Sign On San Diego recently awarded its “Person of the Year” to the Marine.

We can think of no better way to begin this tradition than by selecting as our first winner the Marine. Since Sept. 11, 2001, America has relied on the Marine to keep us safe from terror at home and to take the fight to our enemies abroad, a task our Marines have handled with immense courage, professionalism and honor. (more…)

Oh, if only that were true.

Instead, Time went the moral equivalence route with this nonsense:

Time’s rationale:

(more…)

It’s that time of year again, time for newspapers and magazines to start floating their “top stories of the year” lists and Time Magazine has a whole “Top of Everything” list with which to thrill us. But it is Time’s Top U.S. News Stories list that deserves some closer scrutiny because on it Time has determined that the Occupy Wall Street tale is the number one story of the year. As if anyone ever doubted that this left-wing temper tantrum would pique Time’s interest most.

But, seriously, now. Is the Tucson massacre somehow a lesser story than the Occupiers? Is the long-drawn out GOP primary campaign a lesser story? How about the debt crisis? Is that somehow a less important story than Occupy Wall Street? Apparently Time thinks so.

Certainly these lists are always somewhat subjective. After all, what one considers important another may not. But some of these entries seem to point out Time’s ideology as opposed to a serious attempt to pick the top stories of 2011. And making the Occupy story number one is pure ideology.

Time puts this story above the bad economy, Iraq, the Penn State sex abuse case, and the Gabrielle Giffords shooting. In fact, if it weren’t for the bad economy, the debt ceiling debate and the bank crisis this Occupy business would not have occurred at all.

Naturally, Time’s characterization of the “movement” is all sweetness and light. Not one mention is made of the now over 400 arrests made as a result of crimes perpetrated by the Occupiers. In fact, Time blames all the ills of the Occupiers on the beleaguered cities for their “heavy handed-policing” of the protests.

Time also disgorges the discreditable claim that the OWSers are the left’s tea partiers. This is a calumny against the tea party that really needs to be eliminated from the national discussion of the two movements.

Another aspect of the Occupy events went unmentioned in Time’s laudatory entry on the protests is the fact that taxpayers are being charged millions of dollars in tax money we don’t have to clean up after and police these protests. This somehow never makes an appearance in Time’s gladhanding of the Occupiers.

What is clear with this entry is that Time Magazine had an agenda with this pick. Sure the OWSers deserved a mention on a top ten list. But that it made number one and that the entry ignored all the negative aspects of the protests proves what the magazine is really attempting to do with this list.

(more…)

- While the Occupy movement continues to labor in the streets in a manner designed to help Obama and the Democrats, why isn’t the media bothering to report the significant role Big Labor is playing? That’s a rhetorical question, but you can vent in comments of you  like.

The most interesting part of this story, however, is that one of the AFL-CIO affiliates behind the campaign, the Working America group, is headed by a veteran of the Venceremos Brigades to Cuba, a progressive activist by the name of Karen Nussbaum. Equally significant, her husband works for the public relations firm that represented billionaire hedge fund operator George Soros.

- No bias at Time, nope. Plus, were Cain a Democrat and Time not part of the Left, they’d be called racist for making cracks about him.

Time magazine’s website made a cutesy list of the “The 10 Best (Topical) Halloween Costumes of 2011.” Number two on the list was the “GOP presidential candidates.” You could be Michele Bachmann and look “overly wide-eyed, like you just drank a coffeemaker.” Wear a nightcap with your Rick Perry costume for his “sleepiness on the campaign trail.” Herman Cain has a “gimmicky jobs plan” inside a pizza box.

- But the, with the New York Times all but calling Cain and “minstrel,” Bryant Gumbel mumbling on about plantations, and Andrea Mitchell playing the race card so badly, even NBC’s Chuck Todd disapproved, race is the third rail of politics for thee but not for me, as far as the Left in media is concerned. It’s the new tolerance, the media detests lynching, unless the black person is conservative, or has an “R” after their name.

(more…)

Throughout his tenure, there have been several facets in which President Obama has been demonstrably weak on leadership, with the debt debate coming to the forefront in recent months. Now however, lost in that news cycle has been another failure of leadership for the President – his own request to tone down violent rhetoric in this country. For it was mere months ago that Obama stood in front of a crowd in Tucson that had anxiously sought leadership amidst the chaos of the Gabrielle Giffords shooting; a teachable moment that had The Guardian gushing about how the President had delivered “calm amid the toxic rhetoric.”

