A Presidential Metric

To quote the incomparable Thomas Sowell, “When you want to help people, you tell them the truth.  When you want to help yourself, you tell them what they want to hear.”   Having experienced many election cycles, I know that nowhere are these words truer than in a presidential debate.  Debate is a necessary, but insufficient, means of assessing a candidate.  It can expose a candidate’s intelligence, breadth of knowledge, and ability to think on his/her feet.  Chiefly though, it highlights a candidate’s ability to persuade through oral argument and body language.  Sadly, history has repeatedly shown us that some very bad people can be quite persuasive.  It is folly to elect a president based primarily on debates and oratorical skills.  For example, Joe Biden campaigned as a moderate who would unite a divided nation.  But from the moment he took office, he proved to be perhaps the most divisive president in our nation’s history.

Recently, I watched the Trump v. Harris debate and basically saw/heard exactly what I expected from both sides.  As with anyone, but especially politicians, it is much more informative to watch what they do rather than listen to what they say.  Fortunately, one can judge both Trump and Harris in an apples-to-apples comparison using this better metric of actual past performance.

As President, Donald Trump was responsible for all aspects of performance for the nation including the border.  As Vice President, Kamala Harris was clearly delegated responsibility for the border by Joe Biden.  Biden went so far as referring to Harris as his “Border Czar.”  How then, do Trump and Harris stack up regarding the border?

1. Number of Illegal border crossings

During his term, President Trump greatly decreased the number of illegal border crossings. He did so through Executive Action and through the declaration of a national emergency along our borders.

https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trumps-border-security-victory

The Biden Administration immediately rescinded the Trump era actions and, for the next 3 ½ years, proceeded to do essentially nothing under Harris’ responsibility as “border czar”.  Here’s the result:

Source – Heritage.org

Recently, as the election approached, Harris and the Biden Administration became very vocal about a “tough bipartisan border bill” (S. 4361) that was killed by Republicans. Biden and Harris know how unpopular our border problem is among voters.  This was an attempt to appear as though they cared and were pursuing a solution.  They put the blame squarely on Republicans for the failure of the bill.  One shouldn’t be fooled by this political theater.

Here's the reality:

A.  The current administration caused the border crisis by rescinding Trump’s Executive actions.  Harris, in her capacity as “border czar”, could have easily solved the crisis, at any time, by having Biden reinstate these Trump-era actions.  Instead, she would have us believe that a 292-page bill was needed.

B. Despite all 292 pages, S. 4361 would not have solved our border crisis.  Buried within it were provisions to keep our borders uncontrolled, including the allowance for 5000 illegal entries per day!

C. The Democratic leadership bundled this bill with other expensive and highly contentious funding proposals, virtually ensuring that it would not pass.  So, one can assume that rejection of the bill was their true intent.  In other words, continue letting illegals flow through our porous borders, but blame the Republicans.

US Senate unveils $118 billion bill on border security, aid for

Ukraine, Israel

Richard Cowan, Costas Pitas

2. Dollar costs associated with illegal immigrants

Upon entry each illegal migrant is given $2000 and a phone. With 11 million new illegal immigrants since Biden took office, the entry payment alone adds up to $22 billion.

https://x.com/WallStreetApes/status/1832761775118561579

They are then provided with government-funded transportation further into the country.  Beyond that they are provided with housing and food from a variety of federal and state taxpayer funded sources.  Much of the shelter and food comes from NGOs but these NGOs rely on government grants, so the taxpayer is the ultimate source of funds despite efforts to muddy the waters.

Back in 2019, when the rate of illegal immigration had been drastically curtailed by Trump, the taxpayer paid approximately $134.9 billion to cover the education, medical, welfare, and law-enforcement costs associated with the nation’s illegal alien families.š  This cost has, no doubt, risen astronomically since.

3. Social costs associated with illegal immigrants

When considering social costs/benefits associated with illegal immigration, perhaps the most important considerations are the safety and security of our citizens.  With that in mind, here are crime data for the Trump and Harris eras:

i) The following charts depict migrant crime statistics during the Trump and Biden regimes:

Source – Heritage.org

 

 

ii) During the Biden Administration Venezuela emptied its prisons and drug rehabilitation centers with the provision that all released be sent to the U.S.  DHS knew this and allowed it!

https://www.facebook.com/drphilshow/videos/border-realities-from-ambush-to-advocacy-ep-219-highlights-phil-in-the-blanks-po/1364788691579985/

We currently have violent Venezuelan gangs brutalizing people and terrorizing whole neighborhoods.

https://denvergazette.com/aurora/venezuelan-gang-aurora-apartments/article_428d9b42-659c-11ef-a40a-9baabb6e6b05.html

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/members-of-feared-venezuelan-gang-tren-de-aragua-are-in-chicago-authorities-say/ar-BB1hgNlo

https://www.kktv.com/2024/09/08/police-confirm-4-arrested-aurora-attempted-homicide-have-likely-venezuelan-gang-ties/

 

iii) Under the Biden/Harris administration, 75% of the people arrested in midtown Manhattan for assault, robbery, and domestic violence are illegal migrants.

https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1832254356747370874

https://x.com/RobSchneider/status/1832157564152459767

In Conclusion

The data are clear and compelling.  Under Donald Trump our border was made secure.  Under Kamala Harris the U.S. experienced a dramatic surge in illegal immigration, costing taxpayers many billions of dollars and jeopardizing the safety of U.S. citizens.  It’s possible that the surge under Harris is indicative of her leadership capabilities.  It’s also possible that this surge was precisely what she and Joe Biden wanted.  Either way, one should keep these results in mind when heading to the polls on November 5th.

References

¹ Crashing The Border, The Left’s Manufactured Crisis, John Perrazo, Copyright 2019 David Horowitz Freedom Center, pg. 32

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Can’t Decide Who to Vote For? Read The Durham Report. 

Most people don’t remember much about the Durham Report.   It was published on May 12, 2023.  It was an investigation of an investigation.  Special Counsel John Durham led it. It focused on the conduct of Crossfire Hurricane, the FBI’s investigation of Donald Trump for alleged Russian collusion.  The Durham report made a brief splash in the media before being quickly expunged from any news. For a nation that loves liberty, it should have caused riots in the streets.  Instead, we got crickets.

The Trump “Russian Collusion” Hoax in a nutshell

During the period leading up to the 2016 election, the Clinton campaign cooked up a scheme to slander Donald Trump with lies about collusion with Russia.  Using a convoluted series of intermediaries to hinder traceability, reports (the Steele Dossiers) and other information were generated and provided to the FBI and, in some cases, also to the media.   The Clinton campaign ultimately paid for this scam.  Among others, the convoluted series of intermediaries included:

1. Michael Sussman, an attorney at Perkins Cole, who represented the Clinton Campaign.

2. Fusion GPS, a company hired by Perkins Cole to “uncover” (actually fabricate) a collusion between Trump and Russia regarding the 2016 election.

3. Orbis Business Intelligence, owned by Christopher Steel, and retained by Fusion GPS to “uncover” (actually fabricate) the specifics of this concocted collusion.

4. Igor Danchenko, Charles Dolan, Olga Galkina as primary sources (Danchenko especially) of the information provided to Orbis Business Intelligence.  Christopher Steele wrote the infamous Steele Dossiers based on this information.

The Durham report makes clear that:

1. The FBI, eagerly and very prematurely, pounced on an opportunity to go after Trump by opening a full investigation, Crossfire Hurricane, based on extraordinarily limited and unsubstantiated information from an unvetted source.  In fact, it opened the investigation based only on alleged comments made by George Papadopoulos in a tavern in Australia.  At the direction of Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, Deputy Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Peter Strzok was tasked with opening the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.  As stated in the Durham report, “Strzok, at a minimum, had pronounced hostile feelings toward Trump.”  In one text to Lisa Page, another Trump-hater, Strzok wrote regarding Trump, “we’ll stop from becoming President”.  Other texts between Strzok and Page referred to Trump as “loathsome”, “an idiot”, and as someone who should lose to Clinton “100,000,000 – 0”.

This premature opening of a full investigation, based on such limited and unsubstantiated information, was entirely uncharacteristic of the FBI and was counter to its own rules.  In fact, at the time that Crossfire Hurricane was opened, the FBI was in possession of significantly greater and more credible evidence regarding a plan by the Clinton campaign to vilify Trump by tying him to Vladimir Putin.  Per the Durham report, “Unlike the FBI’s opening of a full investigation of unknown members of the Trump campaign based on raw, uncorroborated information, in this separate matter involving a purported Clinton campaign plan, the FBI never opened any type of inquiry, issued any taskings, employed any analytical personnel, or produced any analytical products in connection with the information”.

2.   The FBI immediately began working on requests for FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) authorities against Carter Page, a member of the Trump campaign.  FISA authority was denied until the Crossfire Hurricane investigators obtained “Company Intelligence Reports” generated by Christopher Steele.  Carter Page, a member of the Trump campaign, was put under surveillance despite the fact that Crossfire Hurricane investigators did not and could not corroborate any of the substantive allegations contained in the Steele reporting.  Furthermore, eventually the main source of the information in the Steele reports (Igor Danchenko) was unable to corroborate any of the information he had provided, and characterized it as “rumor and speculation” and the product of casual conversation.

3. So, after justifying a FISA surveillance based on minimal and fabricated information, the FBI requested and obtained three FISA extensions on Carter Page.  During these three extension filings with the FISC (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court):

A. The FBI deliberately withheld information they had found which contradicted the information under which the initial FISA filing was granted.  This new information likely would have prevented the extension of FISA authorities.

B. The FBI deliberately withheld exculpatory (for Page and Trump) information that they had learned from the first FISA activities.

C. An FBI OGC (Office of the General Counsel) attorney intentionally falsified a document that was material to the FISC’s consideration of one of the FISA applications.  It was the Durham investigation that uncovered this activity leading to the prosecution and conviction of the FBI OGC attorney.

4. Because the Steele Reports were ultimately funded by the Clinton campaign, these reports were provided to the Clinton campaign as well as to the FBI.  Michael Sussman stated to the FBI that he was only providing the information as a “concerned citizen”.  The Durham investigation revealed that this was a lie and that Sussman was being paid by the Clinton campaign.  The Clinton campaign provided these reports to the media at the same time Sussman was providing them to the FBI.

In Summary

The Durham investigation and Report demonstrated that:

1.      The Clinton campaign funded a massive, and entirely bogus, plan to vilify Donald Trump.

2.      The bogus reports were provided to the FBI and to the media simultaneously.

3.      The FBI spared no time or expense in its pursuit to take down Trump.  Unfortunately for the FBI, it was all based on bogus information that could never be corroborated.

4.      The media published stories about the FBI investigating Trump for Russian collusion, all of them based on lies ultimately funded by the Clinton campaign.  So, severe damage was done to the Trump campaign based on lies alone.

5.      Millions of dollars were spent on a fraudulent FBI effort orchestrated by the Clinton campaign, all funded by the taxpayer.

During the months leading up to the 2016 election, and throughout his term in office, President Trump was continuously bombarded with accusations related to “Russian Collusion” stemming from the Steele Dossiers.  All of these accusations were false.  More importantly, all of these accusations were ultimately funded by the Clinton campaign and the associated FBI investigation was funded by the taxpayer.

The Durham report was a success in that it brought to light what had actually transpired.  It exposed a corrupt Clinton campaign that engaged in rampant election interference.  The Durham report also exposed a highly weaponized FBI… offensively weaponized against Trump and defensively weaponized toward Clinton.

The Durham report was also a dismal failure in that Durham lacked the balls to go after the big players.  With such obvious rampant corruption, only a minor OGC lawyer was indicted and convicted.  Why isn’t Hillary spending the rest of her days in jail?  She used the taxpayer-funded FBI as her gun, pointed it at Trump, and fired.  Why haven’t heads rolled at the FBI and why isn’t Strzok in jail?  I ask these questions already knowing the one sad answer. 

So what does the Durham Report have to do with the 2024 election?

Since one can scarcely believe anything coming from mainstream media these days, the Durham Report is the most thorough and verifiable indicator of the existence of a radical Left Deep State.  The FBI’s actions were sharply aligned with the Democratic Party in targeting the Republican candidate.  Personal rights and liberties were trampled upon in an attempt to take down Trump. 

The Durham Report is the most thorough example, but there are others. For example:

A.  Fifty former intelligence officials signed a letter stating that the story of Hunter’s notebook computer had all the earmarks of Russian disinformation.  This letter was written when the notebook was already in the hands of the FBI.  Biden stated that the intelligence services had established that the story was Russian disinformation when he certainly knew that was a lie. Why didn’t the FBI fess up?  Why were these intelligence officials (mostly CIA) all “former” intelligence officials?  Do you suppose it might have anything to do with plausible deniability?  So now we can at least include the CIA with the FBI in this Deep State.

B.  What benefit did we draw from the CDC and NIH mandates regarding COVID-19?  We certainly weren’t protected from Covid. We had our liberties stripped.  We had small businesses shuttered, many of them unable to recover.  Money was printed by the Federal Reserve Bank and widely distributed, often to people who weren’t in need and often well after any Covid justification could be made.  The result was a massive redistribution of wealth and runaway inflation. Landlords’ businesses failed because they weren’t allowed to evict residents for non-payment.  Religious people were prevented from congregating to worship, while violent BLM protestors were allowed by the DoJ to congregate with impunity and without masks.

Pick any government acronym and you’ll find a segment of the radical Left Deep State… FBI, CIA, CDC, NIH, DHS, DoJ, FED etc.  The upcoming election will not be a choice between presidential candidates.  It will be a choice of ideologies. President Trump’s objective is to eradicate the Deep State.  It is unknown whether he can accomplish this objective, but it is a certainty that the election of ANY Democrat in 2024 will mean an acceleration of the grossly damaging policies that blossomed under Biden and were orchestrated by the Deep State.  Any Democrat in the Oval Office will be nothing but a Deep State puppet like Joe Biden was and is.  If you hate Donald Trump – Get Over It!   If you are a moderate Democrat of the JFK variety, realize that your brand of Democracy will not exist as long as this Deep State persists.  The liberties that we are guaranteed under the Constitution have already been seriously eroded. Those that remain will not endure another four years with a Democrat at the helm.

 

https://archive.org/details/durham-report_202305/mode/2up

Please at least read the Executive Summary, pages 7 though 19.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Don’t Celebrate Just Yet

If you think last night’s debate was a win for Conservatives, you’ve missed the fact that the outcome was exactly what the Democratic leadership wanted.  Joe Biden has never been our President.  He has been nothing more than a mouthpiece, albeit a stammering and incoherent one, for a cabal.  Other than Obama and Pelosi, I don’t know the membership of the cabal.  It’s safe to say though, that they are extraordinarily wealthy global elites who hate our constitutional republic and seek to impose a totalitarian socialist regime.  As leaders of this regime, they will never experience the hardships and loss of liberties that they intend to foist upon the public.

Prior to the 2020 election Biden was presented to us as a moderate liberal.  Those who actually voted for him, far fewer in number than the supposed votes he obtained (thank the cabal for that), were voting for that moderate liberal.  The moment he took office, his handlers transformed him into a radical wrecking ball.  He has served the cabal well in this regard by:

-           Building on Obama’s practice of fueling racial hatred by pretending to fight against the myths of Systemic Racism and White Privilege.

-          Destroying the nuclear family by usurping responsibility for children that has always been reserved for parents.

-          Promoting sexual deviancy and perversions, and infiltrating government and military with these perversions.

-          Undermining our military by using non-meritocratic standards of race, gender, and sexual orientation to determine promotion and commendation.

-          Opening our borders to a massive influx of terrorists, drug traffickers, child sex traffickers, rapists, and violent felons, then providing welfare to these illegal aliens.

-          Destroying our economy by shuttling small businesses for a much longer period than reasonable due to Covid, then keeping people on the government dole long after it was prudent.

-          Supporting the insane concept that gender is a choice rather than a genetic absolute.  Asserting that this choice, accompanied by irreversible physical mutilation, can be made by children.

-          Encouraging mentally ill perverts to interact with and indoctrinate our children through programs such as “Drag Queen Story Hour”.

-          Abandoning sophisticated military equipment, worth billions of dollars, to be seized by terrorists upon our withdrawal from Afghanistan.  In the process, deserting Americans and Afghan allies to be captured and tortured by the Taliban.

-          Pushing unconstitutional DEI programs throughout government and industry.

-          Attempting to buy votes through a student debt cancellation program.   This is an increased tax on working people who, most likely, paid for their own education.

-          Using the justice system as a weapon against political opponents.

-          Limiting and/or freezing our production of oil, gas and coal while subsidizing expensive and unreliable wind and solar power of dubious and unquantifiable benefit, all in the name of combating a mythical climate emergency.

The cabal knows that, after four years of the American public coming to know Joe Biden, there is no way that Biden could win against Trump.  They pushed Biden into a debate with Trump knowing it would be a blood bath and would lead to the removal of the doddering old fool from the 2024 presidential race.  It is no coincidence that this debate was the first in history to take place before the Democratic nominating convention.  Biden will not emerge from the primaries as the candidate.

Who then will be the candidate?  Many suggest Gavin Newsom.  I find that unlikely.  Newsom is more vibrant and intelligent than Biden but will surely march us down the same destructive path that we have been on for the last four years.  The American public need only look at California to know that.  As in the 2020 election, I think it will be a candidate who appears to be moderate, then quickly changes to a radical after the election.  Others have suggested Michelle Obama.  I think this is more likely.  Michelle is not at all equipped to be president, but neither was her husband. Most people know very little about Michelle other than as the wife of that smiling guy who won the presidency simply by being Black and repeating the words “Hope” and “Change” a million times.  Michelle Obama also enjoys the benefit of being Black and Female which, sadly, are apparently the presidential qualifications most highly valued by a majority of white women with college degrees.

No matter who emerges as the candidate, if that person wins, he/she will merely be the next mouthpiece for the cabal.

___________________________________________________________________________________

Our Diversity Is Our Greatest Strength?

Recently, when Joe Biden was whining about Republicans blocking his efforts to secure the border, I revisited the many Executive Orders and policies he put in place at the start of his term.  As I correctly remembered, these orders/policies obliterated a relatively secure border that had been achieved under Trump.

I also noticed that his very first Executive Order (EO 13985) contained the same moronic pablum that has been spewed by the Left for years…

“….. our diversity is one of our country’s greatest strengths.”

Where has it ever been shown that our diversity is one of our greatest strengths?  As Thomas Sowell points out…“Is diversity our strength? Or anybody’s strength, anywhere in the world? Does Japan’s homogeneous population cause the Japanese to suffer? Have the Balkans been blessed by their heterogeneity — or does the very word “Balkanization” remind us of centuries of strife, bloodshed and unspeakable atrocities, extending into our own times? Has Europe become a safer place after importing vast numbers of people from the Middle East, with cultures hostile to the fundamental values of Western civilization?”

And what type(s) of strength are we talking about?  Strength leading to …

Productivity?

Innovation?

Safety and Security?

Sense of Community?

General Happiness?

Health and Wellbeing?

Financial Security?

Something Else?

For many of the above categories there are scarcely any readily available data that can be correlated with “diversity”.  There is, however, one for which a correlation can be investigated.  Since Murder Rate data can be obtained for many cities, and since racial population data can be obtained for these same cities, we can investigate “Safety and Security” using Murder Rate as a proxy measure.  In government parlance “increasing diversity” often means increasing the percentage of Blacks, but it always means decreasing the percentage of non-Hispanic White males.

So, lets investigate how Safety and Security (lack of murders) correlates with diversity using:

a) one diversity proxy as the percentage of the population that is not a White Caucasian male

and

b) one diversity proxy as the percentage of Blacks in the population.

Here are the results:š ²

These results should be no surprise to anyone who has eyes and ears.  Racial differences in crime are well known and have been substantiated in past works as have racial differences in cognitive abilities.Âł

We’ve all experienced occasions when diversity of thought or of past experiences has caused a group to achieve an optimal result.  However, the type of diversity needed for an optimal solution depends on the problem to be solved.  It’s absurd to think that a random mixture of race, or sex, or class is automatically beneficial.  The Left’s efforts to promote diversity, based on such simple measures as race, are disingenuous and harmful.  A focus on individuals, rather than groups, is what allows those with particular skills/abilities to break free from whatever stereotypes might be attributed to their specific identity group.

I recently read that the Biden administration is working to diversify small rural towns because it finds them to be too white. Of course, no mention was made of any existing problems in these towns or of any expected benefits from the change…. because there won’t be any.  Also, among the enumerated powers listed in the Constitution, I can’t seem to find the clause allowing the federal government to conduct social engineering experiments. 

Sources:

š Crime In 2018: Updated Analysis, Brennan Center For Justice, Ames Grawert and Cameron Kimble, 12/12/2018

² DataUSA.io/profile/geo/

³ Facing Reality – Two Truths About Race In America, Charles Murray, published by Encounter Books, 2021

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

LET’S STOP PRETENDING WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION

There is a document on display in the National Archives building in Washington, D.C.  In its Preamble, the document is described as the “Constitution for the United States of America”.  In Article VI of the document, it is stated that this Constitution “shall be the supreme Law of the Land”.  Today, that document and five bucks will buy you a cup of coffee.

Over the years our Constitution has been so violated and ignored as to now render it virtually meaningless.  The document itself is an incredible piece of work; painstakingly crafted by some very wise and highly educated individuals.  These individuals, now often mocked as “dead old white guys”, had studied the rise and fall of governments throughout history.  Based on the lessons of history, they put in place a unique framework, a “Constitution”, to promote prosperity and safeguard individual liberty.  They recognized, however, that any constitution would be meaningless unless the people were both moral and educated.  We have now reached that point of an impotent Constitution because of an immoral and ignorant public, and a particularly immoral collection of federal officials.

Our Founding Fathers and past presidents realized what a fragile framework we had in place to preserve a free nation of self-governance.  Here are a few things they had to say:

“If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”

Thomas Jefferson

“A sacred respect for the constitutional law is the vital principle, the sustaining energy of free government.”

Alexander Hamilton

“To suppose that any form of government will secure liberty or happiness without any virtue in the people, is a chimerical idea.”

James Madison

“Being democratic is not enough, a majority cannot turn what is wrong into right.  In order to be considered truly free, countries must have a deep love of liberty and an abiding respect for the rule of law.”

Margaret Thatcher

“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

John Adams

“Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among the people.”

John Adams

“Our Constitution rests on the good sense and the respect of the American people.”

John Quincy Adams

“It is in the interest of tyrants to reduce the people to ignorance and vice.  For they cannot live in a country where virtue and knowledge prevail.”

Samuel Adams

“Neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.”

Samuel Adams

“The government for the people must depend for its success on the intelligence, the morality, the justice, and the interest of the people themselves.”

Grover Cleveland

Lest you think it an exaggeration to state that we are now pretending that we live under the Constitution, consider these three egregious examples:

1. The Constitution prohibits federal entitlements of any kind, yet now 50% of our national budget is devoted to entitlement programs.š

Amendment 10 states –

 â€œThe powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”  Quite simply, there is nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the right to impose entitlement programs.  Therefore, under this Amendment 10, the federal government is prohibited from doing so.

The term “General Welfare” is found in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 1 and there are those who have attempted to pervert the meaning of this term so as to allow for “welfare” entitlements.  The term had no such meaning as dictionaries of the time will attest.  More importantly, the authors of the Constitution made it clear that entitlements were not allowed under the Constitution.  James Madison, considered by many to be the father of the Constitution, had this to say – “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” and “The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined.  Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite.”

The Constitution does not completely outlaw entitlements; it outlaws entitlements imposed at the federal level.  States and local governments are free to enact entitlements as they see fit.  How can we possibly say that we are living under the Constitution when half of our budget is devoted to expenditures outlawed by that Constitution?

2.  Amendment 2 of the Constitution is very short and very clear – “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Our disingenuous President likes to talk about AR-15s not being needed for hunting, as though Amendment 2 was drafted to allow for hunting.  Amendment 2 was clearly not drafted for hunters.  It was drafted to protect the public, as a last resort, against tyrannical overreach of its own government.  This amendment has been “infringed” more times than anyone can count, not only by our federal government, but by the states.  All 50 states have gun control laws.  All of these laws, in one way or another, “infringe” on the right to keep and bear Arms.  Biden has issued executive actions to restrict privately made firearms and items known as stabilizing braces.  Despite what he and his corrupt DOJ say, he has no authority to do so.  In fact, he is violating the Constitution which he pledged to protect and defend.

Amendment 2 is a prime example of a Constitutional law that states and federal agencies have decided to selectively ignore because of their own beliefs and preferences.  I can’t, however, find anything in the Constitution that says it’s OK to ignore these laws if they conflict with your personal beliefs or preferences.  There is a process, clearly spelled out in Article V of the Constitution, by which the Constitution can be amended.  It is doable, but not easy, to amend the Constitution.  This is exactly as it should be so as not to have a government that undulates back and forth at each change in leadership.  The amendment process is one that has successfully worked 27 times over the years.  It has yielded some profound and productive changes including the abolition of slavery (13), equal treatment of all people (14), the right of Blacks to vote (15), and the right of women to vote (19).  For those lawmakers unhappy with Amendment 2, a course of action to ignore the amendment is illegal, but a course of action aimed at obtaining a new amendment is not.

3.  Lastly, the federal government has completely ignored the equal protection clause.  Worse yet, it acts as if it is being virtuous in so doing.

Among other things, Amendment 14 states – “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States, nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

This law is all about equal treatment of all people.  It makes no distinction regarding anything – age, race, gender, sexual orientation.  It is an Amendment that was long overdue when it was enacted and, even then, was largely ignored by a corrupt government under Jim Crow laws, including the absurd “separate but equal” concept.  With the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it looked as though the 14th Amendment would finally have teeth, and colorblind equal treatment would prevail.  Unfortunately, this never happened as we immediately jumped into other, “politically correct”, methods to treat people unequally.

First there was Affirmative Action, which still persists, and is devoted to unequal treatment so as to advance minorities, particularly Blacks.  Affirmative Action has been challenged in past suits that have gone as high as the Supreme Court.  It has been upheld.  This is not due to a complex, or nuanced, law.  It is due to a corrupt Supreme Court judiciary that conflates their personal political views with their duties to properly interpret the law.  In the 2003 case “Grutter v. Bollinger”, Justice Sandra Day O’Conner wrote – “The Court expects that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”  The use of the term, “racial preferences” alone makes it clear that this was not equal treatment under the law.  Moreover, I’m unaware of any clause in the Constitution that says it’s OK to ignore this Constitution for a certain period of time, say 25 years.

Now we have “Equity” which is a nice sounding term for a morally bankrupt concept. “Equity” has brought a proliferation of unequal treatment, chiefly to the detriment of white heterosexual males. The Left defines “Equity” simply as equal outcomes for all.  Equity as so defined has never existed throughout human history.  The closest approach to “Equity” can only be found in highly oppressive totalitarian regimes.  It is a concept that ought to sicken anyone who gives it a second thought.  For the purpose of this paper though, we need not consider the morality of “Equity”.  We need only consider the fact that it is undeniably unconstitutional.  This can be best demonstrated by a simple example given by F.A. Hayek –

“From the fact that people are very different it follows that, if we treat them equally, the result must be inequality in their actual position, and that the only way to place them in an equal position would be to treat them differently.  Equality before the law and material equality are therefore not only different but are in conflict with each other; and we can achieve one or the other, but not both at the same time.”

Two more examples are among my favorite quotes from Thomas Sowell:

i) “The fundamental difference between equal treatment and equal performance is repeatedly confused.  In performance terms virtually no one is equal to anyone.  The same man is not even equal to himself on different days.”

ii) “What exactly is your ‘fair share’ of what someone else has worked for?”

I love our Constitution.  It is extraordinary in its breadth, thoroughness, and simplicity.  I have a 3” by 6” pamphlet in which the entire document is presented in 33 pages!  Contrast that with our recent government spending proposal that numbered 5,000 pages (including attachments), and was delivered to Congress just hours before a vote was required.

As our Founding Fathers foresaw, for our beloved nation to survive and prosper, we must fight to make our government adhere to the “Supreme Law of the Land”!

š https://federalsafetynet.com/entitlement-programs/entitlement-spending/

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Harmful Gender Nonsense – The Ultimate Gaslighting

The Past

* There are two and only two sexes. They are male and female, otherwise known as man and woman.

* The words “gender” and “sex” have the same meaning.

* A person’s sex is locked in at conception and can’t be changed.

* Proper pronouns for a male are “he” and “him”.

* Proper pronouns for a female are “she” and “her”.

* Only women can become pregnant and have babies.

From the dawn of human history until the most recent blink of an eye the above statements have been fundamental truths. 

The Present

Now, suddenly, we are being told (not asked) to accept that:

* Gender is fluid.  It spans a spectrum and can be changed instantly at a person’s whim.  If you think the term LGBTQIA+ contains a lot of characters, consider this; in her book, The Diversity Delusion, author Heather Mac Donald observes “by one count there are now 117 categories of gender identity, many of those developed by students struggling to find some last way to be transgressive in an environment where their every self-involved claim of victimhood is met with tender attention and apologies from the campus diversity bureaucracy.”

* Men can become women. “Trans women are women.”

* Women can become men. “Trans men are men.”

* The only proper pronouns are each individual’s “preferred” pronouns.  Apparently, now one must ask a person about his/her preferred pronouns on any given day (they can change suddenly and without notice) before referring to him/her with a pronoun.

* Men can get pregnant and have babies.

* Women can impregnate other women.

* Women can impregnate men.

From these concepts it follows that Lia Thomas and Rachel Levine are both women.  Therefore, Lia Thomas can win an NCAA national championship in women’s swimming and Rachel Levine can be named Woman of the Year.  So, one shouldn’t be at all surprised or concerned if a hairy, burly dude in a dress follows his/her young daughter into a public restroom.  Furthermore, if one doesn’t buy into these concepts, that person is hateful.

We are also being told that these recent new ideas about human sexuality represent “The Science”. 

The Impact

According to a very recent Gallup poll, the percent of the population identifying as LGBT or something other than heterosexual has shown a dramatic recent increase:

The 2021 Gallup data, striated by age, yields:

                Born                                                      LGBT %

Before 1946                                          0.8%

1946-1964                                              2.6%

1965-1980                                              4.2%

1981-1996                                              10.5%

1997-2003                                              20.8%

Person’s younger than 18 were not included in the poll but, if they had been, it’s likely that their identified LGBT representation would exceed 30%! This astonishing recent increase in LGBT identification defies any timetable that could reasonably be attributed to biological evolution. Frankly, and especially considering that there is a natural evolved purpose behind sex, that being propagation of the species, it’s just not believable.  What is believable is that it depicts a social contagion being spread by social media and a radical education system.  Gender identity is just one facet of the identity politics cancer that has consumed the country and overwhelmed our education system.

In her book, Mac Donald also mentions the 2012 hiring, at UC San Diego, of its first vice chancellor for equity, diversity, and inclusion, for a starting salary of $250,000, plus a relocation allowance of $60,000, a temporary housing allowance of $13,500 and reimbursement of all moving expenses. “This new diversocrat position would augment UC San Diego’s already massive diversity apparatus, which included the Chancellor’s Diversity Office; the associate vice chancellor for faculty equity; the assistant vice chancellor for diversity; the faculty equity advisors; the graduate diversity coordinators; the staff diversity liaison; the chief diversity officer, the director of development for diversity initiatives; the Office of Academic Diversity and Equal Opportunity; the Committee on Gender Identity and Sexual Orientation Issues, the Committee on the Status of Women, the Campus Council on Climate, Culture, and Inclusion; the Diversity Council; and the directors of the Cross-Cultural Center, the Lesbian Gay Bi-sexual Transgender Resource Center, and the Women’s Center.”

Claiming a non-binary gender status now allows one to climb at least one rung of the “intersectional” ladder and thus participate in the popular contest to see who can claim to be the most victimized.  Indeed, it even offers whites a rare opportunity to shift from oppressor to victim.  Simply put, it’s a fad that has gone viral. Like all fads it will pass but this one will leave behind an enormous amount of physical and emotional damage to children and young adults and this damage will stay with many throughout their lives.

Words Matter

Recently, my wife and I spent a night at a very old historic hotel.  The hotel had a library full of fascinating old books, manuscripts, articles, and artwork.  It had a few dictionaries dating back decades.  While there, I took the opportunity to look up a few definitions…

Colliers New Dictionary Of The English Language (1909)

Female:    of the sex in animals or plants that produces or is capable of producing eggs or bearing young

Woman:  an adult female human being

Male:       of the sex in animals or plants that fertilizes in order to reproduce

Man:       an adult human male

The Random House Dictionary Of The English Language (1966)

Female:     one of that sex which conceives and produces young

Woman:   an adult person of the female sex

Male:        pertaining to the sex that begets young; not female; bearing stamens; suitable to the male sex

Man:         an adult male of the human species

                                                                                                                                                       

Websters Encyclopedic Dictionary Of The English Language (1990)

Female:    a person bearing two X chromosomes in the cell nuclei and normally having a vagina, a uterus, and ovaries, and developing at puberty a relatively rounded body and enlarged breasts and retaining a beardless face

Woman:   the female human being

Male:        a person bearing an X and Y chromosome pair in the cell nuclei and normally having a penis, scrotum, and testicles, and developing hair on the face at adolescence

Man:         an adult male person as distinguished from a boy or a woman

To obtain the most current example, I looked up these words on Dictionary.com.  The results were very much the same as those from Websters Encyclopedic Dictionary.

So, based purely on the meaning of words as they have been used for over a century, it’s clear that:

1. Men can’t become women.

2. Women can’t become men.

3. Men can’t get pregnant and have babies.

4. Women can’t impregnate anyone.

These truths are independent of any science because they are implicit in the definitions of words.  Of course, it’s possible for an interest group to hijack words and butcher their definitions to emphasize an objective, usually political.  This tactic has been used extensively, particularly by activists on the radical Left. 

“The Science”

Assuming one is willing to ignore the contradiction based on words and their definitions, what can be said about “The Science”?

First of all, if you hear anyone use the term “The Science” you should recognize immediately that he/she is promoting an agenda and attempting to preempt any argument.  Science is rarely, if ever, settled such that it can be called “The Science”.  Real science is usually in a state of constant debate and advancement based on new theories and new experimental results.  There was a time when those who believed the earth to be flat held “The Science”.  Then came early theories of the solar system which had the sun rotating around the earth with the earth at the center of the universe. Then came the model with the earth rotating around the sun and the sun at the center of the universe.  Next was the sun being the center of our solar system with many solar systems in our galaxy and many galaxies comprising the universe.  Then came debates on whether the universe was finite or infinite.  Also, in the field of physics there was first Newtonian Mechanics, later Relativity, and still later Quantum Mechanics.  All of these were science, none were “The Science”.

Some Real Science

In his book “HUMAN DIVERSITY, The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class” author Charles Murray summarizes the results from hundreds of recent peer reviewed statistical studies regarding differences among genders, races, and classes.  Murray is a mild-mannered political scientist who is extremely thorough in his work.  He is also highly controversial, loved by many and hated by many, simply because he is fearless and reports his findings accurately.

Murray observes “The core doctrine of the orthodoxy in the social sciences is…the sameness premise: In a properly run society people of all human groupings will have similar life outcomes.  Individuals might have differences in abilities, the orthodoxy (usually) acknowledges, but groups do not have inborn differences in the distributions of those abilities, except for undeniable ones such as height, upper body strength, and skin color.  Inside the cranium, all groups are the same….. the sameness principle holds that whatever their gender, race, or class they are born into, people in every group should become electrical engineers, nurture toddlers, win chess tournaments, and write sci-fi novels in roughly equal proportions…Large group differences in these life outcomes are prima facia evidence of social, cultural, and governmental defects that can be corrected by the appropriate public policy.”

The sameness premise implies that Gender, Race, and Class are nothing more than social constructs. Regarding gender, it implies that “Physiological sex differences associated with childbearing have been used to create artificial gender roles that are unjustified by inborn characteristics of personality, abilities, or social behavior.”  Among the three groupings (Gender, Race, Class) to which the orthodoxy presumes the sameness premise applies, gender is the most absurd.  Individuals from different classes have no obvious physical differences.  Individuals from different races have only obvious cosmetic (skin color) differences. With gender, right off the bat we are to accept that “physiological sex differences associated with childbearing” are inconsequential.  So, we are to ignore all differences in sexual “plumbing”, as well as differences in developed height, developed weight, developed strength, developed balance, chromosomes, and genetic encoding for release of specific hormones at specific times.  This is akin to making the statement that dogs and cats are exactly the same providing that you ignore all of their differences.

In his book of 490 pages and 801 references (mostly scientific studies) Murray debunks the sameness principle for all three groupings…Gender, Race, and Class.  For all these categories many significant differences can be found among groups within each category that ARE NOT social constructs.  Regarding gender, this means that males and females have significant differences in “cognitive repertoires” (what goes on inside the cranium) that cannot be attributed to socialization.  Men, as a group, and Women, as a group, are different.  Men can’t become women and women can’t become men.  In all cases, Murray Is Not suggesting that any one group is Better than any other, simply that the groups have differences which are not due to socialization.  Murray specifically states, “To say that groups of people differ genetically in ways that bear on cognitive repertoires (as this book does) guarantees accusations that I am misusing science in the service of bigotry and oppression.  Let me therefore state explicitly that I reject claims that groups of people, be they sexes, or races, or classes, can be ranked from superior to inferior.  I reject claims that differences among groups have any relevance to human worth or dignity.  The chapters to come make that clear.”

Most of the studies reviewed by Murray rely on sophisticated use of statistics including such things as statistical significance, statistical size-of-effect, factor analysis, regression analysis, and a method to amalgamate statistical size-of effect measures across different traits called Mahalanobis D.  Some, however, rely simply on observed differences in newborn infants (meaning no time for socialization to have done anything).  For example:

* Newborn girls showed stronger interest in a human face while newborn boys showed stronger interest in a mechanical mobile.

* On average, infant girls cry longer than boys in response to recordings of another baby crying.

* On average, infant girls hold eye contact with an adult human longer than infant boys.

* On average, infant girls show more expressions of joy than infant boys at the appearance of the mother.

* On average, infant girls are more responsive to maternal vocalizations than infant boys.

* On average, infant girls are more distressed by maternal “still face” than infant boys.

* On average, infant girls show visual preferences for objects with human attributes while infant boys show more visual preferences for balls and vehicles.

* On average, infant girls are more likely to initiate and respond to joint attention.

My purpose here is to expose the truth that there are differences, not to discuss each of those differences in detail.  Many of the differences are quite interesting, for example in understanding differences in vocational choices between men and women.  I encourage you to pick up the book if you are interested in learning of specific differences.

I’m compelled to expose an internal conflict within views held primarily by the Left.  Let’s take Race for example.  On the one hand:

1. There is a reliance on the sameness principle when decrying that race differences are “prima facie evidence of social, cultural, and governmental defects that can be corrected by the appropriate public policy”.  Said differently, if groups aren’t the same, discrimination is the cause.

2. There is an implicit rejection of the sameness principle when “Valuing Diversity”.  If groups were the same, there would be no synergism from diversity.

More Real Science

1. According to Merriam Grossman, MD, a child and adolescent psychiatrist:

“For the White House to state that early affirmation of children with gender issues is “crucial” is a dangerous falsehood, one that misleads parents and places children at risk for serious harm and lifelong suffering.

Instead, parents must be aware of the following:

Regarding children who develop gender dysphoria before puberty, the great majority, on average about 80% but ranging between 50 and 96% depending on the study, become comfortable with their bodies. This improvement occurs if they go through normal puberty and is called “desistance.” There is no way to know if a particular child will desist.”

“One clinician with expertise in the field explains, Gender dysphoria in pre-adolescent children is a condition that ameliorates by itself in most cases if you are just patient.

Changing names, pronouns, and presentations can decrease desistance. Puberty blockers are controversial and have a history of lawsuits. Their off-label use in healthy children is experimental, and they have serious adverse effects that are irreversible, such as osteoporosis and early menopause. There is no country in which PBAs are licensed for the treatment of gender dysphoria. Once on puberty blockers, desistance is very rare. Nearly all children placed on blockers go on to take opposite sex hormones, which must be taken forever.”

“The new form of gender dysphoria develops during adolescence, predominantly in girls with no earlier discomfort with their sex. It appears suddenly and is therefore known as Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria (ROGD). The girls’ discomfort with being female typically follows increased use of the internet and social media and is associated with comorbid mental health disorders and neurodevelopmental disability.

The social influence aspect of ROGD is striking, with one study showing that 86.7% of young people with ROGD had one or more friends who came out as transgender at the same time and/or had an increase in their use of social media. The spreading of behaviors and beliefs amongst friends, especially between girls, is a well-documented phenomenon.”

2. The American Psychological Association has stated, “…because no approach to working with [transgender and gender nonconforming] children has been adequately, empirically validated, consensus does not exist regarding best practice with pre-pubertal children.”

3. In 2020 the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) did a systematic review of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones and found evidence that the medications’ “potential benefits are of very low certainty.”

4. Dr. Stephen Levine, a pioneer in the study and treatment of sexuality and gender problems since 1974 and arguably the most highly credentialed and respected voice in the field, wrote in an expert affidavit: “The knowledge-base concerning the causes and treatment of gender dysphoria has low scientific quality.”

5. Professor Carl Heneghan, Editor in Chief of the British Medical Journal and director of the Centre of Evidence Based Medicine at Oxford, along with Professor Tom Jefferson, a clinical epidemiologist, completed an independent analysis of research on transgender medical interventions. Concerning puberty blockers, Prof Heneghan stated, “The quality of evidence in this area is terrible.”

So Why Should We Care?

The title of this paper mentions “Harmful Gender Nonsense”.  It is, in fact, very harmful and that’s why we should care:

First, we should care simply because truth matters.

Second, it’s obvious that young women are being victimized in the field of women’s sports.  This is happening throughout high school and college athletics and it is sure to come to professional sports soon.  This isn’t just about the denial of trophies and recognition to hard working young women who deserve them, but about lost opportunities for scholarships, professional sponsorships, and income.

Third, there are perverts taking full advantage of recent changes in the law regarding this nonsense. One example is the high school bathroom rapes (two of them) by a trans girl (meaning boy) in Louden County, VA.  This same thing (also two incidents) happened in Oakhurst Elementary School, in Decatur, Georgia.  The perpetrator identified as gender non-conforming.  One of the girls was five years old.

Fourth, criminal males who now identify as females, are being housed in female prisons.  Prisoners, among themselves, are becoming pregnant.  This is absurd and, if nothing else, places a burden on the prison system.

Fifth, “educators” and our government, without parental permission, are indoctrinating young children with this false poison.  Even our woke leaders are pushing this on small kids.  Jen Psaki recently stated the White House position stressing the importance of “gender affirming care” (code for radical indoctrination, administering dangerous chemicals, and eventually surgical mutilations) for young children.

Sixth, studies on gender are being funded by Big Pharma which stands to make billions on gender blockers, hormone “therapies”, and drugs accompanying Trans surgeries which must be taken for life.  With such a conflict of interest, just how unbiased could these studies be?

Seventh, this represents yet another attack on the nuclear family.  The Left abhors the concept of the nuclear family.  When it comes to raising children, communism and socialism both place the role of the state far above that of the parents.

Eighth, it’s biased against males.  The untrue sameness premise dictates that, barring some failure of society or government, men and women should end up in the same work fields and at the same levels in those fields.  “Corrective” measures are being taken to jettison men from many positions and backfill these positions with women.  Hiring practices and promotions are also dramatically favoring women over men.   These actions, to “correct” a “disparate impact”, are grossly unfair and in violation of our constitution as well as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  “Disparate impact” laws, many of which unbelievably have been upheld by our Supreme Court, blatantly assume that any group disparities are caused by discrimination.  This is patently false.  In the case of genders, among other things these laws ignore the fact that, on average, men and women are attracted to different fields and have different priorities regarding the amount of time to devote to work.

Ninth, there are serious negative health impacts, some of them life-long, from gender blockers, hormone therapies, and “gender transition” surgeries.

In Closing

The foisting of this gender nonsense on children and teens represents a concerted effort by our government and our education system to undermine the rightful role of parents.  It is extremely harmful and will have damaging effects on children and young adults for years to come.  I urge parents to become active, particularly regarding the curriculum being used in schools.  Attend school board meetings, speak out, and insist that curriculum be transparent to parents such as posting detailed curriculum on the internet.  I will continue to view the world as a binary gender one and to use the same pronouns I have used for the last 65 years.  Finally, I strongly encourage you to buy and watch the movie “Whose Children Are They?” available for download from www.salemnow.com.  The 2+ hour movie costs $25 and is worth every penny!!!!  It exposes what is happening in our federal government and public education system regarding the indoctrination of our children.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Trump and 2024

 

In 2016 I reluctantly voted for Donald Trump.  I chose the person who I believed to be the lesser of two evils.  Frankly, there are few people who I consider to be more evil than Hillary.

In 2020 I again voted for Trump but without such reluctance.  Trump had reversed some awful and insidious policies that had been put in place by the previous administration and instituted some very positive changes:

Immediately, he cancelled our participation in the Paris climate accord.  That agreement, unilaterally signed by Obama without congressional input, was destined to achieve almost nothing beneficial for the climate, but was sure to kill key industries and cripple our economy over the years while allowing China to thrive and grow. 

He backed out of Obama’s Iran deal, a deal that would place nuclear weapons capabilities into the hands of an enemy dedicated to annihilating one of our strongest allies, Israel.  Biden, of course, re-entered the deal and just today (8/1/22) Mohammed Eslami, head of Iran’s atomic energy organization, stated “Iran has the technical ability to build an atomic bomb, but such a program is not on the agenda”.  Only a fool could believe that last clause.

He cut both corporate and personal taxes in a manner that strengthened our economy to the benefit of all and disproportionately to the benefit of low-income people.  As is often the case, government tax revenue actually increased under these tax cuts because of the positive impact they had on the economy.

He demonstrated strength to potential aggressor countries.   His trade sanctions against China, while still being debated regarding net short-term benefits or detriments, had an important long-term benefit by sending a clear message to China that we will respond in kind if they continue to engage in unfair trade practices.  It’s also no coincidence that Russia invaded Ukraine on both Obama’s watch and Biden’s watch, but not on Trump’s watch.  Biden, on the other hand, continues to demonstrate weakness and wokeness.  Our Afghanistan withdrawal left citizens and allies to die and placed military equipment worth billions of dollars into the hands of an enemy.  We now have a weak military that places CRT training and LGBTQ+ pride initiatives above combat readiness.  During US/China talks held in Alaska in 2021 Chinese Communist Party foreign affairs chief Yang Jiechi told Biden’s US Secretary of State, Tony Blinken, the USA is “Not qualified to speak to China from a position of strength”.

Amidst all his “mean tweets” and bluster, I never found Trump to be the tyrant he was constantly portrayed to be by the media and the left.  As blue cities burned during the “largely peaceful protests” (aka immensely destructive BLM riots), Trump, eager to provide federal troops to quell the violence, nonetheless showed restraint in respecting the sovereignty of the states and states’ rights to call upon the federal government for help when needed.  This stood in stark contrast to Obama’s weaponization of the DOJ against state and local police forces in the wake of the completely legitimate Michael Brown shooting, or the Biden DOJ’s similar tactics against “domestic terrorist” parents who dared to speak out at school board meetings against CRT and gender ideology indoctrination of their children.

Despite the inability of our media or the left to cite the name Trump without also invoking the term “racist”, Trump’s economic policies did more to benefit Blacks than those of either his predecessor or successor.  As Jason Riley points out in his book The Black Bloom, “We know that Blacks and other low-income minorities benefited disproportionately from Trumps economic policies.  And we know that Trump didn’t get the credit he deserved for the economy’s robust performance on his watch because most of the intelligentsia, including an overly hostile mainstream media, consciously played down or ignored his successes.”

During Trump’s time in office, I saw a president under unrelenting attack from all parts of the left.  While claiming Trump to be the tyrant, the mainstream media, woke corporations, the deep state of federal bureaucracies, and the democratic leadership kept Trump under a constant barrage of impeachments and false accusations.  Just exactly whose actions were tyrannical?

Trump spent his entire time in office under attack and/or impeachment for his supposed Russia collusion.  We now know that the Steele Dossier was funded by the Clinton campaign and approved by Hillary, and NONE of the allegations in it were true.  It’s hard to imagine that a document claiming such vulgar behavior as the president asking hookers to urinate in front of him while in a Russian hotel room, would not be thoroughly challenged before being released.  But our own FBI, hateful of Trump, had no interest in doing so.

We saw Twitter suspend the sitting president’s account at a critical time just before the 2020 election.

We saw the mainstream media completely quash the Hunter Biden laptop story which was published (only) by the New York Post shortly before the election.  We heard Joe Biden state that the laptop story was Russian disinformation. The FBI echoed this claim WHILE THE LAPTOP WAS IN THEIR POSSESSION.  Over 50 former senior intelligence officers signed a letter stating they believed the laptop story to be Russian disinformation.  We now know that the laptop story was 100% true.  Further, the results of a poll reported by the Daily Wire suggest that 13% of Democrats would have voted differently had they known the truth about the laptop at the time of the election.

We saw Google, Apple, and Amazon work together to kill Parler, whose engineered demise can only be attributed to the fact that Parler was a social media platform that didn’t cancel conservative speech.

The tactics of the left served only to boost my appreciation for Trump.  Most people would withdraw and assume the fetal position in the face of such vicious, unjust, and unrelenting attacks.  Trump, however, continued to fight and to do his job.

Perhaps the most loathsome effort by the left to bring down Trump is the ongoing Circus/Witch Hunt/Kangaroo Court/Kabuki Theater otherwise known as the House January 6th Investigation.  I’ll discuss this in a separate publication soon.

In summary, although I still find a fair amount of Trump’s behavior to be off-putting, I must thank the left for convincing me that, should he receive the nomination in 2024, I will very enthusiastically vote for him.  He has pledged to drain the fetid swamp.  I think he just might pull it off, and I see nothing more important to our republic and to our personal freedom.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Actual Big Lie

The “Big Lie”

We’ve all heard the phrase “The Big Lie” invoked ad nauseam by mainstream media and liberals when referring to President Trump’s insistence that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.  Anyone using that phrase is being disingenuous.  For the phrase to be true, President Trump would have to i) know that he lost the election and ii) be deliberately promulgating a falsehood.  That’s not what is happening.  His vehement continued assertion that the election was stolen is obviously something that he believes to be true.  If, like many, you don’t agree with his assertion, then you might refer to it as “The Big Delusion”, but you can’t honestly refer to it as a lie.

Despite what one hears from our highest levels of government, it’s not at all clear that the election wasn’t stolen.  Biden’s early claim that “The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history” is laughable, and is as believable as his claim that the Hunter laptop story was Russian Disinformation.  How could he have known so soon after the election was over and after an unprecedented number of recent election law changes had occurred throughout the states?  The answer is he couldn’t.  But then there is the fact that all the lawsuits regarding the election led to nothing.  They led to nothing because they were all thrown out on technicalities.  There was never an unbiased and thorough attempt to hear an argument or weigh any facts.

So, what do we know for certain?

1. A CNBC poll taken at the end of November, 2020, showed only three percent of Trump voters considered the election legitimate: 73 percent said Trump won the election and one-third wanted him to fight the results in court.  Two-thirds said the president should not concede the race.  So, one can infer that 71.4 million voters considered the election to be illegitimate.

2. Trump’s 73.6 million popular votes represented over 7 million more than any sitting president in history.²

3. Biden was the first person in decades to win the presidency while losing bellwether states such as Ohio and Florida.  Biden also lost all but one of nineteen bellwether counties.Âł

4. For all key 2020 Pennsylvania electoral races other than that for president, a big red wave washed over Pennsylvania, yet Biden won Pennsylvania by 80,000 votes.Âł

5. “On election night itself, in key swing states where Trump held large leads – Pennsylvania, Georgia, Michigan – election officials shut down and stopped counting votes. When the lights came back on the next morning, Biden was in front in all.” ⁴

6. Despite the worst showing among minorities of any Democratic nominee since JFK, Biden surpassed Barak Obama’s record-breaking turnout by 10 million votes.

7. Prior to the 2020 election, under the pretext of accommodating for the pandemic, there was an unprecedented number of last-minute voting law changes across several states. Some of these were in direct violation of state election laws, and some were in violation of state constitutions.  These resulted in an explosion of the types of voting known to be most susceptible to fraud, namely mail-in and drop-box voting.  Efforts by the Trump team to expose this fraud, with data, prior to certification of the election results, were met with non-responsiveness, complete dismissal without basis, and deliberate misrepresentation by the media.⁾

8.  Dinesh D’Souza’s documentary 2000 Mules provides compelling evidence that there was widespread illegal ballot harvesting and ballot trafficking in key swing states.⁜

9.  From Trump’s first day in office, and throughout his four years in office, his presidency was under constant attack to discredit him and remove him from office. The Steele Dossier which led to the Russian Collusion Allegations which led to Impeachment was one giant lie and an illegal attack partially funded and promulgated by the Clinton campaign (Steele Dossier) and partially funded by our tax dollars (Mueller probe).

10. Prior to the election, the FBI suppressed the release of the highly incriminating contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop.  While the laptop, now known to be legitimate, was in the possession of the FBI, 50 former high-level FBI and federal intelligence officials signed a letter stating that they believed the laptop story to be Russian Disinformation.  Mark Zuckerberg recently admitted that the FBI visited Facebook/Meta just at the time when the laptop story would have gone viral.  The FBI warned Facebook of an expected dump of “Russian Disinformation”, thus causing Facebook to suppress the laptop story.⁡  Just two days ago (8/30/22) FBI special agent in charge, Timothy Thibault, was escorted out of the Washington field office by at least two “headquarters-looking types”.  Thibault, said to have “resigned”, has been accused of attempting to thwart a criminal investigation into Hunter Biden.⁸  President Trump’s Twitter account was suspended and the entire Parler social media platform was shut down by Amazon, Apple, and Google acting in concert. These steps, by the deep state and liberal elites, effectively thwarted any ability to get to the truth out about the laptop.

None of the above, either individually or collectively, provide proof that the election was stolen. At the very least, however, collectively they support the notion that it’s reasonable for people to have serious doubts about the legitimacy of the election, and to demand investigation into what transpired.

The Actual Big Lie

Although Trump’s assertion is not a “Big Lie”, there is a big lie associated with the 2020 election, and it’s a whopper!  That lie is the assertion that on January 6, 2021, President Trump incited a deadly armed insurrection at the Capitol by white supremacists.  The only falsehoods in that assertion are:

A. That Trump incited this peaceful protest.  OK, it was a riot.  But if one accepts that the BLM summer of carnage and destruction (35 dead and $2+ billion property damage) were “peaceful protests”, then surely this short-lived (approx. 4 hours) event, with $1.5 million property damage, qualifies for such a description.  In any case, it wasn’t incited by Trump.

B. That it was deadly.  The phrase “deadly insurrection” implies that murders were committed by the insurrectionists (protestors).  Although it’s true that 4 people died that day, all who died were protestors and none of these deaths were at the hands of any protestors.

C. That it was armed.  Not a single person was arrested on January 6 for possessing a firearm, and there is zero evidence that anyone who entered the capital had a firearm. 

D. That it was an insurrection.  There are specific criteria which must be met for an event to be classified as an insurrection.  The Jan. 6 riot at the capitol did not meet any of these criteria.

E. That this was a crowd of white supremacists.  For a protest that only lasted about four hours, this was the most filmed event in history, including 14,000+ hours of video surveillance by security cameras and police body cameras.  Although some Capitol police officers have said they were called the “N” word, no video or audio evidence supports this contention.  Were there a few racists in the crowd?  It’s statistically possible, but that hardly supports characterizing the crowd as white supremacists.  They weren’t.  They were a group of citizens who, right or wrong, believed the election had been stolen.

The Events Of January 6, An Overview

The program for the January 6, 2021 Save America March in Washington D.C. consisted of two activities. The first part of the program, held at The Ellipse, was a gathering to hear speeches by President Trump and others.   For this portion of the program a crowd of well over one hundred thousand Americans came together.  That event was entirely peaceful.  The second part of the program was much smaller.  It involved a march to the Capitol for a protest regarding the election.  This protest at the Capitol had pockets of violence.

The Speeches

The crowd that gathered to hear President Trump speak was one of the largest to have ever gathered in the ellipse, although one would never know this based on the almost non-existent coverage of the event by biased media.  Almost no videos of this rally were shown on mainstream media. When discussed on TV, commentators often referred to a crowd of “about ten thousand” or a crown that “numbered in the thousands”.  The crowd, in fact, numbered well over one hundred thousand.  Participants came from across the nation.  The rally was peaceful.  The crowd was composed of young and old, men and women, and all races.  A true depiction of this rally can be seen in either of the following documentaries:

A. Capitol Punishment available on Locals.  This documentary, by well-known actor Nick Searcy, provides a real view of what transpired on January 6th and thereafter.

$9.99 at                https://nicksearcy.locals.com/

or

B. The Real Story of January 6/Documentary.  Available on EpochTV

 https://www.theepochtimes.com/the-real-story-of-jan-6-documentary_4596670.html

For an accurate understanding of January 6, I strongly recommend BOTH of these video documentaries, as well as the books JANUARY 6 How Democrats Used The Capitol Protest To Launch A War On Terror Against The Political Right (Julie Kellie, Bombardier Books, ©2022) and THE BIG FRAUD: What Democrats Don’t Want You to Know about January 6, the 2020 Election, and a Whole Lot Else (Congressman Troy E. Nehls, Bombardier Books, ©2022).

One is hard pressed to find a photo on the internet that provides evidence of the scale of the rally.  This one comes close, but it was taken early before many of the participants had arrived:

https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/crowds-gather-for-the-stop-the-steal-rally-on-january-06-2021-in-dc-picture-id1294918033

The Capitol Protest

The plan for the day included a march to the capitol for a peaceful protest after the conclusion of the speeches in The Ellipse.  The number of people who participated in this protest was a fraction of the number who gathered in The Ellipse to hear the President Trump speak.  Some hot-heads in the crowd engaged in violence, mostly window smashing, after having been incited by others in the crowd.  Some officers were injured, although none critically.  The violent activity was criminal and deserving of prosecution consistent with that typical for similar criminal activity.  But “the idea that a brief disturbance at the Capitol – a chaotic political protest that had pockets of violence and featured more clownish behavior than criminal misconduct – rose to the level of an ‘insurrection’ or attempted coup d’état was absurd and overblown from the start.”⁹  Although at some Capitol entrances protestors were blocked by police, at others police freely allowed these protestors to enter.  Many entered, walked around, then left without having any idea they had done anything illegal…

https://twitter.com/i/status/1440776133675388931

https://youtu.be/xH9XWNz0GW4?t=292

The Events Of January 6, Some Specifics

Death Toll

Four people, all protestors, died at the Capitol on January 6.  They were Ashley Babbitt, Roseanne Boyland, Kevin Greeson, and Benjamin Phillips.  Contrary to incessant blatant lies from liberal politicians and mainstream media, no Capitol Police officers died that day nor did any die later as the result of any injuries sustained on January 6.

