Monday, June 8, 2020

That Time The Police Went On Strike And a City Descended Into Chaos

That Time The Police Went On Strike And a City Descended Into Chaos
 Article by Nicholas Oetken in "Urban Survival Site":

Have you ever heard of the Murray-Hill Riot? Few people have. The event is also referred to as the Montreal Night of Terror. It took place in late 1969 in Montreal, Quebec when the police went on strike because they wanted to be paid as well as the police in Toronto.

While the police were on strike, taxi drivers gathered to protest the Murray-Hill monopoly on the local Dorval International Airport. The provincial police attempted to stop the taxi drivers, but they were stopped by the striking Montreal police. A melee resulted, and from there, things spiraled out of control. 

This riot is why Steven Pinker, the popular science author, gave up on the philosophy of anarchism. In his book, The Blank Slate, he describes what happened:
 
“As a young teenager in proudly peaceable Canada during the romantic 1960s, I was a true believer in Bakunin’s anarchism. I laughed off my parents’ argument that if the government ever laid down its arms all hell would break loose.

“Our competing predictions were put to the test at 8:00 A.M. on October 17, 1969, when the Montreal police went on strike. By 11:20 A.M. the first bank was robbed. By noon most downtown stores had closed because of looting.

Within a few more hours, taxi drivers burned down the garage of a limousine service that competed with them for airport customers, a rooftop sniper killed a provincial police officer, rioters broke into several hotels and restaurants, and a doctor slew a burglar in his suburban home.

“By the end of the day, six banks had been robbed, a hundred shops had been looted, twelve fires had been set, forty carloads of storefront glass had been broken, and three million dollars in property damage had been inflicted, before city authorities had to call in the army and, of course, the Mounties to restore order.”

So why are we talking about this? It’s because the Murray-Hill riot is an excellent example of what can happen without government to run things.

https://urbansurvivalsite.com/time-police-went-strike-city-descended-chaos/ 

W³P Lives Meme Dump - 8 JUN 2020




We haven't done one of these in a good while.
Here are a few memes I found laying in the street after target was looted.





















Don't Forget to Recommend
and Follow us at our

W3P Homepage


Can’t We Just Say It? This Wuhan Panic Was...


Can’t We Just Say It? 
This Wuhan Panic Was a Fraud 
Driven by Politics and 
for the Aggrandizement of Power

AP featured image
Workers from a Servpro disaster recovery team wearing protective suits and respirators more toward equipment as they line up before entering the Life Care Center in Kirkland, Wash. to begin cleaning and disinfecting the facility, Wednesday, March 11, 2020, near Seattle. The nursing home is at the center of the outbreak of the COVID-19 coronavirus in Washington state. (AP Photo/Ted S. Warren)


I think we’re at the point where it is safe to say that the entire Wuhan virus scare was nothing more or less than a massive fraud perpetrated upon the American people by ‘experts’ who were determined to fundamentally change the way the country lives and is organized and governed.

Not long ago, just a couple of months back, we were promised that Chinese Lung Aids would kill over a million Americans. We were told that it was highly infectious. We were told that our hospitals would be overwhelmed. We were told that hundreds of thousands of ventilators would be needed. None of this, not a single projection has turned out to be true. We were forced to wear face masks to guard against…f***, I don’t even know what they guard against because they are exactly as effective against a virus as a chain-link fence is against a mosquito. And we were informed that we were very, very bad people if we didn’t wear them. Even people on the right hopped on the virtue-signaling bandwagon; they advocated a complete shutdown of economic activity and hectored us about how it was important to get with the face mask fetish because it made some other people ‘feel safer.’ When the worst-case scenarios didn’t pan out, health departments have seemingly made a sport of coding homicides, heroin overdoses, and basically any non-hospital death from natural causes as Wuhan-related.

To say the ‘science’ driving this shameful episode was akin to necromancy is an understatement. We saw the mutation of ‘professionals’ like Dr. Anthony Fauci from saying on 60 Minutes that everyone wearing a mask was not only unwise but counter-productive to being a mask nazi. All of this without any additional credible research saying the opposite. We were told by CDC that Wuhan virus could, unlike other members of the coronavirus family, survive for days, weeks, maybe forever, on some surfaces, that clothes needed to be sterilized and groceries wiped down or washed, only to later be told by the same organization, ‘my bad, that can’t happen.’

The projections would have been farcical had they not destroyed lives and businesses. Stay-at-home orders emptied hospitals and killed droves of people who were too terrorized to seek treatment for heart attacks and strokes and who were unable to get scheduled cancer treatments. We were told asymptomatic carriers were highly contagious, presumably to justify the demand that everyone wear a mask, only to find that no, that isn’t the case. Actual doctors reported that people who had survived Wuhan virus were, again unlike any other virus of that family, able to be immediately reinfected. This, fortunately, was another false alarm. And no discussion of the ‘science’ would be complete without the observation that there is zero evidence, other than bald assertions, that the lockdowns, and face masks, and hysteria had any more effect than sacrificing a chicken to the Moon God. The infection rate in those states which did not go along with the insanity is better than those with the most Draconian measures. When Texas and Georgia and Florida released the totalitarian controls the ‘scientists’ predicted a huge spike in infections and deaths. This, to say the least, did not happen.

Underlying this rabid attack on the economy, there was the unmistakable stench of Rahm Emanuel’s ‘never let a crisis go to waste.’ In the name of ‘public health,’ big conglomerates like Walmart were allowed to continue operations while small operators were shut down. Activities that were run by sole proprietors, like nail salons and barber shops, were targeted in particular. Churches, often with the connivance of clergy, were shuttered. Even assembling in cars in church parking lots was prohibited. Visiting the sick and elderly was forbidden. Police forces were used to disperse mourners at funerals. The nation was quickly divided into those with jobs that allowed them to ‘work from home’ and those who couldn’t. The so-called relief bills for the virus contained the beginnings of a Universal Basic Income scheme by setting unemployment payments above what some of the unemployed workers were getting on the job. Under the guise of ‘contact tracing,’ tech companies, like Google and Apple, were enlisted to map our the movements of customers. At least one state governor, Washington’s Jay Inslee, threatened to essentially starve people out of their homes if they did not collaborate…sorry, I mean cooperate…with contact tracers. Parents were arrested in front of their kids for allowing them to play outside. People were insanely told that they could swim in the ocean but not use the beach. As the virus wound down, we saw the goalposts for reopening shift from a finite number of infections to the development of a vaccine.

And, of course, there was also the left’s infatuation with killing the most vulnerable in society. Across the country, the left went to court to have abortion declared an essential service (it isn’t, it is the elective murder of a child). In at least two states, New York and Michigan, we saw a concerted effort to force nursing homes to house people recovering from Wuhan who were still infectious, making the most vulnerable veritable sitting ducks for slaughter. And in New York, we saw a beneath-the-radar change in how nursing home deaths were coded as hospital deaths to cover up the carnage taking place. To be clear, I don’t know if this was mere callousness or a cold-blooded effort to kill people perceived as a drain on society, my point is that it doesn’t make any difference as the result is exactly the same.

All of this was necessary, we were told, because otherwise, Granny was going to die because you didn’t stay home and wear a mask.

In reality, it was a calculated assault upon capitalism and individual freedom that was aided and abetted by members of the federal government who, one can only hope, knew what they were saying was utter bullsh**–I say that because I understand that these people are partisans and, for the most part, militant progressives who loathe America and individual freedom but to think that they actually believed the crap that they were peddling would mean they were incompetent buffoons. If someone is going to destroy our country I really want them to understand and appreciate what they are doing.

Over the past week, with the protests/riots associated somewhat loosely with the death of George Floyd while some Minneapolis cop knelt on his neck, the true agenda behind the Wuhan virus became much more evident. We’ve seen alleged ‘public health experts’ proclaim that the danger posed by not rioting is greater than the danger from Wuhan virus BUT the danger from going to church or work or protesting the utter thrashing of the US Constitution is unconscionable because of Wuhan.

This, for instance, is an actual announcement:
As a scientific or medical or policy statement it is utterly bonkers. The George Floyd protests, while obviously important to some, are, to me, of much less significance than the government arrogating to itself the right to tell you your business can’t open or that you can’t go to church. The virus, obviously, can’t tell the difference. If congregating together is dangerous in one activity, it is dangerous in all. And ‘public health experts’ don’t get the right or authority to decide what activities are important, they don’t even have a right to have an opinion on the subject that carries more weight than that of any other citizen. They. Just. Don’t.

But it isn’t only the bullsh** science that is called into question; it is even how we are dealing with it. This is the actual guidance from the Philadelphia Department of Public Health on what to do if you have been to a riot:

No 14-day self-quarantine as if you were some rube church-goer in Louisville, KY. No contact tracing. Nothing. Wait 7 days and get a test. If Granny dies, well she was old and sh** and she was going to die anyway and rioting to end racism is much more important than her continuing to live.