That moment of calm has long since dissipated. Where once the President had denounced discourse that places “the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do,” we hear Republicans blamed for holding the American people hostage to their economic policies. Where once we were urged to talk “with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds,” we now hear tea party members being denounced as terrorists.

Make no mistake, this ratcheting up of terrorism and hostage-taking discourse directly coincides with recent events in Norway. The instant that Oslo terrorist, Anders Behring Breivik, was labeled as a ‘right-wing Christian,’ liberals finally had their moment to seize upon – not just a chance to mislabel conservatives as extreme ideologues but a chance to label them as violent ideologues. This message has been a coordinated and vicious attack amongst the media, the Democrats, and most assuredly, the President.

Prior to the Norwegian massacre, references to the tea party as extreme were prevalent, but making the leap in logic to terrorism had been scant. After the Norwegian massacre however, liberals defining the tea party as hostage-taking terrorists have become far more frequent. In the last few days it has become practically commonplace.

This past Friday Politico ran an op-ed titled, “The Tea Party’s Terrorist Tactics,” which featured an illustration of an individual with a dollar sign-shaped bomb strapped to their chest, and argued that the party had progressed from hostage-taking to “the intentional infliction of harm on innocent Americans to achieve a political objective – terrorism.”

Joe Klein penned a piece for Time in which he accused Republicans of being beholden to ‘tea party robots,’ and worse, that their perceived unwillingness to compromise is something that would have made Osama bin Laden proud. The exact quote being that were he alive, bin Laden “could not have come up with a more clever strategy for strangling our nation.”

(more…)

On June 23, 2011, Time magazine published an essay entitled “One Document, Under Siege” (one page version, here) by Richard Stengel.  I consider the publication of this article to be nothing less than a scandal.  Besides the deep philosophical disagreements I have with Mr. Stengel, the piece simply fails as journalism.  As I will demonstrate in this post, there were fourteen objectively verifiable errors in Mr. Stengel’s piece, half of which could have been discovered simply by reading the Constitution itself.

I will lay out all of the false claims and evidence in a moment, but let me preview the most egregious error in the article, when Mr. Stengel wrote this:

If the Constitution was intended to limit the federal government, it sure doesn’t say so.

As one commenter wrote: “I had to read it twice to believe my eyes. Time really did say this.”  And while I will prove definitively in a moment that he is wrong, I suspect every single person reading this knows it already.

The fact that this and thirteen other egregious errors appeared in Time at all is bad enough.  But further, it was a cover story:

And look at the top left corner.  This is their history issue.

It is also scandalous because of who wrote the piece.  The author is not only the Managing Editor for Time, but he spent two years as President and CEO of the National Constitution Center.  And even today, he works with the National Constitution Center’s Peter Jennings Project for Journalists and the Constitution, whose stated mission is “to help both professional journalists and students interested in journalism understand constitutional issues more deeply.”  That is right.  He is there to help journalists understand the Constitution better.

So I will present to you fourteen clear errors Mr. Stengel has made in his article, starting with the most egregious errors.  Here are the fourteen errors, in short:

The Constitution does not limit the Federal Government.

The Constitution is not law.

The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment emancipated the slaves.

The Citizenship Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment granted the right to vote to African Americans.

The original Constitution declared that black people were to be counted as three-fifths of a person.

The original, unamended Constitution prohibited women from voting.

The Commerce Clause grants Congress the power to tax individuals based on whether they buy a product or service.

Inter arma enim silent leges translates as “in time of war, the Constitution is silent.”

The War Powers Act allows the president to unilaterally wage war for sixty days.

We have only declared war five times.

Alexander Hamilton wanted a king for America.

Social Security is a debt within the meaning of Section Four of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Naturalization depends on your birth.

The Obamacare mandate is a tax.

When I am done with this post, I am going to make a bleg where I ask you to try to help get out the word about this egregiously incorrect cover story.  So stay tuned to the end (or jump ahead if you feel like it).

But first here, point-by-point, is proof that each one of those claims are incorrect.

False Claim #1: The Constitution does not limit the Federal Government.

(more…)

May 14^th. On this day 63 years ago the Modern state of Israel was founded, it is celebrated yearly on the Hebrew date as Yom HaAtzmaut, Independence Day. More recently another name has been attached to it; “Nakba.” Nakba is an Arabic word meaning catastrophe; it was originally coined to describe the splitting of Palestine from Greater Syria by the League of Nations. This formed the Mandate for Palestine as a protest of the description of the Arabs living between the Jordan and the Mediterranean as not being part of Syria. It is generally observed by Arabs living in Israel by throwing rocks at passing vehicles and burning things.

This year was slightly different. While it was more of the same in Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem, there was also a mass movement of people on the Israel’s Northern border. Thousands pushed through the fence on the border with Syria, breaking into the Golan, and many more massed on the Lebanese border as well. The protest march broke into low level violence here and there, and Israeli troops running down various infiltrators shot and killed four of the Syrian invaders. More were killed on the border with Lebanon, but it is unclear who shot them.

TIME magazine has looked upon this somewhat peaceful invasion and has seen the “Arab Spring” writ large. The march was well organized, with workshops and training, by Israeli Arabs using Facebook and other social media. To the eyes of the people at TIME this connects it directly to the popular uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia.

There are, of course, a few minor differences, but I will concede that some of the goals are the same. Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and Syria all saw internal protests against stagnation and ongoing human rights abuses by minority autocratic dictatorships. All of which were met with vicious repression. The one thread that has been seen repeatedly in many of these uprisings is a promise to “deal with” Israel when they’ve dealt with their own country first.

(more…)

Human beings are amazingly adaptive. We live all over the globe, in every climate and environment from parched deserts to tropical forests to frozen tundra to wide open plains. We have thousands of different speech dialects, a huge variety of approaches to written language and a staggering array of different foods, music or clothing that are the cultural norm.

One of the ways our brains adapt to their circumstances is by subconscious acceptance of our condition as ‘normal.’ If you grew up eating cow tongue, ordering a lengua burrito doesn’t seem gross at all. If you read right to left, trying to wrap your head around a language that reads left-to-right or top-to-bottom is tricky. The world you grew up in is home and everything else is a bit odd, a sense that’s especially true for children or people who live in closed, isolated cultures.

That’s one reason that conservative criticism of the ‘media elite’ sounds just plain weird to those inside the media. It’s not an act in many cases; it really DOES sound weird, like Tuvan Throat Singing suddenly being played on a Honky-tonk jukebox. “What’s that? We’re … biased? What? No, no, no … we’re the fair, educated ones!” The statistics about the voting trends of journalists is clear and widely reported. But the paradox Is that there are so many liberals in the media that it doesn’t feel liberal – it just feels normal. It’s home.

And that’s why you’re seeing some of the Rorschach Test reaction that the James O’Keefe  sting on NPR – not just that it shows the difference between the worldviews of liberals and conservatives but that it shows how blasé and normal it is to talk the way Ron Schiller did about the racist Tea Party. He didn’t think he was saying anything controversial.

Obviously, there are many on the left who known that they have a bias and play that up. The interesting thing about NPR is that I believe they are so biased that they don’t think they are biased. Liberalism is like oxygen to them. It’s nothing they think about.

It’s not just NPR, of course. You can see a good example of this lack of self-awareness among journalists in a recent post by Time blogger James Poniewozik. I think Poniewozik makes a number of good points in this article (as well as a gratuitous, misinformed swipe at Andrew Breitbart) but what jumps out is a bit at the end of the article that would sound 100% reasonable to any American liberal.

Poniewozik is patiently gives you, dear reader, a glimpse at the tough work of a journalist. He paints a picture here of two fundamentally different approaches to recording, condensing and reporting facts. One is objective and unbiased and the other is driven by ideology and frankly, unworthy of being called journalism.

Here’s what he says:

That’s the dilemma of any journalist, as well as, well, whatever O’Keefe is: reality takes forever. You condense, you edit, you quote; you try to get a full sense of the actual story and relate it as best you can in the space you have available–whether limited by actual word count, minutes on air, or your audience’s attention span. You cut a lot of nuances and hope for the best.

