Saturday, November 27, 2021

Critical Race Theory Destroys American Justice


Although Kyle Rittenhouse was acquitted, none of us is safe, so long as “critical race theory” and other Marxist ideas pollute our law schools, our judges’ minds, and our legal system.


The George Floyd riots, conveniently shut off this past summer, were as much theater as reality. They were designed to associate Donald Trump with police abuses and disorder, while painting Democrats and their notions of “racial justice” as the path forward. 

Ordinary citizens standing up for themselves interfere with this guerilla theater indoctrination; after all, there are a lot more normal people who do not want their towns burned down than there are maniacs willing to do street violence. This is why individuals like Kyle Rittenhouse and citizen self-defense groups are dealt with so harshly by the government and the media. 

Government Did Not Protect Us Last Summer

Consider that there were dozens of fires and beatings and a significant number of killings in Minneapolis, Kenosha, Chicago, Portland, St. Louis, and Seattle in the summer of 2020. Hardly any Antifa and BLM rioters have been brought to justice. Federal authorities have made no significant effort to roll up these groups.

In the cities worst hit by the riots, there appears to be a semi-cooperative relationship between the rioters and prosecutors. In the Rittenhouse trial, prosecutors presented Gaige Grosskreutz as a blameless victim, even though he illegally carried a concealed gun and pointed it at Kyle Rittenhouse after chasing him down. Grosskreutz also escaped responsibility for a subsequent DUI

But if Rittenhouse’s presence was provocative and illegal, why was Grosskreutz’s pursuit and brandishing a gun not a more serious crime?

Worse, one of the surprising revelations during the trial was the late production of FBI aerial footage. The high-definition footage had inexplicably disappeared, and the FBI kept news of this all to itself until a media leak. But the infrared, night vision footage remains, supporting Rittenhouse’s narrative and also providing a means to identify the various left-wing criminals who ran amok. Presumably, similar videos were secretly taken during other riots in 2020. 

But, so far as we know, in spite of an impressive surveillance capability, as well as signals intelligence and other resources at its disposal, the FBI has made no significant effort to identify and suppress the leaders, organizers, funders, and foot soldiers of Antifa and BLM responsible for the 2020 riots. 

Instead, we are lately told there is an explosion of “white supremacy” in a country that elected Barack Obama fewer than ten years ago, and that Antifa is only an “ideology,” not a terrorist group. 

Racial Justice vs. American Justice

It is becoming obvious that there are now two standards of justice. This development marks a major retreat from the American ideal of blind justice, which is based on individualized determinations of guilt for particular crimes. The question is supposed to be a narrow one: did this person commit thischarged offense, and did the prosecution prove that beyond a reasonable doubt? 

Now prosecutors and the state are putting their thumbs on the scales, chasing down those on the Right for relatively minor crimes, including a stolen diary the FBI is tracking in New York, reprisals against leftist violence, and, of course, the all-hands-on-deck prosecution of the January 6 protesters. At the same time, federal and state prosecutors are downplaying, releasing, or failing to investigate conspiracies that led to widespread rioting in 2020, which resulted in at least 25 deaths.

None of this is an accident. We saw hints of this two-tiered approach in the lackadaisical prosecutions of the 1970s terror group, the Weather Underground. Many were given kid-gloves treatment and went onto successful careers in academia. Even when the system worked, backdoor channels relieved many of having to face consequences. Recall Bill Clinton pardoned convicted terrorist Susan Rosenberg as one of his last acts in office. Far from feeling guilty or disavowing violence, she has since become a prominent BLM leader

While using the same language as the rest of us, the Left’s concept of justice is flexible. The Left is neither pro nor anti prosecution outside of the Marxist lens of “race, class, gender.” In other words, they are not for justice, but rather for their team. 

Formerly confined almost exclusively to class, the Soviet Union implemented this philosophy with gusto. In an excellent 1938 law review article, “The Soviet Concept of Law,” Vladimir Gsovski lays out the basic approach: 

[I]in accordance with the Marxian doctrine of historic materialism and class struggle, the impartiality of law is denied altogether by the communists. Any law is for them in the first place the law of the ruling economic class; impartial justice is merely an illusion and law reflects actually the class concept of justice.