And you get ridiculous, imbecilic apologia like this one from — double whammy — an academic who used to be a government ‘public health expert’:
OK, let’s address these “why did we lock down if BLM protests are ok” takes.
There are lots of pundits arguing this means public health advice is all relative to ideological sympathies.
That’s not it. It’s about balance of risks.
I’ll say up front: I think there’s a chance these protests will amplify transmission. But I also think there are steps that can be taken (and visibly are being taken, frequently) to mitigate that risk. [I’ll take it even one step further. I’m willing to bet that there is no noticeable increase in Wuhan cases after this nonsense ends just as there has been no noticeable increase in states that have ended lock down.]
We know far more about COVID transmission than three months ago when US social distancing started. Guidance at that time was based on emerging evidence from China and on diseases thought to be similar, e.g. SARS and influenza.
We now have growing evidence on COVID itself.
The evidence tells us a few things (this all predates the protests):
Risk reducers:
– Outdoor/full sun activities
– Masking
– Brief (<10 minutes) or distant contact
– Limiting group size
Risk amplifiers:
– Prolonged close contact
– Large crowds
– Enclosed spaces
– Vocalizing
The highest risk of super-spreading events (which we now suspect drive the bulk of transmission) are those that combine multiple risk amplifiers without the risk reducers.
So something like packed bars (as in WI after their stay-home order was annulled) fall in that category. [Actually, there has been an inconsequential change in Wisconsin’s Wuhan rate, but let’s go on to the the next trope.]
The protests are less clear cut.
They have some of the risk amplifiers:
– large crowds
– vocalizing
As well as some of the risk reducers:
– masking, which has been pretty widespread from what I’ve observed
– outdoors in sun
– some movement to reduce prolonged contact
So risks probably higher than grocery shopping, lower than going to church or a bar. Important to actively mitigate risks as much as possible.
Protesters should:
– stay masked
– practice hand hygiene
– avoid prolonged contacts in crowd
– pre-emptively self-isolate for 2 weeks
That last bit is important. Pre-emptive self-isolation can block those who might be exposed in these protests from infecting others in their lives.
ALSO REALLY IMPORTANT: police behavior can undermine the mitigation measures and elevate transmission risk.
– tear gas & pepper spray can cause coughing, force people to remove masks
– obstructing movement (like NYPD cordoning protesters on a bridge for hours) prolongs exposure
– detention tactics can also worsen things – holding detainees for prolonged periods in enclosed spaces like paddy wagons or mass cells elevates risk
So then the question becomes – if the risk can be mitigated to an extent, how does the remaining risk relate to the importance of the activity itself?
From a public health perspective, many experts are saying it merits the remaining risk.
Racial bias in policing is a direct and unresolved threat to the lives of black and brown Americans. As we have seen over and over. And racial bias in society more generally underpins why COVID has hit communities of color so much harder than white Americans. [Factually, about 200 people per year are killed in police-involved shootings and black Americans are killed by police in nearly identical proportions to their representation in the population.]
So a mass public mobilization to address such deep and longstanding societal problems has important public health relevance, even if the timing is less than ideal.
Unfortunately, spontaneous mass political awakenings do not happen on a pre-planned itinerary.
This is why public health advocates aren’t criticizing the protests.
Their advice doesn’t suddenly evaporate depending on a political cause. Instead they assess relative public health risks of these protests vs continuing to accept a status quo that kills many people of color.
So, a plea to the contrarians out there: do your homework. Most of the takes I’ve seen on this (and I’ve quote-tweeted a few previously) are reacting to their own caricatures of public health advice, and failing to grapple with the actual dilemmas at play here.
The risks of protesting in the age of COVID are not totally clear cut. But that doesn’t mean this should be treated as a punditry Rorschach test that inevitably ends up reaffirming everyone’s priors.

And here’s the point that renders all of this into a liberal circle jerk rather than an argument. This has always been about risk assessment for most of us. For this clown and his posse, it has been exclusively about power — that is, the ability to tell the rest of us what risks are acceptable — and politics, to ensure that their desired political outcomes benefit from the policy decisions.

This whole thing has been a total fraud, insofar as the policy response to Wuhan virus, from day one. There has never been a need for a lockdown. There has never been a need for wearing masks. There has never been a need to shutter churches and forbid public funerals and weddings and baptisms and graduations. There has never been a need for elderly people to die alone because their children are forbidden to visit. There has never been a need for any of the pain and hardship these frauds and charlatans have inflicted upon the nation. The very least we can do is ignore them going forward. If there were justice we’d send and few dozen of these fascists to the gallows and gibbet their tarred bodies in chains until they fall apart.

Peter Navarro Discusses Economic Reopening and Confrontation With China



White House trade and manufacturing policy advisor Peter Navarro appears for an interview with Maria Bartiromo to discuss the strong data for jobs amid the effort to reopen all facets of the U.S. economy.  Navarro highlights the recent visit to Maine where he accompanied President Trump to celebrate U.S. critical manufacturing.

Within the interview Navarro reminds the audience of the larger strategic confrontation against China that involves multiple geopolitical aspects to the U.S. economy.



The media apoplexy over positive economic news is directly related to how much damage a positive economy does to the Antifa/BLM strategy to divide our nation through class warfare. A thriving Main Street economy is antithetical to the objective.