You can do that with a mind toward presenting the fullest, fairest picture you can and earning your readers’ trust on the rest. (And you don’t have to be a nonideological, MSM outlet to do it—kudos to Beck’s The Blaze for calling O’Keefe out.)

Or you can, like O’Keefe, do it with a mind toward making sure your side wins and you present the worst possible picture of your adversaries. You can trust that unpacking all of your slanting will take too long to matter, that the casual news audience will remember your version and that your fans won’t believe your critics anyway.

Let’s unpack those three paragraphs to discover the unspoken, but clear, assumptions that it’s founded on.

1. Journalists are tasked with condensing reality and they do the best they can, given their constraints of time, space and attention span – no mention is made of these real journalists making decisions based on their ideology
2. James O’Keefe isn’t a journalist
3. Nonideological mainstream media outlets condense trying to present a full, fair picture
4. O’Keefe isn’t trying to be fair so he presents the worst possible picture of adversaries
5. Real journalists such as those in the mainstream media, unlike O’Keefe, don’t present the worst possible picture of their adversaries
6. O’Keefe is counting on his audience not to check his work because it would take too long or they are fans of his
7. The mainstream media, unlike O’Keefe, doesn’t count on a casual news audience too busy to check their or with biased fans

I’m writing this to an audience of conservatives and I understand enough by now to know that I could stop writing right now and you’d be able to fill in the problems here yourself. Let me point out a few of obvious (to me, now, anyway) examples.

In their coverage of politicians like Michele Bachman or Sarah Palin or Scott Walker, has the mainstream media been fair, with an eye towards painting the full picture? Did the mainstream media present the case against giving collective bargaining benefits to public workers as part of their full, fair coverage? Did Katie Couric release the full interview she did with Sarah Palin during the 2008 election? Is the complete lack of mainstream coverage of death threats to 18 GOP politicians in Wisconsin because of a lack of space or does it show an ideological decision?

You can admit this is a bias based on an underlying ideology or, like James Poniewozik, try to pretend that there’s an unbiased fair mainstream media so that your side stays in power and paint your journalistic rivals in the worst possible light. You can trust that unpacking your bias isn’t something your audience will be inclined to do since you’ve already cut them out of the editorial process by choosing angles that fit your views and ignoring stories that don’t and failing that, you can count on your audience to act like fans who will hold onto their image of your as objective because it makes them feel better about themselves.

The world Poniewozik describes of an unbiased mainstream media is a fiction. Yes, some sources get the facts straight on some issues better than others, but I’ve seen firsthand the total media fails on stories like the John Edwards affair or the Pigford settlement and there’s no question that the supposedly objective mainstream media has a tremendous amount of built-in bias that there audience isn’t even aware of because it comes in the form of the stories they DON’T show their audiences.

As such, the rightwing, libertarian and ultra—far-left blogospheres become the places that cover the stories and angles that the vast, smug, comfortably numb leftish media just pretend don’t exist. (If you don’t believe me on the ultra-far-left part, check this story on Shirley Sherrod by Ron Wilkins; factually provable and nothing the mainstream media dares touch.)

Not upsetting the apple cart with facts or uncomfortable truths that don’t fit the narrative may be ‘mainstream’ Just please stop pretending it’s objective or fair.

The media is so sure that only the worst about Palin could possibly be true that false stories, out right lies, and even comedy bits are constantly presented as actual news. Time Magazine is the latest to fall into that trap by reporting a satirical Internet posting about Sarah Palin as hard news. It all just goes to prove that Sarah Palin lives in the heads of the Old Media and it must be awfully cramped up there.

Last week on Time’s Celebrity Newsfeed, Nick Carbone reported satire as fact only to make a “correction” days later. Carbone had fallen for a “tongue-in-cheek” Internet posting that joked that in an interview with Fox News personality Sean Hannity Palin said she wanted to deport Christina Aguilera for screwing up the National Anthem at the opening of the Superbowl.

Time’s Carbone was outraged by this. He snakily wrote, “And you thought Sarah Palin went overboard by commenting that she wanted to deport the singer?” The report that Carbone linked to was a piece of satire. Yet Carbone never double checked the source because he was so sure that it was true. Sadly for his skills as a reporter, the piece he was so sure was true was clearly marked as residing in the “comedy” section.

(more…)

November 2^nd was not a pendulum swing, it was the beginning of a movement.