Ashli Babbitt

Ashli Babbitt, an unarmed 35 year-old white female, was shot and killed by Lt. Michael L. Byrd, a Black man, as she was climbing through a broken window at the Capitol.  The appalling video of this murder can be found in either of the aforementioned documentaries.  Had the races of the two been reversed, and had the victim not been a Trump supporter, this gruesome video would have aired nonstop on mainstream media, and it’s likely that half the nation would still be on fire.  As it is, the video went viral on social media for a short period but mainstream media largely neglected it.  Apparently, the media’s only interest was to vilify Babbitt, a veteran who had served 14 years in the Air Force with 8 tours overseas.  The cover-up began immediately.  The Capitol Police never disclosed Byrd’s name – nor did the U.S. Department of Justice when it announced in April that the investigation into Ashli’s shooting was closed and the officer would not face charges.

Byrd finally came forward in August, 2020, well after the USCP cleared him of any wrongdoing.  In an NBC News interview with Lester Holt, Byrd immodestly told Holt that he had shown the “utmost courage” on January 6 and “I know that day I saved countless lives”.  How he could believe he save countless lives, on a day when not a single person was killed by any protestors, defies all rationality.  Incredibly, he also said that if he had it to do over again, even knowing she was unarmed, he would have still shot her.  Byrd’s temerity is colossal, and his statements are revolting.

Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton stated after a review of the documents concerning the shooting; “The Biden-Garland Justice Department and the Pelosi Congress have much to answer for over the mishandling and cover-up of this scandalous killing of an American citizen by the U.S. Capitol Police.”¹⁰  Stan Kephart, a police use-of-force expert, after studying the evidence concluded that, “Ashlie Babbitt was murdered.  She was shot and killed under color of authority by an officer who violated not only the law but his oath, and committed an arrestable offense.”¹¹ Congressman Troy E. Nehls, who served nearly thirty years in law enforcement, with eight of those years as a county sheriff in Texas, was in the Capitol that day.  After reviewing documents and video evidence, Nehls concluded, “Ashli Babbitt did not deserve to die, and Capitol Police Officer Lt. Michael Byrd should have been tried for murder, rather than cleared by the Capitol Police.”¹²

Roseanne Boyland

Roseanne Boyland became trapped in an entrance tunnel to the Capitol as rioters pushed from one side and Capitol Police pushed back from the other side.  The police employed a noxious gas in the tight space causing several people to vomit and pass out.  Many proclaimed “I can’t breathe”.  As confirmed by a District Court Judge, Boyland had fallen on the step and was being crushed as officers pushed protestors back away from the doors of the tunnel entrance.  Protestor Michael Foy attempted to help the unconscious Boyland.  He swung a hockey stick at police, who continued to push the crowd, while yelling “She’s being crushed….she’s dead, she’s hurt.”¹³  In a video of the melee at the tunnel entrance, a police officer appears to repeatedly beat the unconscious Boyland with a truncheon.š⁴  Boyland was eventually taken to a local hospital and died later that day.  Incredibly, the D.C. Medical Examiner’s Office ruled the cause of death as acute amphetamine intoxication without any mention of extenuating factors.  Boyland had been prescribed Adderall (used for attention deficit disorder) for years.  Adderall contains amphetamine salts as its main ingredient. In the same vicinity as that of Boyland’s death, an unarmed woman, Victoria White, was severely beaten by a police officer.  White, trapped in the tunnel by the crowd, was struck with a metal baton nearly forty times in the head and face over a 5 minute period.š⁾

Kevin Greeson

Kevin Greeson’s death was ruled a heart attack with no mention of extenuating factors.  Greeson had a history of heart problems.  An anonymous witness told National File that Gleeson was hit in the eye by a projectile from an explosive device thrown into the crowd by police. “[H]e couldn’t start breathing [sic], he collapsed, and that’s when we [were] just like, ‘Paramedic, paramedic!’.”¹⁶

Benjamin Phillips

Benjamin Phillips died of a heart attack during the protest.  Phillips had a history of heart problems.  There are no known extenuating factors regarding Phillips’ death.

Weapons

As of November 1, 2021, sixty-five defendants faced charges of either possessing or using a deadly or dangerous weapon.  Not a single firearm was among the list of “weapons”.  Included in the list were flagpoles, sticks, a crutch, chemical spray, metal signs, tasers, a stun gun/walking stick, and a skateboard. Protestors who carried some sort of weapon told investigators they did so in order to protect themselves against anticipated attacks by leftwing activists.  BLM and Antifa activists had recently harassed and assaulted people at other Trump rallies.

An Insurrection?

To be considered an insurrection or attempted coup, a violent attack upon the seat of government must meet certain basic criteria.  It must be organized and coordinated; it must be armed; and above all, it must have a plan of action once it seizes the reins of power.⁚  One need only watch any of the video evidence of the protest to know that it wasn’t at all organized or coordinated.  What started as a rally of over one hundred thousand people at The Ellipse resulted in only sixty-five weapons charges at the Capitol without a single firearm among them, and including such ‘weapons’ as sticks, crutches, and a skateboard.  It’s beyond absurd to call this incident organized and armed.  It’s also clear that this small group of misfits could never have seized power and would not have had a clue what to do if they did.  Perhaps the most convincing evidence that this was not an armed insurrection can be found in the actions of the Capitol police.  Other than for the murder of Ashli Babbitt by officer Michael Byrd, the police used only rubber bullets, sting balls, flash bangs, truncheons, and chemical irritant sprays to disperse the crowd.  To quash an armed insurrection, immediate and deadly force would surely be warranted.

Inciting An Insurrection?

The Left and entrenched D.C. bureaucrats have alleged that President Trump’s speech on January 6 incited an insurrection.  “Inciting an Insurrection” is an oxymoron.  “Inciting” implies provoking or urging people to act spontaneously.  By definition, an insurrection is not a spontaneous act.  It must be planned and coordinated, and it must have a plan of action once control is seized.  The disingenuous, continued use of the word “insurrection” is reflective of nothing more than an intense hatred of Trump and a goal to stop him, by any means necessary, from running for president in 2024.  

The Sickening Exploitation of Sicknick’s Death

The Truth

Officer Brian Sicknick, a member of the Capitol Police Force, was defending the Capitol on January 6.  At 2:20 p.m. Officer Sicknick was allegedly sprayed with a chemical irritant on the west side of the building. Video later showed Sicknick, patrolling an area where police were using tear gas against protestors, attempting to wash his eyes with water.š⁡  Sicknick texted his older brother Ken on the evening of January 6 and told Ken he had been sprayed twice with pepper spray but was fine.  Officer Sicknick died the next day.  It wasn’t until three months later (4/7), that the District of Columbia Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, Dr. Francisco J. Diaz, released autopsy results confirming that Brian Sicknick had died of natural causes, a stroke caused by blood clots.š⁸

The Many Astounding Lies

For months the Democrats and the media openly and knowingly lied about the death of Brian Sicknick in order to smear Trump supporters as violently enraged cop killers.   Here are some examples of the lies that transpired during the three months between Sicknick’s death and the truth reported by the DC Medical Examiner:

On January 7, the US Capitol Police issued a statement including “Officer Brian D. Sicknick passed away due to injuries sustained while on-duty”.

On January 8, Nancy Pelosi ordered Capitol flags to be flown at half-staff.  Pelosi also issued the following statement… “The perpetrators of Officer Sicknick’s death must be brought to justice. The violent and deadly act of insurrection targeting the Capitol, our temple of American Democracy, and its workers was a profound tragedy and stain on our nation’s history.  But because of the heroism of our first responders and the determination of the Congress, we were not, and will never be, diverted from our duty to the Constitution and the American people.”

On January 8, Jeffrey Rosen, the acting attorney general, wrote “Our thoughts and prayers are with the family and fellow officers of U.S. Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick, who succumbed last night to the injuries he suffered defending the U.S. Capitol, against the violent mob who stormed it on January 6th”.

On January 8, the New York Times published “Pro-Trump rioters attacked the citadel of democracy, overpowered Mr. Sicknick, 42, and struck him in the head with a fire extinguisher, according to two law enforcement officials.  With a bloody gash in his head, Mr. Sicknick was rushed to the hospital and placed on life support. He died on Thursday evening.”

On January 10, CNN’s Jake Tapper reported “The flags at the U.S. Capitol are at half-staff this morning for the police officer, Brian Sicknick, who was murdered this week”.

On January 11, the Washington Post published an opinion piece stating: “Officer Sicknick was pummeled by a rioter wielding a fire extinguisher, according to witnesses.”

The blatant “fire extinguisher” and “murder” lies were repeated for weeks by CNN and other news outlets.  Reporters Poppy Harlow, Anderson Cooper, Ana Cabrera, Erin Burnett, Rep. Ted Lieu on Wolf Blitzer, Joe Scarborough, Andrew McCarthy, and Tiana Lowe, among many others, all spread these falsehoods.

The military’s joint chiefs wrote in a January 13 statement, “We mourn the deaths of the two Capitol policemen.” (Democrats tried to tie the alleged suicide of another Capitol Police officer to Jan. 6.)

Federal prosecutors included Sicknicks’ death in charging documents against Capitol defendants.

House impeachment managers included the Times story in their official memo detailing the evidence against Trump: “The Insurrectionists killed a Capitol Police officer by striking him in the head with a fire extinguisher.”

On February 1, the House of Representatives passed a resolution stating, “The remains of the late United States Capitol Police Officer Brian D. Sicknick shall be permitted to lie in honor in the rotunda of the Capitol from February 2, 2021, through February 3, 2021.”

Even long after the release of the medical examiner’s findings, Joe Biden has repeatedly referred to the two Capitol Police Officers who were killed on January 6.

As the “fire extinguisher” narrative began to unravel and before the ME’s report of death by natural causes was released, the DOJ charged and arrested two men, Julien Khater and George Tanios, in connection with an “attack” on officer Brian Sicknick.  Tanios claims that he took a few cans of chemical spray in case he needed to defend himself against leftwing protestors. When the D.C. Metro Police force and the USCP began attacking protestors with flash bangs, sting balls, rubber bullets, and tear gas, Khater is alleged to have taken bear spray out of Tanios backpack and sprayed the chemical toward the officers.  Both men spent months imprisoned in solitary confinement without the possibility of bail.

Incredibly, despite the ME’s conclusion, the Capitol Police continue to perpetuate the lie.  After the medical examiner released the report, the agency issued a statement: “The USCP accepts the findings from the District of Columbia’s Office of the Chief Medical Examiner that Officer Brian Sicknick died of natural causes.  This does not change the fact Officer Sicknick died in the line of duty, courageously defending Congress and the Capitol.”¹⁹  Huh????

The KGB

Rounding Up The Domestic Terrorists

If there was a concerted FBI effort to round up and imprison the BLM and antifa activists who

committed violent crimes and massive destruction during the BLM riots, I am not aware of it.  As one example, for months a large section of Seattle was overtaken and vandalized by protestors, many of whom were armed, and virtually nothing happened.  Federal courthouses were vandalized, and many rioters had come from other states, thus warranting FBI involvement.  In stark contrast, after January 6 the FBI immediately began to round up and imprison January 6 protestors.  The stories of over-the-top actions by the FBI are plentiful and chilling.  Protestors who had done nothing violent, had damaged no property, were allowed to freely enter the Capitol, and who would immediately have turned themselves in had they received a phone call from the FBI instructing them to do so, were awakened by early morning raids on their homes consisting of:

a) Armored vehicles, some with turrets and some with battering rams,

b) 20 to 30 armed officers,

c) Announcements over loud bullhorns, for all the neighbors to hear, that they are under arrest and must come out with their hands up,

d) Police flash-bang grenades being detonated,

d) Doors being smashed in by police before the person had any time to get to a door to open it,

e)  Parents being hand-cuffed in front of their neighbors while their children look on frightened and while multiple red dots (laser points from swat rifles) are apparent across the parents’ torsos.

Video evidence of these actions are plentiful in the documentaries previously cited.

The Gulag

The stories of the incarceration of January 6 protestors depict what one would expect from a dictatorial banana republic.  They include many months of incarceration without bail, solitary confinement, brutal treatment, deplorable conditions, and no set trial date.  Some imprisoned protestors have had their trial dates postponed multiple times.  Some have been imprisoned since shortly after January 6 and are still in prison awaiting trial; eighteen plus months in prison without having been found guilty of anything because they haven’t even had a trial. Here is one of many exceptionally disturbing examples that can be found in Chapter 10, “Inside the Deplorable Jail”, of Julie Kelly’s book:

Ryan Samsel

Ryan Samsel was arrested and incarcerated on January 30.  Samsel, accused of assaulting a police officer, remained incarcerated and was not formally indicted until August 25th!  In March, Samsel was beaten severely by prison employees.  According to a fellow inmate, “Ryan had a confrontation with one of the guards about getting toilet paper.  As a Marine, he wasn’t one to put up with a lot of stuff.  All of a sudden, they moved him to the last cell out of sight of security cameras.”  Samsel’s attorney, Steven Metcalf, detailed what then happened to Samsel: “Around midnight, two guards came to that cell, restrained Samsel’s arms behind his back with zip-tie handcuffs and ‘beat him to a bloody pulp’.” He was taken to Howard University Hospital the next day.  According to his lawyers he was treated at the hospital: “for injuries including, but not limited to, head strike and loss of consciousness, bilateral eye ecchymosis, acute kidney injury, injury of the wrists, fracture of the orbital floor (right side/closed fracture), bilateral facial bilateral nasal bone fracture, and thoracic outlet syndrome.  Ultimately, as a result of the brutal assault, Mr. Samsel lost vision in his right eye, has suffered seizures, and has continuing pain and suffering in relation to the thoracic outlet syndrome”.  After his hospital stay, Samsel was transferred to the Central Virginia Regional Jail where officials refused to provide requested treatments such as MRIs and ophthalmology care to his damaged eye socket.

Exactly what happened to “innocent until proven guilty” and to a person’s right to a speedy trial as guaranteed in Amendment 6 of the Constitution – “the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury”?  And what are the chances of finding an impartial jury in a district that voted 93% for Joe Biden?  In fact, not even the judges or defense lawyers have proven to be impartial.  As one of many examples in Kelly’s book:

Judge Tanya Chutkan had this to say at the sentencing of a defendant who had made a plea deal – “I would just remind you of the officers who were in fact killed that day and officers who had heart attacks and officers who had their eyes gouged out and officers who will never be coming home to their families.”  The judge’s statement is rife with errors, myths, and falsehoods. All these assertions are untrue.  Apparently, truth and facts carry little weight among DC judges.

As another example:

In cases where a defendant cannot afford an attorney, the court assigns one.  D.C. Defense attorney H. Heather Shaner has assigned books and videos to be watched by the January 6 defendants she represents, her “captured audience”.  These materials present a decidedly one-sided view of American history as one of racism and oppression.  Just imagine being falsely accused of a crime and having a defense attorney who immediately treats you as an ignorant white supremacist!²⁰

The Russian Show Trial

The House Committee On January 6 (aka Circus, aka Witch Hunt, aka Kangaroo Court, aka Kabuki Theater)

I confess, but make no apology for the fact, that I didn’t watch this prime-time theater, knowing from the outset that it was a complete farce.  I did keep up with much of what transpired through podcasts to which I regularly listen.  What can one possibly expect from an investigation that is composed entirely of members selected for the extreme hostility they have demonstrated toward the person being investigated?  Usually in House investigations, the House Majority Leader affirms members for the majority party and the House Minority Leader affirms members for the minority party.  In this unique case, Nancy Pelosi did not allow any of the Republican members selected by the Minority Leader.  Who could have been better suited to sit on the committee than Congressman Troy. E. Nehls, one of the members proposed by House Minority Leader, Kevin McCarthy.  Before being elected to Congress, Nehls had been in law enforcement for 30 years, the last eight of which were as a Sherriff.   On January 6, Nehls assisted the Capitol Police against rioters who were smashing windows and attempting to enter the House chamber.  Pelosi instead chose two members to represent Republicans, both of whom were known to hold animosity for Trump, and both of whom had voted to impeach him.  What is one to expect from a trial, of sorts, in which no defense representative is allowed to question witnesses?  This farce, which isn’t yet complete and which is sure to drag on until shortly before the mid-terms, has already cost taxpayers millions.

To date, the biggest “bombshell” uncovered by the commission appears to concern a story about Trump lunging for the steering wheel of his vehicle on the trip back from The Ellipse on January 6.  Apparently, Trump wanted to go to the Capitol, and the Secret Service was intent on taking him to the White House.  My reaction when I first heard about this was, and continues to be, so what?  Unless I’m mistaken Trump, who is known to be brusque and curtly reactive in some situations, was still the sitting President at the time.  This story was relayed to the commission by Cassidy Hutchinson, aide to former chief of staff, Mark Meadows.  Hutchinson wasn’t even present at the time, but relayed the story that she said had been relayed to her.   The Secret Service members who were present immediately issued statements that Hutchinson’s story was untrue.  These same agents had earlier been questioned by the commission.   Why would the commission allow hearsay testimony about an incident for which they could have easily obtained direct testimony and for which the direct testimony contradicted the hearsay?

Lastly, what should one expect from an investigation of Donald Trump done by a committee whose vice chair, Liz Cheney, issued a campaign ad in which her father, Dick Cheney, described Trump as a coward and the greatest threat to our republic in our nation’s 246-year history?

Another Scenario

Another scenario, one that doesn’t crumble under scrutiny, is that Democrats and entrenched Washington bureaucrats engineered and instigated the events that transpired on January 6 in order to paint Trump as an insurrectionist and to eliminate any chance Trump might have of retaking the presidency in 2024.  Such an action is consistent with the final impeachment of Trump, an endeavor that could not have had any motive other than preventing Trump’s potential re-election.  Here are just some of the pieces of information that don’t hold up under the “Trump incited an insurrection” scenario, but that make perfect sense under a “Get Trump at all cost scenario”:

1. The security arrangements provided an illusion that the Capitol had been prepared for an attack, while making it easy for protestors to enter the Capitol so that they could be charged with crimes, and the narrative of an insurrection, with media coverage and trials, could go on indefinitely.

A. The USCP’s Intelligence and Interagency Coordination Division (IICD) issued an assessment, regarding January 6, on January 3 that included “there has been a worrisome call for protestors to come to these events armed and there is the possibility that protestors may be inclined to become violent.” The IICD noted a concern about the attendance of the pro-Trump group Stop The Steal which it said has a “propensity to attract white supremacists, militia members, and others who actively promote violence,” which “may lead to a significantly dangerous situation for law enforcement and the general public alike”.²¹

B. Why was the National Guard not in place to defend the Capitol?  Trump claimed in a Washington Times article that he “strongly recommended” to Pelosi that she send in the National Guard to secure the Capitol on January 6 but Pelosi ignored the request.²²

Pelosi denies this but, in any case, as the leader of the USCP Pelosi had the authority to request National Guard assistance, in advance, and did not.

