They may be willing to die themselves. But it doesn’t mean they want their families to suffer.


      June 16, 2016 at 3:38 pm

  4. What happened to (K)ike (Enrique) Marquez?


    June 15, 2016 at 6:02 pm

  5. First off, the notorious comment provoked a media firestorm because “take out” is generally synonymous with “kill.” It’s ridiculous you would say Obama’s following Trump’s “advice.” Trump didn’t even have the conviction to see this comment through and predictably tap-danced around it, later clarifying that “take out” does NOT mean kill.

    Of course the authorities will go after people (and institutions) tangentially related to these massacres. That’s the way it has always been, so there’s no causal relationship between Trump’s “advice” and the FBI’s actions. By that standard, you should have been accusing Obama (and just about everyone else in the establishment) of hypocrisy by saying they actually do take out family members, and again, that’s “take out” in the weak, clear-as-mud sense. In fact, Obama does have a policy of literally killing people, including children, in targeted drone strikes.


    June 15, 2016 at 9:45 pm

  6. Trump said he would “go after” the families of terrorists. This is an ambiguous statement, meant to get inside the OODA-loop of terrorists. “Go after” can mean many things — from a tough investigation to destroying the family houses of terrorists.

    In some places the families of terrorists are rewarded with cash prizes from wealthy Islamic Supremacist donors. Trump’s veiled threat are an intelligent way to complicate the thinking process of families aiding terrorists.

    Haven Monahan

    June 16, 2016 at 12:39 am

  7. It’s interesting how the Israelis, Russians, Thai &c. &c. all converge on the same strategy for dealing with “these people”. Go after the families.

    Economic Sophisms

    June 16, 2016 at 11:14 am

  8. The dad should go to jail too. He’s absolutely at fault for this too, but he is probably a CIA asset and skates.

    The first wife ought to be looked at too. Clearly she hates America even if she didn’t have anything to do with the shooting. She didn’t report the guy to the police for abuse either.


    June 16, 2016 at 11:28 am

  9. One problem is that these terrorists have no respect for rule of law and they see the law as an illegitimate authority. However these terrorists do listen to their families and religious authorities. The families and religious communities create the social networks and ideological petri dishes that nourish radical thinking and enable the terrorists.

    I disbelieve media analysis that these terrorists are somehow radicalized by visiting random ISIS websites. The radicalization comes from family and religious groups. The ISIS websites finish the process by urging radical beliefs be converted to radical actions.

    We need to use civil forfeiture laws to go after the terrorist networks. For example, seize mosques that are associated with a disproportionately large number of terrorists. There are notorious mosques out there that preach radical Islam and have ties to terrorists. If those mosques were used for networking and planning terrorism they should be seized.

    Same thing with houses and small business. If family members look the other way while Omar Jr plans terrorism in the basement of a house or in the back of the family shop then seize them.


    June 17, 2016 at 12:16 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: