The idea of a republic is that the people, through their
representatives, get to make the laws that govern the country, but it
appears that’s no longer a thing. What if you made a law, and no one
enforced it? Is there even any point to the exercise? And if we can make
all the laws we want and not have them enforced except in the limited
manner that the people hired to enforce them choose, are we even a free
country?
Well, it appears that our garbage elite does not think so, and it’s ecstatic about it.
Remember
that dancing scroll on Saturday mornings, if you are of a certain age,
and how it sang its ode to the democratic process? “I’m just a bill,”
it yodeled. The whole premise is that folks we elect go through this
rigorous process of review and analysis and, after much work and debate,
it pumps out a bright, shiny new law. The underlying assumption is that
this actually matters, that when we make a law it gets treated like a
law and not a suggestion.
It’s all a lie.
Let’s just get
past the sausage-making part. There is no legislative process anymore. A
bunch of congressional poobahs gather in a Capitol Hill office – now
behind layers of concertina because our elite fears the American people –
then they decide what outrageous garbage the latest omnibus will
contain, and then they trot it out to the floor for a vote before anyone
can read it, much less meaningfully debate it. Bill the Bill is no
longer the sleek little document of Schoolhouse Rock fame, but a bloated, diabetic fattie waddling about while taking puffs from an oxygen bottle.
Debate a bill? Are you nuts? Hell, then people might find out what’s in it.
But
let’s assume we do get a law passed. And assume the president signs it.
That bill becomes a law and here we are. We got a law we wanted. Yah!
So what?
Our
elite has decided to take upon itself a sneaky little veto of its own
and to just not enforce laws it doesn’t like, or even worse, to
selectively enforce laws against its political opponents. You know, you
and me.
Take immigration, please.
You know, it’s illegal for
foreigners to come into our country without us inviting them. There are
laws, lots of them, that say that’s not allowed. And the laws further
say that illegal aliens are to be rounded up and shipped home. I took
high school civics back about the time Reagan was in his first term and
apparently stuff has since changed, but according to my civics class,
the president is supposed to “take care that the laws be faithfully
executed.” Of course, our president is a wizened old dust puppet and if
what he’s doing is faithful, then by that standard Bill Clinton is
staying home playing Go Fish with Felonia Milhouse von Pantsuit instead
of scamming on half-hammered cougars at his local Ruby Tuesday’s.
So
now, apparently, it’s totally fine to ignore laws the elite doesn’t
like even though they are laws that our representatives enacted. In the
case of immigration, that means just order all the little executive
branch functionaries not to function. So, suddenly, everyone from
Tijuana south is heading north. Effectively, the laws our reps made have
been repealed. Except you and I never got a say in that repeal. We said
– and we know we did because it’s a law – that we didn’t want this.
But, somehow, now it’s cool to ignore the law – that is, the manifest
voice of the citizens – and instead effectively make a new and different
law without all the hassle of asking us what we think.
This kind of changes the nature of America, doesn’t it?
Oh,
these defenders o’ democracy won’t put it like that, even though it is
exactly like that. Remember, they always have an excuse when they breach
a norm. Just like book banning and speech suppression – see, they are
fine in this case because the Suess being suppressed or the people being
gagged are bad. So, it’s fine.
In the case of undermining the
entire premise of a democratic republic, the excuse is that they aren’t
changing the law but exercising “discretion,” as if Founders thought it
would be a genius move to allow the people we hire to run things have
the discretion to completely ignore us and consistently do the exact
opposite of the law our representatives passed. Or the elite just
doesn’t like what we decided, and since we’re knuckle-dragging Jesus gun
people who don’t understand how there are 643 genders, we have no moral
right to self-determination. It’s easy to ignore the demand of the
citizens if you effectively make them non-citizens.
Welcome to
America 2021, a nation that drives its legitimacy, to the extent it
retains any, by acting with the consent of the governors. There are a
lot of ways to describe a country where the powerful make political
decisions without the input or consent of the governed, but “democratic”
is not one of them.
“Democrat” is, though. For all their endless, tiresome political voguing
about Muh Democracy in theory, they sure don’t seem to like it much in
practice. And that’s a problem, because why should any of us respect,
obey or otherwise defer to a government that Nadlers on the governed?
Are you a bit perturbed that the law changes without you getting a
say? I am. I find it vexing, so very vexing, not least of all because I
swore to defend the Constitution and did so for 27 years and it might as
well have been written on Charmin.
And it gets worse.
Sometimes
the law gets enforced selectively. And guess who they select to apply
it to? Comey and McCabe are running around getting paid though they
treated the law like a Scat Francisco hobo treats the sidewalk. But the
feds can’t apply the law hard enough against the Trump folks. The Antifa
and BLM scumbags got their charges dropped but the Capitol Hill folks –
who we now know our media and political betters lied about when they
called them murderers – are getting the whole library thrown at them.
Look at all the fascist “campaign finance laws” the Democrats
are trying to pass. Oh, they’ll get enforced – against us. There is 0%
chance they will ever get enforced against other Dems.
So, do we
even live in a Republic anymore? We don’t get to make our own laws. Our
betters effectively make them for us. What is written in the United
States Code means nothing if it is not enforced, and we don’t get to
have laws we like enforced. It sounds like we are now something, but a
“citizen” is not it.
One thing is for certain, though. This is
not sustainable. And the elite seems to sense this can’t go on without a
massive backlash, judging from how they cower from the American people
behind soldiers and barbed wire. If you break the social contract with
red America, if you decide to withdraw from the Constitution, you better
be prepared to find someone else to feed, fuel, and fight for your
regime. Count us out.
Democrats are desperately trying to maintain political power by perpetrating a number of lies. The National Pulse has been on the forefront dissecting the lies, including The Russia Lie, The Charlottesville Lie and The Insurrection Lie, to name a few.
There is one lie, though, that exceeds all others because without it, the Democratic Party would cease to exist: The Racism Lie. This week, our editor at The National Pulse, Raheem Kassam, was banned from Twitter immediately after publishing an article critical of the Congressional Black Caucus. Merrick Garland spent his testimony before the Senate promising to make it a priority to prosecute white supremacists whom he suggests form the core of the Trump movement.
To celebrate Black History Month, The National Pulse provides the following, accurate account of the civil rights movement. In the end, it was black writers and thinkers, operating mostly in alternative media, who won the argument. The white Boomers atop the Oligarchy who silence political opponents under the banner of “racism” steal the valor of the real heroes for political gain.
*. *. *
In the late 1960s, Democrats in coordination with media, academia and the most powerful institutions in America, performed the greatest political card trick in history. Until then, the upper echelons of the Democratic Party had a strong, historical association with racism. When they could no longer use government to keep black people from their schools, neighborhoods, and clubs, they shamelessly appropriated the civil rights movement to feign a phony moral superiority. Then they weaponized racism, turning the charge against their political opponents.
Merrick Garland is the latest shill in this long and contemptible history.
A History of Harvesting Ballots.
The Democratic Party came into prominence in the 1840s by harvesting three out of five uncast slave ballots to check the North’s attempts at abolition. When Northern Whigs and Abolitionists had enough of Democrat vote padding under the three-fifths compromise, they formed the Republican Party to finally stop slavery for good.
They elected the first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, and Democrats seceded from the Union and launched a Civil War to preserve slavery. They lost, and to this day, the Democratic Party is the only American institution that ever launched armed insurrection against federal authority – in the 1860s and again in the 1950s – each time to deny African Americans basic civil rights.
During Reconstruction (federal postwar control of Southern states between 1865-1877), Republicans passed the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, abolishing slavery, the three-fifths compromise, and guaranteeing due process, equal protection, and voting rights. What did the Democrats do in response? They bided their time and used their political clout to work against the meaning of the law and to get milquetoast judges appointed to federal courts. When Democrats returned to Southern state governments after Reconstruction, they began to require official separation of the races in public enterprises, like schools, trains, buses, restrooms, water fountains, etc.
The laws were challenged in the courts, but in 1896 the politically tamed United States Supreme Court bowed to the resistance in the case of Plessy v. Ferguson, ruling that “separate but equal” is a perfectly fine interpretation of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection clause, even though it clearly was not. This purposeful misinterpretation of the Constitution led to a system of apartheid in America, where it was suddenly okay to separate blacks and whites in public, taxpayer funded, enterprises and accommodations. In the South, these were called “Jim Crow laws,” a pejorative description of black citizens meant to add insult to injury. The laws were designed to remove the political and economic gains black Americans had made in the Republican-led period of post-Civil War Reconstruction.