C. Why wasn’t the IICD information shared with the USCP’s own officers?  As a Senate Report makes clear, “critical information was not shared with USCP’s own officers and other law enforcement partners.”²³  The Capitol Police on the ground didn’t understand what they might be up against.

2. In the April 2022 Gretchen Whitmer kidnapping trial, two defendants were found not guilty because they were subject to clear entrapment by the FBI.  It’s clearly not a stretch, then, to think that the FBI was complicit in a scheme to entrap Trump.  It has been discovered that several FBI agents were among the crowd of protestors on January 6, but their purposes and actions have not been revealed.

3. Coincidently the main FBI agent in charge of the Whitmer kidnapping case, was transferred to the DC field office sometime prior to January 6.

4. Some Capitol entrances had significant police protection.  These are the ones most seen in media coverage of the event.  Others had very limited coverage where officers can be seen removing barricades and protestors can be seen freely walking by officers into the Capitol.²⁴ ²⁾   Some officers posed for selfies with protestors.²⁜

5. At a rally held on the evening of January 5, a man, later identified as Ray Epps, is captured on video repeatedly and loudly instructing those present to “Go Into The Capitol Tomorrow”.  The crowd is suspicious of Epps and begins chanting “Fed, Fed, Fed…”.  Epps is seen in another video on January 6 at The Ellipse provoking the crowd in the same manner.  Later, at the Capitol, Epps is seen standing in front of a police barricade shouting into a person’s ear.  That person, Ryan Samsel (recall the horrific prison treatment of Samsel described above), then turns and pushes back the barricade with Epps following right behind.  Curiously, Epps himself is never captured on video entering the Capitol.  At one point Epps’ name appeared on the FBI list of those wanted for the Capitol riot.  His name later disappeared from the list and Epps was never charged.  Epps, perhaps the person most responsible for inciting the melee of January 6, was never charged for anything!²⁡

6. Video evidence shows that several people who were present at the January 6 rally were also present at BLM/Antifa riots in the summer of 2020.  The person who caught Ashlie Babbitt’s murder on video, John Sullivan, also known as “Jayden X.”, was present at many of the George Floyd protests.  He founded a group called Insurgence USA to fight police brutality.  He told a crowd at a June 2020 protest “racism is still real in America and that needs to change. It’s not enough to voice your words. Put those words into action…make change happen.”  He was arrested in July for an altercation with pro-police protestors.  According to the Washington Examiner, Sullivan ran “an antifa Discord server that featured other left-wing activists discussing tactics and strategy at protests.”  There is footage of Sullivan inside the Capitol yelling “This shit is ours! Fuck yeah.” and “We gotta get this shit burned.”²⁸  What would be the purpose of BLM/Antifa members attending a Trump rally other than to incite violence?

7. Prior to January 6, fences were put up around the Capitol and signs were posted indicating this was a restricted area.  Video footage shows a man waiting alongside the fence for 21 minutes, then, calmly and methodically, cutting down and rolling up the fence and taking down the signs that would have indicated to later arriving Trump supporters that the area was restricted and, consequently, they could be arrested for entering the Capitol area.  Oddly, even though there is plenty of footage, this man did not make it onto the FBI’s Most Wanted list.²⁚

8. In addition to the videos taken by the protestors, more than 14,000 hours of video evidence was captured by security cameras and police body cameras.  Requests by members of Congress to see these videos were repeatedly denied for the stated reason that they could compromise the security of the Capitol.  It’s hard to imagine why these videos could not be released to Republican Congressmen and Senators who are in the Capitol daily.  Ultimately it was determined that about 7000 +/- hours of the videos would be released, but the remaining 7000 +/- hours would be withheld because that footage was not relevant.  This is akin to a fox who is guarding a henhouse providing evidence that “the hens are fine” by showing half of the hens!

In Conclusion

Each reader will draw his/her own conclusions based on this article.

Here is what I know:

The 2020 presidential election was the most corrupt election in my lifetime.

Here is what I believe:

1. The 2020 presidential election was stolen.

2. The “insurrection” lies and distortions, and the House Commission “show trial” are part of an elaborate scheme by Democratic politicians, liberal elites, and the deep state aimed at ensuring that Donald Trump is not permitted to run for office in 2024.

References

š               January 6…How Democrats Used The Capitol Protest To Launch A War On Terror Against The Political Right, Julie Kelly, Bombardier Books, Š2022, pg. 4

Âł              pgs. 4-5

⁴              pg. xii

⁚              pg. 57

š⁰             pg. 198

š³             pg. 42

š⁜             pg. 32

š⁡             pg. 34

š⁸             pg. 153

š⁚             pgs. 139-156

²⁜             pg. 158

²⁸             pgs. 188-189

²              Newsweek, Natalie Colarossi, 11/19/20

⁾              Jan. 6 Committee Ignores Clear Evidence Of Mass Illegal Voting, Systematically Broken Election Laws, Margot Cleveland, The Federalist, June 17, 2022.

⁜              https://watch.salemnow.com/series/xFOCFe59zfCS-2000-mules?channel=featured-movies

⁡              https://nypost.com/2022/08/25/mark-zuckerberg-criticizes-twitters-handling-of-the-posts-hunter-biden-laptop-story/

⁸              National Review, Top FBI Agent Resigns after Allegedly Thwarting Hunter Biden Investigation: Report, Caroline Downey, August 30, 2022

š⁴             EpochTV, The Real Story of January 6/Documentary, 1 min. 7sec.

                š⁾             16 min. 0 sec.

                šš             43 min. 26 sec.

š²             The BIG FRAUD….What Democrats Don’t Want You to Know about January 6, the 2020 Election, and a Whole Lot Else, Congressman Troy E. Nells, Bombardier Books, Š2022, Pg. 257

²š             Pg. 231

²⁡             Pgs. 246-247, 249-250

²⁚             Pgs. 250-251

²⁰            Huffpost, A Lawyer for Jan. 6 Defendants Is Giving Her Clients Remedial Lessons In American History, Ryan J. Reilly, June 21, 2021

²²             The Washington Times, Trump says calls for National Guard on Jan. 6 were ignored by Pelosi, Joseph Clark, Feb. 3, 2022

²³             United States Senate, “Examining the U.S. Capitol Attack: A Review of the Security, Planning, and Response Failures on January 6”,  Pg. 2

²⁴             https://twitter.com/i/status/1440776133675388931

²⁾             https://youtu.be/xH9XWNz0GW4?t=292

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The BLM Hoax, Part 4

BLM “Accomplishments”

Several times during his term in office President Donald Trump called the BLM movement “domestic terrorism”.  This statement, like everything else Trump said or did while in office, came under widespread attack from the Left.  The attacks notwithstanding, Trump was correct.

Under federal law domestic terrorism means activities that:

  • Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law

  • Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping

  • Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the USš

The BLM movement:

I. deepened a racial divide that only a few years ago had finally almost disappeared,

II. was responsible for a huge jump in criminal activity including homicides, assaults, and destruction of property,

III. vilified law enforcement officers thereby targeting them for violence and murder.

I. Deepening a racial divide.

BLM deepened a racial divide by promoting a false narrative that the US is systemically racist, particularly in law enforcement by police officers.  Unfortunately, virtue signaling corporate and Hollywood elites fueled this false narrative as a way of paying ransom so that they and their companies might escape the “racist” stigma. ²

BLM promoted and supported the “1619 Project”, a pack of lies and distortions promulgated in an attempt to rewrite US history as nothing more than the formation of country built to promote and exploit slavery.³ ⁴

BLM promoted the teaching of “Critical Race Theory” in schools.  This hateful and racist theory erroneously suggests that oppressive White Supremacy abounds throughout society and that blacks are victims of this ever-present oppression.  Little children are being taught that they are oppressors if they happen to be white and are victims if they happen to be black. Additionally, in 2018, 20 major cities incorporated “BLM at School Week” into their curricula.  A key resource for the BLM-related lessons is a textbook titled Teaching for Black Lives, whose opening sentence reads: “Black students’ minds and bodies are under attack.”  It teaches students about “the continuing police murders of black people” whose “lives are meaningless to the American Empire”. ⁾

Both “The 1619 Project” and “Critical Race Theory” will be explored in future emails.

II. Causing a huge jump in criminal activity including homicides, assaults, and destruction of property.

1. Andrew Klavan’s 11 minute interview with Heather Mac Donald substantiates that:

*BLM was responsible for “Thousands more overwhelmingly black victims of homicide.”

* Due to BLM, “Last year saw the largest percentage increase in homicides in recorded US history”

* The homicide surge is “happening” because of “the demonization of police” … “since the death of George Floyd”.

*“Every elite establishment in the country is embracing this phony narrative about systemic lethal police bias.”

Please watch this important interview here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGdLVmMIgAg ⁜

2. The Ferguson Effect. The Minneapolis Effect.

“The Ferguson Effect” (Michael Brown) and “The Minneapolis Effect” (George Floyd) are terms referring to an increase in violent crime and homicides resulting from a decrease in policing activity.  The decrease in police activity comes as a result of the wholesale attack on police after “viral” news coverage of the death of a black man at the hands of a police officer.  Although this effect should have been patently obvious to anyone who pays attention, its validity was often challenged in the mainstream media.  Harvard Economist Roland G. Fryer Jr. (a black man) undertook a thorough study to either confirm or debunk this effect.

Fryer found a clear causal effect.  In just 5 cities (Baltimore, Chicago, Cincinnati, Riverside, and Ferguson), 893 additional homicides and 33,472 additional felony crimes took place after “viral” news reporting of blacks killed by police, than would have been expected based on background trends. These additional homicides were almost exclusively of blacks killed by other blacks.  For reference, the total average annual number of blacks killed by police, for any reason, in these same 5 cities is 12. It would therefore take 75 years, in these 5 cities, for the number of blacks killed by police to equal the number of additional blacks killed by other blacks after these “viral” incidents. Fryer found that after these “viral” incidents, the amount of policing activity dropped abruptly as police came under attack. For example, in Chicago there were 1,132 police-civilian contacts the day before a “viral” event. The day after there were 1079 such contacts; one week later there were 838; and three weeks later there were 359.⁡

Find the complete study here:

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w27324/w27324.pdf

3. According to Zac Kriegman, a data scientist who investigated BLM data while working for Reuters…

“Regardless of whether you call it the Ferguson Effect or the Minneapolis Effect, if you add up the estimates of murders from the different studies in various time periods, you get something in the neighborhood of 2500 additional murders on the lowest end.  While it may be difficult to pin down an exact number, what’s clear is that thousands of black people have been murdered as a result of BLM’s falsehoods villainizing the police, and the resultant anti-police sentiment that makes police even more wary of confronting criminal suspects.”⁸

4. According to the Insurance Information Institute, the BLM riots that followed the death of George Floyd “were the costliest civil unrest in U.S. History, with insured losses at over $2 billion.” Others have estimated insured plus uninsured losses to approach $5 billion.  According to the U.S. Crisis Monitor, 633 riots took place in 2020 after the death of George Floyd.  Although there were indeed some “peaceful protests” following the death of Floyd, none of those have been counted in this figure of 633 riots.

5. In response to BLM calls to “Defund The Police”, over 20 major US cities cut their police budgets including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Portland, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Denver, Austin, Minneapolis, San Francisco, Long Beach, Las Vegas, New Orleans, Columbus, Washington D.C., Boston, Dallas, Detroit, Louisville, and Arlington. 

A quick look at the three largest such cities reveals:

Does this surge in homicides come as a shock to anyone? ⁚

6. Throughout the BLM riots of 2020 and 2021, the US population witnessed rampant theft, violence, vandalism, destruction of businesses, and assaults that went entirely unpunished.  These occurred almost exclusively in Democrat-run cities whose leaders restricted the police from doing their jobs.  Kamala Harris went so far as to help post bail for arrested rioters. Baltimore Mayor Stephanie Rawlings Blake made the statement, “while officials worked to protect protestors taking action over the death of Freddie Gray, they also gave those who wish to destroy space to do that as well.”  So, instead of protecting the victims of a riot, we watched our government work to protect the protestors (rioters) and to give these rioters the space they needed to destroy.  The entire population witnessed this loathsome spectacle. Every would-be criminal became emboldened as they saw entire cities completely abandon law and order.

7. Twelve major U.S. cities had all time high homicide records in 2021.  All Twelve were Democrat run cities.š⁰

8. BLM demands for cities to be softer on crime, supported by huge donations from George Soros, led to the election of “progressive” DAs across the country as well as absurd changes in the law. Noteworthy examples include:

* San Francisco DA Chesa Boudin has promoted policies rolling back mass incarceration, ending cash bail, ending tough sentencing for gang members. 40 Attorneys have resigned from the DAs office since Boudin came to power.šš

* Los Angeles DA George Gascon is trying an adult, James Tubbs, as a minor in the violent sexual assault of a 10 year old girl.  Tubbs, well into adulthood now, assaulted the girl just weeks before turning 18.  Gascon has been further induced to soften the sentence because Tubbs now identifies as a girl who goes by the name “Hannah”. In a leaked audio from a prison phone call, Tubbs mocked the DA’s leniency – “”I’m gonna plead it out. Plead guilty. They’re gonna stick me on probation. I won’t have to register. Won’t have to do nothing.”¹²

* BLM activist Darrell Brooks Jr. drove his Ford Escape SUV into a marching band at the 2021 Christmas Parade in Waukesha, WI killing 5 people. Just three weeks prior the Milwaukee DA had allowed Brooks to be released from jail with a mere $1000 bond after Brooks had attempted to run over his ex-girlfriend. š³

* A report by the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund (LELDF) found that in each of six jurisdictions with progressive district attorneys, “felony crime rates have increased while their prosecutors’ policies are reducing conviction rates. The net results are a lack of justice for victims and rising crime rates.” The report concludes, “This signals a troubling trend as these progressive activists attain local prosecutorial roles and may mark a rise in crime in the affected jurisdictions and nearby locales.”¹⁴

* After progressive cities raised the felony threshold for stolen goods, shoplifting and “smash-and-grab” crime rates exploded: 

“Organized gangs brazenly steal branded items even with security present, as California raised the threshold for a felony charge from $450 to $950 in stolen goods.”¹⁵

“Coordinated crime sprees in major cities in California, New York and elsewhere are forcing retailers to close stores and limit operating hours, as packs of shoplifters regularly make off with hundreds of dollars-worth in merchandise to be resold online, at street markets or returned for gift cards.” š⁾  

“Walgreens has closed 17 locations in San Francisco over the last five years citing this sort of theft, the San Francisco Chronicle reported in May. Jason Cunningham, regional vice president for pharmacy and retail operations in California and Hawaii, said at a hearing at the time that theft in Walgreens stores in San Francisco is four times the average of stores elsewhere in the country.” ¹⁵

“Just last week, viral video from San Francisco showed a band of thieves running out of a Neiman Marcus in Union Square carrying designer handbags before jumping into waiting getaway vehicles.” ¹⁵

“Union Pacific said last month in a letter to the Los Angeles District Attorney that it saw a 160% year-over-year increase in theft in LA county. The company claims that a December 2020 special directive issued by District Attorney George Gascón that changed how low-level offenses are prosecuted has contributed to the uptick.”¹⁶

III. Ambush and Assault on Police Officers

 Ambush-style attacks on police officers across the U.S. went up 115% in 2021 compared to 2020.  This was a 20 year high.š⁡

* During a Black Lives Matter March in Dallas on July 7, 2016, BLM activist Micah Xavier Johnson ambushed and killed five police officers.  Additionally, seven other officers and two civilians were injured by Johnson.  During negotiations with Dallas Police Chief David Brown, Johnson stated that he wanted to “kill white people, especially white officers.” š⁸

* After shooting two police officers in an ambush, Black Lives Matter rioters tried to block the hospital caring for the officers and taunted officers with “I hope they f***ing die”.¹⁹

* On Dec. 16, 2021, Police Officer Keona Holley was assassinated sitting alone in her patrol car at 1:30 a.m. in southern Baltimore. Travon Shaw, 32, a violent felon awaiting trial on a gun possession charge, shot her from behind, according to his accomplice — striking Holley twice in the head, once in the leg and once in the hand. A week after the ambush, Holley was removed from life support and died, leaving behind four children and a stricken police force.²⁰

A Quick Summary:

1. BLM is a movement based entirely on a lie which is easily debunked with abundant facts.

2. At least 2,500 people, mostly black, have been murdered and the figure continues to climb.

3. At least $2 billion, and possibly up to $5 billion, in property damage and the figure continues to climb as “smash and grab” incidents take place throughout the country.

4. A 115% increase in ambush attacks on police officers, and these attacks continue.

5. White children are being taught that they are oppressors, and black children are being taught that they are victims.

Conclusion

During President Obama’s time in office, he invited BLM leaders to the White House several times.  On one of those occasions, in February 2016, Obama put his arms around them figuratively and said: “They are much better organizers than I was when I was their age, and I am confident that they are going to take America to new heights”. On another occasion he said, “Keep speaking the truth to power”.²š

Several months before that, in August 2015, the Democratic National Committee passed a resolution endorsing the Black Lives Matter movement and its false narrative: “The DNC joins with Americans across the country in affirming ‘Black lives matter’ and ‘Say her name’ efforts to make visible the pain of our fellow and sister Americans as they condemn extrajudicial killings of unarmed African American men, women, and children.”²¹

In contrast, during President Trump’s time in office, he called Black Lives Matter a domestic terrorist organization. Trump also offered to send the National Guard into cities to quell the violence and destruction resulting from BLM riots.  This offer was often refused, primarily by Democratic Governors.

Now that many Americans have experienced first-hand the enormous destruction from Black Lives Matter, support for Democratic Leaders is plummeting according to an abundance of polling data.  In the recent State of The Union address, we heard Biden declare, “We need to fund the police, not defund the police.”  We also recently heard Nancy Pelosi declare, “Defund the Police is dead.”  These abrupt reversals, while obviously the right thing to do, are sickening in that they are clearly a response to poll numbers rather than to the horrific consequences of BLM.  Such a response could have, and should have, come much earlier as property destruction and death tolls climbed.  It’s beyond comprehension that anyone could have thought that defunding the police was a good idea in the first place.

Whether it be the result of ignorance, hatred, virtue signaling, cowardice, or pandering to a crowd, those who have supported the BLM movement own responsibility for 2,500 deaths and billions of dollars worth of property damage.

References:

š               Was the US Capital attack “domestic terrorism”?, Jennifer Williams, Vox, Jan. 7,2021

²              The Authoritarian Moment, Ben Shapiro, Broadside Books, Chapter 5.

Âł              Marxist Revolution In The Making In America, Mike Gonzalez, The Epoch Times, February 2, 2022.

⁴              1620 - A Critical Response To The 1619 Project, Peter W. Wood, Encounter Books, Copyright 2020

⁾              Black Lives Matter; Marxist Hate Dressed Up As Racial Justice, John Perazzo, David Horowitz Freedom Center, pgs 28-29.

⁜              The Andrew Klavan Show. Heather Mac Donald. The Real Reason Behind The American Crime Explosion.

