Fraud: Democrats reveal their hand in Arizona vote recount debacle

Democrats have a way of revealing themselves and their agenda, any time one of their truisms are just a tiny bit challenged.
 
So no surprise, they opposed a hand-recount of the 2020 voting ballots in Maricopa County, Arizona, which includes large or at least well known cities such as Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, Chandler, and Mesa.  The vote went to Joe Biden.

Somehow, they didn't want them recounted.

According to the Washington Post:


Yeah, and what if the recount does show fraud, as the Washington Post assures it does not?  How is it that the in-the-tank paper of record for the Democratic Party would actually know how the recount would come out unless they already knew the fix was in?

Gotcha.  Revealed your hand, lapdogs, and among Democrats themselves, the reveal was even worse:

According to AZCentral:


Since when do Democrats care about election security, or identification for participants (which was part of the lawsuit), or valid voter information?

Up until now, all we have heard is that those things are Republican plots.  The judge, however, agreed with their election security concerns (AZCentral describes several of them, and yes, some seem valid) but explained to them that his role was as part of the interpret-the-law Judicial Branch, not the legislative one, which they didn't seem to know.  Citing the Senate's authority to do the recount, he asked the Democrats in objection to post a $1-million bond to cover for any losses should their suit not succeed and their delay add costs.  It made sense, because any Senate maneuver could be subject to just such junk suits effectively halting the work of the elected legislators and subjecting representative democracy itself to the desires of left-wing lawyers.

They curiously refused, saying they didn't like the law.

That left the process open to the recount.

Why was their objection so vehement?

It seems they want to hold on to that "narrative" that there is no such thing as election fraud and can't allow any room for questioning that, for one.  Why might that be?  This being politics, one can surmise that they benefited from such fraud, if there was any.  There really isn't any other explanation.

Certain things amplify that thesis considerably.  Number one, the Republicans said it wouldn't change the outcome of the election.  In fact, they said, truly or not, that they only wanted to find ways to make the system better, and, yes, a forensic audit might be a good place to start.

So in theory, even if there was fraud, Democrats should have nothing to worry about.

Yet they are worried, and that raises questions as to why.

After all, a Republican outcome in the recount is highly unlikely, given that Phoenix is a big city that's full of leftists.  It's not as bad as other places, but if the recount showed a blue result, nobody would be surprised.  So Democrats would have plenty of reason not to worry.

Yet worry they do.

You'd think they'd like to celebrate the vote recount, as it would prove their claims that the 2020 election had no fraud.  But they don't.

If the recount in fact showed what they feared — a red result, then look out: the fraud was probably there if the result recorded was blue, and there might have been fraud in other places when Arizona as a state unexpectedly went blue for Joe Biden.  The fix could have been in, particularly since some of the news media appeared to be in on it.  Remember: a huge conspiracy to "fortify" the 2020 election was described by Time magazine involving hundreds of elitist players involved in various means of rigging.  All of that could come tumbling down if the recount didn't match the reported result.

I agree with the Dems and the judge that there should be strong transparency in this, with everyone who wants to permitted to watch.  But Democrats refused to put their money where their mouth is on this argument.  They couldn't cough up $1 million for a short period of time to comply with the judge's order?  This sounds as though this isn't a matter of transparency.  A normal entity concerned about fraud in the recount would shell that cash out fast to make sure the recount was halted if security grounds were that important.  These guys didn't.  That signals that something else is going on, something else we can't tell.

All we know now is that they don't want a recount, and the Washington Post says they fear any fueling of talk that the election did have fraud.

Well, did it?  All we know for now is that they don't even want us to ask.  And that says more than anything they could say about election fraud charges being "baseless."  Anyone who wanted to show that would pay for the recount himself. (read more)

How [illegitimate president] Biden's [insane] climate plan could limit you to eat just one burger a MONTH, cost $3.5K a year per person in taxes, force you to spend $55K on an electric car and 'crush' American jobs

• [Illegitimate president] Biden announced the goal to cut emissions by 2030, compared with 2005 levels, at the start of a two-day climate summit on Thursday
• He vowed the plan, which would set the US on a path of a zero emissions economy by no later than 2050, would create jobs and boost economies
• But he is yet to release any firm details on exactly how such a plan will affect the daily lives of ordinary Americans
• It could prompt sweeping changes that could affect how Americans eat, drive and heat their homes
• While [illegitimate president] Biden hasn't released details, experts and recent studies have laid out what would need to change by 2030 to reach the goal

[Illegitimate president] Joe Biden's ambitious plan to slash greenhouse emissions by 50 to 52 percent over the next decade could prompt sweeping changes that could affect how Americans eat, drive and heat their homes.

[Illegitimate president] Biden announced the goal to cut emissions by 2030, compared with 2005 levels, at the start of a two-day climate summit on Thursday.

He vowed the plan, which would set the US on a path of a zero emissions economy by no later than 2050, would create jobs and boost economies.

But he is yet to release any firm details on exactly how such a plan will affect the daily lives of ordinary Americans.

He also hasn't set out the price for reducing emissions. 

The plan immediately sparked criticism from Republicans and industry experts who argue it isn't sustainable in the long run, will put jobs at risk and cause tax hikes for Americans.  

While [illegitimate president] Biden hasn't released details on what life could look like for Americans, experts and recent studies have laid out what would need to change by 2030 to reach the goal.

Cutting red meat consumption by 90% and animal products by 50%

Americans may have to cut their red meat consumption by a whopping 90 percent and cut their consumption of other animal based foods in half.

Gradually making those changes by 2030 could see diet-related greenhouse gas emissions reduced by 50 percent, according to a study by Michigan University's Center for Sustainable Systems.

To do that, it would require Americans to only consume about four pounds of red meat per year, or 0.18 ounces per day.  

It equates to consuming roughly one average sized burger per month.

Making the switch to an electric car

More than half of new cars bought in the United States would need to be electric within the next decade, studies show.

The University of Maryland's School of Public Policy estimated that cleaning up transportation would count towards about a quarter of [illegitimate president] Biden's goal.

It would mean more than 65 percent of new cars and SUV sales and 10 percent of new truck sales would need to be electric. 

Currently, electric cars make up about 2 percent of new passenger vehicle sales.

The average cost of a new electric vehicle is about $55,000. 

Refitting the home with electric heat pumps

Nearly 25 percent of homes would need to be heated by electricity, rather than natural gas or oil, to help reach [illegitimate president] Biden's emissions goal by 2030.

The average cost to install an electric heat pump, which an all-in-one heating and cooling unit, is about $5,613, according to figures from HomeAdvisor.

Taxpayers could fork out trillions of dollars

Industry leaders say Biden's climate plan, while there are no cost specifics yet, could end up costing American taxpayers trillions of dollars.

David Williams, president of the Taxpayers Protection Alliance, told DailyMail.com that [illegitimate president] Biden's plan is just a 'multi-trillion dollar corporate welfare giveaway'.

'Strict climate mandates/targets will disproportionately hurt lower and middle income citizens who will be forced to pay higher electricity bills,' he said. 

Bjorn Lomborg, a visiting fellow at Stanford University, told the OC Register that the [socialist] plan will likely cost taxpayers about $3,500 per year.  

'This cost will increase significantly,' he said.

'While more than two-thirds of the [brainwashed] US population finds that climate is a crisis or major problem, less than half are willing to spend even $24 a year to fight it, according to a 2019 survey by The Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation.'

Jobs: [illegitimate president] Biden says he'll create millions but Republicans argue it will crush them

[Illegitimate president] Biden says he can create millions of good-paying jobs in his plan but many Republicans say it will actually damage the economy.

Matt Coday, who is president of the Oil & Gas Workers Association, was among the critics.

'[Illegitimate president] Biden is using buzzwords to justify his 'transition away' from American jobs while foreign countries like China, Iran, Russia, Mexico, Venezuela, and Iraq keep working and take over America's global market share,' he told DailyMail.com.

'[Illegitimate president] Biden's misguided policies will crush small businesses, hurt American workers, and harm all Americans.

'If we 'transition away' from American jobs while foreign countries keep producing, did we 'save the planet' or just kill American jobs?'

[Illegitimate president] Biden's new commitment, timed to the summit, would cut America's fossil fuel emissions as much as 52 percent by 2030.

It comes after four years of international withdrawal from the issue under President Donald Trump, who mocked the science of climate change and pulled the US out of the landmark 2015 Paris climate accord.

'The signs are unmistakable. The science is undeniable. The cost of inaction is mounting,' [illegitimate president] Biden said.

'This is a moral imperative, an economic imperative.

'Time is short, but I believe we can do this. And I believe that we will do. Thank you for being part of the summit.'

[Illegitimate president] Biden's [regime] this week is sketching out a vision of a prosperous, clean-energy United States where factories churn out cutting-edge batteries and electric cars for export, line workers re-lay an efficient national electrical grid and crews cap abandoned oil and gas rigs and coal mines.

The [illegitimate] Biden [regime]'s pledge would require by far the most ambitious US climate effort ever, nearly doubling the reductions that the Obama administration had committed to in the Paris climate accord.

But Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell dismissed the administration's plans as costly and ineffective.

'This is quite the one-two punch,' McConnell said in a Senate speech Thursday. 'Toothless requests of our foreign adversaries... and maximum pain for American citizens.'

The US emissions cuts are expected to come from power plants, automobiles, and other sectors across the economy.

Sector-specific goals will be laid out later this year. 

How Washington intends to reach its climate goals will be crucial to cementing US credibility on global warming, amid international concerns that America's commitment to a clean energy economy can shift drastically from one administration to the next.

[Illegitimate president] Biden's recently introduced $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan contains numerous measures that could deliver some of the emissions cuts needed this decade, including a clean energy standard to achieve net zero emissions in the power sector by 2035 and moves to electrify the vehicle fleet.

The measures, however, need to be passed by Congress before becoming reality.

[Illegitimate president] Biden's $2.3 trillion infrastructure plan has many items that would help reduce emissions, including a clean energy standard to achieve net zero emissions in the power sector by 2035 and money to electrify the vehicle fleet.

[Illegitimate president] Biden, in his remarks, argued taking action now would 'set the world up for success, protect livelihoods around the world and keep global warming at a maximum of 1.5 degrees Celsius. We must get on the path now, in order to do that.'

'If we do will breathe easier, literally, and figuratively,' he said. 'We'll create good jobs here at home for millions of Americans and lay a strong foundation with growth in the future.'

[Illegitimate president] Biden has included a string of climate initiatives in his infrastructure plan including $85 billion to modernize public transport, $174 billion on building more electric cars, $100 billion to upgrade the electrical grid and a $10 billion 'Civilian Climate Cops.' (read more)

Nevada's Republican secretary of state finds no 'evidentiary support' of voter fraud in latest blow to Donald Trump's 2020 election rigging claims

• Nevada Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske found no 'evidentiary support' for the state GOP's voter fraud claims
• 'These concerns do not amount to evidentiary support for the contention that the 2020 general election was plagued by widespread voter fraud,' she said
• The new findings are the latest blow to Donald Trump's claims widespread voter fraud was to blame for him losing to Joe Biden
• Cegavske is the only Republican statewide office holder in Nevada
• The Nevada GOP censured Cegavske earlier this month

Nevada's Republican Secretary of State Barbara Cegavske revealed Wednesday she found no evidence to support the state GOP's claim of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 general election.

'[W]hile the NVGOP [Nevada GOP] raises policy concerns about the integrity of mail-in voting, automatic voter registration, and same-day voter registration, these concerns do not amount to evidentiary support for the contention that the 2020 general election was plagued by widespread voter fraud,' she said in a letter addressed to the Nevada Republican Party.

Cegavske is the only Republican who holds a statewide office in Nevada.

Her findings are the latest blow to former President Donald Trump's claims that voter fraud in several swing states – including Nevada – were to blame for his loss against Joe Biden.

In the November 2020 general presidential election, Biden earned 50.1% of the vote over Trump's 47.7%. Nevada is one of the state's Trump's team and allies most vehemently denounced as engaging in some sort of voter fraud.