Prior to the Wuhan virus President Trump was positioning the confrontation between the U.S. and China based on economics and trade. Within that dynamic Beijing had a weak hand and President Trump exploited their vulnerabilities with a geopolitical strategy to dismantle China’s one-belt/one-road expansion plan.

President Trump used access to the strong U.S. market to leverage multinational companies away from Chinese manufacturing. Trump’s tariffs against China were extremely effective; and led to Beijing’s initial acquiescence. However, it was soon evident that China would not accept their diminished economic outcome.

President Trump has been creating a dual position for several years; this is very unique because it is the same strategy used by China.  By expressing a panda mask, yet concealing the underlying dragon, President Trump’s policy to China is a mirror of themselves.

Historic Chinese geopolitical policy, vis-a-vis their totalitarian control over political sentiment (action) and diplomacy through silence, is evident in the strategic use of the space between carefully chosen words, not just the words themselves.

Each time China takes aggressive action (red dragon) China projects a panda face through silence and non-response to opinion of that action;…. and the action continues. The red dragon has a tendency to say one necessary thing publicly, while manipulating another necessary thing privately.  The Art of War.

President Trump is the first U.S. President to understand how the red dragon hides behind the panda mask.

First he got their attention with tariffs.  Then… On one hand President Trump has engaged in very public and friendly trade negotiations with China (panda approach); yet on the other hand, long before the Wuhan virus, Trump fractured their global supply chains, influenced the movement of industrial goods to alternate nations, and incentivized an exodus of manufacturing (dragon result).

It is specifically because he understands that Panda is a mask that President Trump messages warmth toward the Chinese people, and pours vociferous praise upon Xi Jinping, while simultaneously confronting the geopolitical doctrine of the Xi regime.
In essence Trump is mirroring the behavior of China while confronting their economic duplicity.

There is no doubt in my mind that President Trump has a very well thought out long-term strategy regarding China. President Trump takes strategic messaging toward the people of china very importantly. President Trump has, very publicly, complimented the friendship he feels toward President Xi Jinping; and praises Chairman Xi for his character, strength and purposeful leadership.

To build upon that projected and strategic message – President Trump seeded the background by appointing Ambassador Terry Branstad, a 30-year personal friend of President Xi Jinping.

To enhance and amplify the message – and broadcast cultural respect – President Trump used Mar-a-Lago as the venue for their first visit, not the White House.  And President Trump’s beautiful granddaughter, Arabella, sweetly serenaded the Chinese First Family twice in Mandarin Chinese song showing the utmost respect for the guests and later for the hosts.

All of this activity mirrors the duplicity of China.  From the November 2017 tour of Asia to the January 2020 China phase-1 trade deal, President Trump has been positioning for an economic decoupling and a complete realignment of global trade and manufacturing.


Much of the UniParty opposition, arguably almost all of it, is specifically because the America-First economic agenda wipes out the control elements within Washington DC who are paid to retain the status quo.

Part of the reason why limo-liberal elites have been successful politicians through the years is the outcome of their economic policy inherently creates a wider gap between the haves and have-nots.  This divide allows politicians to control apportioning.

Exploiting the gap, essentially exploiting class warfare as a political strategy, is the fuel that drives identity politics. Ergo all progressive economic policies, the offshoring of jobs; the policies that support Wall Street and globalism etc; are designed to weaken the U.S. middle-class while making rich people more affluent, and poor people more dependent.

The ruling elites deny this fundamental truth, but the rust-belt did not create itself.  The erosion of the U.S. manufacturing base -and Main Street- was an outcome of policy. Republicans and Democrats participated in this process.  Democrats claim, falsely, to be champions of the middle-class; but their narrative is refuted by the actual results of their policy.  Both parties are deep in the pockets of Wall St multinationals.

Many people call for a third party in politics without realizing President Trump represents the first second party DC has seen in decades.  That’s why he is opposed by both wings of the same legislative bird.

Through dependency the political elites begin their role to decide who gets what part of their limited and controlled economic pie.  Economic intervention, supported by both wings, in the spending process is what has allowed political interests to retain control.
Main Street and the freedom within the free market is a problem for command and control economic systems.  Wall St global financial systems, controlled by a limited number of large institutional multinationals, are much easier to control.

Remember the catch phrase “too big to fail” in the banking system?  The DC ruling class said a small group of banks controlled too much wealth.  So they instituted ‘banking reform’.  The result was even fewer banks that were even bigger.  The outcome was the exact opposite of what they said was the purpose.  Their policy made the problem worse.

President Trump’s America First agenda is specifically a benefit to Main Street and the middle class.  In the banking sector treasury policy and targeted deregulation focused on creating more community banks and credit unions to benefit Main Street.  That’s exactly what happened. By focusing on Main Street, Trump and Mnuchin fixed what the uniparty congress did not. [Arguably, congress purposefully and willfully did not.]  Smaller, more nimble, banks are now positioned to assist small and medium Main Street businesses.