⁡              Policing The Police: The Impact Of “Pattern- Or-Practice” Investigations On Crime, Tanaya Devi and Roland G. Fryer Jr., National Bureau Of Economic Research, June 2020

⁸              BLM Spreads Falsehoods That Have Led to the Murders of Thousands of Black People in the Most Disadvantaged Communities, Zac Kriegman, Dec. 7, 2021

⁚              Daily Wire, Dillon Burroughs, Jan 3, 2022; New York Post, Larry Celona and Dean Balsamiri, Jan 1, 2022; Los Angeles Magazine, Jon Regardie, Jan. 17, 2022

š⁰             ABC News, ‘It’s Just Crazy’; 12 major cities hit all time homicide records, Bill Hutchinson, December 8, 2021

https://abcnews.go.com/US/12-major-us-cities-top-annual-homicide-records/story?id=81466453

šš             Behind the loud pushback against progressive district attorneys across the country, NPR, Eric Westervelt, November 6, 2021

š²             Could the outrageous pedophile case finally end the “progressive” justice farce?, New York Post, Mary Harrington, Feb. 23, 2022

š³             MailOnline, Rachel Bunyan, November 23, 2021

š⁴             Soros Funded D,istrict Attorneys Linked To Increases In Violent Crime, John Byrne, Capital Research Center, February 24, 2021

š⁾             Coordinate crime sprees forcing retailers to close stores, limit hours, Danielle Wallace, Fox News, 7/12/21

š⁜             Thieves in LA are looting freight trains filled with packages from UPS, FedEx, and Amazon, Matt McFarland and Cheri Mossburg, CNN Business, January 15, 2022

š⁡             346 Police Officers Shot In The Line Of Duty During 2021, Breitbart, AWR Hawkins, 1/4/22

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/01/04/346-police-officers-shot-line-duty-2021/

                Intentional killings reach 20 year high, FBI says, CNN Wire, Emma Tucker, 1/14/22

https://abc7chicago.com/police-officers-killed-in-2021-fbi-crime-statistics-how-many/11468095/

š⁸             I Can’t Breath; How A Racial Hoax Is Killing America, David Horowitz, Regnery Publishing, pgs 112-113

š⁚             'Y'ALL GONNA DIE' ‘Black Lives Matter group’ tries to block hospital caring for ambushed cops & taunt officers: ‘I hope they f***ing die’, Fionualla O’Leary, The U.S. Sun, 9/13/2020

²⁰             Where is the outrage over the killing of Baltimore Police Officer Keona Holley, New York Post, Heather Mac Donald, December 29, 2021

https://nypost.com/2021/12/29/where-is-the-outrage-over-the-killing-of-keona-holley/

²š          I Can’t Breath; How A Racial Hoax Is Killing America, David Horowitz, Regnery Publishing, pgs 115-116

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The BLM Hoax, Part 3

The Birth And Growth Of BLM

 

Birth

In 2013 a Facebook post from Alicia Garza containing the phrase “Black Lives Matter” went viral and thus began the BLM movement.  The post was in reaction to the shooting death in 2012 of Trayvon Martin at the hands of George Zimmerman.  The circumstances surrounding the death of Martin were discussed in part 2 of this series.  Zimmerman was tried and acquitted for murder and manslaughter. His acquittal was considered by many to be a miscarriage of justice.  Zimmerman is neither a police officer nor a Caucasian.  He is a “white” Hispanic male.  Garza and her associates, Patrice Cullors, and Opal (now Aya) Tometi are credited as the founders of the BLM movement.

Garza, Cullors, and Tometi are hardcore Marxists. Cullors and Garza are also self proclaimed “queer black feminists”.  As feminists, prior to BLM, Cullors and Garza denounced men, and black men in particular, for their treatment of women.

From its inception BLM claimed that “virulent anti-Black racism permeates our society”¹.  But BLM’s larger objective went far beyond matters of interracial violence and police misconduct. Its overarching mission was to discredit the U.S. as a detestable and irredeemable nation where black people are “collectively” subjected to “inhumane conditions” in a “white supremacist system” that was originally “built on Indigenous genocide and chattel slavery.”²

Garza reveres Marxist revolutionary Assata Shakur for her contributions to the “Black Liberation Movement”.  Shakur is a former Black Panther, convicted cop-killer, and longtime fugitive. In a letter written by Shakur, she described herself as a “Black revolutionary” who had “declared war” against “the rich who prosper on our poverty,” and against “all the mindless, heart-less robots” who served as police officers.  Garza is also a great admirer of Angela Davis (revolutionary Marxist and former Black Panther) and the late Audre Lorde (black socialist lesbian feminist).Âł

Cullors was a protĂŠgĂŠ of Eric Mann for more than a decade.  Mann, in the 1960s and ‘70s, was a member of the students for a Democratic Society and the Weather Underground.  Both organizations sought to topple U.S. democratic institutions by means of violent revolution, remake the nation’s government in a Marxist image, and promote America’s military defeat in Vietnam. ⁴

Tometi has praised the Bolivian Revolution by which Hugo Chavez originally came to power.  Chavez, a Marxist dictator, transformed Venezuela from South America’s wealthiest nation into an economic disaster in which the masses rifle through garbage cans in search of food.  In 2015, Tometi asserted that “the racist structures that have long oppressed Black people” in the U.S. have perpetuated a “cycle of oppression” and a permanent climate of “anti-Black racism”.⁴

Growth

So, the BLM movement started with a Facebook post based on a reaction to the death of a black man at the hands of non-Caucasian person who was not a police officer.  Prior to this post, there is little or no evidence available (at least I couldn’t find it) to suggest that the three leaders of the movement had conducted any research to support the notion that police in the US are systemically racist.  From this inception the movement grew at a slow pace until the Ferguson shooting in 2014 of black Michael Brown at the hands of white police officer Darren Wilson.  This incident spawned days of BLM violence and rioting in Ferguson and elsewhere which was thoroughly and sympathetically covered by the media. Money flowed into the BLM coffers. It was irrelevant that the shooting of Brown by Wilson was completely justified as was made abundantly clear from eye witness testimony in a grand jury trial with a decision not to charge Officer Wilson.  Then, in 2020, the movement underwent explosive growth based on the death of black George Floyd at the hands of Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin.  Astronomical amounts of money poured into BLM and virtually 24/7 media coverage was given to this incident and the months of rioting that ensued.  Corporate CEOs and Hollywood elites came out of the woodwork to decry our systemically racist law enforcement and to endorse BLM and its tenets. The skeptic might wonder what these CEOs had been doing prior in order to obtain such a deep knowledge on the intricacies of our systemically racist system.  Amazon, under Jeff Bezos, was one of the first major companies to champion the BLM movement but others followed in quick succession…. Apple, Disney, Target, Coca-Cola, Netflix, Google, Microsoft, Nike, Marriott and on and on. 

BLM’s goals go well beyond efforts to address their perception of systemic racism.  As a movement founded by activist Marxists it seeks to destroy both our entire system of government and the traditional nuclear family.  In a document titled “What We Believe,” BLM proclaims its desire to “disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement” and replace it with the socialist ideal of “villages” serving as “extended families” that “collectively care for one another”.   It follows, then, that billionaire corporate CEOs and Hollywood elites look forward to turning over their children to “society” for their upbringing.  Also, one must assume that these folks look forward to relinquishing their millions and billions in ill-gotten gains from an evil capitalist system in order to achieve a Marxist utopia.

Follow The Money (Good luck with that!)

We know that, in 2020 alone, BLM—which also goes by the name of Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation (BLMGNF) -- raised over $90 million from donors and BLM related causes are estimated to have received billions of dollars.  Two things we don’t know completely are a) who all these donors were and b) how this money was spent.  The funding into, and out of, Black Lives Matter is convoluted and hard to trace.

Money In

The “Black Lives Global Network Foundation” has been a fiscally sponsored project of Thousand Currents, a left-wing, California based 501 (C)(3) nonprofit organization. Funds flow into Thousand Currents for many “projects” and some of those funds flow from Thousand Currents to BLM.  There are many other avenues for funding BLM.  For example, visitors to the BLM website can contribute by clicking a link.  This link directs them to ActBlue Charities, an organization that facilitates donations to “democrats” and “progressives”. Unaccounted millions that went into ActBlue under the name of BlackLivesMatter, may have gone to fund the election of Joe Biden and other progressives. Other known contributors are George Soros, Ford Foundation, Borealis Philanthropy, Kellog Foundation, Democracy Alliance (a funding cleraringhouse through which left-wing millionaires and billionaires funnel enormous sums of money), Shining Light Advisors, 23 and Me, Airbnb, Amazon, Apple, Bad Robot Productions, Cisco, Disney, Door Dash, Dropbox, Etsy, Fitbit, Gatorade, Hourglass Cosmetics, Intel, Microsoft, Nabisco, Nike, Pokemon, Savage X Fenty, Scopely, Skillshare, Spanx, Square Enix, Thatgamecompany, Tinder, Ubisoft, and Unilever.⁾

In her recent book “Putin’s Playbook” Rebekah Koffler, a former senior DIA analyst, details Putin’s long term plan to bring down America.  A main component of Putin’s strategy is internal destabilization of the U.S. and an important tactic of that is stoking racial animus.  Given that a stated goal of BLM is to bring down our current system of government, one would have to be very naĂŻve to believe that millions, and likely billions, of dollars did not flow into BLM and BLM related entities from Russia and likely China.

Money Out

Finding where the money went is at least as confusing as finding where it came from.  Of the $90 million+ in funding that BLM received in 2020, it reported a little over $8 million in operating expenses and a little over $20 million in donations it had made.  Cullors resigned from her position as Executive Director of BLM in May 2021 coincidental with an uproar about four properties she had amassed worth millions of dollars.  On January 30, 2022 the Attorney General for the state of California issued BLM a DELINQUENCY NOTICE AND WARNING OF ASSESSMENT OF PENALTIES AND LATE FEES, AND SUSPENCION OR REVOCATION OF REGISTERED STATUS.  This was due to the fact that $60 million of donations had not been properly accounted for in required filings to the state.  Laurie Styron, executive director of CharityWatch said these findings were deeply troubling.  “Like a giant ghost ship full of treasure drifting in the night with no captain, no discernible crew, and no clear direction,” she said.

The Founders And BLM Now

In May of 2021 Patrisse Cullors decided “it was time” and resigned from her role as Executive Director of BLM.  At that time Garza and Tometi were already no longer affiliated with BLM.  Coincidently, Cullors decision to resign came just as she had come under attack for amassing a multi-million dollar portfolio of houses including one in an elite, very white, neighborhood of Los Angeles.  She characterized the attacks as racist and sexist attacks by right wing media despite the fact that most of them came from within the BLM organization itself.  As one example, in March 2021, Lisa Simpson and Samaria Rice, the mothers of two blacks killed by police, released a statement calling for BLMGNF and others to stop capitalizing on their suffering. “We don’t want or need y’all parading in the streets accumulating donations, platforms, movie deals, etc. off the death of our loved ones, while the families and communities are left clueless and broken,” they wrote. “Don’t say our loved ones’ names period! That’s our truth!”⁶   When a reporter attempted to reach Cullors with questions, she was unavailable as she was filming a commercial for Ugg boots. Is it characteristic for an avowed Marxist to accumulate million dollar properties in affluent neighborhoods?

At the present, BLM is in a complete state of chaos without any apparent leadership.  When Cullors left, Makani Themba and Monifa Bandele were named as her successors but neither of these women took up their roles because they “were not able to come to an agreement with the acting Leadership Council about our scope of work and authority.”  Additionally no one has been responsible for BLMs finances since the departure of Cullors.  As for the founders, one needn’t worry about them.  The three are doing quite well with book deals, film deals, speaking engagements, advertising deals and other such typically Marxist/Social Justice activities.

In the fourth (final) part of this series we will examine what the BLM Movement has actually done.

 

š               https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-xpm-2012-mar-27-la-oe-goldberg-trayvon-martin-race-2120327-storyhtml; https://blacklivesmatter.com/sample-press-release-post-title/

²              https://books.google.com/books?id=sUJKDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA645&lpg#v=onepage&q&f=false

Âł              https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individuals/alicia-garza/; https:/solidarity-us.org/p3525/; https://edisciplinas.usp.br/pluginfile.php/1016693/mod_resource/content/1/Ella_Baker_and_the_Black_Freedom_Movement.pdf

⁴              BLACK LIVES MATTER Marxist Hate Dressed Up As Racial Justice, John Perazzo, Copyright 2020, David Horowitz Freedom Center, pg. 4

⁾              BLACK LIVES MATTER Marxist Hate Dressed Up As Racial Justice, John Perazzo, Copyright 2020, David Horowitz Freedom Center, pgs. 32-33

⁜              https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/black-lives-matter-finances.html

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The BLM Hoax, Part 2

Let’s replace “Say Their Names” with “Know Their Facts”

In Part 1 it was shown that, even if all of the examples that follow were found to be true cases of police racism, collectively they would not even remotely prove a case of systemic racism in US law enforcement.  Here, the details of each case are examined.  The results are that NONE of the examples pose a clear case for claiming racism.  Even in the few cases where officers were found to have acted wrongly, just because the victim was black does not automatically imply racism.  Each year, more unarmed whites are killed by police than unarmed blacks.  These cases don’t make national media, apparently because they don’t fuel racial animus and fueling racial animus makes for even more news and builds ratings.  It would be telling to examine the case details of officer involved shootings of unarmed whites vs. officer involved shootings of unarmed blacks but, of course, this wasn’t done. It would also be telling to deeply examine an officer’s history while on the force to determine if there is a significant difference between his/her treatment of blacks and his/her treatment of whites in similar circumstances.  Of course, this also was not done.

As summarized by David Horowitz in his book I CAN’T BREATHE.   HOW A RACIAL HOAX IS KILLING AMERICA, “With the exception of Trayvon Martin and Ahmaud Arbery, who were not killed by police officers, and Tamir Rice, Philando Castile, and Akai Gurley, who were victims of tragic circumstances, the twenty one other “victims” were either criminals resisting arrest or so high on illegal substances as to be unconscious of the fact that resisting arrest was a crime.”  Most of what follows has been based on Horowitz’s above named book. Granted, it’s a single source of information, but the book itself, containing 659 references, was based on a thorough investigation across a great many sources. I highly recommend the book as well as The War On Cops by Heather Mac Donald, Cop Under Fire by Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. (black), and the video documentary What Killed Michael Brown? by Shelby Steele and Eli Steele (both black).

Here is a summary of what follows regarding these 26 cases (sometimes multiple factors per case):

# of cases that did not involve law enforcement officers                                                                 2

# of cases in which subject was not killed by a white person                                                         5

# of cases in which subject was resisting arrest                                                                              20

# of cases in which officer reasonably feared for his/her life                                                         15

# of cases in which subject had unknown severe health conditions contributing to death 3

# of cases that were tragic accidents                                                                                                    3

# of cases in which subject was out of control on drugs or alcohol                                               5

# of cases in which subject’s death was a suicide                                                                               1

# of cases in which subject’s death was “suicide by cop”                                                                  2

# of cases in which subjects death was unintended “collateral damage” in shootout            1

# of cases in which none of the above factors apply                                                                        0

 

The Cases

1.  Trayvon Martin, Sanford, Florida, February 26, 2012

Trayvon Martin was killed by George Zimmerman, a neighborhood watch volunteer.  George Zimmerman was not a member of any police force and was not Caucasian. He was Hispanic or, as the media would often refer to him in an attempt to gin up some sort of white supremacy angle, a White Hispanic.  As a neighborhood watch volunteer, Zimmerman had been advised by his police dispatcher not to follow Martin and not to leave the vehicle he was in when he became suspicious of Martin.  He ignored the instructions from the police dispatcher, accosted and killed Trayvon Martin.  The Trayvon Martin killing was a reprehensible crime, but it was not a crime at the hands of a police officer and, in fact, was a crime committed in violation of specific instructions from a police dispatcher.š

2.  Dontre Hamilton, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, April 30, 2014

Dontre Hamilton was killed by a Milwaukee police officer while resisting arrest.  The officer was responding to a call from some Starbucks employees reporting a homeless man asleep in a park.  As the officer began to pat down Hamilton he awoke believing he was being attacked and began to fight.  The officer tried to use his baton to subdue Hamilton but Hamilton got control of the baton and hit the officer with great force in the head and the neck.  Fearing for his safety, the officer shot and killed Hamilton.  It was later learned that Hamilton had a history of mental health issues including treatment for schizophrenia.²  This was a tragedy and an injustice.  The tragedy was the death of Dontre Hamilton, a mentally ill person.  The injustice was the firing of a police officer who did his job and discharged his weapon when he feared for his life.  There is zero evidence of any racial element to this tragic episode.

3.  Eric Garner, Staten Island, New York, July 17, 2014

Eric Garner resisted when four officers attempted to place him under arrest for a relatively minor crime of selling “loosies”.  Presented with a dilemma regarding how to subdue a 6’3” 350 lb. man who was resisting arrest, Officer Daniel Pantaleo took him down with a submission hold which he held for only 15 seconds.  Critics would maintain that this was a choke hold (illegal) rather than a submission hold (legal) but an autopsy showed that there was no damage to Garner’s larynx or hyoid bone, the latter of which is almost always fractured in the case of strangulation.  Garner complained that he couldn’t breathe once while in the submission hold and at least 10 more times after he had been released from the hold. Within approximately seven minutes after having been brought down by the officer’s hold, Garner was placed in an ambulance.  Garner suffered a heart attack and died while in the ambulance on the way to the hospital.  Unknown to the officers was the fact that the morbidly obese Garner suffered from hypertensive cardiovascular disease, heart disease, and severe bronchial asthma. It was determined that Garner died because the struggle he had with the officer triggered a cardiac arrest.  A medical doctor’s article in American Thinker, analyzing Garner’s death, stated “A normal and healthy male would have been transiently distressed by the actions of the arresting officers.”  The sergeant in charge at the scene of the altercation was an African-American female.  A grand jury did not indict Officer Pantaleo and the Obama Justice Department decided not to file federal civil rights charges against any of the officers involved in Garner’s death.Âł

4.  Michael Brown, Ferguson Missouri, August 9, 2014

Michael Brown was shot and killed by Officer Darren Wilson.  Prior to the shooting Brown had attacked Officer Wilson, striking him repeatedly through the open window of Wilson’s cruiser, and had struggled with Wilson trying to get his weapon.  At the time he was shot and killed by Wilson, the 6’4” 292 lb. Brown was in full charge at the officer.  He did not have his arms up, was not saying or screaming “Hands Up. Don’t Shoot”, and remained in full charge despite repeated commands from Wilson that he stop.  Officer Wilson did nothing wrong.  He was exonerated by the Democrat authorities in Ferguson, by the grand jury, and by an independent inquiry conducted by the Obama Justice Department.  Yet he had to leave the police force, uproot his family, and go into hiding because of the inflammatory lies spread by Black Lives Matter.⁴   In statements regarding the Michael Brown case, President Obama betrayed the American people and fueled racial animus.  As one egregious example, after the grand jury decision Obama stated “There are Americans who are deeply disappointed, even angry. It is an understandable reaction.”   Just how exactly is it “understandable” that people should be disappointed or angry with a just decision made by a grand jury in accordance with our laws and supported by an independent inquiry from the Obama Justice Department?  A thorough look at the Michael Brown case and its impact on Ferguson and the nation is presented in the documentary film by Shelby Steel and Eli Steele, “What Killed Michael Brown”, available on Amazon Prime.