In the 2016 election, however, the state went blue for Hillary Clinton by nearly the same margin.

Nevada was one of the states in 2020 that sent out mail-in ballots to all registered voters to try and combat potential voting hesitancy in the midst of the coronavirus pandemic.

States engaging in this practice led to Republican claims that it could make situations ripe for voter fraud, including people voting more than once or sending in ballots they automatically received that were not under their own name.

Issues like change of address and deceased individuals voting became an issue.

In Cegavske's letter, she said of the 122,918 records submitted by Nevada's GOP, her office narrowed the list to 3,963 'Election Integrity Violation Reports'.

Some of the nearly 4,000 claims were already being investigated and an accompanying report found many complaints were unsubstantiated.

The state also determined it wasn't cost effective to track down those who live out of state and voted in the Nevada election. Cegavske reasoned there are several ways those not living in the state may vote and still be qualified as a permanent resident – like college students.

Cegavske was censured earlier this month by the Nevada Republican Party.

They reasoned their censure was for 'disregard of her oath of office by failing to investigate election fraud, her dismissive public statements regarding election integrity concerns, and her failure to ensure compliance with Nevada and federal election law, these actions being at least partially causal in November 2020 election irregularities and fraud.'

She rebuked her censure in a statement claiming: 'My job is to carry out the duties of my office as enacted by the Nevada Legislature, not carry water for the state GOP or put my thumb on the scale of democracy.'

'Unfortunately, members of my own party continue to believe the 2020 general election was wrought with fraud – and that somehow I had a part in it – despite a complete lack of evidence to support that belief,' Cegavske continued. (read more and see PDF of report)

The State-Senate-Mandated Audit of Maricopa County (Phoenix) Ballots and Machines Is Finally Taking Place - Democrats Did Not Post $1 Million Bond to Delay It

See the action live from Veteran's Memorial Coliseum: https://azaudit.org/

part 2 of statement:

“We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission; which is the stage of the darkest periods of human history, the stage of rule by brute force.”

— Ayn Rand

The Real Reason for Daunte Wright’s Death

His death is a tragedy, but we need to look at the full picture of why it happened.

We will never hear the last of these names. Eric Garner. Alton Sterling. Michael Brown. George Floyd. Rashad Brooks.

And now Daunte Wright.

We will never hear the last of them because there will always be more. And because certain people are invested in forcing us to hear about them.

But what they demand we hear isn’t the truth.

Is it a tragedy that Daunte Wright is dead? Of course it is. Should he have been shot dead on Sunday by a Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, police officer? Why, no, he shouldn’t have been.

We can get this out of the way very easily. The Brooklyn Center police department employed, it appears, a female cop who after 26 years on the force can’t tell the difference in a stressful situation between a taser and a Glock pistol. To call this a failure of hiring and training would be a rather generous statement.

There was something of a hue and cry over the firing of the city manager in that Minneapolis suburb because he called for the officer to be given due process, but the fact of the matter is that the most likely result of due process in the Daunte Wright case is firings up the chain of command anyway. The officer in question, Kim Potter, who was a former police union local president,  has already resigned. The police chief, Tim Gannon, has also resigned. Mike Elliott, the African American Democrat mayor of Brooklyn Center, seems pretty intent on throwing under the bus as many underlings as possible in order to save himself, but he probably ought to go, too.

Particularly after what the mob did to Brooklyn Center in response to the Daunte Wright shooting.

We could have an argument about “diversity hiring” here. We could also have an argument, as Reason.com was insistent on raising Monday, about the deadly stupidity of laws like the one Minnesota has criminalizing the hanging of air fresheners or other items from the rearview mirror of a car. Reason‘s Billy Binion pronounced Daunte Wright dead as a result of that idiotic statute.

He’s wrong. That law, disgracefully ridiculous though it might be, did not kill Daunte Wright.

Daunte Wright, or at least the life he led, killed Daunte Wright.

He wasn’t pulled over because he had air fresheners hanging from his rearview mirror. He was pulled over because he had expired tags on his license plate. Then it was noticed that he had air fresheners hanging from his rear view.

Then it was noticed he had an outstanding warrant.

Then it was noticed he resisted arrest.

Then it was noticed he got back in his car and drove away from the police. Which he had done before, as it turned out; Wright had fled from officers in June. The circumstances from which that police encounter arose make for scintillating reading. He was reported to the police for waving a gun around, and when the cops showed up it turned out Wright didn’t have a permit for the gun.

He ran away. And he was cited and ordered to appear in court. He didn’t, which occasioned the warrant for his arrest.

That’s not all that appears on Wright’s record. There was the February arrest for aggravated robbery. There was a disorderly conduct charge arising from a 2019 incident. There was the guilty plea in late 2019 to possession and sale of marijuana. And there was an arrest warrant for armed robbery; Wright was accused of choke-holding a woman and threatening her at gunpoint, demanding $820 intended to pay her rent.

Daunte Wright dropped out of high school, then fathered a child out of wedlock he couldn’t support with minimum-wage jobs and petty drug dealing. He had borrowed $50 from his parents to take his car to a car wash and had his girlfriend in the car with him, with expired license tags. He was stopped by the police, resisted arrest, and then attempted to drive away — which raised the likelihood that he would expose his girlfriend to bodily harm. She was apparently injured when, as he bled out following being shot by Officer Potter, he crashed the car attempting a getaway.

In other words, this is someone who chose to be a penny-ante John Dillinger. He ended up with the full ante.

His parents are justifiably upset at his death. The loss of a child is one of the most heartbreaking events anyone could bear. Certainly our sympathies go out to them.

But Daunte Wright’s father called him “a great kid.” He said he was “a normal kid. He was never in serious trouble. He enjoyed spending time with his 2-year-old son. He loved his son.”

Great kids don’t fight with and then flee the cops. Great kids don’t bring the police around because they’re waving guns. Great kids aren’t arrested for aggravated robbery or for dealing drugs.

Or, in the community Daunte Wright came from, maybe they do. Maybe that’s great.

If so, that’s a lot bigger problem than the incompetence of the politicians and police in Brooklyn Center, Minnesota.

But that isn’t something you’ll hear much about, is it?

You aren’t even allowed to talk about the fact that this 20-year-old kid had already messed up his life and may have been well on his way to becoming a career criminal. Daunte Wright had perpetuated the cycle of out-of-wedlock childbirth, academic failure, the inability to learn and deploy a marketable skill, and escalating criminal behavior that so horrifically afflicts the black community in this country.

If Daunte Wright’s life was “great” and not substandard, then we will never be rid of these tragedies. And they’re all fundamentally the same — career criminal on the fringe of society, a failure in life, involved in drugs (if not high at the time; we’ll know later what the toxicology report shows), likely faced with prolonged jail time upon arrest and resisting arrest.

How do you prevent deaths like Daunte Wright’s? You try to prevent young men from living lives like Daunte Wright’s.

But you aren’t allowed to say that. Neither Joe Biden nor Kamala Harris, both of whom had the opportunity to lead but instead chose to pander to the mob, would say it. Nor would Minnesota’s Gov. Tim Walz, another pandering Democrat responsible for more of his state’s destruction than perhaps all of his predecessors combined.

Wright’s family hired — of course! — the race-hustling attorney Ben Crump, who has made his entire livelihood trying cases like this in the media as the cities where they happen burn. Crump’s street-criminal clients, or more specifically their families, often pull nice settlements out of local governments despite weak evidence of actual malfeasance.

This case, owing to the Barney Fife nature of the gunplay involved, might be Ben Crump’s best yet. Which isn’t saying much.

So he was on the scene in Brooklyn Center almost before the body was cold.

“Daunte Wright’s life matters,” Crump said.

Well, of course it matters. It matters to Ben Crump. Daunte Wright will be a nice paycheck for him. And so will the next Daunte Wright, and the one after that. Before too long, Ben Crump will be able to buy a million-dollar house in Topanga Canyon near [Only] Black Lives Matter founder Patrisse Cullors’ fresh crib.

It isn’t a coincidence that nobody is interested in preventing lives like Daunte Wright’s but rather celebrating them. Daunte Wright’s funeral will be a lot bigger deal than David Dorn’s. There will be murals painted and stores burned and looted in his honor.

And then there will be a fat settlement. Daunte Wright will end up worth a whole lot more dead than he ever was alive.

So long as this tragic cycle can’t be called out for the horrific farce that it is, it will continue. But it can’t. And the next Daunte Wright will only keep the wheel turning around and around. (read more)

Let’s Choke Woke Coke

Coca-Cola’s British-born CEO led the company over the falls. If Coke wants to reclaim conservatives, then let it sacrifice him.

There may not be a more American brand than the Atlanta-based Coca-Cola, but the company carrying that brand is a lot less red, white, and blue than you think.

It isn’t run by an American, or at least not by someone who was born here. James Quincey lives in Atlanta, but he was born in London. Quincey lived for a while in New Hampshire as a little kid, as his father lectured at Dartmouth, but he grew up and went to college in Birmingham.

Not the one in Alabama.

Quincey got his start in business working at Bain & Company, the Boston-based consulting firm, in 1993. By 1996, he had a job at Coca-Cola. Coke moved him around from Latin America to Europe, finally naming him chief operating officer in 2015 and then CEO the next year.

Quincey was the one who came up with the idea of selling Coke in smaller packages as a response to politicians attacking its product as harmful.

“We know that consumers are looking for less sugar, so we’re expanding the selection of low- and no-calorie products, in addition to working on more than 200 reformulation initiatives worldwide,” Quincey said back in 2015. “We will continue to honor our great history built on more than 130 years of proud traditions, but at the same time we must continue to follow our consumers and customers to where they take us.”

Since then, a review of the press releases sent out by Quincey’s communications department indicates he thinks the consumers and customers are taking the company hard Left. It’s difficult to discern whether one is looking at Coke’s website or the Center for American Progress sometimes; Coke seems a lot more interested in “sustainability” and climate change than making beverages people want. They’re even very proud of having pioneered a prototype for a paper bottle (as though paper straws aren’t lousy enough).

It’s been an item of faith for a very long time that Coca-Cola was the choice of America’s conservatives when it comes to soda drinks; Pepsi was more the Democrat brand. But since Quincey took over the company, what’s clear is that while Republicans might like Coke the feeling is most certainly not mutual.

They’re chasing the woke consumer. They don’t give a damn about the rest of us. Or, more to the point, they might be happy to take our money, but as far as they’re concerned we can drive off a cliff so long as there’s a 12-pack of Coke in the trunk.

If there was any question about this, two incidents of recent vintage removed it.

The first was when video went public of diversity seminars Coke put on for its employees in which the message was unbridled critical race theory. A slide that appeared in one such seminar, which Coke denied was part of its training program but didn’t deny employees were shown, exhorted employees to “try to be less white.”

That set off a firestorm, and it should have scared Quincey and his management-team minions straight. But when the state of Georgia passed what seems to be a fairly mild election reform package in an effort to squelch some of the ballot harvesting and election irregularities that have negatively affected public perception of election integrity in that state, it was clear another lesson was needed.

Quincey, in a CNBC interview, pontificated in a way almost designed to infuriate the maximum number of people. He said the law “does not promote principles we have stood for in Georgia around broad access to voting, around voter convenience, about ensuring election integrity.”

That brought Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp out of his shell. Kemp, reviled by many Trump supporters for a perceived weak position on the integrity of the state’s elections in the 2020 cycle, signed the reform bill and then took a shot at Coca-Cola, Delta, and the other woke corporations who trashed it. He said they were “intimidated” by Stacey Abrams and Joe Biden.

In Delta’s case Kemp is clearly correct. In the case of Quincey’s Coke, not so much.

Coca-Cola is a left-wing company. It may have been a left-wing company before James Quincey brought his Euro sensibilities to the C-suite, but it certainly is one now.

But after Kemp took a swing at Coke and lots of conservatives — including Donald Trump, Rand Paul, and even the squirrelly Pat Toomey — reacted to Quincey’s partisan advocacy in a corporate cloak by intensifying calls for a boycott, it appears the company would now like to sue for peace:


To be fair, as in the case of Delta Airlines, Coke’s griping about the Georgia election reform law really intensified after threats of boycotts by [Only] Black Lives Matter–affiliated groups. But unlike Delta, Coke has a very woke track record.