In other words, in a dispute between a proletarian and a bourgeois, or a former aristocrat and the Soviet State, the question was not one of individualized guilt or innocence, but rather whether a verdict furthered the broader goals of the revolution. Individualism became passé

Needless to say, millions were sent to the Gulag and shot in the back of the head in Lubyanka prison as expressions of such “class justice.” Today, instead of the bourgeois, whites and conservatives and property owners are the “enemies of the people” under the ubiquitous Marxist framework of “race, class, and gender.” 

Is Self Defense Still Allowed?

The Rittenhouse prosecution is a landmark case. It is fundamentally a referendum on whether normal, middle-class Americans will be at the mercy of the Left’s violent shock troops. The prosecution is simply an expression of the “class justice” concept, as Rittenhouse was treated differently than those who initiated the violence in Kenosha. 

The un-American and thoroughly destructive concept is dressed up as “critical race theory” or “equity” or some other euphemism. But, in practice, it amounts to anti-white race hatred and hostility to successful middle-class property owners of all races. 

Rittenhouse is no white supremacist or fascist or whatever boogeyman the media and the Left have concocted. But he is an avatar for the system’s self-proclaimed enemies. The system does not believe such people are entitled to self-defense; they are held to a different standard of justice than the one that applies to the oppressed and the woke. 

So far, the Marxist takeover of the justice system has been incomplete. We still have an advocacy system, and Rittenhouse benefited from a judge who still cares about the Constitution. We also have a jury system, where regular people, and their sense of justice, operate as a check on run-amok prosecutors. 

That said, the process itself is a punishment, a Kafkaesque, expensive ordeal where an innocent person wonders if he will spend the next 65 years in prison. And juries too often have the same “race, class, gender” framework as the broader Left. 

Since the end of the Cold War, the Soviet regime and its crimes have been memory-holed. Younger generations have no lived experience of fearing nuclear war, observing the manifest failure of the Soviet state to provide a decent quality of life, and the testimony of numerous dissidents mistreated by the Soviet system because of their independence of mind and commitment to personal freedom. Knowledge of this is suppressed, not least because the Democratic Party and our major cultural institutions are now fully in the grip of a Soviet-style ideological program, one hostile to freedom, justice, and the rights of “class enemies.”

Although Rittenhouse was acquitted, none of us are safe, so long as “critical race theory” and other Marxist ideas pollute our law schools, our judges’ minds, and our legal system. 


Joe Biden Moves to Completely Screw You at the Pump



Bonchie reporting for RedState 

Just days ago, Joe Biden was insisting that his climate change provisions weren’t causing higher gas prices (see Joe Biden Goes Full Ron Burgundy in Reality-Bending Speech on Gas Prices). You see, according to the White House, canceling Keystone XL and limiting oil and gas leases in the name of fighting global warming doesn’t actually have an effect on gas prices.

Of course, most of us realize that’s a complete lie because we understand basic economics. And while Biden may be senile, he’s cognizant enough to understand what he’s doing. When you lower the supply and make oil more expensive, you end up with higher prices at the pump. In fact, the current hike in gas prices tracks with the rise in the price of oil almost perfectly.

Yet, just as prices looked to be going down due to a drop in the cost of oil caused by COVID-19 hysteria (oil dropped over $10 a barrel today), Biden is making a move to get those prices headed up again.

Enter some breathless media member insisting that the president doesn’t control the price of gas. In some sense, that’s true, but Biden absolutely can make the problem better or worse. By raising the costs to drill on public leases, the president is directly influencing the cost of gasoline, and not in a good way. You will absolutely pay more at the pump if the White House raises the costs to drill in the name of fighting climate change.

Besides, how does this make any sense at all? Global demand is global demand. You are going to go fill your car up this week. The only question is how much it’s going to cost you. Does pumping oil in Saudi Arabia that will be burned in Texas somehow result in fewer emissions than if it was pumped in North Dakota? The answer is: of course not. We all share the same planet, last I checked, so even if you are a big believer in climate change, you are not fighting it by raising costs on American consumers.