TROTTER’S ARGUMENTS WON OUT, TO THE CHAGRIN OF DEMOCRATS.
The Jim Crow era lasted several decades. In the face of lynchings, the Ku Klux Klan, and official oppression, African American leaders emerged to challenge the system. Black universities gained prominence, and black-owned newspapers like The [Boston] Guardian and The Pittsburgh Courier began to construct irrefutable arguments against segregation.
A History of Voter Suppression.
In 1912, the revitalized Democratic Party elected the despicable racist, Woodrow Wilson – who is still immortalized in Washington D.C. – as president. This victory was secured by suppressing black Republican votes in the South with literacy tests and the like, while Northern Republicans split their vote between Theodore Roosevelt and William Howard Taft. The stolen presidency of Woodrow Wilson had succeeded by 1914 in re-segregating even federal offices. President Wilson would make the pro-Ku Klux Klan film, The Birth of a Nation, the first White House movie screening, after which he would remark, “It’s like writing history with lightning. My only regret is that it is all so terribly true.”
These were wretched times for black Americans. Robert L. Vann, the Courier editor, wrote a groundbreaking editorial for the Christmas 1914 edition, promising to end “every vestige of Jim Crowism.” Then, something extraordinary happened.
The election-fixing, constitution-dissembling, Democratic Party lost the argument to the black thinkers. Black polemicists such as Vann, and W.E.B. Du Bois, and William Trotter convinced Americans of the immorality and unfairness of Jim Crow.
The change was bottom-up, emanating from the working class. In 1947, the “dees, doze, dat” fans of the Brooklyn Dodgers cheered the black-Republican baseball player Jackie Robinson, who had broken the color barrier and changed the world.
JACKIE ROBINSON GREETING CALIFORNIA SENATOR AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE RICHARD NIXON AFTER WINNING GAME 5 OF THE 1952 WORLD SERIES.
Civil rights was first advanced in lowbrow middle class endeavors like major league baseball and not in America’s blue-blooded institutions, which remained racist. Within a year of Jackie Robinson’s breakthrough in 1948, Princeton University named its public policy school after Woodrow Wilson, an elitist throw down on behalf of the school’s one-time despicable racist president.
That the middle class was the champion of racial understanding is especially noteworthy considering that its members were treated to constant racist brainwashing by Hollywood depicting black Americans as inferior. Hollywood has always been in the business of preserving America’s powerful institutions – and in the 20s, 30s and 40s there was no more entrenched, elitist institution in America than racism.
A Real Racist Insurrection.
In 1954, Thurgood Marshall – a black lawyer trained at Howard University – successfully argued Brown v. Board of Education at the United States Supreme Court, which overruled the ridiculous Plessy v. Ferguson decision the same court had made 58-years before. The Equal Protection Clause was finally going to be enforced on behalf of black Americans, 86-years after its initial passage.
Politically, the decision came about when the Supreme Court’s Democrat Chief Justice Frederick Vinson (who was stalling a decision) died in 1953, and Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower appointed the Republican Governor of California, Earl Warren, to replace him. Chief Justice Warren would write the Opinion, and lead a unanimous court to its ruling in Brown.
EISENHOWER SENT THE U.S. MILITARY TO TACKLE DEMOCRAT RACISM
Some Democrats, though, did not accept the result and engaged in actual insurrection. Arkansas Governor Orval Fabus ordered the state’s National Guard armed with assault rifles to surround Little Rock’s Central High School, to prevent black students from attending. Eisenhower would enforce Brown by sending the Army’s 101st Airborne Division to Little Rock to put down the racist uprising.
Brown was a crowning victory for black writers who dominated the movement. By 1955 many hearts and minds had changed and victory was all but secured. Martin Luther King, Jr. would carry this mantle, engaging in civil disobedience against segregation, receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964 after rejecting Attorney General Robert Kennedy’s call for a cooling off period.
Importantly, until then, it was ordinary citizens – skilled writers and thought leaders mostly working in alternative media – who changed minds, and not federal legislation and sprawling bureaucracies. Those would come later.
Never willingly bound by facts, the Democratic Party sought to switch the historical narrative, to make themselves – incredibly – the heroes of the civil rights movement. Texas Senator Lyndon Baines Johnson knew how to use legislation to construct a false consciousness. He backed civil rights legislation that would mostly codify the hard-won gains already made against Democratic opposition.
