The Two Things That Raise Eyebrows About the El Paso Shooting

CHO parody image
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

By Frank Salvato:

Frank Salvato

As the mainstream media, the Democrats, and the Progressive-Fascists play politics with this heart-wrenching act of violence keep in mind that they are advancing a false narrative…

There is no question that the recent shootings in Dayton, Ohio and El Paso, Texas were a tragedy for those affected. As well, these shootings can be seen as nothing less than acts of domestic terrorism (they fit the basic definition of terrorism, and they were domestic at their core). But the El Paso shooting stands out as a hand over-played by the Progressive-Fascist Left, both domestically and internationally.

As usual, the mainstream media is committing sins of omission are a fast and furious rate, pun intended. Even as they paint the societally dysfunctional shooter, Patrick Crusius, as a “white nationalist”, they are conveniently leaving out his self-declaration as a neo-Progressive; a self-declaration proven by his own hand in his “manifesto”.

Gateway Pundit points out that Crusius was a proponent of both basic universal income and universal healthcare, two goals only valued by the Progressive-Fascist Left:

“In the near future, America will have to initiate a basic universal income to prevent widespread poverty and civil unrest as people lose their jobs (to automation). Joblessness is in itself a source of civil unrest…Achieving ambitious social projects like universal healthcare and UBI would become far more likely to succeed if tens of millions of defendants are removed.”

He also comments on his environmental leanings to include blame for any and all environmental decline resting with Capitalism:

“The decimation of our environment is creating a massive burden for future generations. Corporations are heading the destruction of our environment by shamelessly overharvesting resources.”

These are hardly the words of a Capitalist, a Conservative, a Libertarian, or a devotee of the President’s. In fact, these are the words of the Ocasio-Cortez Left; the Progressive-Fascist Left. So it is that once again the mainstream media is executing ideological and political dishonesty in its overt activism. Where they are making Crusius sound like a Trump supporter, he is actually a supporter of the fringe Left, although one could hardly deduce that from their coverage.

Then we have the international one-world, Progressive-Fascist disingenuousness. Mexico’s Foreign Minister, Marcelo Ebrard, as much as said his government was going to hold the United States legally responsible for the endangerment of Mexican nationals in El Paso.

FOX News reports Ebrard as saying:

“The president of the Republic has instructed me so that this posture and indignation from Mexico is translated, first in protecting affected families, and then in legal actions, efficient and prompt, quick and convincing so that Mexico can demand the conditions to protect to the Mexican-American community and Mexicans in the United States,” (emphasis mine).

Excuse me?!

While not every Mexican national who illegally crosses into the United States is a violent criminal or a drug cartel-related operative, there is a good percentage who are. There are reports daily of lives ended tragically, senselessly, and unnecessarily by illegal immigrants who have often been ordered deported and who disappeared into the sanctuary city mist. These Mexican nationals have committed crimes against American citizens; citizens the United States government has a duty to protect from “enemies foreign and domestic” – like illegal immigrants from Mexico who would even be considered criminals in their own country.

It takes a real set of cojones for Ebrard and his government to even suggest legal action against the United States in the wake of this senseless tragedy. It is an international insult to the United States and President Trump would be well within his moral and ethical right to shut the Mexican border completely citing their exact demand in reverse: we demand the conditions to protect American citizens from criminals who choose to violate our immigration laws to affect violent crime in our country.

As the mainstream media, the Democrats, and the Progressive-Fascists play politics with this heart-wrenching act of violence keep in mind that they are advancing a false narrative even as they try to emotionalize the event for their own ideological purposes. Repulsive doesn’t even begin to summarize their intents, words, and actions.

My sincere condolences and prayers to all who are affected by this event.

© Copyright by Frank Salvato, 2019. All rights reserved.