The activist old media and their Democrat friends act like this is just another fad that will come and go quickly—just like they saw in 2008 with their Dear Leader elected as President. Since they saw the rise and fall happen to them, then it must happen to us. Oh, their inability to see themselves is always entertaining.

When Republicans lost in 2008 there were stories everywhere about the Death of the Republican Party.  The one in Time Magazine was most enjoyable. While this article talks about the possibility of a comeback, Michael Grunwald can’t mention often enough that Republicans are an “endangered species” and even calling them the Donner Party. Who’s eating their own now?

Republicans went more conservative as a party and just completed perhaps the most amazing sweep of this nation in our lifetimes. 63 House seats, 6 Senate seats, 12 Governorships and nearly 700 State seats went Red in 2010. While repeating those numbers seems unlikely in 2012 (we’re just looking mainly at that Top Spot and a bunch of those Senate seats up for grabs), few honest observers could doubt this move to the right will continue.

(more…)

Our pals at the Media Research Center bring the Christmas cheer with a highlight reel of the year in liberal media bias.  Enjoy:

With the release last week of another cache of classified documents via Wikileaks, we’ve learned a few things about the war in Iraq. One of the highlights, if it can be called that, is just how heavily involved Iran was in a proxy war against the US forces in Iraq. The NY Times covered it in a front page story Saturday:

During the administration of President George W. Bush, critics charged that the White House had exaggerated Iran’s role to deflect criticism of its handling of the war and build support for a tough policy toward Iran, including the possibility of military action.

But the field reports disclosed by WikiLeaks, which were never intended to be made public, underscore the seriousness with which Iran’s role has been seen by the American military…

Citing the testimony of detainees, a captured militant’s diary and numerous uncovered weapons caches, among other intelligence, the field reports recount Iran’s role in providing Iraqi militia fighters with rockets, magnetic bombs that can be attached to the underside of cars, “explosively formed penetrators,” or E.F.P.’s, which are the most lethal type of roadside bomb in Iraq, and other weapons. Those include powerful .50-caliber rifles and the Misagh-1, an Iranian replica of a portable Chinese surface-to-air missile, which, according to the reports, was fired at American helicopters and downed one in east Baghdad in July 2007.

In short, the new leak is replete with evidence of Iran’s role – but notice the first sentence above. It says that “critics charged that the White House had exaggerated Iran’s role.” Who were these critics, the ones who got it so wrong? They were legion, but some of the most high profile critics could be found in the media’s ranks, including at the editorial board of the NY Times. (more…)

Joe Klein is one angry man. In fact, Joe’s so pissed-off I think he could shoot the next Twelve Angry Men sequel all by himself. Why is poor Joe so unhappy? Because we—well, actually, mostly you conservative women out there—are just so bleeping ignorant, that’s why. As an avid Tea Party supporter, I’ll be the first to admit I’m just a mindless dolt who consistently misspells the racist, dimwitted signs I bring to the rallies. Still, I’m not nearly as ignorant as you female Tea Party supporters. I mean, you’re really bleeping dumb!

But don’t believe me. Just read irascible Joe’s latest rant, “Ignorance as Authenticity,” immortalized for all time—or at least for a week or two—in Time. Mined from which, I bring you this nugget of angry Joe gold:

There is no way she [Delaware Republican Senate candidate Christine O’Donnell] could ever be confused with a member of the elites; there is no way she could be confused with an above average high school student. Her ignorance, therefore, makes her authentic–the holy grail of latter-day American politics: she’s a real person, not like those phony politicians. In that sense, she—and the lifeboat filled with other Tea Party know-nothings—follow in the wake of our leading exemplar of ignorant authenticity, Sarah Palin (who seems every bit as unaware of public policy—she certainly never talks about it—as she was when a desperate and petulant John McCain chose her to be his running mate). There is something profoundly diseased about a society that idolizes its ignoramuses and disdains its experts.

(more…)

Thursday during the 1 p.m. hour, CNN’s “Newsroom,” this exchange took place between CNN reporter Ali Velshi andTime Magazine’s deputy international editor Bobby Ghosh:

VELSHI: The name Cordoba- some people are associating it with Muslim rule and bloody battles, when, in fact, Cordoba was one of the finest times in relations between the major religions.