“They’re Getting Pretty Uppity.”
Before he became vice-president, Johnson commented to his fellow Democratic Senator from Georgia:
“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference.”
As president (by way of the Kennedy assassination), he spearheaded the Civil Rights Act of 1964, passed mostly by Republicans, and opposed generally by Democrats.
The minority of Republicans who opposed the legislation had philosophical objections; i.e., if we create all-powerful federal bureaucracies to regulate equality the system will be abused to produce absurdities (they had not yet imagined boys dressing in girl’s locker rooms under compulsion of the law, but that sort of thing). It was an early example of the conservative movement placing abstractions ahead of smart politics, a losing approach that would hurt Republicans for the next 50-years.
Even though Republicans had presided over all of the major racial advances to that point, they would not get credit. By narrative sleight-of-hand, and a huge media-assist, Democrats appropriated the civil rights movement. President Johnson is credibly reported to have exclaimed upon passage of the law, “I’ll have those ni**ers voting Democratic for 200 years.”
Then, the serious race grift started.
Avoiding Valor, Stealing Honor.
Wealthy white baby boomers who could afford college deferments began to burn their draft cards and protest to avoid service in the Vietnam War, so that working-class whites and blacks would be sent in their place. In the jumble of history they later wrote, their war protests somehow merged with the black cause and made white, college-educated twits and not Vann, DuBois and Trotter, the heroes of the civil rights movement.
Today, civil rights is presented almost exclusively as a project of white liberals who came of age in the 1960s. Like all of their lies, this one is spectacular in its audacity.
The historically racist institutions portray themselves as progressive, while casting the working class – the entity with no institutional power during the dark days of Jim Crow – as the institutional racists. The race project in America is directed at fixing the mores and values of working class Americans who had little to do with institutional racism.
If you took a poll on college campuses and asked students why they are reflexively Democrat, their answer – if they were honest – would be “we’re not racist.” It has been one of the most successful propaganda efforts every launched.
How were they able to twist history? The simple answer in the modern political lexicon is: fake news.
NIMBYism When It’s Me. Racism When It’s Thee.
In the late 60s and early 70s, the federal government erected property-value-killing public housing in working-class neighborhoods (and not on Park Avenue) and forced working-class kids to board buses and attend schools miles away.
Coarse, poorly dressed, diction-deficient parents issuing fiery complaints in front of cameras were spliced onto the nightly news by well-dressed news commentators with some version of, “behold the stupid racists.” Basically, the powerful turned poor people against one another by intrusive policies (that never applied to the powerful), just so they could have someone else to blame for their racism.
Thus did America’s institutions shift the blame for the nation’s racist history from themselves to white families in the suburbs. The information op continues to this day. Washington’s top-down unisex bathroom and girl’s lacrosse roster requirements are designed to cause regular people to complain, so that the political establishment can say, “behold the bigots.”
Conservatives make a mistake when they argue that institutional racism does not exist. The truth is that the great racist institutions of this country never truly repented. They simply learned to redirect their ire. Now, instead of maintaining their elite perch by discriminating just against black people, they have adjusted to direct their bigotry and prejudice at the entire working class — the “basket of deplorables” whether black, white, or otherwise.
They have found new sources of slavery, notably in China, to make their iPhones cheaper and their hair extensions better,
They achieve political cover for their globalism by falsely claiming the civil rights high ground and setting poor people against one another.
Which brings us to this crazy historical moment: where’s the evidence that Trump’s gains among working class voters has anything to do with racism?
Trumped Up Charges.
Go to any of the deep-red counties in the Rust Belt and drive the back roads that connect the once vibrant small towns and you’ll feel a haunting desuetude, the palpable absence of the nation’s manufacturing base that has been sent to China. The people who live there are Trump’s base – his voters. They once voted Democratic but switched. The left, unable to explain this desertion, engages in the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc: “we practice identity politics, they stopped voting for us, therefore they are racists.”
That libel is contradicted by the large presence of minorities in these boarded up towns, on the high school football and basketball teams, in the churches, and increasingly in families, as boy still meets girl who lives next door. The same integration of minorities cannot be found, except in token numbers, in the private schools and neighborhoods that surround America’s hedge fund capitals. Republicans have become the party of people who want more and better jobs, not the rich. Trump is one of the few Republicans who understands this, and he has worked it with political skill.