Accordingly, conciliatory statements by Coke don’t cut it. There will be a time to find “common ground” with these people, but this isn’t that time.

Corporations willing to throw their weight around in the political arena need to be made to understand that it’s a nasty, bloody, unprofitable place where people lose their careers all the time.

And this is a perfect opportunity to teach that lesson.

Remember your Saul Alinsky, whose Rules for Radicals is the essential how-to book for the destruction of our civil society the Left has practiced particularly in the last 15 to 20 years. One of his most important rules was Rule No. 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.

James Quincey is the target. He needs to be canceled.

Coca-Cola should be the subject of the most hostile economic action possible — including boycotts, shorts, vexatious health-hazard class action lawsuits, distributorship revolts, you name it — until James Quincey is forced out of his job as CEO. When he’s gone, when that scalp is taken, when our picked, frozen, personalized, and polarized target is obliterated, then we can make “common ground.”

And the other James Quinceys out there, like Delta’s wimpy Ed Bastian, might just become frightened enough of the Right that they’d like to abstain from partisan advocacy altogether in hopes of keeping their filthy-rich jobs and perks, and we can start putting paid to this idiotic notion of “woke corporatism.”

Maybe Quincey’s replacement might even agree to put real sugar, rather than that high-fructose corn syrup, back into Coke Classic. That would be a real victory worth celebrating. (read more)

“This is the clearest picture yet of the terroristic intimidation jurors faced to ensure Chauvin was found guilty in what was fundamentally a rigged show trial,”

— Chris Menahan

New Footage Shows Ma’Khia Bryant Yelling “I’m Going to Stab the F**k Out of You, Bitch!” During Knife Attack

New footage of the moments before she was shot dead by a police officer during a knife attack shows Ma’Khia Bryant yelling, “I’m going to stab the f**k out of you bitch!” – yet again vindicating the officer’s response.

Leftists have continually lied about the incident in Columbus, Ohio, at first claiming Bryant was unarmed and then trying to argue that she was “just a child” who got involved in a “knife fight” and should have been left alone.

In reality, the new footage once again underscores what really happened – Bryant was engaged in a frenzied knife attack and by shooting her dead, the officer saved the lives of two other African-American women.

The 26-second video captured by a neighbor’s garage camera across the street shows Bryant charging towards another woman while screaming “I’m going to stab the f**k out of you bitch!”




As the other bodycam video of the incident shows, Bryant was carrying a kitchen knife and trying to slash her victims before the police officer, Nicholas Rearden, shot her dead.

Neighbor Donovan Brinson, who released the garage cam footage, said it clearly vindicates Rearden’s response.

“He could have either not fired and the young lady in pink could have been stabbed in the neck and brutally or fatally injured and then he could shoot [Bryant] and we could have had two [young women] dead – or he could have responded in the way that he did and one young lady lost her life,” Brinson told Fox News.

Another eyewitness, Ira Graham III, told the Columbus Dispatch, “I believe in truth and facts. Video doesn’t lie. “She was in full attack mode.”

Bryant “was literally aiming a knife at this young lady,” Graham said of the female in pink seen in the clip. “She needed to be stopped at that point. That young lady’s life was at stake.”

As Raheem Kassam notes, the new footage confirms that Bryant “makes an overt threat to kill then proceeds to act on it. The officer is a HERO!!!”




As another respondent pointed out, “This video appears to disprove entirely the family members who said Bryant “grabbed a knife to defend herself” and that she was “fending off a physical assault when police arrived.”




As we highlighted yesterday, BLM supporters initially tried to claim that Bryant had called the cops for help, but the 911 tape clearly proves her intended victims made the call.

That wasn’t made clear however in an NBC News report on the issue, which completely omitted the fact that the 911 call was made by Bryant’s intended victim. The network also stopped playing the footage before the point where Bryant was clearly seen to be wielding a knife.

Despite the overwhelming amount of evidence proving the shooting was not only justified but crucial to save lives, BLM has adopted Bryant as their latest martyr.

Columbus Mayor Andrew Ginther appears to have bowed to the maniacal mob, saying that Bryant’s death was a “failure of the community” and that Officer Rearden “will be held accountable” if found guilty of wrongdoing. (read more)

IndoctriNation: No. 1 U.S. High School Pushes Racist Activism On Students
 
Parents got zero prior notice to submit opt-out forms or review curriculum before students were told to watch videos claiming ‘white culture’ includes ‘individualism’ and ‘objectivity.’

FAIRFAX COUNTY, Va. — Late last month, Suparna Dutta’s son, a student at Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology, started sending his mother distressing videos from a mandatory lesson straight out of controversial critical race theory — all in the name of “socio-emotional learning.”

The lesson centered a Netflix film, “13th,” with controversial activist and Communist Party member Angela Davis and a biased narrative about policing in the United States. While all discrimination must be eliminated in policing, the film has this odd takeaway: “Criminals are constitutionally deprived of freedom.”

Also unsettling, the PowerPoint slides had the distinct bright yellow three stripes that are the official brand of [Only] Black Lives Matter, the multimillion-dollar global enterprise. The slides included a key BLM mantra, “Racism as a structure,” with the menacing oversized finger of a white man over a cowering young black man.

For about 36 minutes, teachers lectured the students—who are about 70 percent Asian, 10 percent black, Hispanic, and multiracial, and 20 percent white—about the critical race theory concept of “intersectionality” and called out the mostly minority students of color for their alleged “racism,” stating without any evidence: “At T.J., the lack of diversity and informed students has perpetuated microaggressions and casual racism.”

In a videotaped message accompanying the  lesson, Anant Das, an alumnus from the local activist TJ Alumni Action Group, scolded the students for salsa dancing at an international night celebration, which he called cultural “appropriation.” Teachers also led a bizarre discussion on “what stereotypes might you have about your own culture.” They pushed activism, stating: “Ways to address racism can include being upfront and vocal or pushing for social change through your own actions.”

The “Extra Resources” included a reference to “[Only] Black Lives Matter,” with a link to the official website for the [Only] Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.

The “[Only] Black Lives Matter” link in the slide takes students straight to [Only] BlackLivesMatter.com, with snappy invitations: “Join the Global Movement” and a sign up for “periodic text messages from [Only] Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation.” With just one click, T.J. students were directed to the political ambitions of the [Only] Black Lives Matter PAC, with its list of 2020 election endorsements, including specific politicians, including a specific school board member, Shayla Adams-Stafford, in nearby Prince George’s County, Md.

Enraged, parents, including me, questioned the school’s activist principal, Ann Bonitatibus. She wrote to the T.J. Parent Teacher Student Association president claiming, “There is no critical race theory training with students.” She deflected responsibility for the teaching, calling it “a project initiated and created by students for students.”

But 200-plus pages of internal school emails, disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information Act request, reveal that on Aug. 19, 2020, Bonitatibus sent the T.J. “Equity Team,” including two assistant principals, a message that she had met with student government leaders about a plan to show the “13th” documentary in summer 2021, along with a conversation on “anti-racism.” She wrote, “I shared with them that their idea doesn’t necessarily need to wait until next school year. There could be a way to think about their proposal or a variation of it for this year.”

Over the next seven months, the T.J. principal, two assistant principals, the director of student services, at least three teachers, several counselors, and a Fairfax County Public Schools “equity” officer directly edited, wrote, and reviewed all of the content for the lesson, masked as “socio-emotional learning.”

One set of stakeholders never consulted: parents. That’s why I helped start a new organization, Parents Defending Education, fighting indoctrination in K-12 schools, so we could file FOIA requests like the one I sent Fairfax County Public Schools, revealing the complicity of the principal, teachers, and staff in creating the ideological lesson that our students got.

Meanwhile, over the past school year, we faced a superintendent, school board, and principal leading a crusade to racially alter the school’s demographics, with the school district abandoning the school’s merit-based, race-blind test in December to gerrymander the admissions process so fewer Asians and more black and Hispanic students would make the cut to attend the advanced math and science school.

The stealth lesson underscores several serious issues vexing schools today and the future of America. It reveals how school officials circumvent parents as they move aggressively to indoctrinate students in K-12 schools from neighboring Loudoun County, Va., to California.

It also serves as a cautionary tale on how how important it is that parents assert three rights most districts promise to secure: the right to inspect curriculum, spelled out in Fairfax County, for example, under “Policies and Regulations 3002-3011,”; the right to opt-out students from certain teachings, including on topics “sensitive in nature”; and the right to have “controversial issues” discussed “impartially and objectively,” a point spelled out in Fairfax County under Regulation 3280.4.

Contradicting these promises, the “Extra Resources” in the lesson also included a link to the organization Showing Up for Racial Justice, which believes “none of us can be free until we end white supremacy.” It featured on the homepage a very problematic and reductionist page, “The Characteristics of White Supremacy Culture.”

This displayed “a list of characteristics of white supremacy culture,” including “perfectionism,” a “sense of urgency,” “defensiveness,” “worship of the written word” like memos, “either/or thinking,” “power hoarding,” “individualism,” “objectivity” and—finally, a very disturbing notion to present to K-12 students—“right to comfort.”

The final bullet point led to a shocking video, “On Solidarity with the [Only] Black Lives Matter Movement” by a first-generation Korean-American, Kaiti Yoo. She flashed the image of a Time magazine cover with smiling young students beside the headline, “Those Asian-American Whiz Kids,” as she waxed on about learning to “justify our existence through our work, our grades, our accomplishments.”

Yoo’s video laid out a central narrative of critical race theory ideologues like Ibram Kendi and [racist and ahistorical] 1619 Project lead Nikole Hannah-Jones, who argue blacks and Asians “don’t experience this country in the same way” because Asians didn’t come to the United States as slaves. It laid out the guilt trip thrust on Asians from critical race theory activists to support radical black goals as the only way to support “justice.” The same theme was present in T.J. lesson materials such as the slide below.

At 30 seconds, the film featured an image of the American flag with a sign in front of it that reads, “The American Dream is Over.” It’s a biased, problematic, and shame-based video for anyone pursuing the “American Dream” without blind support for the BLM movement. It’s wildly inappropriate, unhealthy, and potentially emotionally damaging to thrust on students at a mostly Asian school caught in a race war of the principal’s making.

The next “socio-emotional learning” blocks will be April 21, May 5, May 21, and June 2, according to staff. Back home, Dutta sent a dispatch to the principal. She had one remedy for the indoctrination: the principal’s immediate resignation. Her subject line: “Dereliction of duty.” (read more)

NBC Deceptively Edits 911 Call And Body Cam Video Of Police Shooting To Conceal Teen Wielding Knife

NBC “Nightly News” deceptively edited the 911 call and footage of a fatal police-involved shooting in its Wednesday night segment to conceal that the teenage girl who was shot and killed was charging another girl with a knife.

In the original body camera video released shortly after the shooting, 16-year-old Ma’Khia Bryant is shown running at another girl with the deadly weapon. The officer responding to the scene can be heard calling for everyone to get down several times before he fired off four shots directed at Bryant.

The audio featured on one of NBC’s most popular shows, however, omitted parts of the 911 call featuring frantic cries for help from people who claimed a girl was “trying to stab us.” Instead, NBC chose a quick audio clipping of someone saying, “We need a police officer here now.”




While other corporate media outlets made a point to note the knife in Bryant’s hand, sometimes zooming in and freezing the video where it showed her wielding the weapon, NBC simply glossed over it and merely stated that authorities claimed, “She was threatening others with a knife.”

“Body camera footage shows a knife on the ground,” NBC stated, showing a screenshot of a knife lying in the driveway at the scene.




NBC’s unwillingness to feature all the evidence follows an evidenceless narrative created by media outlets, activists, and even the White House that this shooting was racially motivated.

“She was a child,” the White House said in a statement. “We know that police violence disproportionately impacts black and Latino people and communities and that black women and girls, like black men and boys, experience higher rates of police violence.”