In fact, if one is concerned about environmentalism, you should prefer oil be drilled domestically, as US laws and regulations result in far cleaner extraction. Yet, we live in this silly moment where Democrats insist we can’t be energy independent while at the same time begging OPEC to pump more oil. That strategy, whatever the goal may be, makes no sense whatsoever.

Meanwhile, your elected betters simply don’t care about the pain they are causing because to them, this isn’t about actually lowering emissions. Rather, it’s about mindlessly virtue signaling and punishing normal Americans for their supposed sins against the climate. Inflation is out of control, yet in the midst of that financial hardship hitting families, Biden won’t even let them have slightly lower gas prices.

This man’s entire presidency has been one big middle finger to the middle-class. Every step of the way, the president has managed to destroy the prospects of success and prosperity that were dumped into his do-nothing lap by his predecessor. He just won’t get out of the way, and that’s not a coincidence at this point.


Durham vs. Stephanopoulos: Who Colluded, Trump or Clinton?


It does not take a rocket scientist to see that Hillary Clinton and her campaign colluded with the Russian government to influence the election through disinformation.


Recently, in “Hail Mary” fashion, former Bill Clinton aide turned ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos attempted to revive the moribund absurdities of the Steele dossier and alleged collusion between Donald Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign and the Russians. Naturally, CNN followed suit. While quixotic quests are sometimes admirable, this one is so toxic to our body politic, and so absurdly and palpably dishonest, that it must be interred without even faint hope of resurrection. 

Just for openers, the ongoing investigation by Special Counsel John Durham has provided solid links between Obama and Clinton officials and the Kremlin. A most obvious contact point is the recently indicted Igor Danchenko, the primary subsource for Christopher Steele’s infamous dossier. Danchenko, while a young researcher at the left-leaning Brookings Institution, reportedly tried to recruit two young Brookings staffers soon to have security clearance for classified information, asking them if they wanted to “make a little extra money.” 

The FBI’s counterintelligence investigation of Danchenko as a suspected spy was closed in 2010 when he left Brookings. But the question lingers: If he was unsuccessful in recruiting those two, was he successful with anyone else who did not report him?

Shortly after leaving Brookings, Danchenko co-authored a paper on Russia with a notable Brookings scholar and former colleague named Fiona Hill, who later held high-level national security positions with both the Obama and Trump Administrations. Danchenko’s co-authorship, attached to the reputable Hill, gave him both status and credibility.

But Hill was not finished helping Danchenko. In 2011, she introduced Danchenko to her friend Christopher Steele, a former British spy previously stationed in Russia, later running the Russian desk in London. Steele was not particularly successful in the latter posting, as defected FSB agent Alexander Litvinenko, who was assigned to his protection, met in 2006 with a fatal polonium breakfast. Was it incompetence, and only that, which caused this failure?  

How had Steele been paying for supper since leaving British government service? It is noteworthy that he soon developed a lucrative client for his research and investigation business, Orbis Business Intelligence: Oleg Deripaska. Deripaska is a wealthy Russian aluminum oligarch who has enjoyed an extremely close relationship with Vladimir Putin. Deripaska for years had been seeking recognition as the “good oligarch.” Steele’s provision of perhaps 100 reports to American government agencies, on Russian and Ukrainian subjects, helped burnish that image. The research, of course, was funded by Deripaska. 

Fiona Hill reemerged in early 2016 and introduced Clinton campaign aide and public-relations executive Charles Dolan to Danchenko. Dolan had represented the Russian Federation for eight years for its PR in the United States. Why would Hill, well before the FBI’s collusion investigation supposedly began in July 2016, feel that Dolan and Danchenko needed one another? Of course, the easy answer is that the FBI and CIA were already nosing around, as Steele and his Russian researcher Nellie Ohr knew.

While Hill was introducing the two, Hillary Clinton had by then become profoundly aware that she was deeply compromised by Russian email hackers. Remember that earlier, Clinton had allegedly helped acquire between $150 million and $350 million for the Clinton Foundation from parties seeking approval of the sale of Uranium One to, ultimately, Putin and Russia. Out of the nine agency sign-offs required to approve the deal, only one agency—Clinton’s State Department—was considered to have “equity” in the decision, so it was State’s decision to make or break. As a result of that sale, Vladimir Putin now has undisputed pricing power over sales to American nuclear utilities.