Contrast that with the political establishment.
COVERED IN KENTE CLOTH – USED BY KING PREMPEH AND HE SUBJUGATED AND SOLD BLACK PEOPLE INTO SLAVERY – DEMOCRATS CLAIM THE ANTI-RACIST ‘HIGH GROUND’.
By 2016, all of Washington had become dependent on the race grift. Democrats were defined by it, for the reasons mentioned above. But Republicans, too, had long-ago made a deal with the grift under the banner of “compassionate conservatism.”
Karl Rove Republicans essentially said, “Okay, we’ll support your working-class social engineering if you support our globalist corporatist initiatives.” When Sen. Mitch McConnell speaks of the “mob” he is talking about the working class voters who have figured that out.
Washington is protected by razor wire today because a political awakening is threatening the out-of-touch establishment. The Trump movement is called racist not because of anything its adherents do that is racist. There is certainly nothing racist in asking that America’s generous and progressive immigration laws simply be enforced.
No, Trump supporters are deemed racist because they are the middle class rejecting top-down regulation. Very simply, Trumpists threaten the race grift in America by telling the establishment to get lost. Trump voters are political heirs to those oppressed in the 1960s by Washington’s bulldozer of irrational public policy in their neighborhoods and schools.
The great divide in America right now is not between black and white. It is Washington, elite institutions, and the establishment, against the rest of us. It is such a profound divide that they have called in the National Guard and built a fence to make a physical demarcation. The January 6th rabble rousers are being investigated and imprisoned aggressively so the “behold the bigots” trick can be tried one more time. They are part of the fencing. Federal authorities have been slow to investigate and disclose facts that undermine the false insurrection narrative.
In 2020, Trump performed historically well among working class black and Hispanic voters, especially in those boarded up mill towns. The places he did not perform as well were generally in Democrat controlled cities in swing states: Atlanta, Milwaukee, Philadelphia and Detroit. Rules were tweaked in those places under pandemic conditions to produce the sort of ballot harvesting among disengaged African Americans unseen since the three-fifths compromise.
TIME MAGAZINE ADMITTED THE PLAN
Time Magazine helpfully told us that a consortium of the credentialed elite conspired to assure an outcome. As reported in that piece:
“It’s massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen accidentally. The system didn’t work magically. Democracy is not self-executing.”
In other words, nothing threatens democracy more than when the props of Boomer race conceits – black voters – begin to pull in a different political direction. That’s when powerful whites have to start filing lawsuits to “unsuppress” their votes, ahem.
The good news, from this vantage point, is that the razor wire in Washington is not some entrée to Communist revolution. No, it is the spoiled brats who govern us covering their ears and shouting, “We’re not listening!” Trump landed smack dab in the middle of their heroes’ journeys and wrecked lots of self-involved fantasies among those posing as principled. They cannot accept it, so they have to lie about insurrection.
The Boomer beneficiaries of Democrat lies have more power than ever, but less clout. That is dangerous, because they have shown a willingness to use federal police power to prop up ridiculous but self-serving political narratives. Attorney General Bill Barr’s failure to prosecute The Russia Lie has only emboldened the out-of-control bureaucrats. If you want to see Merrick Garland’s playbook and learn how he will go after political opponents on ridiculously phony premises, click on that link and READ IT! It is the complete, unvarnished story of Russian collusion that pulls no punches and identifies all culprits, Republican and Democrat.
How Boomerism Ends.
An aging and decaying aristocracy is its own brand of pathetic, which we are witnessing.
The once waifish Bruce Springsteen at 71, face lifted, hairline-improved, pumped full of GNC powdered proteins and amino acids after low impact dumbbell workouts to approximate the body-type of someone who drills a single screw into 300 Chevy Volts a day on his shift in Lordstown, Ohio, looked forlornly at the camera in the second half of this year’s Super Bowl and called for unity on behalf of Jeep.
He had one of those triple hoop earrings that you have to show your artist credentials to the girl at the Piercing Pagoda kiosk in the mall to even get, so — please know — this was coming from a place of creative angst one can only develop at a $10 million mansion in a Jersey suburb.
Except nothing about it worked. Barefoot girls on the hood of a Dodge sipping warm beer in the soft summer rain all over America looked at their TV and said in once voice: “Okay, Boomer.”