President Trump’s domestic and global political opposition recognize that his trade and economic policies have reversed much of their control.  There are trillions at stake, that’s the financial motive for the opposition.  However, a lack of control over the economic outcome; meaning President Trump creating more pies; means not only do they lose control over the money, they also lose control through diminished political power.

America-First is a program focused on Main Street and it expands the middle class.  That is why during President Trump’s first term the wealth gap actually started to narrow for the first time in decades.   The wage growth for line-level or blue collar workers was/is rising faster than the supervisory wages.  This is a uniquely trumpian effect from a return to economic policies that benefit Main Street USA workers.

More jobs means the value of labor to do those jobs increases.  This economic path is against the interests of coastal elites and the politicians they pay to retain the wealth gap.



It is much harder to create outrage over a wealth gap when the workforce is seeing increased wage growth. In that scenario, the voices who live on the fuel of class warfare are ignored.

All of the current U.S. antagonism is dependent on the class struggle.  If the police are defunded only the wealthy will have access to police.

The same process is true for healthcare, housing and a host of economic measures.  If a person can independently afford to access these sectors, those who construct the system of controlling, dividing and apportioning the benefits become irrelevant.

The media outrage over the positive economic data today is indicative of their concern the economy will quickly rebound; and that means diminished influence for the politicians the media are in position to support.

The current protest movement is reliant upon the class struggle as the primary narrative underpinning the need for protest leadership.  Abundance is against their interests.

When the economy was shut-down by the COVID virus, it was an unnatural economic event.  Everything inside the U.S. economy including: the number of workers; the growth in wage rates; the availability of jobs; the lack of inflation; the expansion of investment, was the strongest in our history.  However, when everything was stalled all of that positive architecture, the policy that created the outcome, did not go away.

U.S. economic conditions were being driven by internal economic activity that was no longer as dependent on global drivers.  When the underlying economic strength is domestic, it makes sense the economy can restart much faster because the activity is not dependent on outside global stimulus.  In essence, the USA can rebound much faster because we are NOT dependent on the restart of other global economies.  Again, another uniquely positive attribute that is enhanced by ‘America-First’ policies.

China, Obama, Pelosi and Schumer can, and did, attempt to throw a COVID wrench in the expanding U.S. economy.  However, they cannot undo the foundation President Trump had already established.  Those America-First policies will again work in our favor; and yes, when President Trump says he “can do it again” his confidence is based on that underlying foundation.

Trump may not articulate it, but he knows the U.S. economic independence he has already achieved through three years of advanced policy to benefit Main Street.  He knows the trade agreements, the cutting of regulation, the unleashing of energy development and the weight of tariffs on imports all mean the best place for investment is inside the U.S.A.

That fundamental structure did not change, and is not going to change.

A recent example – Remember the previously mentioned policy focus on deregulated community banks and credit unions to assist Main Street?  The success and efficiency of the Paycheck Protection Program for small and medium business was a direct result of that earlier policy.  Even in crisis the America-First foresight pays dividends.

The far left is hoping to curtail the strength of the economy; that’s why the blue state governors are fighting against reopening.  However, the organized protests of thousands of people gathering together have made their best COVID shutdown arguments moot.

The professional grievance operators have a very narrow window to achieve their objective, and that desperation is starting to show in how severe they are pushing to create division before the economy restarts. Every social justice protest movement has been activated and Antifa footsoldiers are attempting to sow chaos.

The next funeral for George Floyd is being held in Texas with a full day viewing on Monday, and final funeral on Tuesday.  With the COVID nonsense collapsing at the same time the currency of the race-card is exhausting, what are they going to do after that?

A classic Alinsky agitator, President Obama and his global allies have a goal to exploit the current economic conditions to once again push divisive class warfare.  However, the economic conditions are rebounding faster than he/they are able to exploit…

…There is a collective desperation showing amid their 2020 alliance.


The Black Lives Matter Movement Is...


Hoover Fellow: 
The Black Lives Matter Movement Is Deeply Unserious


Hoover Fellow: The Black Lives Matter Movement Is Deeply Unserious

Shelby Steele, a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution said Friday that the contemporary civil rights movement under the banner of “Black Lives Matter” was deeply unserious, catering to an old form of victimization that has accomplished nothing to lift up black people.

“There’s a pathos here. It’s like we’ve done this too many times. We’ve been here too many times, we’ve seen this kind of thing and there’s a big hallabaloo and then it sort of fades away and this is already beginning I think to fade. What was it all about? What was the point? What did these various groups, what did they want?” Steele asked on Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier. 