No doubt frighteningly for Clinton, 10 suspected Russian intelligence agents circling near the uranium deal were caught before the corrupt bargain closed. Rather than entice them to blab, with the prospect of a Miami condo and assumed identity, the Obama Administration shipped them all to Russia in a nanosecond, in exchange for just one American.So, the issue loomed in early 2016 of Russian kompromat, not on Trump, but on Hillary, probably buttressed by the 30,000 emails she destroyed, but also likely feared would reappear. Hillary, covertly through a law firm, hired Fusion GPS and Steele to engage in dishonest projection, accusing Trump of precisely what she had done. 

But there is more.

Incredibly, despite being the agent of a well-connected Russian oligarch, Steele in 2013 had managed to infiltrate the Department of Justice as a “confidential human source.”. He did so through cultivating a relationship with Bruce Ohr, then chief of the Justice Department’s organized crime unit. How this clear Russian agent was accepted into this status is the stuff of John le Carré novels. The Horowitz report on the FBI’s FISA abuse spells out this cultivation in dry, albeit eyebrow-raising, factual detail. (See pages 268-303.)

After Trump was elected, Ohr convened an interagency meeting of officials below his ranking to exhort them to assist . . . Oleg Deripaska. He explained to an incredulous aide that Deripaska was going to help the Justice Department deal with a “corrupted” Trump campaign. And Ohr worked, outside his job duties, to push his wife Nellie Ohr’s (conflict, much?) Manafort chronology on the Justice Department, to help prosecute Paul Manafort, who, not coincidentally, was Deripaska’s sworn enemy. Ohr also carried Steele’s reports to the FBI (not within his job description) after Steele was cut off by the FBI as a confidential human source after leaking to the press.

In addition, Steele claimed to the Department of State’s Kathleen Kavalec that through his sources he had access to Putin-affiliated Vyacheslav Trubnikov and Vladislav Surkov in compiling the Dossier. Trubnikov was a retired chief of Russian Intelligence agency SVR, and former first deputy of foreign affairs, while Surkov was still in power as a close confidant of Putin, such a close advisor that he was known as “Putin’s Rasputin.”

If they were Danchenko’s sources, do we believe that they were truthfully exposing, against Putin’s wishes, his supposed scheme to help Donald Trump? Can you say “disinformation”? All of this was financed by the Clinton Campaign and the DNC, approved by the White House which, quite cynically, after electoral defeat sanctioned Russia for interfering in the election. And, of course, one of Danchenko’s main sources was Charles Dolan, longtime Clinton campaign aide who was working in close consultation with Russian “diplomats” (read: spies).

How were the FBI and the White House to know of these unholy alliances? CIA Director John Brennan called for a special high-level briefing in the Oval Office on July 28, 2016, just as the FBI was about to open the “Crossfire Hurricane” investigation on Trump-Russian collusion. Brennan explained to President Obama, National Security Advisors Susan Rice and Denis McDonough, and FBI Director James Comey that solid, actionable intelligence suggested that Clinton was using Russian disinformation to smear Trump. Brennan, to his great credit, followed up on September 7, 2016 with a referral to the FBI of an investigative lead based upon the same Russian disinformation plot. Comey has since testified that this dramatic referral, “didn’t ring a bell.”

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that all of this pretty much sinks Hillary Clinton and her campaign as colluding with the Russian government to influence the election through disinformation. So, if former Clinton aide Stephanopoulos wants to continue to bet his reputational chips on the Steele dossier, lots of luck to him.  


SGT Report and And we Know-Nov 27


 

Hope you're enjoying the weekend! Here's tonight's news:


Non-Citizens Who Want to Vote Should Become Citizens First

Non-Citizens Who Want to Vote Should Become Citizens First

Voters at a polling location in New York City, November 2, 2021. (Mike Segar/Reuters)

Democrats on the New York City Council, last seen expelling Thomas Jefferson from their chamber, have decided to attack another venerable pillar of American democracy: citizenship. A veto-proof majority of the Council, backed by incoming mayor Eric Adams, plans to allow over 800,000 green-card holders and non-citizen residents with work permits to vote in municipal elections. This is not a small number of additional voters: no candidate for Mayor of New York has received 800,000 votes since Rudy Giuliani in 1993.