The Springsteen commercial played during a Super Bowl that featured 22,000 masked real fans interspersed among 50,000 mostly unmasked cardboard cutouts will someday be a cultural marker in the hippy, dippy end of Boomer rule. It is the moment 75-million Americans and counting turned to their 50-inch flatscreens and groaned.
This is the way Boomer-world ends, not with a bang, but with a senile president.
They are propped up by lies, none greater than the “Trump voters are a bunch of white supremacists lie.” Take that away and they are nothing. People are starting to catch on, which is their biggest problem. That explains the irrational political reactions America is witnessing.
Local people have started a petition calling on President Putin to halt the construction of a port in Batareinaya Bay, a popular beach about 100 km west of St Petersburg, Russia's second largest city.
Ilmira Bagrautinova danced in -15C and posted her videos online. She hopes her performance will save real swans which nest in the bay.
Independent journalist and suspiciously inaccurate Spygate predictor John Solomon appears on Fox Morning News with Maria Bartiromo to discuss his ongoing Spygate storyline. After predicting for three years that indictments were coming, Solomon now says indictments over the next six to eight weeks are most likely; AS LONG AS the DOJ gives John Durham permission.
The House of Representatives passed the George Floyd Justice in Policing Act of 2021 on Wednesday with the hopes that it would rein in police violence against minorities as well as prevent law enforcement misconduct.
The legislation seeks to be a federal response to the deaths of Floyd and other black Americans such as Breonna Taylor, Daniel Prude, and Rayshard Brooks by overhauling the current definition of qualified immunity for police forces, creating a national database of police misconduct to prevent law enforcement officers who have failed to follow policy from getting new jobs in different departments, requiring the use of dash and body cameras, prohibiting racial profiling, banning chokeholds, and other provisions. If states or police departments fail to comply with the new measures, they would face penalties including losing federal funding, a financial practice often used by the federal government to avoid violating the state powers outlined in the 10th Amendment.
While the legislation is championed by Democrats including thepresidentas a step in the right direction to prevent police brutality, with some even saying it is the beginning of upending “systemic racism,” the policing act faces multiple hurdles before it even gets a shot to be implemented.
Only one House Republican, Rep. Lance Gooden of Texas, voted in favor of the bill on Wednesday, a move he later corrected on the official record, saying he accidentally pushed the wrong voting button. The lack of GOP support in the House leaves Democrats scrambling to fight GOP opposition in the Senate, especially after leftist politicians snubbed Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., and other Republicans who tried to pass police reforms last summer.
The bill also faces scrutiny from various experts, people involved in law enforcement, and even some progressives for not fully or properly addressing some of the policing methods used by law enforcement departments across the nation. As one activist noted, the measures addressed in the bill don’t correlate with Floyd’s death.
“Floyd did not die from a chokehold,” wrote columnist and activist Derecka Purnell in The Guardian, also noting that Floyd was not necessarily racially profiled, both actions that receive attention and regulation in the new legislation.
Rafael Mangual, a senior fellow and deputy director of legal policy at the Manhattan Institute, also noted that while police reform is something to examine, the bill is either “misguided” or “reflects a kind of oversimplification or overstated case with respect to the need for certain kinds of reforms.”
“Take the ban on chokeholds for example,” Mangual told The Federalist. “Obviously no one wants to see excessive force used on anyone when it’s not necessary, but the mere fact that we’ve had a handful of controversial cases involving chokeholds, I’m not sure that that should justify a blanket ban, particularly when you consider the fact that there are going to be situations in which using that kind of neck restraint could probably mean less force than what might otherwise end up being used because an effective grappling technique was taken off the table. … Proposals like that kind of failed to appreciate some of the nuance involved in policing.”
The same concept, Mangual said, applies to the qualified immunity doctrine included in the bill Democrats are pushing.
“No one wants to see legal doctrines abused to offer protection to people who don’t deserve it,” he said. “But if you dig down into the data, the reality is that qualified immunity just doesn’t seem like a particularly enabling doctrine with respect to law enforcement behavior.”
Otherexpertsare warning that the new definition for qualified immunity could hurt local law enforcement agencies and police unions, which have garnered support from President Joe Biden in the past. When the previous version of the policing bill made its way to the House last summer, the National Association of Police Organizations wrote aletterto members of Congress urging them to reject it over fears that the modified version of qualified immunity would “make it easier to prosecute police officers for minor mistakes that they make on the job.”