Email Frank:

Read More Articles by Frank Salvato

Frank Salvato
About Frank Salvato 30 Articles
Frank Salvato is a partner at TRR Consulting Group, LLC, a reputation management and organizational strategies group. He serves as managing editor of The New Media Journal. His writing has been recognized by the US House International Relations Committee and the Japan Center for Conflict Prevention. His analysis has been published by The American Enterprise Institute, The Washington Times, and Accuracy in Media, and is syndicated nationally. Mr. Salvato has appeared on The O'Reilly Factor on FOX News Channel and is the author of six books examining internal and external threats facing our country. He can be heard twice weekly on “The Captain’s America: Third Watch” radio program syndicated nationally on the Salem Broadcasting Network and is a host on The Underground Podcast Network.


  1. The left has taught generations that communist and fascists are at the opposite end of the political spectrum. Show them that they are in fact juxtaposed if not joined at the hip and the cognitive disonance make their heads explode.

    The overarching strategy is to limit both the FIRST and SECOND amendments to the Constitution. The upcoming RED FLAG laws and subsequent confiscations will be based, in part, on an individual’s public statements. Expect these new BACKGROUND CHECKS to include the scouring of social media and private emails.

    The end result:
    Citizens disarmed, or afraid they will be, if they speak out in the public square.

    “Never Let A Crisis Go To Waste”

  3. By now everyone on BOTH sides knows that both of these shooters were Leftists…but we still have to play the long…agonizing game because the Left have no decency or integrity.

  4. This one sentence referring to the 1st Amendment sums up the best explanation of the 2nd Amendment I have ever seen. “Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches”?

  5. The [U.S.] Constitution is a limitation on the government, not on private individuals … it does not prescribe the conduct of private individuals, only the conduct of the government … it is not a charter for government power, but a charter of the citizen’s protection against the government.” Ayn Rand
    We are the only country in the world that has a Second Amendment.
    Find one government in all of history that banned it’s own ARMED FORCES from “Keeping and Bearing” ARMS.
    Find one government in the history of humanity that felt a need to document a “RIGHT” for it’s ARMED FORCES to possess ARMS.
    Oppressive Governments are ALWAYS banning the People’S RIGHTS to arms.
    The claim that the Founding Fathers wrote the 2nd Amendment to give Our ARMED FORCES a “right” to keep and carry ARMS is S-T-U-P-I-D.
    The only reason for the Second Amendment is to clearly spell-out the GOD GIVEN RIGHT of INDIVIDUALS to keep & bear ARMS.
    The only reason for the BILL(list) of RIGHTS was to codify INDIVIDUALS’ GOD GIVEN RIGHTS.
    Has there ever been a government that was not chock full of it’s “rights” up to and including declaring itself to be the Lord God Almighty?! (Rome, Egypt, Israel,etc)
    Does the 1st Amendment mean the GOVERNMENT is allowed to give speeches? Try shutting up any Politician. But THEY would LOVE to shut YOU up, hence the FIRST Amendment.
    Anyone who tells you the 2nd Amendment applies to the Army or State Militia, is telling you they think you are STUPID.
    There has NEVER been a government that felt it had to codify it’s army’s/soldier’s “RIGHT” to “Keep and BEAR ARMS” because there has NEVER been a government that refused to allow It’s own soldiers to KEEP and BEAR ARMS!
    The Second Amendment was written for the People, like the other 9 Amendments in the Bill of Rights. This was confirmed by the SCOTUS in the DC vs Heller decision, where they stated that the “People” in the Second Amendment were the same “People” that are mentioned in the First and Fourth Amendment.
    The 2nd Amendment clearly codifies the “right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms”, and certainly not “the Militia”.
    Why would “the Militia”, a type of army manned by citizen-soldiers as opposed to full-time “regulars”, need a constitutional amendment to guarantee they have the right “to keep and bear arms”?
    Is there any specific statement anywhere in the Constitution that the army Congress is empowered to raise has the “right to keep and bear arms”? Of course not. …………. That is assumed.

  6. The manifesto documents his indoctrination. 21 year-olds have insufficient life experience to prompt a comprehensive political worldview. So the question is, who filled his head with all this crap?

Discuss This Article (subject to CHO guidelines, comments are held for moderator approval)