The immediate objection to the plan, which prompted even Bill de Blasio to veto it previously, is that it violates the state constitution, which provides that “Every citizen shall be entitled to vote at every election for all officers elected by the people . . . provided that such citizen is eighteen years of age or over and shall have been a resident of this state, and of the county, city, or village for thirty days next preceding an election,” and that “laws shall be made for ascertaining, by proper proofs, the citizens who shall be entitled to the right of suffrage hereby established.” It further requires the secret ballot for “elections by the citizens.”

No state permits non-citizens to vote. Ballot initiatives in Alabama, Colorado, and Florida explicitly limited the vote to citizens by overwhelming popular majorities in 2020, joining Arizona and North Dakota. The constitutions of many other states are written, like New York’s, with the assumption that voting rights derive from citizenship.

Each of the guarantees of voting rights in the national Constitution — in the 14th, 15th, 19th, 24th, and 26th Amendments — is explicitly limited to “citizens of the United States.” Since 1996, federal law has made it a felony for non-citizens to vote in federal elections, although federal law allows states to make their own choices.

Non-citizen voting is the latest push by progressives — along with felon voting and mass amnesty — who fear that they cannot win elections conducted only among law-abiding American citizens. San Francisco is presently the only major city to allow it, and the governance of San Francisco is not exactly a model that anyone should emulate. Chicago also allows non-citizens to vote in some school elections, as do several Maryland municipalities.

The Vermont legislature recently overrode a veto by governor Phil Scott of a plan to permit non-citizens to vote in Montpelier and Winooski. That plan faces its own legal challenges under Vermont’s constitution. The Illinois legislature and the city council of Washington, D.C., are also both considering proposals for non-citizen voting.

There are good reasons why Americans have traditionally limited the vote to citizens. Citizenship is no mere formality, as anyone who has attended a citizenship ceremony can attest. It is a bond of right, responsibility, and affection between the citizen and the nation. Duties such as voting and jury service have long been essential attributes of citizenship, limited to those who by residence and public declaration of allegiance have permanently joined the community. We require new citizens to pass a test to demonstrate their understanding of our history, values, and political system.

Adding the votes of non-citizens dilutes the votes of citizens as well as the value of citizenship itself. Moreover, while the push for legal resident voting is couched in part in the rhetoric of taxation without representation, anyone who has followed progressive politics can confidently predict that the success of these measures will lead to further efforts to enfranchise “undocumented” illegal aliens next. But non-citizens are not a separate, oppressed class; those who choose to become citizens are, like citizens under age 18, passing through a temporary status.

The Founders, though they welcomed immigrants and set for them a path to become citizens, were cautious about extending the franchise immediately to new arrivals. The proper time period to become a citizen was hotly debated: Congress changed it four times between 1790 and 1802, ranging from two years to 14 years before settling on five years. The intensity of the debate reflected the importance they placed on the status of citizen.

Alexander Hamilton, himself an immigrant, wrote that “The impolicy of admitting foreigners to an immediate and unreserved participation in the right of suffrage, or in the sovereignty of a Republic, is as much a received axiom as any thing in the science of politics, and is verified by the experience of all ages.” Jefferson warned that masses of immigrants from European monarchies “will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another.  It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty.” Maybe that is why the City Council didn’t want him to see what it would do next.

Just this month, New York State’s voters soundly rejected misbegotten progressive efforts to water down the state’s requirements for registration and voting. If the City Council votes to dilute the voting rights of the city’s citizens, the state should step in to protect them.


Here’s a List of Leftist Liars Whose Hands Are Stained with Waukesha’s Blood

These media lies are both intentional and pernicious. They spread like wildfire, and they are specifically meant to gin up racial hatred against white people.


It turns out that propaganda has consequences. Who could’ve imagined? 

Those consequences manifested themselves in the form of Darrell Brooks, a career felon and Black Lives Matter radical who allegedly mowed down nearly 50 people at a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wisconsin on Sunday night. He’s been charged with five counts of homicide. At the time of this writing, 10 children remain in intensive care at Wisconsin Children’s Hospital. 