5.  Ezell Ford, Los Angeles, California, August 11, 2014

According to officers Sharlton Wampler (White) and Antonio Villegas (Hispanic), they were attempting to arrest Ezell Ford for trying to dispose of illicit drugs when Ford wrestled with Wampler and took Wampler’s gun while lying on top of him.  Wampler shouted, “He’s got my gun”, prompting Villegas to fire two shots at Ford. At the same moment Wampler managed to draw his backup gun and used it to shoot Ford once in the back. The officers’ story was disputed by onlookers. Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey, a black woman, declined to prosecute stating, “The evidence indicates that Ford was on top of Wampler, struggling to obtain Wampler’s primary service weapon and posing an immediate threat to his safety and his partner’s safety.”⁵

6.  Akai Gurley, Brooklyn, New York, November 20, 2014

Because the Louis H. Pink Houses in Brooklyn are notorious for crime, for safety Officer Peter Liang drew his gun and placed his finger on the trigger before opening the stairwell door while patrolling the 8th floor of the complex.  Startled by a loud noise, Liang tensed suddenly causing the gun to go off. The bullet ricocheted off a wall of the stairwell striking Akai Gurley in the chest.  Liang, a Chinese American, says that at that moment he was unaware that he had shot anyone. The Atlantic reported that when Liang did reach the victim he didn’t offer to perform CPR.  Gurley’s girlfriend administered CPR with the help of a neighbor taking instructions from an operator over the phone.  It’s clear that Liang had no intention of shooting Gurley and didn’t even aim his gun but he should neither have drawn his weapon nor put his finger on the trigger.  Liang was charged with second-degree manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide, second-degree assault, and reckless endangerment.  A jury convicted Liang of manslaughter and official misconduct.⁜

7.  Tamir Rice, Cleveland, Ohio, November 22, 2014

What the officers knew?

Officers Timothy Loehmann and Frank Garmback responded to a police dispatcher’s report about a man outside a local recreation center who was pointing a pistol at everybody.  As the officers approached the suspect, who “appeared to be over 18 years old and about 185 lbs.”, they repeatedly shouted “Show me your hands.”  Even when the suspect reached into his waistband the officers didn’t fire and continued to yell “Show me your hands”.  When Officer Loehman then saw the suspect pull a gun out of his waistband he shot the suspect twice. Having neutralized the threat the officers then struggled to help the suspect who died the next day in the hospital.

What the officers didn’t know.

The suspect was Tamir Rice, a 12 year old boy who looked much older because of his size.  The “pistol” was, in fact, an Airsoft pellet gun which was a replica of a Colt M1911 semi-automatic pistol, indistinguishable from the real thing. The person who made the call to the dispatcher at one point said the gun was “probably fake but you know what, he’s scaring the shit out of people”.  The statement about the gun being “probably fake” was never relayed by the dispatcher to the officers.

A grand jury declined to indict the officers, primarily on the grounds that Tamir Rice was drawing what appeared to be an actual firearm from his waist when Officer Loehman fired.⁡  This was a tragic death and a prime example of the fact that sometimes awful things happen despite no ill intent on the part of anyone.

8.  Tony Robinson, Madison, Wisconsin, March 6, 2015

Officer Matt Kenny was dispatched to answer several police reports that a man a) had assaulted another man, b) had attempted to strangle a man who was fueling his car at a gas station, c) was shouting at bystanders, and d) was jumping in front of traffic. When Kenny arrived at the scene a local bystander informed him that the suspect, Tony Robinson, had just gone into a local apartment house.  As Kenny approached the apartment he could hear the noise of a disturbance, including a person striking someone or something, coming from the upstairs apartment.  When Kenny was near the top of the staircase he announced he was a police officer.  Suddenly, Robinson appeared in the doorway and charged at Kenny punching Kenny multiple times in the head and causing him to fall to the bottom of the staircase.  With Robinson again bearing down on him, Kenny shot Robinson seven times.  He then tried to administer first aid to Robinson but to no avail.  Robinson died of the gunshot wounds.  An internal police investigation determined that Kenny was justified in using deadly force.  An autopsy report revealed that Robinson had recently ingested Xanax, psilocybin mushrooms, and marijuana.⁸

9.  Meagan Hockaday, Oxnard, California, March 28, 2015

Officers in Oxnard, California were dispatched to answer a 911 call from Luis Morado requesting that the officers assist in a dispute Morado was having with his girlfriend.  As Officer Roger Garcia approached the apartment he heard people screaming inside.  Morado, shirtless and with visible injuries to his chest, met Garcia at the front door.  Twenty seconds later Meagan Hockaday charged the men with a serrated kitchen knife in her right hand.  Morado, fearing for his life ran past Officer Garcia and towards the front door.  As Hockaday was swinging her right arm in an effort to stab Garcia, Garcia fired three times.  When Oxnard Police Sergeant David Walker arrived at the scene, Garcia was kneeling next to Hockaday, saying, “Stay with me”. A forensic analysis concluded that this incident took place just as Garcia had described it.  Hockaday was found to have been intoxicated with a blood alcohol level of 0.20 percent.⁚

10.  Walter Scott, North Charleston, South Carolina, April 4, 2015

Most Americans were deeply disturbed to see a video of the last 10 seconds of an incident in which Walter Scott was shot in the back multiple times while running away from Officer Michael Slager.  What wasn’t captured in the video were the preceding events.  Scott had been stopped by Slager for a broken brake light.  As Slager was checking Scott’s identification, Scott bolted from the vehicle and ran.  Slager fired his taser at Scott but it failed to stop him.  An examination of the taser showed that it had been fired six times in sixty seven seconds during this incident.  Eventually Slager caught up with Scott and the two men wrestled.  Scott was able to grab the taser from Slager and Scott then again began to run.  This was when Slager fired the shots killing Scott. It is unknown why Scott ran but it has been theorized that it was either due to the fact that a) he feared he might be jailed for failing to make child support payments, or b) he had cocaine and alcohol in his system as would be discovered in an autopsy.  It was unjust for Slager to shoot Scott but there is NO evidence of any racial motive.  Scott had a) resisted arrest, b) fought with the Officer Slager, and c) stolen a weapon (non-lethal) from Officer Slager.  Slager was convicted of second degree murder with a twenty year prison sentence.š⁰

11.  Freddie Gray, Baltimore, Maryland, April 19, 2015

After a scuffle with officers while resisting arrest, Freddie Gray was placed in the back of a police van.  The police had pursued Gray, a known drug dealer, when he fled unprovoked after making eye contact with the officers. The officers caught up with Gray and found a knife in his possession. Four minutes after being placed in the van, the officers placed leg shackles on Gray because he was becoming irate.  The officers stopped the van and checked on Gray 13 minutes after that and again 25 minutes later whereupon they called a medic to report that Gray was in “serious medical distress”. Paramedics arrived and spent 21 minutes treating Gray then delivered him to the Maryland Shock Trauma Center.  Gray fell into a coma and died seven days later from “injuries to his spinal cord”.  Murder charges were filed against the six police officers, three of whom were black. The prosecutors alleged that by failing to strap Gray into the van with a seatbelt the officers had created a situation making Gray vulnerable to a serious injury.  A black judge found the officers innocent of the charges and all six were acquitted.  This incident triggered 10 days of riots in Baltimore.  Regarding the protestors, Baltimore’s black mayor, Stephanie Rawlings-Blake, said “while we tried to make sure they were protected from the cars and other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well”.šš

12.  Sandra Bland, Waller County, Texas, July 13, 2015

After arguing, scuffling, and refusing to comply with an officer’s directives after a traffic stop, Sandra Bland, a 28 year old school teacher and Black Lives Matter activist, was arrested and charged with assaulting an officer.  Three days later she was found hanged in her jail cell.  The death was ruled a suicide after surveillance video showed that no one had entered her cell in the time frame surrounding her death. Toxicology showed “a remarkably high level of THC in her system” for someone who had been incarcerated three days. The medical examiner concluded that Bland “either had access to the drug in jail or she was a consistent user of the drug and her body had accumulated THC to the point that it was slowly releasing it over time.” It is probable that the drug in Bland’s system contributed to the altercation with the officer, who was later reprimanded and then fired for not following protocol when making the arrest.  Jail intake forms said that Bland had attempted suicide earlier in 2014.š²

13.  Alton Sterling, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, July 5, 2016

Officer’s Howie Lake II and Blane Solomoni responded to a report that a black man in a red shirt (Alton Sterling) was selling CDs outside a convenience store and that he had used a gun to threaten a homeless man at the location. Sterling resisted arrest and scuffled with the officers during which time the officers tased him twice.  A video of the incident shows one of the officers yelling “Going for his pocket! He’s got a gun! Gun!”  Body cam footage also showed an officer warning Sterling that he would be shot if he moved. The footage also showed Sterling reaching for his right side and then one of the officers firing three shots, followed by another three, killing Sterling.  The officers retrieved a loaded, illegal .38-caliber revolver from Sterling’s front pants pocket. A department of Justice investigation concluded “Given the totality of the circumstances - - that the officers had been fighting with Sterling and had attempted less-than-lethal methods of control; that they knew Sterling had a weapon; that Sterling had reportedly brandished a gun at another person; and that Sterling was much larger and stronger than either officer—the Department cannot prove either that the shots were unconstitutional or that they were willful.  Moreover, two different, independent experts opined that this shooting was not unreasonable given the circumstances.”¹³

14.  Philando Castile, Falcon Heights, Minnesota, July 6, 2016

Philando Castile, a young black man, was shot and killed by Officer Jeronimo Yanez, a Hispanic, during a routine traffic stop for a broken tail light.  Castile had informed Yanez that he was carrying a firearm, which indicated that he was not intending to use it on the officer and didn’t present any danger. But when Castile reached for his ID, Yanez panicked and fired 7 quick shots, killing Castile. When tried for culpable negligence by a jury including two black members, Yanez claimed that he told Castile “Don’t pull it out” and believed that Castile was reaching for the gun. Yanez clearly panicked. The jury verdict was a failure of the criminal justice system.  The jury likely did not understand the charge of “culpable negligence”.  Officer Yanez was fired from the police force.š⁴

15.  Korryn Gaines, Randallstown, Maryland, August 1, 2016

On March 10, 2016 Korryn Gaines was stopped for driving without a license plate. Despite the fact that her five year old son was in the car, Gaines refused to cooperate or give police her driver’s license.  She told the officers that, if they put her hands on her, they would have to murder her and carry her out in a body bag.  She called the officers “pigs” and urged her child to bite them. Gaines subsequently failed to show up for her court date related to the incident.  In the meantime she posted a picture of herself on Instagram loading a shotgun with a caption thanking her father for teaching her “how to protect myself” and “who to protect myself from”.  On August 1 officers went to Gaines’ home to serve her a warrant for failing to appear and to serve her fiancĂŠ a separate warrant for assault. Gaines refused to open the door.  One of the officers borrowed a key from the apartment rental office, unlocked the door, and found the door to be chained as well.  He kicked in the door and entered the apartment only to find Gaines pointing a shotgun at him. The officer quickly retreated beginning a stand-off that lasted more than five hours. At one point, several hours into the stand-off, Gaines told the police “If you don’t leave, I’m going to kill you”.  One of the officers saw Gaines raising her shotgun to a shooting position.  He fired one round in her direction. Gaines fired back two rounds and the officers then responded with three shots killing Gaines. Her five year old son was wounded in the arm, though it was unclear whether this was from an officer’s gun of Gaines’ gun.  In 2018 an all female jury decided that the fatal shot was a violation of Gaines’ civil rights and awarded the Gaines family $38 million in damages. The verdict was overturned in 2019 when a judge ruled the officers had acted in an objectively reasonable” way.š⁾

16.  Terence Crutcher, Tulsa, Oklahoma, September 16, 2016

Officers in Tulsa responded to a report that a man had abandoned a vehicle in the middle of the street, blocking traffic.  The caller said the man appeared to be impaired and was claiming that the vehicle was going to blow up.   Once officers were on the scene, Terence Crutcher approached his vehicle with his hands up.  One officer observed that Crutcher was sweating heavily and smelled of PCP  (Angel dust)  chemicals.  At a certain point Crutcher placed his hands on the vehicle and then moved to reach into the vehicle despite being told to stop.  One officer tased Crutcher and another, a female, shot and killed him.  No weapon was found on Crutcher or in his vehicle.  The DA charged the female officer with manslaughter, but a jury acquitted her because Crutcher, despite being ordered to stop, had reached into his car, provoking the fatal shot.š⁜

17.  Keith Lamont Scott, Charlotte, North Carolina, September 20, 2016

As two plainclothes officers in an unmarked vehicle waited outside the apartment of Keith Lamont Scott in preparation to serve a warrant to Scott, they observed him (Scott) pull up, roll a joint, and exit his vehicle holding a gun.  Scott had a long record of criminal violence including felony assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon when Scott had fired two gunshots at police officers.  According to the Washington Post: “Due to the combination of illegal drugs and the gun Mr. Scott had in his possession, the officers decided to take enforcement action for public safety concerns.  They departed the immediate area to outfit themselves with marked duty vests and equipment that would clearly identify them as police officers.  Upon returning, the officers again witnessed Mr. Scott [in his vehicle] in possession of a gun.  The officers immediately identified themselves as police officers and gave clear, loud, and repeated verbal commands to drop the gun.  Mr. Scott refused to follow the officer’s repeated verbal commands.”

A third officer arrived and used his baton to smash the passenger window of Scott’s car in an effort to make an arrest. But Scott exited the vehicle with his firearm and ignored the officer’s repeated, loud demands that he drop the weapon. One of the officers, a black man named Brentley Vinson, perceived Scott as an imminent threat to himself and his fellow officers and shot and killed him.š⁡  

18.  Alfred Olango, El Cajon, California, September 27, 2016

Officers Josh McDaniel and Richard Gonsalves responded to an urgent call from the sister of Alfred Olango. She said her brother was behaving strangely and intervention was needed.  Over the years Olango had committed offenses including taking a person’s car without consent, burglarizing a home, selling crack cocaine, driving with a fraudulent license plate, possessing 185 grams of marijuana, illegally carrying a loaded 9mm semi-automatic pistol in his car, and driving under the influence.

When the officers arrived, Orlango retreated into a corner formed by a fence and a parked truck.  There he paced back and forth refusing to comply with instructions to remove one of his hands from his pocket.  He then withdrew his hand and rapidly drew an object and extended it in two hands towards the police in a shooting stance.  The officers then simultaneously tased and shot him.  The fatal shot was fired by Officer Gonsalves, a Hispanic.  The object was later discovered to be a vape pen.š⁸

19.  Jocques Clemmons, Nashville, Tennessee, February 10, 2017

During a traffic stop Jocques Clemmons began a confrontation with police officer Joshua Lippert.  During the altercation, Clemmon’s 357 Magnum fell to the ground. When Clemmons picked up the weapon, the officer shot him, once in the abdomen, once in the hip, and twice in the back as Clemmons tried to flee.š⁚

20.  Ahmaud Arbery, Glynn County, Georgia, February 23, 2020

Ahmaud Arbery was shot and killed after being pursued by three white men who suspected him of being a burglar running away from the scene of a crime.  Arbery was shot when he attempted to resist a “citizen’s arrest”.  Although one of the men was a retired police officer, it was his son, Travis McMichael, who fired the fatal shot.  This was a case of vigilantes taking the law – or what they thought was the law – into their own hands.  The three men were tried, deservedly so, and all three were convicted of murder.  There is no evidence to show that the three men were motivated by racial animus. More than a year after Arbery’s death newly released court documents showed that Arbery had a history of running away from various locations after committing criminal trespass, or theft, or both. Arbery was known as “The Jogger” based on his repeated behavior of running up, stretching in front, and then entering convenience stores where he would grab items and run out before he got caught. ²⁰

21.  Breonna Taylor, Louisville, Kentucky, March 13, 2020

Three officers appeared at the apartment of Breonna Taylor with a no knock warrant at 12:30 a.m. on March 13, 2020.  The officers claimed that, despite the no knock warrant, they knocked and announced themselves.  Taylor’s new boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, who was in the apartment, later claimed not to have heard them.  The officers used a battering ram to break down the door.  This action was one of five raids taking place that evening on locations that were suspected of being distribution centers for crack cocaine and fentanyl dealer Jamarcus Glover.  Police suspected that Taylor, formerly Glover’s girlfriend, was allowing Glover to use her apartment as part of his distribution network although no drugs were later found there. Police had ample evidence for their suspicion including the facts that a) Glover had used her apartment to receive parcels he sent by mail, b) Glover was seen leaving her apartment carrying a package directly to a drug “trap house”, and c) Glover had been recorded in a phone call to the mother of his child saying, “This is what you got to understand, don’t take it wrong, but Bre been handling all my money, she been handling my money….She been handling sh*t for me and Cuz, it aint just me.”

Roused by the noise, Taylor and Walker got out of bed and went to the entrance hall.  Walker fired at the intruders (officers) in the darkness using a legally registered weapon, hitting Sergeant Jonathan Mattingly in the leg.  This triggered a hail of bullets from the officers, six of which hit Taylor and killed her.  Contrary to claims throughout the media that Taylor had been shot “in her sleep”, she actually died on the floor of her hallway where she had followed Walker.  It is most likely that Walker jumped out of the line of fire after firing shots but Taylor did not.  The death of Breonna Taylor was a tragedy and, in hindsight, one can identify steps that could have been modified to prevent this.  What one can’t reasonably conclude, however, is that there was any racial animus or criminal activity on the part of the officers who returned fire when fired upon. ²š

22.  Daniel Prude, Rochester, New York, March 23, 2020

On March 22, 2020 at about 3:00 am a truck driver in Rochester called 911 to report that a naked man was attempting to break into a car and was claiming that he had the coronavirus.  When officers arrived, Daniel Prude was walking down the street naked and bleeding.  One of the officers pointed a taser at Prude and instructed him to get on the ground and place his hands behind his head.  After the sixth time the officer issued that instruction Prude complied, but he soon became agitated and began spitting at the officers.  One officer placed a spit hood over Prude’s head and Prude yelled, “Give me that gun, give me that gun!” The officer held Prude face-down on the pavement for two minutes and fifteen seconds, repeatedly telling him to stop spitting and calm down.  Prude stopped breathing and was given CPR on the scene, then hospitalized and placed on life support.  He died seven days later after being taken off life support.

The medical examiner determined the cause of death to be “complications from asphyxia in the setting of physical restraint”.  The medical report showed factors contributing to his death were “excited delirium” and “acute intoxication” (by PCP). It was later learned that Prude’s history included a previous brain injury that was giving him some lack of oxygen and blood flow to the brain.²²

23.  George Floyd, Minneapolis, Minnesota, May 25, 2020

Most of the U.S. and the world watched in shock and disgust as the media repeatedly aired a video in which George Floyd pleaded, “I can’t breathe,” and called for his “mama”, while Officer Derek Chauvin held Floyd down.  Floyd was held in a prone position, with Chauvin’s knee pressed against his neck, for nine minutes and twenty-nine seconds, by which time Floyd had stopped breathing. The first two officers to arrive at the scene to arrest Floyd for a relatively minor crime were J. Alexander Kueng (black) and Thomas Lane (white).  Nine minutes into the arrest Derek Chauvin (white) and Tou Thao (Asian-American) arrived to assist.  Officer Chauvin was charged with two counts of murder and one of manslaughter while the other officers were charged with abetting.  Officer Chauvin was convicted on all three counts.

Not seen by the U.S. and the world at the time following Floyd’s death, was the officers’ body cam footage which had been deliberately suppressed by Minnesota’s attorney general, Keith Ellison.  Ellison was a former spokesman for Louis Farrakhan, a former DNC chair, and a current supporter of Antifa. Nearly three months after Floyd’s death these body cam videos were leaked to U.K.’s Daily Mail, which released them to the public.  During these three months, multiple injuries, deaths, and billions of dollars in property damage had occurred during the violent BLM riots that swept the nation, triggered by George Floyd’s death.