Earlier this week, CBS News cropped body camera footage that showed a 13-year-old boy holding a gun before he was fatally shot by Chicago police in March. The video released this month appears to show Toledo holding a weapon moments before he was shot, but CBS News posted a clip to its website and Twitter page that cropped out parts of the footage that showed the teen’s alleged firearm. (read more)

Vaccine-Hesitant Americans Aren’t Ignorant Rubes, They’re Understandably Cautious
 
Tens of millions of Americans aren’t going to get a COVID-19 vaccine, no matter what. Instead of shaming them, we should try to understand why.

Recent polls show about a quarter of American adults either don’t plan to get a COVID-19 vaccine or want to wait on it. The numbers have held steady for months: 27 percent in a recent Quinnipiac poll, 25 percent in an NPR/Marist poll from late March, and 30 percent in a Pew survey from mid-February. After federal health officials called for a pause in the distribution of Johnson and Johnson’s one-shot vaccine last week over fears of severe blood-clotting, the number of vaccine-hesitant Americans could be slightly higher now.

That means tens of millions of American adults won’t be getting a vaccine, at least not right away. Why? For corporate media, the answer is simple: those people are idiots who have either bought into crazy conspiracy theories about the pandemic or are simply too selfish and lazy to do the right thing. [Bill Gates' puppet] Dr. Anthony Fauci, for one, is very frustrated with them.

For outlets like the New York Times, it’s even simpler: “Least Vaccinated U.S. Counties Have Something in Common: Trump Voters,” ran a recent headline in the Times. The article argues that vaccine hesitancy “is highest in counties that are rural and have lower income levels and college graduation rates — the same characteristics found in counties that were more likely to have supported Mr. Trump.”

In other words, it’s all those science-denying MAGA idiots who are wary of getting a COVID-19 vaccine. The Times article notes the vaccine gap persists even in wealthier Trump-supporting areas, so it’s not just poor and uneducated Trump voters who are vaccine-suspicious, they’re all like that. Figures, right?

Not quite. The Trump administration shepherded these vaccines into existence. It was Trump’s own Operation Warp Speed that oversaw the record-breaking development of COVID-19 vaccines. Indeed, Trump himself boasted last fall that every American would be able to get a vaccine by April of this year, a prediction the media mocked at the time but has now come to pass. Devotion to Trump, then, would suggest an enthusiasm for the vaccines he championed, not hesitancy.

The Long-Term Effects of the Vaccines Are Unknown

Could there be some other explanation, then — one that hasn’t yet occurred to reporters at the Times and other corporate media outlets — why so many Americans in rural, Republican-leaning places are reluctant to get the vaccine? Could it be that residents of these places have had a different experience with this pandemic than coastal elites and New York Times reporters?

Perhaps they assessed the risks of getting COVID compared to the risks of an experimental medical treatment whose long-term effects are unknown, and decided that the former is a risk they’re willing to take. Is that unreasonable? Is it crazy?

Of course not. Consider North Dakota, which currently has the highest number of COVID cases per capita in the country. It’s also one of the states with the highest number of estimated vaccine-wary residents. How could this be? Perhaps it has to do with risk assessment. After all, the one-week average number of COVID cases in North Dakota has hovered below 200 since mid-January, and the one-week average number of COVID deaths statewide has vacillated between one and zero since the beginning of February.

Maybe a fair number of North Dakotans have decided that in their sparsely populated state, COVID is not actually a great risk to them and their families, and that they’d rather take their chances with the virus than on a vaccine that by any historical standard amounts to a mass medical experiment.

Consider also that in a relatively young state like North Dakota (the median age is just over 35) vaccine hesitancy might be especially prevalent among young couples hoping to have children, or women who are pregnant, since there is currently almost no data on the safety of the vaccines in pregnant women, according to the Centers for Disease Control.

If you consume corporate media, you’ll hear just the opposite, that the vaccines pose no risk at all to pregnant women or children in utero, and that there’s no risk of infertility associated with the vaccines. But those assertions aren’t based on science or data, because there is no data on this yet.

Pfizer and Moderna didn’t include any pregnant women in their clinical trials, and Pfizer only launched a large-scale clinical trial for pregnant women in late February, after its COVID vaccine had been approved for general use around the world. The company estimates the trial won’t conclude until January 2023, so it might be years before we have data showing what, if any, effects that vaccine has on pregnant women and their children.

The Vaccines Also Pose Moral Questions

Beyond the unknown long-term health effects of the vaccines, there are ethical and moral questions that religiously observant Americans are likely taking into account. In March, the Catholic Archdiocese of New Orleans issued a statement urging Catholics not to get the Johnson and Johnson vaccine, which it called “morally compromised” because of its “extensive use of abortion-derived cell lines.”

All the major COVID-19 vaccines use cells originally derived from aborted children in the 1970s and 80s, but unlike the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, which only used these cell lines to test their vaccines, the Johnson and Johnson vaccine used them in the development and production of their vaccine, as well as the testing.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops quickly followed up with its own statement, saying that if Catholics are able to choose between vaccines, the ones that have the least connection to abortion-derived cells lines should be chosen. “Therefore, if one has the ability to choose a vaccine, Pfizer or Moderna’s vaccines should be chosen over Johnson & Johnson’s.”

Some Catholic leaders have gone further. In December, Bishop Joseph Strickland of Tyler, Texas, said all the vaccines that make use of abortion-derived cell lines are morally objectionable. “The bottom line for me is, does it actually contain the markers, the DNA, of aborted children? If it does, I’m not going to accept it,” said Strickland.

And it’s not just Catholics. Some evangelical Christian leaders have also expressed moral objections to getting a vaccine. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll published last month found that 28 percent of white evangelical Christians say they will definitely not get a vaccine, and another 21 percent said they will wait and see or only get a vaccine if required to.

Religious Americans have a point here. An epidemiologist has no special authority on moral questions like these. As C.S. Lewis said, “Let the doctor tell me I shall die unless I do so-and-so; but whether life is worth having on those terms is no more a question for him than for any other man.”

Shaming And Insulting Vaccine-Hesitant Americans Won’t Persuade

That Kaiser poll had another, less publicized finding: 51 percent of non-health care essential workers say they will definitely not get a vaccine, will only get one if it’s required, or will wait and see. In other words, people who work at grocery stores and gas stations, who have been working throughout the pandemic, are less inclined to get vaccinated than people who have the sort of jobs that allow them to work from home.

You can see a pattern taking shape here. The groups least likely to get a vaccine — rural residents, conservative Christians, the working class, Republican voters — are the very groups corporate media and left-wing elites hate the most.

The concerns of vaccine-hesitant Americans, whether about the safety of the vaccines or the morality of taking them, are utterly alien to our elites. It’s easy, then, for the New York Times to chalk up all such qualms to ignorance and stupidity — much like worries about election integrity, or allowing men to compete in women’s sports, or many other contentious issues. In every case, the answer is the same: those people are idiots.

What our elites don’t seem to grasp is that vilifying the tens of millions of Americans who refuse, on various grounds, to get a vaccine, will not change their minds. Lectures on CNN from a disappointed Dr. Fauci will not give them pause. Insulting them on “Saturday Night Live” will not shame them into compliance.

The reason these things won’t work is that many Americans have decided the ruling class doesn’t really know what they’re talking about. After their many failures, not just during the past year of the pandemic but going back decades, many Americans have heard enough. Call them what you will, but they intend to make up their own minds about the vaccines, when they’re good and ready. (read more)

Digital vaccine passports: How to fight back and win!

Private corporations are working hand in glove with state and local governments to quietly implement digital vaccine passports, forcing Americans to show their papers before they can attend universities, board airlines, or enter libraries, hotels, cruise ships, sports arenas and eventually almost every type of business that deals with the public.

Rutgers University, Boston University and Notre Dame are among the institutions of higher learning that have already announced they will require students to show proof of vaccination against COVID before they can return to school in the fall.

On March 26 the state of New York rolled out its Excelsior Pass system, developed in cooperation with IBM, for certain large-gathering events including sports, theaters, concert halls and other venues.

Health officials in Orange County, California, announced a digital passport that “enables individuals to participate safely and with peace of mind in activities that involve interactions with other people, including travel, attractions, conferences/meetings, concerts, sports, school and more.”

But it’s not just happening in big cities and major population centers in progressive “blue” states.

The town of Kongiganak, Alaska, is demanding that people be fully vaccinated before they can go shopping inside stores. Even the local gym is closed to anyone who is not fully vaccinated, reported Alaska Public Media (APM).

Harvey Paul, general manager of a local store, told APM his store is only allowing four people in at a time. Paul said his employees verify a customer is good to enter by checking their name against a list of vaccinated individuals that is updated every three days or so.

The U.K. is set to roll out its vaccine passport next week, joining Israel as the first two nations in the free world to require their citizens to “show your papers” to perform basic functions like buy food, enter a pub, a library, a sports arena or theater.

The question is, can the momentum toward vaccine passports be stopped in America?

The answer is yes but it will take courage to confidently stand up and say “no.”

A Georgia man who works at a major corporation in the Atlanta area told me he is taking no chances. When he started hearing rumblings that his employer might require the vaccine, he decided to take a preemptive approach, putting the company on notice that if it should ever require a vaccine as a condition of his employment, he won’t comply.

“I told my boss, you will have to fire me and then you will need to lawyer up because I will sue the company.”

The mainstream media, as evident in this article by NBC News, is already trying to plant seeds of doubt in the minds of Americans, indicating that they will be powerless to reject the vaccines should they be required by an employer or other private company they do business with. As a vaccine rejector, they want you to feel helpless and alone, as though you are the only one in the world who refuses to comply.

What the media won’t report is that people are fighting, and winning, against the un-American vaccine Nazis.

Mat Staver, chairman and founder of the Orlando, Fla.-based Liberty Counsel, a public interest law firm specializing in constitutional issues that affect faith, freedom and the family, has already scored some early victories for his clients.

“Digital health or vaccine passports along with tracking and tracing apps present a serious threat to freedom,” Staver said. “Vaccine passports and tracking apps are about collecting data and control. COVID is being used to advance this dangerous threat to freedom. We must never accept vaccine passports or tracking apps as the new normal.”

Staver told me that people must recognize that, contrary to what they will read in the media, digital health passports and tracking apps were unprecedented in the free world until Israel became the first nation to implement them. He believes they represent a serious threat to all manner of previously taken-for-granted rights and freedoms. As such, they should be treated as a back-door assault on Western values, including your freedom of movement, your civil rights to have equal access to public accommodations, and your own bodily autonomy.

“This is becoming a bigger issue every day,” said Staver in a recent phone interview. “This involves access to basic functions of society and your rights to move about in society.”

On March 16, the dean of the Louisiana State University School of Dentistry sent out a directive that COVID vaccines would be mandatory for all returning students, teachers and staff. Non-compliance would result in the student’s inability to complete coursework requirements and graduate. A group of students, desperate for help, reached out to Staver’s organization.

“We sent a demand letter and they reversed their decision,” he said.

Liberty Counsel’s letter dated March 19 to Dean Robert Laughlin stated the mandate was a “violation of fundamental individual, economic and religious liberties. These include the rights of personal autonomy and bodily integrity, and the right to accept or reject the various COVID vaccines based on religious belief.”

The Glenview, Illinois, Board of Education tried the same heavy-handed tactic, sending a memo to all staff and employees stating they must get the COVID injection by April 30 “as a condition of continued employment.”

Like LSU, the school district reversed course within days of receiving a demand letter from Liberty Counsel on behalf of several school employees. Staver said the school district was violating not only federal law requiring informed consent of any unapproved medical treatment, but also state law, which guarantees people the option of rejecting any vaccine if it violates their religious conscience. A total of 45 states have similar religious-exemption laws on the books. He said all states allow for medical opt-outs so anyone who has had a previous stroke, blood clot, auto-immune condition or suffered from seizures could get a medical exemption because these are known side effects of the vaccines.

Then there’s the issue of fertility and pregnant and nursing mothers.