A cursory search of his social media profiles shows that he was propagandized by the left-wing media. One of his most recent posts? A link to an NBC news article about Kyle Rittenhouse’s acquittal. He said he wasn’t “surprised [one] bit” about the verdict, presumably because news outlets like NBC have been force-feeding their far-Left audiences utter nonsense about “white supremacy” in America for years, and they turned up the dial after Rittenhouse walked on Friday. 

It’s time to name and shame the worst offenders

Recall that Rittenhouse was defending his community in Kenosha, Wisconsin on August 25, 2020, from a horde of Black Lives Matter and Antifa shock troops who were rioting over the “death” of Jacob Blake, a lowlife who spent his last moments standing upright attacking cops with a knife before he was shot by the police he attacked. 

In fact, Blake lived. He remains partially paralyzed from the waist down. You wouldn’t necessarily know that if your only source of the news is the corporate leftist press.

The Detroit Free Press falsely claimed in its Sunday print edition that Blake was killed by Kenosha police, sparking the Kenosha riots. 

ABC News’ Terry Moran, a senior national correspondent, said live on air that Blake was killed by Kenosha police. 

Over the weekend, ESPN’s Jalen Rose, a former NBA player, said that Blake had been killed by Kenosha police. What that has to do with basketball is anyone’s guess, but here’s a tip: if you get your political news in the form of soundbites from people whose only discernible skill is dribbling a ball, you are wholly unqualified to participate in political debate and you should shut up forever. 

Then there was a gaggle of evil propagandists—and keep in mind that they areevil and malicious, not simply stupid—who claimed that Blake was unarmed during his confrontation with police. 

One of those propagandists was Harvard Law Professor Ronald Sullivan, who wrote in the Wisconsin Examiner that Blake was unarmed. Nope. Blake had a knife. It’s safe to say Harvard, along with the rest of academia, isn’t what it used to be. 

CNN’s Jake Tapper, one of America’s most incorrigible propagandists, made the same claim live on air on August 25. 

It took three reporters from CNN’s esteemed print division to get the Blake story wrong. Amir Vera, Sarah Jorgensen, and Polo Sandoval published that same lie in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, citing, if you can believe it, a video of the incident. Don’t believe your lying eyes. That lie has never been corrected. 

The Washington Post, nearly always wrong but never in doubt, published that lie as late as January of this year. 

Vogue, which like ESPN should stay in its lane (as far as I can tell, that lane is expert analysis on how to become a 40-year-old spinster) published the lie that Blake was unarmed. Like CNN, Vogue also hasn’t bothered to issue a correction. 

As sure as the night follows day, you can expect that BuzzFeed is lying to you. That outlet published the same lie. 

Interwoven in the lies about Jacob Blake being dead and unarmed is, of course, the false narrative that Rittenhouse was a “white supremacist,” and that he was only acquitted because of some magic privilege afforded to him based on the color of his skin. 

The media, it should be noted, are doing their best to even that fabricated score by declaring open season on white people. 

That’s why outlets like CNN publish commentary from people like John Blake, a black man who claims, “There’s nothing more frightening in America today than an angry White man.” 

That piece was published hours before Brooks’ rampage, and I’d bet the victims of the Waukesha Christmas parade would beg to differ with his analysis. 

CBS’ Margaret Brennan allowed her Sunday “Face the Nation” guest, NAACP President and CEO Derrick Johnson, to claim that Rittenhouse picked up the “mantle” of white supremacists in Kenosha, and that Black Lives Matter was peacefully protesting when Rittenhouse was attacked by the mob. 

MSNBC’s certifiable lunatic Joy Reid, who was on vacation during the Rittenhouse verdict, joined her own show as a guest to compare Rittenhouse to “slave catchers” who gave white men “freedom” to kill black people. 

In fact, a huge chunk of the show was dedicated to race agitation.

Jason Johnson was guest-hosting Reid’s show, and he made the most of his opportunity to sit in the propaganda saddle. 

Johnson said he was afraid that white nationalists would declare “open season” on black people and anyone with a Black Lives Matter sticker, keeping with the unfounded media narrative that “white nationalists” are the greatest threat to America. 