“With the change to qualified immunity, an officer can go to prison for an unintentional act that unknowingly broke an unknown law. We believe in holding officers accountable for their actions, but the consequence of this would be making criminals out of decent cops enforcing the laws in good faith,” the letter stated.
If the legislation passes the Senate, it will most likely be months before changes are implemented in states and local police departments due to the slow bureaucratic nature associated with federal laws.
Former Director of National Intelligence, John Ratcliffe, appears on Sunday Morning Futures with Maria Bartiromo to discuss HR1 and the escalating border crisis.
Ratcliffe rightly notes the policies of President Trump had stopped the border crisis. U.S. agreements with Central American nations along with diplomatic terms with Mexico were working and the influx of illegal immigrants was essentially halted. However, as Biden has reversed all of the Trump policies the explosion of the border crisis is entirely his responsibility. “Biden has created the current border crisis, and Biden owns the current border crisis.”
Additionally, Ratcliffe discusses how the FBI held back information about domestic issues prior to January 6, 2021, in what seems like a purposeful effort to create the problems in Washington DC. Ratcliffe finishes the interview by discussing the likely result from John Durham’s investigation of DOJ and FBI misconduct.
Authorities in Austria have stopped vaccinations with a batch of
AstraZeneca's inoculation against the coronavirus, after one person died
and another became seriously ill after receiving their jabs.
“The Federal Office for Safety in Health Care (BASG) has received two
reports in a temporal connection with a vaccination from the same batch
of the AstraZeneca vaccine in the district clinic of Zwettl” in Lower
Austria province, the local health authority said.
“Currently there is no evidence of a causal relationship with the
vaccination,” the BASG said, adding that it would now investigate the
incidents further.
A 49-year-old woman died as a result of severe coagulation disorders, an illness related to the blood’s ability to clot.
The woman was admitted to the intensive care unit of Vienna General
Hospital last weekend after initially being treated at a hospital in
Lower Austria. A day after being admitted, the woman died.
“The woman received the first partial vaccination of a Covid19
vaccine ten days before hospital admission,” a spokesperson for the
Vienna hospital told the Niederoesterreichische Nachrichten.
Meanwhile, a 35-year-old female developed a pulmonary embolism and is
now recovering. A pulmonary embolism is a lung disease that is caused
by a dislodged blood clot.
Several local news organization reported that both women were nurses working at the local hospital.
Anton Heinzl, from the centre-left said that “we have to wait for the
results of the inquiry. After all, it is an approved vaccine. We first
have to see if there is a connection with these cases.”
The far-right FPÖ said on Saturday that “until a connection can be ruled
out with certainty, vaccinations with the AstraZeneca vaccine must be
suspended with immediate effect.”
Senator Lindsey Graham (U-DC) appears for his scheduled pontificating pantomime with Maria Bartiromo. Right-wing Graham is outraged, shocked and verklempt at the policies being advanced by the left-wing of the UniParty bird.
Graham walks through the legislative constructs that are destroying our constitutional republic and then promises if the flag atop the Senate spire is changed, all will be better. Graham is what Native Americans aptly described as “forked tongue”.
Understanding the DC game of Chaff and Countermeasures…. A “Countermeasure” is a measure or action taken to counter or offset a preceding one.
Politically speaking, the deployment of countermeasures is a well-used tactic by professional politicians in Washington DC to counter incoming public inquiry and protect themselves from anger expressed by the electorate. The UniParty leadership are very skilled in the deployment of “chaff” (outrage), and “countermeasures” (the distraction).
Weaponized government takes action and creates victims. Beyond the outcome – the countermeasures are politicians assigned a role to control the incoming righteous inquiry from voters who find out about the weaponized or corrupt governmental action. It looks like this:
1.) The electorate become aware of a political issue or action; often illegal. 2.) The electorate become angry. 3.) The DC system (UniParty) needs to protect itself. 4.) Countermeasures are assigned and deployed to delay, obfuscate and create the illusion of investigation of the illegal governmental action. 5.) The electorate watch. 6.) The investigation goes nowhere. 7.) There is no accountability or even change.
… The Countermeasure deployment was successful. Repeat.