“Striking to me is that about this particular one is that there was not even a list of demands. Usually there’s always a long, elaborate list of demands. That wasn’t the case here. There’s nothing that you could come away from, this entire episode, the last two weeks or so that’s meaningful,” he said.


Baier then asked Steele about remarks delivered by Reverend Al Sharpton Thursday at Floyd’s memorial service in Minneapolis.

“George Floyd’s story has been the story of black folks because ever since 401 years ago, the reason we could never be who we wanted and dreamed of being is you kept your knee on our necks,” Sharpton said.

“He went on to say that this is the moment and repeated the systemic racism in this country. Your response to that?” Baier asked.

“Al Sharpton is the master of this old form of politics that comes out of the ’60s where we as blacks cry victimization and demand the larger society give us things of some kind or another,” Steele said.
I don’t take Al Sharpton seriously. I know him, he’s a nice person. I will take his message here seriously when he stands before a congregation like that, a black people in America over a tragic event and says what black Americans can do to get out of the situation that we’re in. No one from the president on down anywhere says what role, what’s going on with black America? Why are they so dependent on white America, on the government. That all they can think of is themselves as victims which of course deflates themselves as human beings, undermines their best energies, their best intentions, and so after 50, 60 years now past the civil rights bill, we’re worse off than many socioeconomic categories than we were.

Steele went on to explain that this African-American dependency emerged out of white Americans desperately seeking to prove themselves as non-racist.

“White Americans live under this accusation that they’re not racist. They need to prove that they’re not racist. In order to prove that you’re not racist, you need to take over the fate of black people and say, go with us, we’ll engineer you into the future. We’ll engineer you into equality,” Steele said. “Life doesn’t work like that. We have to engineer ourselves. Period. There is no other way.”

Baier pushed back on Steele’s assertion about an absence of demands from today’s Black Lives Matter movement, including the destruction of law enforcement and reparation payments to African-American communities.

“Is there a solution out there that politically you can get your head around?” Baier asked.

“I will take those things seriously when I also hear from Sharpton and others the argument that we need within the black community to work on the institution of marriage,” Steele said, citing the fact that 75 percent of black children are born out of wedlock with no father.

“I don’t care how many social programs you have. You’re not going to overcome that.”

Divisive Insurrectionists...


Divisive Insurrectionists 
Have Brought The Nation To 
The Brink Of Chaos


Tolerance for criminality and political sabotage has led America into one of it's darkest moments in decades. Do we have the will to unite once more?

Are we at war? Did we pass that invisible line beyond which the country cannot hold? After everything the Democrats and the media have put us through since the election of Donald Trump, is it even possible to imagine peaceful reconciliation and common national purpose?

For a majority of Americans, the answers to those three questions are as obvious as they are dispiriting. That so many believe the country has fallen, is falling, or will be falling soon is a terrifying reality. An America that destroys itself will be like nothing the world has seen. If our institutions fall, if indiscriminate violence becomes the norm, if the economy crashes, we will condemn ourselves to not years, but decades of poverty and chaos.

For far too many on the left, chaos is the point. Destruction is the goal. They prefer the unknown madness that lies ahead to whatever is still managing to (barely) hold us together in the present.

Constitutional republicans often look at what the left unleashes and see no point in pretending that we are a nation at peace. Some would rather we finally end this lingering “cold civil war” and get down to the dirty business of fighting for America’s future.

Why doesn’t this prospect terrify every politician in the American government? Why do they work so hard to exacerbate the conflict when their offices and positions of power will be the first casualties of any actual war that tears this country apart? Are they all so blind to believe that they can lead a country to victory by destroying it?

How do we avoid a war that will end America when mayors, governors, congressmen, judges, journalists, and bureaucrats are all actively conspiring to drag us into the blaze?

On May 25, a black man died in police custody. We saw images of a police officer’s knee on the back of this man’s neck. Immediately, Americans—almost to a person—said, “This is wrong.”

There is no great divide on the moral question of what happened to George Floyd. There is no disagreement between the defenders of law and order and the defenders of civil liberty. In this case, law and order and civil liberty require the same response. All Americans should have been able to unite in condemning this injustice.

What happened instead? Radical leftists transformed a moment of national agreement into one of divisive conflict.

Americans united in their sense of what is just have no reason to destroy each other. Unity and agreement lead to peace. Uncorralled passion and grievance, however, can turn violence into a political opportunity.

The looting and riots and fires in blue cities across the country today reaffirm that it is not “justice” but “war” that today’s radicals have in mind. From a moment that brought all Americans together in their sense of right and wrong, politicians and groups bent on destabilizing the nation chose division…and got their way.