“We are also working with another student, a nursing student in Virginia,” Staver said. “She is pregnant and a student at a community college, and she refuses to get the vaccine because of what she’s read about the potential for these vaccines to cause miscarriages. She’s already in her clinicals and now can’t finish her degree in nursing due to this new policy.”

Staver said many young people are also worried about the potential for sterilization.

“There is a body of research that have raised serious concerns because COVID itself has been known to cause some concern about miscarriage [and lowering of sperm count in men] and the problem with the injection is it doesn’t go away like the disease itself. It stays there in your body forever.”

Staver said federal HIPAA and ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] issues related to privacy are being trampled upon by corporations practicing vaccine blackmail, whether targeting their employees or customers.

“Your employer doesn’t have a right to invade your medical privacy under the EEOC Title 7 employment law, and also OSHA came out and said there’s no evidence the vaccine prohibits transmission of the virus. You also have rights that could be applicable under the Public Accommodations section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

The other issue is the Emergency Use Authorization law, or EAU status, under which the vaccines were released to market.

“These vaccines have never been licensed by the Food and Drug Administration [FDA], they only have EUA, so federal law requires for all EUA treatments that you need full informed consent to administer them to anybody, you cannot coerce anyone to have the drug or shot,” Staver said. “They are only authorized because of a declared emergency. And there’s a lack of data to know the effects of these injections beyond a couple of months. So any of these companies or employers trying to force people as a condition to enter their facilities are violating federal law. They likely are violating state laws in many cases as well.”

John Whitehead, another constitutional attorney and founder of the Charlottesville, Va.-based Rutherford Institute, said he has been representing clients on vaccine-related issues as well.

“To force someone to take a vaccine against their religious beliefs would in my opinion violate the Constitution.

People fighting forced or coerced vaccines based on religious conviction should have a good case to fight in the courts, Whitehead said.

“Also, people should be pre-screened for COVID infections before they’re given this, because if they have the infection in their body, it causes certain genes to activate the immune system in a powerful way [which can cause seriously harmful health conditions up to and including death],” Whitehead said.

He also sees a red flag in last week’s announcement by Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla saying people will need a third vaccine dose.

“So, if they say you need a third dose, when they initially said there were only going to be two, then they are caught not giving people accurate information. We’re defending a couple of defendants canceled from Instagram, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Children’s Health Defense Fund, and the only way to have a free society is to fulfill society’s need to hear all points of view, otherwise you’re not a free people if only one viewpoint is allowed. Everybody needs to hear both sides before they can make an informed decision, so before they declare this is required they need to establish a commission made up of people with different viewpoints and air out all of the arguments.

“The pharmaceutical industry is very powerful,” Whitehead continued. “They donate to political candidates. And they get this big vaccine contract. The point is, with all we’re seeing in America, basically they’re taking free will away from the American people. Mainstream media is pouring this stuff out as if it’s all facts. But now we have them on record saying one month you will need two doses and the next month it’s three. What’s the deal?”

Here’s the deal:

They went from no masks required because they don’t work [Fauci in February 2020], to masks being essential, then two masks are better than one.

They went from two vaccine doses to three to “possibly one every year.”

They went from keep the borders open to closing the borders to opening them back up.

They went from “asymptomatic people are super spreaders” to asymptomatics rarely spread the virus.

They went from sanitize everything that comes into your house, to the virus “only lives on hard surfaces for a short time.”

What is the truth? If your only source of information is the government and the mainstream media, you would be thoroughly confused. Social media has also shut down alternative viewpoints on COVID and the vaccines.

Challenging the vaccine passports on the basis that the vaccines are experimental is another legal option.

“That’s a tough one, because you have a society that is only given one point of view,” Whitehead said. “But are these vaccines experimental? Yes I think you could argue that in a courtroom.”

And that’s where the Nuremberg Codes of 1947 come into play. Would this international law established in the wake of World War II and the Nazi medical experiments be recognized in U.S. courts?

“It’s a possibility if you can actually get a judge to say it’s an experimental drug,” Whitehead said. “And it’s going to be difficult. Because the government is going to line up every doctor they can find who will say it’s a good and safe product,” Whitehead said.

The flip side is that you can find just as many scientists who would disagree with the government’s scientists.

Conduct a simple Google search and you will only find one side of the argument represented. You will not find the dark side of the vaccines or the word “experimental” anywhere linked to the COVID injections. 

Whitehead said lobbyists are embedded everywhere in Washington, D.C.  Many FDA officials were former executives in the pharmaceutical industry with conflicts of interest.

“And the pharmaceutical industry has converged with the mainstream media to manipulate public opinion,” he said. “Because they have a different view. Free speech is hanging at the gallows right now.

“Unless we the people get our acts together.”

Staver says the idea of saddling Americans with health passports of any kind is bigger than just COVID or even vaccines.

Once such a system is in place, more personal data will inevitably be added to the app on your phone, or the chip that eventually gets placed under your skin.

Today it is COVID. Tomorrow, other add-ons come with a simple click. A Chinese-lookalike system of “social scoring” is being implemented against some businesses in America. It is called the “ESG Score” or “ESG Rating,” which is a number or letter grade given to a company based on how a certain perspective views their environmental, social and governmental impact.

Former Democrat presidential candidate Michael Bloomberg’s “Bloomberg ESG Data Services” already has profiles on more than 11,000 businesses!

China already uses a social score for every person. It tracks everything from how many steps you take each day to what you buy, who you hang out with and if you go to church. The algorithm decides what car you may buy, what apartment you may live in and what travel tickets you may purchase. It even has a special ringtone when someone calls a person on the government’s blacklist so their friends can pressure that person to take whatever action the communist government wants.

Right now, nine states totally controlled by Republicans have not introduced a single bill in their state legislatures to ban vaccine passports, nor have the governors of those states issued executive orders banning vaccine passports.

These states include Colorado, Georgia, Indiana, Mississippi, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah and West Virginia.

Truth be told, this was never about your health. It was always about gaining control over human populations and launching the Great Reset. But they can never control you unless you submit.

In her article, “The End of America?,” author Naomi Wolf writes “The new biofascism in the West, very much driven by Big Tech leaders, and soon to be exploited by our enemies geopolitically, is a war against free human beings and against the qualities that make us human. But this time we do not just face a war on freedom. This time we face a war on human beings, and on all that makes us human.” (read more)

There’s No Way Americans Can Trust The Jury’s Chauvin Verdict
 
A fair trial might have come to the same conclusion. But we'll never know, and never be able to trust this outcome, because America's left purposefully made a fair trial impossible.

A Minnesota jury has found former police officer Derek Chauvin guilty of second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and second-degree manslaughter. This means they claim to have concluded that they unanimously believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Chauvin caused Floyd’s death.

Given the circumstances of the trial, however, it’s extremely hard to believe the jury was solely concerned with either truth or justice. It’s extremely hard, if not impossible, for any thinking person not to have a reasonable doubt about the outcome.

We know the judge in the case refused to sequester jurors from media coverage and outside influences during the trial, and that the pressure conveyed to them was beyond intense. It was made perfectly clear to them that the nation would be engulfed in flames if they expressed they did in fact have a reasonable doubt over whether Floyd’s death was Chauvin’s fault.

The entire bloody year of 2020, in which unprecedented and murderous riots swept the nation, was premised on the incident that led to this trial. At least 30 people died amid waves of [orchestrated and coordinated] riots that widely used Floyd’s death as the pretext. The Floyd riots have caused the most high-dollar damage in U.S. history, an estimated $2 billion.

The rioters’ violence against police, and elected officials’ willful endorsement of the rioters and failure to back law and order in response, helped cause a historic surge in homicides. As measured across 34 sampled cities, homicides surged 30 percent in 2020, causing an additional 1,200 dead. That’s just in 34 cities.

So, thanks to the anti-police unrest employed in the wake of Floyd’s death, thousands more people are now dead, and a disproportionate number of them are black. The riots’ unchecked anti-police violence metastasized in deadly crime. Anyone who lives in or near a city like these jurors do, especially those in the Twin Cities epicenter, is fully aware of this.

That was all before the verdict. During the Chauvin trial itself, “hundreds” of rioters smashed buildings and assaulted police nearby in the aftermath of another officer-involved shooting. Minneapolis police put up razor wire around their offices in preparation for the verdict announcement. So did police and cities across the nation.




National Guard troops were deployed in Minnesota and D.C. in anticipation of the verdict announcement.

The jurors knew that the media covering the trial and looking at their faces every day for three weeks knows who they are. An in-state newspaper even signaled to the jurors its willingness to expose them to the violent mobs roving Minnesota over the last year by publishing descriptions of the jurors in advance of the verdict. Those descriptions published in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune contained age, race, location, profession, even immigration history.

You think jurors would have been willing to have themselves and their families go into witness protection to venture a reasonable doubt about Chauvin’s potential contribution to Floyd’s death? You think they’d be willing to trade their lives plus nationwide violence for one stranger’s? If you think that, you know nothing about human nature.

Officials from the local mayor all the way up to the [illegitimate] president of the United States made it clear in widely reported news the jurors and all their family, friends, and neighbors could read and would have to live with for the rest of their lives that the only verdict they would accept was “guilty.” Democrat politicians openly called for violence if the jury did not decide as street thugs wished, and the Democrat Party — which controls all levels of the national government at present, as well as controlling the state in which these jurors live — backed them up.

“I’m very worried,” Rep. Karen Bass said on CNN’s “State of the Union” about the likelihood of violence across the nation should the jury vote “the wrong way.” “I don’t think anyone in Minneapolis, frankly, anyone in the United States or over a good part of the world would understand any other verdict other than guilty.”

News that jurors, and their families they went home to at night, could read during the trial also told of a severed pig’s head left at the former house of a witness who testified on behalf of Chauvin. The witness’s former house — half a country away from the trial, in northern California — was also doused in blood. And his former employer, a local police department, disavowed him over his testimony.

Everyone, including these jurors, knew exactly what would happen to them at the hands of mobs like this if they expressed a reasonable doubt about whether a man who died while overdosing and with a serious heart condition was actually killed by a police officer kneeling on him after he had struggled with police repeatedly. Reasonable doubts about whether the jury’s decision was justice or politics seem fully justified.

The city government building where jurors heard the case was fortified like a military installation in an occupied country. Every day, they walked into this.



*



You can’t tell me all of this didn’t affect jurors’ psyche and ultimate decision. They would be superhuman or inhuman if it didn’t. Yet those endorsing mob culture and vigilante “justice” for political ends are working hard to make it impossible to express such reasonable doubts, whether in a column or as a member of a murder jury.

Jurors are always human. There is always room for miscalculation, fear, and error. In this case, however, it is extremely clear that these human weaknesses were deliberately amplified to catastrophic proportions, all because of politics.

A fair trial might indeed have come to the same conclusion for Chauvin. But we’ll never know, and never be able to trust this outcome, because America’s left purposefully made a fair trial impossible, all for political power.

They deliberately perverted justice in favor of violent mob rule to strengthen their political hand. They have done evil and called it justice. They have sown the wind, and the resulting whirlwind has still not fully hit our nation yet. But it will. (read more)

"I have spent all my life under a Communist regime and I will tell you that a society without any objective legal scale is a terrible one indeed. But a society with no other scale than the legal one is not quite worthy of man either."

— Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

The Unfinished Business of Creating a More Just Society

Dear Members of the Harvard Community,

Recent weeks have brought yet more devastating tragedies across our nation. The heartbreaking killings of Adam Toledo and Daunte Wright, two young people who had so much of their lives yet to live, and the gut-wrenching testimony recounting George Floyd’s final minutes, have focused this country again on the killings of African Americans and other people of color by police. The list of those whose names we know is long, and a full list would include many others whose names we do not know, and whose deaths did not occur in broad daylight, in full view of multiple witnesses, or with cell phone or body cameras recording.

No words can capture the hurt, fear, anger, and grief felt about these tragedies by so many in our community, across this country, and around the world. It is appalling and unjust that people in our nation, by virtue of the color of their skin, face a greater risk of being killed in a police encounter if they are driving with an expired tag or a burnt-out taillight, if they make a rolling stop, if they somehow arouse a store clerk’s suspicion, or if they are just coming home from a family dinner.