GHOSH: Exactly right- in interfaith discourse-

VELSHI: Yeah-

GHOSH: And the great mosque of Cordoba that people are talking about and that Newt Gingrich was talking about- the man who built it, the Muslim prince who built it, bought it from a Christian group- paid money for it and bought it from a Christian group. And there was not a lot of alarm and anger raised then.

These statements are journalistic malpractice—ahistorical, whitewashed drivel—compounded by Ghosh’s ad hominem attack on Newt Gingrich. (more…)

There’s a lot of buzz on the Internet about what has been called the JournoList. This was a private e-mail list maintained by Washington Post columnist Ezra Klein of about 400 journalists, bloggers, and academics who may have colluded in aiding the election of Mr. Obama. Mr. Breitbart is the king of the alternative media and created his “Big” sites to report what was being unreported by the mainstream media. Big Journalism and Big Government are two Breitbart sites that have uncovered scoops that took weeks for the mainstream media to report. The Acorn scandal would never have come to light without this exposure. On May 10, Brad Thor posted on Big Government the capture of Taliban leader Mullah Omar in Pakistan, yet to date we haven’t heard a ripple in the mainstream media.

Mr. Breitbart offered a $100,000 reward for anyone who could provide the complete Journolist e-mail sessions and while no one has claimed that reward yet, Tucker Carlson, the editor of the DailyCaller.com, has released copies of some of the e-mail correspondence. These have been reported on the “Big” sites and Fox News. What they reveal is very disturbing to those who still naively believe that the Fourth Estate is incorruptible. Uncovered is an egregious conspiracy to slant the news for an ideological motive rather than journalistic integrity.

The mostly white, liberal, leftist group correspondence suggested ways to cover the 2008 presidential campaign that would benefit Mr. Obama and vilify the McCain/Palin team. Of course, this media bias is not news to anyone on the right, but for the first time there is concrete proof that Mr. Obama was the choice of the mainstream media, which aided and abetted his campaign. (more…)

JournoList archives revealed by Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller this morning are remarkably similar to what I imagined they would be: a bunch of — how did the boss put it? Oh, yes — insufferable assholes conniving, colluding and more than willing to lie and engage in character assassination in order to put a Democrat in the White House.

Spencer “call them racists” Ackerman

Then-Senator Barack Obama, The Man Who Would Be President, spent 20 years sitting in a church run by a racist demagogue and hater of all things America (government-created AIDS, we had 9/11 coming, “God damn America!”) and rather than investigate that relationship and report on whether or not Obama’s absurd claim that he knew nothing about such incendiary and racist statements was true, the media obsessed over Sarah Palin’s children and wardrobe.

The ONLY explanation for this is a JournoList. (more…)

At least the latest Glenn Beck cover story wasn’t as bad as that Time Magazine hit piece from last year.

USA Weekend, the magazine supplement that comes with many Sunday newspapers, ran a front-page story on the Fox News dynamo over the weekend.

“Ten Things You Never Thought You’d Hear From Glenn Beck” is a mostly sympathetic portrait of the garrulous talker. Such profiles typically are, but even a soft-focused feature can’t help but reveal the inherent biases in today’s mainstream press. (more…)

No clearer difference can be seen in how the Old Media and its left-wing compatriots treat mass killers, terrorists and nutjobs than the way Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and Joe Stack have been portrayed by the Old Media and the left. Abdulmutallab, the jihadi Christmas Bomber, was treated as an aberration unconnected with any larger group — despite that he trained with al Qaeda — and Joe Stack, who flew a plane into an IRS building in Austin, Texas, has been held up as the epitome of the “teabaggers” and the “anti-government right” despite that not a single tie to those folks has been yet discovered.

Immediately after Abdulmutallab tried to blow himself and a plane full of passengers into martyrdom on Christmas Day 2009, President Obama’s administration declared this guy an “isolated extremist” and said he had no connection to our Islamofascist enemies. Obama was helped along in this by many Old Media news sources.

On Dec. 26, for instance, CBS reported that Abdulmutallab was a loner: “As of now, he appears to be a lone actor with no conspirators. A report the following day said of the jihadist bomber, ‘We’re not aware of anybody else,’ one official told Orr. No further arrests are imminent.” (more…)