After nights of murder and loss, President Trump walked to a firebombed church with a Bible in hand. There was a moment to de-escalate. There was an opportunity to choose calm. There was a chance for reconciliation. Instead, CNN accused the president of hurting “peaceful protesters” for a photo op. Some of the highest-ranking Democrats in the country call him a fascist, a bigot, and a murderer.

When every act of peace is treated like war, and every act of war is treated like justice, how do Democrats expect to preserve a future America for them to lead?

If Democrats believe that creation can only come from wanton destruction, how can we ever trust them to choose peace when they have an opportunity to destroy?

Breaking store windows, setting buildings on fire, vandalizing monuments to American heroes, leaving graffiti threats on synagogue walls, attacking Christian churches and tombstones, terrorizing the living, and giving no peace to the dead— these are the great accomplishments of Antifa and those they egg on. They have given America her own “Kristallnacht” and still fail to see the sad irony. Or maybe they understand it completely. Maybe it’s only sad to those with their eyes and ears open because the press so easily missed the joke.

Most Americans had no idea that leftists thought setting the nation on fire was akin to the Boston Tea Party. Though most Americans who’ve been paying attention never really understood how Democrats could so easily join hands with Iran’s Ayatollah, the Chinese Communist Party, dangerous drug cartels on our southern border, and international corporations that have strengthened China at the expense of the American worker. How can Democrats be friends with so many of our enemies and pretend—with a straight face—that they are still our friends as well?

If America is to survive, something new must take hold right now. The current political parties and officeholders and corporate-owned media are not up to the task.

Politicians who cheer on destruction should be behind bars, not before microphones.

Those who directly or indirectly fund mayhem and destruction should be in courtrooms defending their actions, not hiding on palatial estates while applauding the carnage.

Social media giants who act as authoritarian state censors should not be afforded extra-constitutional protections while they work to undermine the rights of everyone else.

If we will unite together once more, America may well recover. If we do not, it’s future survival could be in danger. We must stand up to the insurrectionists all around us—and we must do so today, lest it becomes that much harder to do so tomorrow.

Tolerance for criminality and political sabotage has led us to the edge of a dangerous cliff. We will either dig our heels into the ground and push back or we risk falling into the murky depths below.

Someone is Blocking FBI Agents From Testifying


Senator Lindsey Graham Discusses Rod Rosenstein Testimony


Senator Lindsey Graham appears with Maria Bartiromo to discuss last weeks testimony by former Deputy AG Rod Rosenstein.  It remains clear that part of Graham’s purpose for discussing the FISA fraud and the Spygate operation is to enhance his reelection bid.

However, all of that said, the key point of this video is buried deep at 05:47: “I made a request to interview the case agent and the intel analyst, and there were two other people, who interviewed the [primary] sub-source for three days in January, again in March and again in May, they’re denying me the ability to do that, I’m going to keep working the system”

Unfortunately Ms. Bartiromo did not catch the phrase “they are denying me the ability to do that”, and she never asked who “they” are.  The impression is the FBI is blocking Graham from interviewing the FBI investigators.  You decide.  WATCH:



Who is blocking the FBI from testifying?

Why hasn’t Agent Joe Pientka been made available by the FBI? 

Who is “they” in the phrase: “they’re denying me the ability to do that”? 




George Floyd and What ...


George Floyd and 
What Martin Luther King Jr. Really Said about Riots and "the Language of the Unheard"

The moment is ripe for change. We must not waste it on counterproductive violence.


This moment was long in the making. From slavery, to Jim Crow, to the Civil Rights struggles of the last century, to the ongoing struggle to overcome racism today—these formed the foundations of the fear, frustration, and discontent in America’s black community.

Disproportionate police brutality against black people pervades this history. Fuel for the fires we face today came from these past troubles, and the failure to overcome their vestiges built up a powder keg, primed by the frustrations and anxieties of a global pandemic and an economic shutdown.

The viral video of George Floyd dying under the knee of a Minneapolis police officer was the spark.

People have poured into the streets demanding justice and change, in protests that have spread like wildfire across not only the United States, but the world.

Here many people of every background have come together in spontaneous demonstrations of varying character, evoking imagery of the Civil Rights movement perhaps remembered best for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s powerful words and nonviolent methods to expose and fight racial barriers. If we are to invoke MLK’s name, then we’d do well to remember one important point as we consider tactics and organization…

Rioting and looting are inexcusable, and are, emphatically, not productive protest.

We’ve all seen the shattered glass, broken doors, cars and buildings ablaze, graffiti everywhere—perhaps even in your own community. Some protesters, though, say this is to be excused for the transgressions endured by marginalized populations. That we should refuse to even speak their names—rioting and looting—in favor of "rebellion" or “revolution.”

No matter that these businesses are often minority-owned. That, regardless of race, they represent hard work, savings, blood, sweat, and tears—not to mention employment for the community. And they’re not all coming back, insurance or no.