The terrible impact of these tragedies goes far beyond the lives lost, children deprived of their parents and parents deprived of their children. In a system in which police have vast discretion to stop people on suspicion of minor offenses, so many people of color in this country live with an ever-present sense of vulnerability because of the possibility that a police encounter will result in tragedy.

Harvard’s motto, Veritas, requires a commitment to truth. The truth is that racism runs through the history of the United States and continues to have deadly effects on people of color in this country today. The truth is that our society is far from eradicating the evil of racism, whatever the verdict in the latest trial.

We, as a community, must stand against racism. We must commit ourselves to the unfinished work of building a just society—one in which everyone’s rights and safety are protected, and everyone’s dignity is honored.

Sincerely,

Lawrence S. Bacow
President, Harvard University

Tomiko Brown-Nagin
Dean, Radcliffe Institute for Advanced Study

Nancy Coleman
Dean, Harvard Division of Continuing Education

George Q. Daley
Dean, Harvard Medical School

Srikant Datar
Dean, Harvard Business School

Emma Dench
Dean, Graduate School of Arts and Sciences

Francis J. Doyle III
Dean, Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences

Douglas Elmendorf
Dean, Harvard Kennedy School of Government

Alan M. Garber
Provost, Harvard University

Claudine Gay
Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences

William V. Giannobile
Dean, Harvard School of Dental Medicine

David N. Hempton
Dean, Harvard Divinity School

David F. Holland
Acting Dean, Harvard Divinity School

Rakesh Khurana
Dean, Harvard College

Katie Lapp
Executive Vice President, Harvard University

Bridget Terry Long
Dean, Harvard Graduate School of Education

John F. Manning
Dean, Harvard Law School

Sarah M. Whiting
Dean, Graduate School of Design

Michelle A. Williams
Dean, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health

(read more)

Remember the Khmer Rouge? They were the "red" Khmer, the commies, led by a homicidal homunculus known as Pol Pot. They killed off a substantial slice of Cambodia and starved the rest in re-education camps and the countryside. They created the killing fields.

The Khmer Vert, the "green Khmer" is my latest name for the commies using CO2 as an excuse to kill off many of us and starve the remainder.

They are now wailing that the atmospheric concentration of CO2 has reached 420 parts per million (PPM).

The illegitimate Biden regime held a virtual climate summit today to plan how to freeze us in the winter, broil us in summers, limit our mobility with useless electric vehicles, significantly increase the price of gasoline and diesel, and thereby raise the price of everything we buy in stores.

Lets do a simple math demonstration to explain their "science" of societal destruction:

1,000,000 PPM = 100%
   100,000 PPM =   10%
     10,000 PPM =     1%

Are you still with me? This isn't even algebra.

Now, it starts to get interesting:

      1,000 PPM =   0.1% or 1/10 of one percent
         420 PPM =   0.042% or 1/25 of one percent
         100 PPM =   0.01 0r 1/100 of one percent

So, the Khmer Vert claim that CO2, at an alleged 420 parts per million (PPM), is going to affect our climate? What have they been smoking? What possible greenhouse effect could be perpetrated by a gas at so minuscule a concentration? The only "Greenhouse Effect" I could believe in would be the little if any effect the leftist journalistic slant of Linda Greenhouse, a former writer for the lying New York Times, had on her readers. 

Humans are not the only emitters of CO2, the gas of life. Volcanoes release prodigious amounts of CO2. Among human organizations, the U.S. Department of Defense is the largest single emitter of CO2 on Earth. The Pampered Princes of the 5-sided wind tunnel emit much more than hot air. Their vehicles, aircraft and ships go through "fossil fuels" like there is no tomorrow. Will there be any limitations on their profligacy? Don't count on it. Remember that war is the health of the state.

CO2 is the gas of life because it is used by plants to make O2 (oxygen) and sugars. The food chain depends on the products of photosynthesis. Except for the very few creatures that get their energy from sulfur (for example) all other animals are dependent on the carbohydrate products of photosynthesis.

The atmosphere of the primordial earth had no oxygen. Photosynthesis, first by cyanobacteria (blue-green algae), then by ever more complex plants, made ALL the oxygen we breathe. ALL OF IT.

Photosynthesis cannot occur below 180 PPM. This planet has had up to 7,000 PPM of CO2. That however, did not cause runaway heating. That was at the tail end of a prolonged Ice Age, the Cryogenian.

As I wrote in my recent mini Philippic, the "science" of global warming belongs in the same category as: phlogiston, spontaneous generation and an Aristotelian universe. At one time, scientists believed those things. They were fictions. We now laugh at them. Years from now, scientists will laugh and joke about the rubes who believed in anthropogenic global warming and "Climate Change."

13-year-old Nyaira Givens was stabbed to death by another 13-year-old black girl in Cincinnati

CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION SECTION
MEDIA RELEASE
April 20, 2021

On April 19, 2021, at approximately 9:08 PM, District Five officers were dispatched to 14 Topridge Place for a report of a person stabbed. Upon arrival, officers located a female victim suffering from a stab wound. Fire personnel responded and transported the victim to Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. The victim succumbed to her injuries at the hospital. The victim has been identified as Nyaira Givens, a female 13 years of age.

On April 20, 2021, the Cincinnati Police Department’s Homicide Unit, with the assistance of District 5 patrol officers, charged Janiah Pate, a female 13 years of age, with causing the death of Ms. Givens.

The investigation by the Cincinnati Police Department’s Homicide Unit is ongoing. Anyone with information about this homicide is asked to call the Homicide Unit at (513) 352-3542.

15-year-old Trevon Dickson shot to death in a gun battle with 15-year-old Nasir Ndiaye in Columbus

Incident Summary:

On Tuesday, April 20, 2021, at 3:52PM, Columbus Police Officers were called to the 3200 hundred block of Marion Pl. on a report of a shooting. On arrival, officers found 15-year-old Trevon Dickson suffering from an apparent gunshot wound. CFD Medic 21 transported Dickson to Mount Carmel East Hospital in critical condition, where he was pronounced deceased at 4:31PM.

Meanwhile, 15-year-old Nasir Ndiaye was transported from the scene to Children’s Hospital by private vehicle where he was treated for a gunshot wound. After taking Ndiaye to the hospital, the person(s) who transported Ndiaye fled from the hospital in the transporting vehicle.

The investigation revealed that Ndiaye shot Dickson, for unknown reasons, fatally wounding Dickson. Dickson was able to return fire, wounding Ndiaye, before collapsing. Detectives have charged Ndiaye with Murder for causing Dickson’s death.

Anyone with information regarding this incident, is asked to call Columbus Police Homicide Unit at (614) 645-4730 or Central Ohio Crime Stoppers at (614) 461-TIPS (8477). This is the 62nd homicide in Columbus Ohio in Calendar Year 2021. Incident #210272274. Detective Huffman is the lead detective on the case and is being assisted by Detective Egelhoff

Police shoot knife-wielding black 16-year-old girl, Ma’Khia Bryant, in Columbus, before she could stab another teen girl

Columbus Police show body cam footage of officer shooting, killing teen girl

Deliberations?

Shoot, contrary to what many posts claimed about the shallow mental abilities of the jurors, actually those folks must be geniuses.

So acute were their listening skills that, in a four-hour sprint, they were able to comprehend and digest, and without preconceived notions about Chauvin’s guilt, deliver verdicts; they were able to master every particular matter related to them by dozens of witnesses, some of the witnesses experts in law, experts in medical science, experts in policing, experts in physics.

And those jurors’ reading skills, mastering dozens (hundreds) of pages of transcribed testimony. Four damn hours. Who here can compare favorably? I cannot.

Poor, slow, dimwitted me who, after an intense 2.5 weeks here, trying to follow the reasoning fairly closely, trying to absorb what was offered in the unfolding of the trial, still can’t comprehend everything the jurors were able to assess and judge in four hours, even after having read and reread many posts and the cogent opinions of Mr Branca and Professor Jacobson.

Poor, slow dimwitted me. 2.5 weeks of frustrated thinking.

Four hours? Those jurors are motherfucking geniuses.

thetaqjr | April 21, 2021 at 9:45 am

Ben Shapiro is certain the jury gave no consideration to the evidence. Not at all.

Nowadays, no one with critical thinking skills or above-average intelligence can get on a jury. Both sides are afraid of a juror who can think for himself. They don't even want a juror who can walk and chew gum at the same time. A "jury of your peers?"  Don't be naïve, unless your peers wore dunce caps in school and graduated with a C average or less.

Years ago, Vin Suprynowicz, then writing for the Las Vegas Review Journal, stated that voir dire is French for "jury tampering." Ain't that the truth.

"Alright, we’re going to leave it there as Joe Biden seeks to exploit this moment. This is an opinion show and I’m allowed to give my opinion. He’s exploitative and he’s been that way since the very beginning. And George Floyd continued to be painted as a saint. He was a man with many, many flaws. The verdict has been rendered..."

— Greg Kelly, 20 April 2021, on Greg Kelly Reports

”I don’t want this moment to be framed as this system working… This is not justice. It’s not justice. And I’ll explain to you why this is not justice. It’s not justice because justice is George Floyd going home tonight to be with his family. Justice is Adam Toledo getting tucked in tonight by his mother. Justice is when you’re pulled over, there not being a gun in the interaction because you have a headlight out.”

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

"Thank you George Floyd for sacrificing your life for justice!”

— Nasty Pelosi, yesterday, at the Congressional Black Caucus press conference

Cry, not only for the injustice of an innocent man convicted by a panel of weak jurors, terrified of rendering an honest verdict. Cry also for the thousands of honorable men and women who serve us and keep us safe, the men and women who proudly wear a police uniform and accept the challenges and dangers of policing, especially in urban combat zones.

Their work has become even more difficult.

The city council of Minneapolis placed their collective thumb on the scales of justice by awarding the family of a career criminal and drug addict, with a treble fatal concentration of fentanyl, $27 million dollars just before the trial. A fair-minded city council would have delayed that vote until after Officer Chauvin's trial. The near constant stream of threats and intimidation from irresponsible, race-baiting politicians as well as the Only Black Lives Matter partisans no doubt swayed the weak jurors. Mad Maxine Waters contributed to this gross injustice. In a real sense, Ms. Waters suborned the jurors by reminding them that only a guilty verdict would be accepted by the mob..

Cry also for the poor, the minorities and the newest immigrants who live in those urban combat zones. Their lives have become more difficult and dangerous. The young black males who commit a disproportionate share of crime in America are now emboldened. They will expect and demand less policing or no policing in their neighborhoods. They will take over, becoming unchecked warlords preying on their communities.

Will police dare interact with those warlords and gangsters? Will police be able to keep the peace knowing their superiors and local politicians and the media neither support them nor respect them?

European cities have "no go" zones filled with recent Muslim invaders where police dare not go. Those "no go" zones resemble the third world hell-holes those immigrants fled.

No one needs a crystal ball to see "no go" zones developing in our large cities mismanaged by Democrats for decades.

Many of us have the means to avoid those future "no go" zones.

The poor, the minorities and the newest immigrants lack those means.
 
Cry, my beloved country.

JURY IN CHAUVIN TRIAL WAS NOT PAYING ATTENTION

Count 1. 2nd degree felony murder: GUILTY

Count 2. 3rd degree murder: GUILTY

Count 3. 2nd degree manslaughter: GUILTY

OR, THE MEMBERS OF THE JURY FEARED FOR THEIR LIVES AND THEIR PROPERTY.

IT'S NOT OVER. I PRAY JUSTICE ULTIMATELY PREVAILS.

The state has filed Blakely motion for aggravated sentencing, above and beyond guidelines, arguments for that will be heard over next couple of weeks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhJbubcqSnE

or

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhW_7w_7iZc

BREAKING: A Verdict in the Chauvin Trial is Imminent

The jury in the trial of former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin trial has reached a verdict. It will be read Tuesday afternoon from the Hennepin County Courthouse between 4:30 and 5:00 pm ET. According to reports, there were no questions from the jury.