The body cam footage showed Floyd’s resistance to arrest and to the officers’ efforts to put him in handcuffs. It showed that the 6’6”, 240 lb. Floyd was very difficult to control.  Floyd was disoriented, delirious, paranoid, and unable to follow a command for more than a few seconds. He was panicky and unwilling to be put in a police vehicle, claiming he was claustrophobic despite having been arrested while sitting in his own vehicle. Perhaps most importantly, the footage showed Floyd claiming “I can’t breathe” at least five times while he was standing, sitting, or kneeling as he refused to cooperate with police – well before he was prone with Chauvin’s knee on his neck.  The autopsy showed the Floyd had four times the lethal dose of Fentanyl in his system. According to WebMD: “[F]entanyl has rapid and potent effects on the brain and body, and even very small amounts can be extremely dangerous. It only takes a tiny amount of the drug to cause a deadly reaction…..Fentanyl can depress breathing and lead to death.  The risk of overdose is high.”  The autopsy also showed that Floyd suffered from severe multifocal arteriosclerosis, had hypertensive heart disease, and was positive for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19.  There were no signs of asphyxiation resulting from the knee Officer Chauvin had placed on Floyd’s neck, nor would there be, since the knee was not applied to his windpipe.  As a prosecutor specializing in police brutality cases reported in American Spectator, the video of Chauvin kneeling on the side of Floyd’s neck appears to be a textbook application of an officially approved technique.  Minnesota police are trained to use a “neck restraint” technique which involves compressing one or both sides of a person’s neck with an arm or a leg, without applying direct pressure to the trachea or airway.

The later videos and autopsy report do not lessen the shock and disgust one experiences when watching the initial video.  It is clear that Officer Chauvin did something very wrong.  Perhaps it was gross negligence.  Perhaps it was willful infliction of harm.  In either case there should have been consequences and in either case there is no evidence of a racial component to Chauvin’s actions.  What the later videos should have impacted, but apparently didn’t, was whether or not Chauvin should have been convicted of murder.  George Floyd is the person who chose to ingest four times the dosage of Fentanyl that is considered lethal and Officer Chauvin did nothing to constrict Floyd’s airway.

In an interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Attorney General Keith Ellison said there was no evidence that George Floyd was the victim of a “hate crime” or racial bias.  For the skeptical, who may think that only blacks are the subject of rough police tactics, check out the YouTube videos of Daniel Shaver (white, fatally shot while begging for leniency) or Tony Timpa (white, died under very similar circumstances to George Floyd).²³

24.  Tony McDade, Tallahassee, Florida, May 27, 2020

Tony McDade was a thirty-eight-year-old black transgender male with a criminal record including armed robbery and battery. On May 25, 2020, McDade pistol whipped his girlfriend, Jennifer Jackson.  He also returned to her home the next day to verbally abuse her.  While sitting in her home, he texted the following message to an acquaintance: “I’m sitting in the kitchen looking at this motherfucker wanting to off her for playin [with] my mind.  The bitch and her fam have to pay in blood.”  Jackson’s son, Malik (21, black), admonished McDade for his violent behavior and then went outside in hopes that McDade’s temper might burn out.  McDade followed Malik and circled around a vehicle (that Malik was using to maintain separation from McDade) while carrying a gun and a knife and cursing at Malik.  Other members of Jackson’s family intervened, McDade challenged them to a fight, and a violent brawl ensued in which McDade was beaten badly.  Two days later McDade posted his recount of the episode on Facebook including a video in which he said: “And I’m posting this live. Warning comes before destruction.  And I’m telling you five m----f----- that you’re going to die.” and “Just know before I kill myself through a shootout, because that’s what’s going to happen, because I’m gonna pull it out and you know these officers nowadays they see a gun and they just gonna shoot.”

McDade stabbed Malik Jackson to death that same day.  When police approached McDade as a suspect in the killing, McDade pointed his weapon at an officer and the officer shot and killed him.  Apparently, due to “intersectional theory”, which BLM supports, McDade was a special cause for BLM activists because he was not only black but transgender.  In the following week several BLM protests featured signs like “Protect Black Trans People”.  On June 20, 2020, hundreds of demonstrators gathered to commemorate McDade’s death and support “Black Trans Lives Matter”.  Apparently, the life of a transgender black who pistol whipped his girlfriend and killed her black son, has greater value than that of the non-intersectional black son, Malik Jackson.²⁴

25.  Rayshard Brooks, Atlanta, Georgia, June 12, 2020

Rayshard Brooks was a 27 year old black man who had a long history of criminal violence including offenses such as obstruction of an officer, false imprisonment, cruelty to children, felony cruelty, possession of a weapon, receiving stolen property, theft, and various forms of battery.   On June 12, 2020, Atlanta Officers Garrett Rolfe and Devin Brosnan responded to a complaint that Brooks was asleep in his car which was blocking a Wendy’s drive-through lane.  A sobriety test found that Brooks had alcohol levels above the legal limit.  Since Brooks was on probation for four crimes, if charged with a DUI he would have faced the prospect of going back to jail.  Initially, Brooks engaged in civil conversation with the officers but, when they tried to arrest him, Brooks instigated a violent fight during which he wrestled the taser away from Officer Brosnan, fought his way free, punched an officer, fired the stolen taser, and then began to flee on foot.  Officer Rolfe fired his taser at Brooks but it failed to bring Brooks down.  When Brooks hurriedly turned and fired the stolen taser at Rolfe, Rolfe drew his handgun and shot Brooks twice in the back as Brooks turned and continued to run.  Brooks was rushed to a nearby hospital where he died after undergoing surgery.  In the ensuing BLM riots the Wendy’s was set on fire and an eight year old black girl was shot and killed by one of the protesters.  Under extreme public pressure, the Atlanta Police Chief resigned, Officer Rolfe was fired, and the Atlanta District Attorney, who happened to be under investigation for having used a non-profit to funnel $200,000 of city funds into his personal bank account, filed eleven charges against Rolfe: felony murder, five counts of aggravated assault, four police oath violations, and damage to property.  The DA characterized Brooks as a) having been “peacefully sleeping in his car” and b) having been generally “cooperative”.  He also stated Brooks “never presented himself as a threat”.  There is no evidence of any racial component to this event.²⁾

26.  Jacob Blake (paralyzed), Kenosha, Wisconsin, August 23, 2020

On August 23, 2020 Kenosha police officers responded to a 911 call from a woman claiming that her ex-boyfriend, Jacob Blake, a twenty-nine-year-old father of six, had violated a restraining order by coming to her home, taking her car keys, and refusing to give them back.  The restraining order was due to an alleged felony sexual assault for which there was an outstanding warrant for Blake’s arrest.  When the officers arrived at the scene they found Blake in his car with three of his young sons in the back seat.  Blake engaged in a violent fight with the officers, two of whom tased him unsuccessfully.  Unable to restrain Blake, the officers drew their firearms and ordered him to stop.  Blake disregarded the officer’s commands, walked purposefully around his vehicle, opened the driver’s side door, and lunged downward.  Fearing that Blake might be reaching for a weapon – a knife was later found on the floor of the car – one officer shouted, “Drop the knife! Drop the knife!”  When Blake failed to comply, the officer fired seven shots, hitting Blake four times in the back.  Blake was rushed to a hospital.  His wounds have left him paralyzed.²⁜

References from I Can’t Breathe. How a Racial Hoax Is Killing America., David Horowitz, ©2021, Regnery Publishing,

š pgs. 61-62.

² pgs. 69-70.

Âł pgs. 71-75.

⁴ pgs. 77-86.

⁾ pgs. 87-89.

⁜ pgs. 92-95.

⁡ pgs. 89-92.

⁸ pgs. 95-97.

⁚ pgs. 97-98.

š⁰ pgs. 99-102

šš pgs. 102-105

š² pgs. 118-121

š³ pgs. 105-106

š⁴ pgs. 107-109

š⁾ pgs. 121-123

š⁜ pgs. 123-124

š⁡ pgs. 124-125

š⁸ pgs. 126-128

š⁚ pgs. 128-129

²⁰ pgs. 131-132

²š pgs. 135-140

²² pgs. 133-135

²³ pgs. 49-54

²⁴ pgs. 140-142

²⁾ pgs. 142-144

²⁜ pgs. 144-147

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The BLM Hoax, Part 1

If the accuracy of a statement could be verified by observing a) how often it was stated, b) by whom it was stated, and/or c) how much money was devoted to the support of that statement, then I would have to concede that law enforcement across the United States is systemically racist.  Fortunately, a much better method to check accuracy consists of gathering and analyzing the facts.  On this basis I conclude that U.S. law enforcement is not systemically racist and, further, that the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement is illegitimate, hateful, and racist. 

That Black lives matter, that ALL lives matter, is a central tenet of the moral code held by the vast majority of Americans today.  But BLM has transmuted this venerable and noble sentiment into a malign program of cultural demolition, individual degradation, and societal destruction.  In essence, BLM is the epitome of evil.

In the analyses that follow, BLM will be examined from four perspectives:

Part 1.  What is the meaning of systemic racism and, is our nationwide law enforcement systemically racist?  This analysis will show that US law enforcement is not a single system but, even if it were, and even if all of the prime BLM examples of systemic racism were true, US law enforcement could not be considered systemically racist based on these facts.

Part 2.  The analysis of Part 1 made the assumption that ALL of the prime BLM examples of systemic racism were, in fact, truly the result of police racism.  Part 2 will examine each of these prime examples to determine if they could legitimately be shown to be the result of racist police actions.

Part 3.  The inception of the movement will be examined and its true purposes will be explored

Part 4.  The results of the BLM movement thus far will be examined.

Part1.  Systemic Racism

Definitions

Systemic: of, relating to, or common to a system.š

Common: occurring, found, or done often; prevalent.š

System:  a group of related parts that move or work together.š

Racism: a belief that race is a fundamental determinant of human traits and capacities, and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.š

So, Systemic Racism suggests that: a) there is a belief that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, and b) this belief is prevalent among the various parts of a system that work together.

A.  Can U.S. nationwide law enforcement even be considered a system? 

NO.  The primary characteristic of a system is that it is comprised of a group of parts that work together and are interdependent. The human circulatory system is a great example.  The lungs oxygenate the blood, and the heart circulates the blood so that oxygen can be delivered to the organs and muscles. Without the lungs the work of the heart would be useless and vice versa. 

Is U.S. law enforcement organized and does it function in an analogous manner?  NO.  It is conducted by thousands of distinct entities at town, county, city, state, and national levels. There are also functional levels like “Parks” police.  Although there is some cooperation among some entities at some times, they work largely independent from one another. The laws that they enforce are often different from one entity to the next. A system analogy cannot be drawn, for example, between a police force in Minneapolis, MN and a sheriff’s department in Weber County, UT. One of these entities could simply disappear without any impact on the other.  Granted we often hear about the “Criminal Justice System” in the United States but, especially regarding law enforcement, there is no such single system.  There are a great many individual systems across the country whose interconnections are often miniscule or non-existent.  A characteristic of a police system in Chicago, for example, by no means implies that the same characteristic exists in the police system of Wichita.

B.  The main examples that BLM puts forth as proof of systemic racism by law enforcement are the deaths of²:

Trayvon Martin, Sanford, Florida, February 26, 2012

Dontre Hamilton, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, April 30, 2014

Eric Garner, Staten Island, New York, July 17, 2014

Michael Brown, Ferguson Missouri, August 9, 2014

Ezell Ford, Los Angeles, California, August 11, 2014

Akai Gurley, Brooklyn, New York, November 20, 2014

Tamir Rice, Cleveland, Ohio, November 22, 2014

Tony Robinson, Madison, Wisconsin, March 6, 2015

Meagan Hockaday, Oxnard, California, March 28, 2015

Walter Scott, North Charleston, South Carolina, April 4, 2015

Freddie Gray, Baltimore, Maryland, April 19, 2015

Sandra Bland, Waller County, Texas, July 13, 2015

Alton Sterling, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, July 5, 2016

Philando Castile, Falcon Heights, Minnesota, July 6, 2016

Korryn Gaines, Randallstown, Maryland, August 1, 2016

Terence Crutcher, Tulsa, Oklahoma, September 16, 2016

Keith Lamont Scott, Charlotte, North Carolina, September 20, 2016

Alfred Olango, El Cajon, California, September 27, 2016

Jocques, Nashville, Tennessee, February 10, 2017

Ahmaud Arbery, Glynn County, Georgia, February 23,2020

Breonna Taylor, Louisville, Kentucky, March 13, 2020

Daniel Prude, Rochester, New York, March 23, 2020

George Floyd, Minneapolis, Minnesota, May 25, 2020

Tony McDade, Tallahassee, Florida, May 27, 2020

Rayshard Brooks, Atlanta, Georgia, June 12, 2020

Jacob Blake (paralyzed), Kenosha, Wisconsin, August 23, 2020

As will be shown in the next section, NONE of these constitutes a legitimate example of law enforcement racism. For the sake of a statistical analysis though, I’ll suspend reality and treat ALL 26 cases as clear examples of racism. Also, although one of the incidents did not lead to a death, let’s call all 26 incidents racially motivated deaths. Do these examples then demonstrate systemic racism?

i.  Some Important Facts:

- The above incidents took place over a period of 8.5 years.

- The population of the United States is 331,449,281.Âł

- The number of law enforcement officers in the United States, as of 2020, was 696,644.⁴

- The annual number of contacts between police officers and civilians across the U.S. is 375 million.⁾

ii.  It is difficult to assess the significance of 26 deaths occurring over 8.5 years among a population of more than 330 million.  330 million is a number that is not easy to grasp in that people never, or rarely, directly encounter 330 million of anything.  To better understand the significance, I’ll use this data to construct an exactly analogous scenario to which most people can relate.

What do the above facts suggest about the expectation that one should have about his/her city police force in a hypothetical city of 1 million people that has racial proportions identical to those of the entire US? (This is a large city. Only 11 cities in the U.S. have populations in excess of 1 million.)  Most all people within the U.S. have spent time in a city of about one million people and therefore, from direct observation, can relate to this size of a population.

 a) 26 incidents across a population of 331,449,281 people in 8.5 years equates to 0.079 incidents for every 1 million people in those same 8.5 years.

b) 696,644 law enforcement officers across a population of 331,449,281 averages out to 2,101 law enforcement officers per every 1 million people.

c) 0.079 incidents across a population of 1 million people in 8.5 years corresponds to 0.009 incidents per 1 million people every year.

d) 0.009 incidents every year corresponds to 1 incident every 111 years 

So, based on this data, a person living in a hypothetical city of one million people with a police force of 2,101 officers, should expect one racially motivated death caused by a police officer to occur every 111 years! This police force of 2101 officers would, in fact, turn over many times in that 111 year period.  IS THIS EVICENCE OF SYSTEMIC RACISM IN LAW ENFORCEMENT?  Clearly not!  It is, in fact, strong evidence of the exact opposite.  For the government of this hypothetical city to address that one racially motivated death, which happens every 111 years, as a systemic problem would be ludicrous. Properly, it should be treated as an isolated occurrence and prosecuted as such.

iii. What do the above facts suggest about the frequency of racist interactions leading to death among all of the interactions that police have with civilians?

a) 375 million interactions each year equates to 3.2 billion interactions every 8.5 years.

b) 26 incidents in these same 8.5 years suggests 26 incidents per 3.2 billion interactions or one racially motivated death at the hands of law enforcement for every 123 million interactions between police and civilians.

This, again, points only to an isolated occurrence that should be prosecuted as such, and not to any systemic problem.

C.  A thorough, data-driven statistical study done by Dr. Roland G. Fryer Jr. determined that, “On the most extreme use of force – officer involved shootings – we find no racial differences in either the raw data or when contextual factors are taken into account.”  Dr. Fryer is a Ph.D. economist teaching at Harvard University.  In 2007, at age 30, Dr. Fryer became the youngest African American to be given tenure at Harvard.  He is a recipient of the MacArthur Fellowship (2011), the Calvo’-Amengol prize (2012), and the John Bates Clark Medal (2015).  The entire report from his study, An Empirical Analysis Of Racial Differences In Police Use Of Force, can be downloaded at –

https://scholar.harvard.edu/fryer/publications/empirical-analysis-racial-differences-police-use-force

D.  A 2001 Bureau of Justice Statistics report found that blacks were statistically underrepresented among killings due to police use of force on violent criminal suspects.⁜

E. A 2011 Bureau of Justice Statistics report found that while blacks accounted for 38.5% of all arrests for violent crimes (the type of crime most likely to trigger a potentially deadly confrontation with police), only 31.7 percent of such subjects that were killed by police were black. These numbers don’t suggest a lack of restraint by police when dealing with blacks.  They suggest the exact opposite.⁡

F. Recent data continues to show that police do not shoot and kill blacks in disproportionately high numbers. In 2017, blacks were arrested for 37.5 percent of all violent felonies, but were just 24.7 percent of people killed by police. In 2018 the corresponding figures were 37.4 percent and 26.4 percent respectively and in 2019 they were 36.4 percent and 29.3 percent respectively.⁸

G. The aforementioned 2001 Bureau of Justice Statistics report also found that the rate at which black officers killed black felons was more than double the rate at which white officers killed black felons. Are we to believe that once a black person becomes a police officer that black person is transformed into an anti-black racist and is even more racist than his supposedly racist white fellow police officers?

š Merriam Webster Dictionary

² I Can’t Breathe. How a Racial Hoax Is Killing America., David Horowitz, ©2021, Regnery Publishing, pgs. 39-40.

Âł US Census Bureau, 2020 Headcount

⁴ https://www.statista.com/statistics/191694/number-of-law-enforcement-officers-in-the-us/

⁾ The Myth Of Systemic Police Racism, Heather Mac Donald, Wall Street Journal Op-Ed, June 2, 2020

⁜ Jodi Brown and Patrick Langan, “Policing and Homicide, 1976-98: Justifiable Homicide by Police, Police Officers Murdered by Felons,” U.S. Department of Justice, March 2001, https://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/ph98.pdf, 5;  “Persons Arrested,” Uniform Crime Reports, 1995 (see Table 43), https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/1995/95sec4.pdf; “Persons Arrested,” Uniform Crime Reports, 1996 (see Table 43), https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/1997/97sec4.pdf; “Persons Arrested”, Uniform Crime Reports, 1998 (see Table 43), https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/1998/98sec4.pdf.

⁡ Andrea M. Burch, “Arrest-Related Deaths, 2003-2009—Statistical Tables, NCJ 235385,” U.S. Department of Justice, November 2011, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pib/pdf/ard0309st.pdf. The annual violent-crime arrest statistics for 2003-2009, broken down by race, can be found here; “Crime in the Unites States, 2003, “U.S. Department of Justice, (see Table 43), https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2003/03sec4.pdf;  “Crime in the United States, 2004, “U.S. Department of Justice (see Table 43), https://www2.fbi.gov.ucr/cius_04/persons_arrested/tqable_38-43.html; “Crime in the United States, 2005, “ U.S. Department of Justice (see Table 43), https//www2.fbi.gov/ucr/05cius/data/table_43.html;

“Crime in the United States, 2006, “ U.S. Department of Justice (see Table 43), https//www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2006/data/table_43.html; “Crime in the United States, 2007, “ U.S. Department of Justice (see Table 43), https//www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_43.html; “Crime in the United States, 2008, “ U.S. Department of Justice (see Table 43), https//www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_43.html; “Crime in the United States, 2009, “ U.S. Department of Justice (see Table 43), https//www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_43.html.

⁸ Uniform Crime Reports, “Crime in the United States, 2017” Table 43A, https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the u.s.-2017/topic-pages/tables/table-43; Uniform Crime Reports, “Crime in the United States, 2018” Table 43A, https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the u.s.-2018/topic-pages/tables/table-43; Uniform Crime Reports, “Crime in the United States, 2019” Table 43A, https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the u.s.-2019/topic-pages/tables/table-43; Statista.com, “Number of People Shot to Death by the Police in the United States from 2017 to 2021, by Race,” https://www.statista.com/statistics/585152/people-shot-to-death-by-us-police-by-race/.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________