Raiding the shoe store, burning down restaurants, smashing and burning everything around you aren’t rebellion. It's riot. Riot incited by those who just want to loot, stoking the passions of the otherwise peaceful, and turning away the otherwise allied. To join them is a choice—and the easy choice, at that. If you want to downplay this, know that I am not on your side.

Happily, most protesters are not rioters. Let's make that clear. I am on their side.

Some have taken to quoting MLK on riots as the "the language of the unheard," of the oppressed and downtrodden. Let's be crystal clear then, as well, about his thoughts on the matter, as fully expressed in his "The Other America" speech from 1967. His entire point in the relevant section was that riots are counterproductive—but that we must recognize the grievances over injustice expressed in them, the violent conditions suffered that create them. Some seem to leave out the counterproductive bit, and others the injustice bit.

Specifically, he said:
“...riots are socially destructive and self-defeating. I'm still convinced that nonviolence is the most potent weapon available to oppressed people in their struggle for freedom and justice. I feel that violence will only create more social problems than they will solve.”

Lest you think this is to deny the reality of brutal injustice that often feeds such a response, he finished these remarks with a bit of prescience:
And as long as America postpones justice, we stand in the position of having these recurrences of violence and riots over and over again.”

So here we are, many cycles of riots later, from (ironically) the King assassination riots, to Stonewall; from the 1980 Miami riots, to the L.A. Rodney King riots; from Ferguson, to the current conflagration.

Stonewall, I’ll note, demonstrates that this is not peculiar to racial oppression. That fight for recognition, for legal and social equality for LGBT people, follows the same logic. What logic is that? The logic Dr. King laid out when, perhaps inspired by the Gospel of Matthew, he said:
“The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy, instead of diminishing it, it multiplies it. Through violence you may murder the liar, but you cannot murder the lie, nor establish the truth. Through violence you may murder the hater, but you do not murder hate. In fact, violence merely increases hate. Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars.”

Though some good may follow a violent riot, such as awareness of the desperate issues which inspired it, the good comes in spite of it, and never because of it.

History is a witness to countless iterations of this lesson. These riots were largely sparked by violence done to the rioters, with specific flash points. But where then is the lasting change from any of the above listed? Only in the instances succeeded by clear organization pursuing specific goals, using a range of nonviolent measures and legislative action.

For the black community, it’s that part that’s been missing for a long time. Understanding the origins of these systemic issues in our criminal justice institutions, legal frameworks, judicial doctrines, etc. is vital to distilling the message that black lives are being systematically devalued, and that black lives matter.

Police unions, qualified immunity, unjust laws criminalizing peaceful activity and voluntary enterprise, plus denial of opportunity through barriers to entry in legal market competition… All these issues are suddenly on the lips of people having these conversations in a meaningful way. At last, we have a chance to forge this rage into real change—if we choose to. Looting and rioting, no matter the source, must be condemned so that we may reach those who need to be reached, to bring about the changes we seek.

And what violence may this violence beget, in an age of militarized police? The total violence of the state.

We’d do well to remember King’s example, and focus on building this energy from the peaceful majority of protests into real, lasting change—for all of our lives, yes, but particularly for the black lives so threatened by a broken social order.

Where do we go from here? I won’t pretend to have all the answers. No one can. But here’s a starting point: organize, formally, around specific causes. This is a complex matter, and we each have different causes under this umbrella that we care about; the pain is real but can’t be addressed until the points are thought out and articulated. I’d like to begin with these six points:
  • End qualified immunity. If the Supreme Court won’t, it can be done with legislation, like Congressman Justin Amash’s bluntly named End Qualified Immunity Act. If police face no consequences, there is no accountability.
  • Stop subsidizing police abuse by putting the taxpayer on the line for payouts. Like any other professional facing these kinds of risks based on their actions, police should carry liability insurance. As their risk increases, so too would the cost of insuring them. Should they persist and continue to abuse, harass, etc., they’d become uninsurable, and thus unemployable.
  • End the drug war, end sex work prohibitions, and the general criminalization of peaceful commerce. The fewer points of contact needed with the police, the better for all parties. The essence of police work is legitimate force, so let them focus on where that force needs to be applied (murderers, rapists, etc.) and let us hold them accountable.
  • Demilitarize the police. Military equipment is looking for a military response. Cops aren’t soldiers, and we’re not enemy combatants.
  • Empower independent, non-police investigators for allegations of police misconduct.
  • Create a database of decertified officers. The insurability mentioned above provides a good incentive structure, but it should also be clear to every police force that officers who lost their jobs for these reasons are not to be rehired in a new city.
The old song said, “We shall overcome.” I’d prefer to say that we can overcome, if we choose to. But it’s going to take hard work and thoughtfulness that riots—understandable though their underlying fury might be—threaten in every way.