Prosecutors and the defense finished closing arguments on Monday afternoon. Jurors stayed late after closing arguments, ending at 8 p.m. and started the day early at 8 a.m. The trial lasted 14-days. Jurors were instructed not to "turn on the news," but were not sequestered.

Chauvin faces one charge of second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter after George Floyd died while he was subduing him on the ground on May. If convicted, he faces up to 40 years in prison.

Chauvin's attorneys asked for a mistrial after Democrat Congresswoman Maxine Waters urged violent rioters to get "more confrontational" should the jury reach a verdict other than "guilty." While the judge denied the request, he did say her remarks could grant them a solid argument on appeal and make the entire first trial "being overturned." (read more)

Sen. Rick Scott: Dear Woke Corporate America, beware of the backlash that's coming

It turns out that power does corrupt, and you have become corrupt

Dear Woke Corporate America,

I hope you are all having fun with your virtue signaling. I hope you are enjoying trying to one-up each other and showing how woke you can be, all the while believing that you are more sophisticated and morally superior to the hard-working people of this country.

You must have loved the accolades from your elitist, left-wing peers when you took the MLB All-Star Game from Georgia. What a fun day for you on Twitter. Congratulations. 

Never mind that you have destroyed working people’s jobs and hurt people who haven’t worked since COVID-19 took a member of their family or destroyed their small business.  

You get texts from your elitist friends praising you for your courageous stand when you support "mostly peaceful" movements that loot small businesses, set fire to government buildings, and take the lives of innocent people. 

You think that makes you morally superior to the people in what you call "flyover country."

But you are lying. You are lying to Americans, lying to each other, and lying to yourselves. You know that everything you have said about the election reforms in Georgia being racist is a lie.  

You know that the Georgia law actually expands early voting and does nothing to suppress or curtail the voting rights of anyone. And yes, the Georgia law requires an ID to vote. Well, so does Delta Airlines, and so does Major League Baseball in order to pick up tickets.

It’s not that you have twisted the truth; you have rejected the truth. Worse, you do not care what is true.

You give the woke mob concession after concession, hoping to buy time to rake in more cash under your watch. You feed the rabble leftist mob that is shouting that America is racist, hoping they won’t come for you.

Amazingly, the woke, liberal corporate news media is just as dishonest as you. They support your lies. And the President of the United States, Joe Biden, shows you the way. He demonstrates how to lie in public and get away with it. 

Let me give you woke corporate leaders a heads-up: Everybody can see the game you are playing. Everybody can see your lies. You are the naked emperor.

You are, in fact, morally inferior to the working men and women of this great country, who are not racist people, and who, unlike you, care about truth.

And here is another bit of news for you: There is a massive backlash coming. You will rue the day when it hits you. That day is November 8, 2022. That is the day Republicans will take back the Senate and the House. It will be a day of reckoning.

Your latest attempts to hurt Georgia’s economy will help us do something that is long overdue – make corporate welfare a thing of the past. There will be no number of well-connected lobbyists you can hire to save you. There will be no amount of donations you can make that will save you. There will be nowhere for you to hide.  

It turns out that power does corrupt, and you have become corrupt. American taxpayers will soon stop tolerating your lies, your attempts to denigrate them, and your attempts to control the way they think, act, talk.

A good and great people are going to rise up and stand up for the truth. They are going to stand up for their principles. They are going to stand up for their country.

So, cancel as many people as you can right now. Make as much money off of slave labor in Communist China as you can now. Keep telling your customers how racist and sexist and unsophisticated they are.  

The backlash is coming. 

Republican Rick Scott represents Florida in the United States Senate
(read more)

"Unfortunately and what is interesting is from the get-go it has been nothing but certifying election integrity.  But the fact that we have been pushed back.  They have sued us.  They are threatening to sue us again.  Maricopa County supervisors have done everything in their power to prevent us from doing this and now I’m beginning to wonder why would they not want to prove that their election system works, that it’s perfect.  I don’t understand why we are getting threatened, sued and threatened, when all we want to do is election integrity here.”

— Karen Fann, President of the Arizona Senate

Are the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors hiding something?

“I’m aware of the media reports. I’m aware that Congresswoman Waters was talking specifically about this trial, and about the unacceptability of anything less than a murder conviction, talked about being confrontational, but you can submit the press articles about that. This goes back to what I’ve been saying from the beginning. I wish elected officials would stop talking about this case, especially in a manner that is disrespectful to the rule of law and to the judicial branch and our function.”

“I think if they want to give their opinions, they should do so in a respectful, and in a manner that is respectful to the Constitution, to respect the co-equal branch of government. Their failure to do so I think is abhorrent, but I don’t think it has prejudiced this, with additional material that would prejudice this jury.”

- Judge Peter Cahill

If you are in the control group for the experimental gene therapy mRNA shots currently available under an emergency use authorization, the image below might be useful. That group includes those of you who have chosen NOT to be guinea pigs and are valiantly serving as a scientific control group to help the world assess the results of this huge experiment on humanity. Valid medical studies published in peer-reviewed publications always have a control group.



(use with care in certain totalitarian jurisdictions - printer-friendly PDF here)

Thank you for your service in following the science and volunteering to be in the control group. Scientific progress will be made when we compare the results for the control group with the results for those taking the jab. Live long and prosper!

“Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome.”

— Charlie Munger of Berkshire Hathaway

Chauvin Trial VERDICT WATCH

As the jury deliberates, we will update this post with any courtroom developments

This is a “group” post in which primarily Andrew Branca and Prof. Jacobson will post updates as we await a verdict, but other authors may jump in depending who is available when news breaks, including if the jury has questions or there are other court proceedings

[NO POSTS YET, JUST READER COMMENTS]

(read more)

Chauvin Trial Judge: Rep. Maxine Waters’ threats may result in “this whole trial being overturned” on appeal

Judge denied defense motion for mistrial after Waters’ threatened “more confrontational” protests if no murder conviction, but lashed out as her and said her comments “may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned.”

For years Democrat Rep. Maxine Waters has gotten away with stoking political violence, without ever behing held to account by the media or her own party. This time her sleazy incitement may have real world consequences.

Just yesterday Waters threatened Protesters Need to “Get More Confrontational” If No “Murder” Conviction Of Derek Chauvin:





Today the defense in the Chauvin trial moved for a mistrial based on Water’s comments. The judge denied the mistrial motion, but noted it may be an issue on appeal and could lead to any conviction being overturned.

The Post Millenial reports:


The obvious reason for the Judge to deny a mistrial is that if there is a not guilty verdict on all counts, then the issue of Waters’ threats goes away. Andrew Branca will have his full write up later tonight, but I think the defense counsel Eric Nelson was phenomenal in closing, he picked apart the timeline of the 9-minute video. He was so good that the prosecution rebuttal was mostly personal attacks on him, which led to another motion for mistrial that was denied.

Here’s the full video court segment:

(video)

(read more)

Chicago Prosecutor Suspended For Stating [Accurately] Adam Toledo Was Armed Before The Shooting

Chicago prosecutor, James Murphy, has been placed on leave Saturday after he noted in court hearing this month that Adam Toledo, 13, had a gun in his possession. The statement was made at the bond hearing for Ruben Roman, 21, who was with Toledo on the night that he died.  The action was taken despite the position of the Chicago police that Toledo was armed until a fraction of a second before the shooting — a view also echoed by local media after reviewing the videotape. However, various politicians like Andrew Yang have insisted that this was the shooting of “an unarmed child” by police. The error may prove be the use of the word “has” in a court statement. The question is whether this type of action was warranted for a prosecutor who was trying to keep a dangerous individual in jail.

The shooting occurred in a stronghold of the Latin Kings, a notoriously violent gang in Chicago. Many of us who grew up in Chicago are familiar with the Latin Kings, which is a huge criminal organization that often uses children to hold guns since they are subject to lower possible criminal penalties. Roman is facing felony charges of reckless discharge of a firearm and unlawful use of a weapon by a felon as well as child endangerment and violating probation,

This incident occurred around 3 a.m., when two Chicago police officers confronted the 13-year-old and Roman while investigating gunshots in Little Village. According to prosecutors, Roman had fired a gun at a passing car. Roman has been rumored to be a member of the Latin Kings. The Chicago Police Union president also alleged that Toledo was a known member of the Latin Kings.

It appears that Murphy was opposing the bond for Roman who was accused of shooting at a passing car and alleged to be a member of a violent gang. He noted that Toledo had a gun. As local media has noted, that is supported by the videotape which shows what appears to be a gun in his hand less than two seconds before the shots are fired.  A gun was found near Toledo and police say that he tossed the gun just as he was turning toward police.

The line in dispute in the proffer may be this: “The officer tells [Toledo] to drop it as [Toledo] turns towards the officer.  [Toledo] has a gun in his right hand.” One could reasonably object that the line seems to say that Toledo had the gun in his hand at the time of the shooting. Murphy would likely say that the preceding line makes clear that it is a reference to having a gun “as [Toledo] turns towards the officer.”  According to police, he “has” a gun in his hand a fraction of a second before turning toward the officer. The question is whether such a difference warrants a public correction rather than a public suspension.

Cook County State’s Attorney Kimberly M. Foxx’s office  announced that Murphy was suspended with pay because he did not “fully inform himself” before testifying. [Notorious race-pandering] Foxx had a long and controversial record in the city, particularly in her role in the Jussie Smollett [hate hoax] scandal.

Toledo is clearly not armed at the time he is shot.  He appears to have tossed the weapon within a couple seconds of the shooting by Chicago Police Officer Eric Stillman. That raises the question of whether the officer was still justified in using lethal force. However, that would not mean that Toledo was unarmed in the encounter.

Murphy noted that surveillance video showed Roman shooting at the passing car with Toledo next to him.  He said that Roman and Toledo then ducked into an alley, where officers located them.  Despite presuming Roman to be armed, Stillman tackled Roman to the ground. As another officer puts Roman into custody, Stillman then went after Toledo. Murphy reportedly noted that the gloves worn by Roman tested positive for gunshot residue and seven shell casings recovered by officers matched the handgun Roman is previously seen using. He then reportedly added that the gun appears to be the same that Toledo was carrying.

The office may also have objected to that last part if there has been no confirmation that it was the same gun or even fingerprint evidence tying Toledo to the gun found near him.  The picture of the gun in the hand of Toledo does appear to be similar to the one found near him after the shooting. Notably, this should be an issue that is already largely resolved by the police. Here are the images:

I do not know why the District Attorney would not confirm whether the gun is the same as the one used in the shooting and whether there are any fingerprints on the weapon.

I can understand the need for Foxx to keep her prosecutors from making inaccurate or unsupported statements in a case that has caused rioting in the Chicago. However, I am uneasy about the actions taken against an attorney for a statement that could have been clarified in both court and in public. I am also concerned with the lack of specifically on the error and the failure to confirm the basic facts on the gun forensics. (read more and see images)

What Is The Difference Between The Wright And Babbitt Shootings?

Below is my column in USA Today on charging decisions in the Wright and Babbitt shootings. The sharp contrast in the two decisions raises serious questions over the legal and political issues that rage around such cases.

Here is the column:

Within an hour of each other, charging decisions in two lethal police shootings were announced with strikingly different conclusions. The decisions reached in the shootings of Daunte Wright in Minnesota and Ashli Babbitt in Washington highlight concerns over the political and legal elements that can influence such decisions. The timing of the two decisions that involved two chaotic situations raises questions why charges were filed in Minnesota, but not in Washington.

In the Minnesota shooting, police were attempting to arrest Wright who, after a traffic stop, was found to have an outstanding warrant for fleeing police with an unlicensed firearm. Wright broke free of officers while he was being handcuffed and jumped back into the car to drive away. Kim Potter decided to deploy her stun gun against Wright, which would likely be viewed as a reasonable level of force in that circumstance. However, in the struggle, Potter grabbed her service weapon rather than her Taser. In the video, the officer is heard yelling “taser, taser, taser” before she swears and says, “Holy S**t I just shot him.”