MSNBC legal analyst Paul Butler claimed on the same program that Rittenhouse has inspired “white men who want to take the law into their own hands” to murder. 

NBC columnist and SiriusXM host Dean Obeidallah said on the show that the “GOP has mainstreamed white nationalism” and that now “they’re mainstreaming and celebrating political violence.” 

The show went on and on that way for its entire first segment. 

Even NBC “comedian” Amber Ruffin joined the propaganda party, trying her hand at cogent political analysis. In the way of factual information, it didn’t go well. In the way of propaganda, she couldn’t have done better. 

“It’s not OK for a man to grab a rifle, travel across state lines, and shoot three people and then walk free,” she said, despite none of that having happened. “It’s not OK for the judicial system to be blatantly and obviously stacked against people of color. It’s not OK for there to be an entirely different set of rules for white people.”  

Nearly 300,000 people “liked” the Ruffin clip on Twitter. 

There are hundreds more examples of this sort of propaganda. 

These media lies are both intentional and pernicious. They spread like wildfire, and they are specifically meant to gin up racial hatred against white people. 

The blood of Waukesha stains the hands of everyone listed above and countless others in the left-wing media, and a civilized society would lock these people up forever next to Darrell Brooks. 


Mr. T’s Holiday Words of Wisdom Put BLM’S Thanksgiving Scolding to Shame

Mr. T’s Outstanding Holiday Words of Wisdom Put BLM's Thanksgiving Scolding to Shame

(AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, File)

It never fails that around the holidays and other special occasions, radical leftists and members of the mainstream media (but I repeat myself) enjoy pouncing and seizing on the opportunity to bore everyone to tears by attempting to prove their “woke” creds, in the process proving to us how deeply unhinged/wacked most of them truly are.

For instance, there was Bulwark/The Atlantic writer Molly Jong-Fast’s bizarre suggestion this week that President Biden declare war on the Republican “enemy” going into the new year as well as urging so-called progressives to report their non-compliant relatives to the FBI in case their “deprogramming” efforts on Thanksgiving Day didn’t work.

There was also CBS Morning urging people to stick all their Thanksgiving guests in the garage and rapid-test them for COVID before allowing them into the house, and Axios floating the possibility of having a “Thanksgiving bouncer” on standby to confirm guests have recently tested negative for COVID.

Fortunately, not everyone jumped on the “let’s see how woke I can go” bandwagon on Thanksgiving. The actor Mr. T, most famous for his roles in the hit TV series “The A-Team” and the movie “Rocky III,” took to the Twitter machine Thursday evening likely after enjoying some turkey, stuffing, and mashed taters, and provided some food for thought on how he approaches the Thanksgiving holiday.

In it, he noted how being thankful is how we should approach every day, not just the one day out of the year that is dedicated to that specific purpose:


Happy Thanksgiving! Notice, if you please, I did not say, “Happy Thanksgiving Day” because “Thanksgiving” is more, way more, than a 24 hour period on a particular or special day. As a Christian, I am taught that Thanksgiving is everyday! Thanksgiving is a way of life to me…


He followed up with an enduring Biblical message:

Replying to @MrT
I am taught to care, to share, and to give; “God loveth a cheerful giver” 2 Corinthians 9


The moral of his story? Not only to be thankful every day but also to demonstrate it to your family, friends, and/or your local community in giving back in some meaningful way whenever you can.

Think about Mr. T’s outstanding words of wisdom and then contrast them with the Thanksgiving scolding people received from Black Lives Matter hacktivists, whose message was on how, “You are eating dry turkey and overcooked stuffing on stolen land,” as we reported earlier.

Cringe. Sounds like the only people eating “dry turkey and overcooked stuffing” on Thanksgiving Day were the perpetually unhappy grifters at Black Lives Matter HQ.

On one hand, we have “report your relatives to the FBI,” “stick guests in the garage for the holiday with a Thanksgiving bouncer,” and something something “dry turkey and stolen land,” versus “‘Thanksgiving’ is more, way more, than a 24 hour period on a particular or special day” and “Thanksgiving is a way of life.”

Which one likely resonates with a majority of the American people? I think the answer should be pretty obvious.