Look familiar?
The DC countermeasures are deployed to act as shiny distractions keeping the larger electorate satisfied something is being done. Countermeasures are designed to create investigations that go nowhere.
The goal is not resolution or justice; the goal is to deflect, create distraction and eventually dilute/diminish the outrage over time. Keep kicking the can until it rusts and simply falls apart.
Nothing to see here. Move along, move along now folks.
The political system in Washington DC has become so massive it is now capable of protecting itself. Any attempt to reduce the influence, scope or size of the system is considered a risk. The system is, in essence, protecting itself. Deep State is self-aware.
Political countermeasures are now deployed as human articles of self-preservation.
It is not a sense of boundless hypocrisy that drives them to showcase their disconnect, the disconnect is purposefully part of the ideological advancement of their goal.
The question “do the elites care if we know” is accurately answered by “they want people to know.” The outlook that elites are hypocritical is the wrong nuance to what is visible. Their openness about their untouchable constructs is part of their purpose.
“Elitism” in its most raw and brutal display is a system of people who are beyond reproach according to their own outlook. They must not be questioned; they are in ultimate control of society, outcomes or (fill_in_the_blank) as an extension of their self-proclaimed magnanimity. Essentially they are projecting their position inside a club and all those not in the club are outsiders who do not get to provide input or judgement on the club rules.
This might sound like a DUH statement from the literal definition of “elitism”; however, it must be accepted this outlook is one of consumption, not determination. They believe they represent the ‘greater good’ and by extension control moral authority. Thus, within their mind, they are above reproach. The visible outcome is they operate outside the systems they push upon others who are not in the club.
Elites do not have to wear masks (Pelosi hair salon); or elites do not have to abide by group and social distance rules (Newsom at restaurant party); or elites do not have to concern themselves for carbon emissions (Kerry private airline travel); or elites do not have to worry about the justice system (Clinton emails, Comey FBI lies), etc.
This is NOT hypocrisy, this is a fundamental part of creating a classist society.
Those within the club, in this example the DC club, want those outside the club to accept there are two systems of rights and responsibilities. The club members have all powerful rights and no responsibilities for consequences; the non club members have lesser rights and full responsibility for consequences. This is the cornerstone of a tiered or classist society outlook.
“Rules for thee and not for me” is more than a catch phrase; it is an actual worldview with a history in political control. They are not hypocrites, they are living out their creed.
The outlook gained popularity going all the way back to the formation of the Fabian Socialist society. You might remember George Bernard Shaw saying “at a certain point those [outside the club] will have to justify their existence.” Shaw was advocating for a genetic cleansing of those undeserving people who take more from society more than they provide in value.
This Fabian Socialist outlook is the most extreme form of “elitism”, the actual extermination of undesirables, but it is essentially along the same continuum as believing their are two sets of rules depending on your place in the hierarchy of society.
This outlook has been modernized to include the latest industry of Big Tech. Those who control technocracy have merged with those who control the politics of society. The outcome is elites deciding which voices are allowed to participate in the national conversation, and which voices must be ostracized because they are not compliant to the elitist worldview.
It is critical, actually beyond critical, that people start to accept what they are witnessing is not some misplaced system created by bad actors. Those bad actors are actually elites who benefit from numbing society to the sheer audacity of their ideology.
Those who understand big picture dynamics are still comfortable sticking their heads in the sand about “motive”. Most people are still clinging to actual beliefs around a principle of ‘rule of law’ that applies to National Leadership.
You’d better change that thinking quickly – or you’ll be asking ‘what happened’ far too late.
There seems to be a willful blindness on the part of the American people, a chosen refusal to acknowledge the implications of the unAmerican and unConstititional behaviors, actions and outcomes we are being served on a daily basis.
It can no longer be presumed to be a matter of “I can’t see what’s happening” because a whole lot of normal Americans really are clean and articulate.
“I can’t see it” just doesn’t cut it.
NONSENSE! Most people can see it. Most are just choosing to reconcile the irreconcilable because it is more comforting to ignore the truth of it. Just be honest, for many people avoidance has become a survival mechanism.
It’s more along the lines of “I see what’s happening, but it’s scary and complicated and confusing, and if I admit that I see it, I will become responsible in a way that I am not if I keep pretending I can’t see it or hear it or maybe I don’t understand it.”