Weapon confusion cases

The case has tragically familiar elements as a “weapon confusion” case. There are so many such weapon-confusion cases that departments have tried a variety of solutions, from adding special training to new designs for stun guns. The problem is such training can be lost to the fog and frenzy of the violent scene.

The case is similar to what happened in 2009, when Bay Area Rapid Transit officers struggled with Oscar Grant to arrest him. With Grant on the ground, BART officer Johannes Mehserle warned he was about to use a Taser but then grabbed his service weapon and fired a fatal round into Grant’s back.

The videotape of the incident showed Mehserle moving his thumb over his weapon as you would to release a safety on the Taser. (His service weapon did not have that type of safety release). The jury rejected second-degree murder or voluntary manslaughter charges but found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter.

Unlike past cases, the prosecutors did not overcharge Potter. However, under the criminal provision, the prosecutors must show that the 26-year veteran “creat[ed] an unreasonable risk, and consciously [took] chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another.” The question is whether a possible split-second mistake legally constitutes a conscious choice of an officer.

The Babbitt shooting

In Washington, the Justice Department announced that it would not charge the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt during the Jan. 6 riot. The decision in Washington had a number of striking differences. Potter was charged within a few days. It has been months since Babbitt was shot in the Capitol. The identity of the responsible officer has not been made public. Babbitt was an unarmed Air Force veteran without a criminal record. While she was clearly trespassing and at the forefront of a riot, there is no claim that she was threatening any officer or possible person with serious bodily injury or death. Indeed, near her were other officers who could have been hit by the round. (Babbitt was trying to climb through a broken door in the Speaker’s Lobby as police fought back the mob).

If the officer intended to shoot Babbitt, it would not likely meet the standard for a justified shooting under governing cases like Tennessee v. Garner (1985). If the officer fired blindly or wildly, it would appear to have many of the same negligent elements as the Wright shooting.

In rejecting charges, the Justice Department statement notably does not say that the shooting was clearly justified. Instead, it noted that “prosecutors would have to prove not only that the officer used force that was constitutionally unreasonable, but that the officer did so ‘willfully.’”  It stressed that this element requires a showing of “a bad purpose to disregard the law” and that “evidence that an officer acted out of fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or even poor judgment cannot establish the high level of intent.”

Of course, “weapons confusion” cases are often caused by an officer’s acting out of “fear, mistake, panic, misperception, negligence, or poor judgment.” Yet, in one case an officer is charged and in the other the officer is cleared.

An uncertain line

For the public, the line of distinction can be hard to discern. For officers, that uncertain line can be the difference between discipline and incarceration. Officers have to be able to see that line clearly in carrying out duties with often in split second decisions in violent incidents.

Both of these deaths were tragic. There was a clearly different political contexts and timelines for the decisions. After Babbitt’s death, there was no outcry over her death because she was part of an infamous riot that stopped a constitutional process of certifying presidential electoral votes. Yet, the shooting does not appear any more justified than the Wright shooting, which was likely an accident. The Justice Department indicates an intentional shot was fired by an officer either at Babbitt or the mob generally. It does not explain which.

Violent riots are unfortunately common today in cities ranging from Minneapolis to Portland to Washington. The use of live rounds however have never been authorized absent a particularized showing of a significant threat to an officer or others. Nothing in the announcement in the Babbitt case answers how such a showing was made by the officer.

In the end, these cases capture the uncertain line in these cases of when mistakes or errors by police are criminal matters. There is a credible basis for the charge in the Wright shooting, but a jury will now have to decide if this was a conscious decision or tragic (but noncriminal) mistake. All such cases are highly fact specific. However, the Babbitt decision leaves more questions than answers for the public and police alike. (read more)

Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, [picked by Biden's handlers because of the color of his skin] —Former Member of Raytheon Board of Directors—Has Awarded Over $2.36 Billion in Contracts to Raytheon Since His Confirmation in January

The Pentagon has awarded the defense giant Raytheon Technologies over $2.36 billion in government contracts since [token Negro] Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin III’s confirmation on January 22nd.

Austin was on Raytheon’s board of directors prior to his confirmation.

Austin at the time had made a commitment to resign from Raytheon’s board and recuse himself from all matters concerning Raytheon for four years and agreed to divest from his financial holdings in the company, amounting to between $500,000 and $1.7 million in stock.

These initiatives, however, have not prevented Austin from using his position to bolster Raytheon’s fortunes. Nor those of other defense contractors on whose board he has sat such as Booz Allen Hamilton, the world’s “most profitable spy organization,” according to Bloomberg News, and Pine Island Capital, a private equity firm that invests in military industry.

At Austin’s nomination hearing, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) questioned him about his ties to Raytheon—whose headquarters are based in Warren’s home district (Waltham, Massachusetts).

A year earlier, Warren had proposed legal changes to strengthen ethics at the Defense Department by blocking the revolving door between the Pentagon and giant defense contractors like Raytheon, including by prohibiting big defense contractors from hiring former Pentagon officials for four years after they leave government.

Warren paradoxically voted to confirm Austin’s appointment as Defense Secretary—even though he embodies the danger of the revolving door.

Mark Pocan (D-WI), who with Barbara Lee wrote a letter in November 2020 to President-elect Joe Biden requesting that he nominate a Secretary of Defense with no previous ties to weapons manufacturers, stated that “American national security should not be defined by the bottom lines of Boeing, General Dynamics and Raytheon.”

With men like Austin at the helm, however, it is very clearly being defined in this way
[...]
Besides his connection to Raytheon, Austin’s appointment as Pentagon chief was controversial because he had not been retired from the military for the requisite seven years and required a legal waiver.

Traditionally, the role of Defense Secretary is supposed to be a civilian position, ensuring the U.S.’s military apparatus is led not by a warfighter, but a policymaker. That requirement is laid out in the National Security Act of 1947 that established the Defense Department[, formerly the War Department]. (read more)

LIVE Chauvin Trial Day 15: Closing Arguments and Jury Instructions

After more witness and jury intimidation by activists and politicians threatening violence if no murder conviction.

Today we’re expecting to hear the closing arguments from the prosecution and the defense (likely with a follow-up rebuttal closing by the prosecution), as well as to have the jury given the final instructions intended to guide them in their application of Minnesota law to the facts of this case as they alone determine those facts to have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

So far, that’s the normal course of business in any criminal trial in America.

What’s not normal, of course, is the judicial terrorism raging around this case.

Terrorism, of course, is the use of non-state violence to achieve political ends.  What we are seeing currently in America is the use of violence to achieve purported “justice,” in the twisted and profoundly anti-American view of “justice” that is held by militant factions of such groups as [Only] Black Lives Matter, Antifa, and other proponents of mob rage and violence and destruction, in which “justice” is defined not by the process but by the outcome.

As one example, the UK-based Daily Mail is reporting that the former home of defense use-of-force expert witness Barry Brodd was vandalized with blood last night—and in case there was any ambiguity in the messaging, a severed pig’s head was also left behind.  Although this act of judicial terrorism has gone largely unreported by the US press, it’s certainly been noted on platforms like Twitter, by Jack Posobiec and others:

(image from twitter)

Given that Brodd’s testimony in this case is long since over, this cannot be a message targeted at him personally, as there’s nothing to left intimidate him about.

No, this can only be understood as a chilling message for the jurors in the Chauvin case, who were not sequestered over the weekend, and thus fully exposed to the “push” news of social media.

Even worse, of course, is that such acts of judicial terrorism have ripple effects that reach to every other high-profile case that may occur anytime in the living memory of anyone aware of this case.  Every prospective witness, juror, even defense counsel in the next high-profile case—perhaps the rapidly approaching Rittenhouse trial?—will be fully aware of what they can expect if they play any role in the defense whatever.

This would all be bad enough if the acts of judicial terrorism were limited to a handful of fringe wackos, but it’s not. Apparently, such conduct is gleefully embraced even by America’s fringe national-level politicians.

The UK-based The Guardian is reporting that US Congresswoman Maxine Waters has crossed state lines to incite violence among protestors in Minneapolis, urging the mob to “get more confrontational.”


Those words said in the midst of a peaceful protest could be interpreted as merely urging further peaceful efforts—when said in the midst of a protest already violent, it can only be interpreted as a call for more violence.

And, sure enough, shortly after Waters’ comments, shots were fired at Minnesota National Guardsman present to secure public safety from the violent mob.

In that same video clip, Waters can be heard demanding that the chaos occurring in the streets of Minneapolis and all over the country around the trial of Derek Chauvin continue, and intensify, unless Chauvin is found guilty of first-degree (pre-meditated) murder—an intentional killing charge not even the state of Minnesota thought appropriate to bring against him, and obviously one not even on the table for the jury’s consideration.

A routine question for criminal defense attorneys at cocktail parties is, how can you defend people in court whom you know to be among society’s worst criminal predators.

And the fundamental answer to that question, at least for this criminal defense attorney, is because I care desperately about the process of justice generally, and American criminal due process in particular.

Denial of the criminal due process to the worst of us can only lead to denial of criminal due process to the rest of us—and therein lies mob “justice” and judicial, or even literal, lynching.

The American vision of justice has always been based on that process, and not on the particular outcome in any specific case, a view which helped ensure that process for all us, from best to worst, and prioritized process justice over the mob justice.

In contrast, the mob vision of justice is based entirely on outcome, and process be damned.  No judicial or criminal due process can be permitted to interfere with the “justice” demanded by the mob.

Of course, this is precisely the view of “justice” that led to the infamous lynching of Emmitt Till in 1955 Mississippi, a black 14-year-old, for the purported crime of offending a white woman in a grocery store.

And this is precisely the mob justice that the militant factions of [Only] Black Lives Matter and Antifa want to bring to 2021 America.

Give us guilty, on all counts, even on counts not actually being argued in this trial, or we burn it all down generally, and target defense witnesses and, by implication, the trial jurors specifically.

Good luck with that, America.

Frankly, at this point it’s absolutely apparent that Derek Chauvin can receive nothing like a fair trial in this case.  When I write that, by the way, I’m defining “fair trial” as one involving a process we’d want for ourselves or a loved one, or even a friend or neighbor.

No one would want to be on trial, or have anyone they cared about on trial, in a courthouse surrounded by a violent, raging mob, being exhorted to further violence by government officials, with militant factions of political groups terrorizing the witness for the defense, and by extension the jury itself.

Yet that is what’s been offered to Derek Chauvin as “justice.”

Regardless of what anyone may think of Derek Chauvin, it is absolute truth that the criminal due process we offer to the worst of us is precisely what any of the rest of us should expect to also receive should we find ourselves having to account in a criminal court. And not one bit more.

If you would not want to be tried under these circumstances, then you ought not want anyone tried under these circumstances, including Derek Chauvin, or worse.

One reason that Judge Cahill has denied every defense motion for a continuance or a change of venue in this case has been, in effect, what could / would it do? How long would you delay? Where would you go? This chaos, in effect, will follow this defendant everywhere, so he’s no more likely to get a fair trial elsewhere in Minnesota than he is here.

I think Judge Cahill is right about that—but I think his reasoning has led him to the wrong conclusion.

If it cannot be expected that Chauvin can get any fairer a trial elsewhere in Minnesota than he can in the rage-mob surrounded Hennepin County Courthouse, the solution consistent with the “justice” any of us would want for ourselves or anyone we care about is not to compel him to endure an unfair trial where he is.

Rather, the solution consistent with “justice” is to dismiss these charges, with prejudice.

And if the rationale for not doing so is anticipated rioting, looting, and arson—and I expect that will be the rationale—then all we’re doing is admitting that we’ve already handed over “justice” in America to the mob, and adopted the “Emmett Till lynching model” of “justice” for anyone targeted by the mob.

If that’s the case, enjoy the ride.

In the meantime, stay with us right here all day as we LIVE stream the court proceedings, as well LIVE blog testimony throughout the day. (read more and watch video)

"The tumultuous populace of large cities are ever to be dreaded. Their indiscriminate violence prostrates for the time all public authority, and its consequences are sometimes extensive and terrible."

— George Washington, 1791