PODCAST: Sheriff David Clarke — Defunding Police Is ‘Buffoonery’!

/in , , , , , /by

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

DAVID CLARKE

America’s Sheriff, David Clarke now serves as a Senior Advisor and Spokesman for America First Action, dedicated to supporting the Trump/Pence agenda. He recently retired as the Sheriff of Milwaukee County after nearly 40 years in law enforcement. The Sheriff’s latest book is: Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hastags of Race, Crime and Politics for a Better America and his website: America’s Sheriff ..www.americassheriff.com.

TOPIC: Defunding Police Is ‘Buffoonery’!

ADAM ANDREZEJEWSKI

Adam Andrzejewski is the CEO & Founder of OpenTheBooks.com the world’s largest private database of government spending. Adam is a senior contributor at Forbes Opinion and frequent radio and tv opinion commenter.

TOPIC: Why California Is In Trouble

JULIE GUNLOCK

Julie Gunlock is a senior fellow at Independent Women’s Forum and leads the organization’s Culture of Alarmism Project. She is the author of the book From Cupcakes to Chemicals: How the Culture of Alarmism Makes Us Afraid of Everything and How to Fight Back. Before joining IWF, Gunlock served as a Professional Staff Member on the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and on the House Homeland Security Committee, and on the staffs of Ohio Senators Mike DeWine, George Voinovich, and Tom Coburn. Gunlock has written about food and culture for the New York Post, the Washington Post, New York Daily News, the Los Angeles Times, USA Today, Forbes, U.S. News & World Report, The Washington Times, National Review and Townhall.com. She has offered political commentary on Fox News, TheBlaze TV and other networks

TOPIC: Minneapolis City Council’s plans to defund and dismantle the police department

Trump’s Executive Order on Improving Policing Brings Welcome News in Troubled Times

/in , , , , /by

Since the tragic and inexcusable killing May 25 of George Floyd, Americans have called for police reform. Some proposed “reforms”—such as demands to defund or dismantle police departments—are misguided, while more measured responses may be appropriate.

After all, when tragic incidents like this occur, as they occasionally do, it is often the police who suffer the greatest backlash, both in threats to their own physical safety and in growing distrust from some in the communities they are sworn to serve and protect.

As I stated last week in a commentary with my colleague Cully Stimson: “Unfortunately, when a heinous crime like that occurs—regardless of whether it was the result of overt racism or just horrifically bad training or judgment—it rips the scab off an old and deep wound and rubs salt in it.”

Even though there are more African American police officers in positions of leadership than ever before, the police carry a lot of historical baggage—and they know it.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

House Democrats have introduced their police reform bill—the Justice in Policing Act—and Republicans in the House and Senate reportedly may soon unveil their own proposals.

President Donald Trump, meanwhile, signed an executive order Tuesday titled “Safe Policing for Safe Communities” and it is a definite step in the right direction.

In fact, this executive order builds on steps the president already has taken. Last October, the president created a Presidential Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, tasked, among other things, with looking at how to improve police departments’ relations with the communities they serve.

According to commission member Frederick Frazier, a 24-year veteran of the Dallas Police Department, the law enforcement commission already has conducted nine hearings, held 35 panels, heard from 125 witnesses, and received 190 written statements.

At a roundtable event Thursday in Dallas, Trump said: “We’re working to finalize an executive order that will encourage police departments nationwide to meet the most current professional standards for the use of force, including tactics for de-escalation.  Also, we’ll encourage pilot programs that allow social workers to join certain law enforcement officers so that they work together.”

At that same event, Attorney General William Barr said: “More and more, our police are being asked to deal with problems that [haven’t] previously been the problem of law enforcement. They have to deal with homeless people. They have to deal with a lot of mental health issues. They have to deal with … drug addiction, the drug addicts, and so forth. And providing some additional support to the police in these areas is going to be important.”

The new executive order addresses these and other issues. It does not sugarcoat the extent and nature of the problem.

After acknowledging that federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement officers “place their lives at risk every day to ensure that [our] rights are preserved,” Trump’s order continues:

Unfortunately, there have been instances in which some officers have misused their authority, challenging the trust of the American people, with tragic consequences for individual victims, their communities, and our Nation. All Americans are entitled to live with the confidence that the law enforcement officers and agencies in their communities will live up to our Nation’s founding ideals and will protect the rights of all persons. Particularly in African American communities, we must redouble our efforts as a Nation to swiftly address instances of misconduct.

In terms of professional standards, the executive order directs the attorney general to set standards and certify independent credentialing bodies that will, among other things, assess the efficacy of law enforcement agencies’ policies and training regarding use-of-force techniques (including prohibiting the use of chokeholds “except in those situations where deadly force is allowed by law”), de-escalation techniques, and early warning systems to identify problematic personnel issues, as well as practices around community engagement.

To incentivize law enforcement agencies to subject their policies and practices to this review, the order states that the attorney general

shall, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, allocate Department of Justice discretionary grant funding only to those State and local law enforcement agencies that have sought or are in the process of seeking appropriate credentials from a reputable independent credentialing body certified by the Attorney General.

It also provides that the attorney general should require credentialing bodies to confirm that any law enforcement agency’s use-of-force policies adhere to all applicable federal, state, and local law before it may be considered to be credentialed.

To prevent a situation where bad cops simply transfer from one police department to another, the president directs the attorney general to create or adopt a database that will enable police departments to share information about fully adjudicated cases against officers who engage in excessive uses of force.

The database will track “terminations or de-certifications of law enforcement officers, criminal convictions of law enforcement officers for on-duty conduct, and civil judgments against law enforcement officers for improper use of force” as well as “instances where a law enforcement officer resigns or retires while under active investigation related to the use of force” with aggregated data being made available to the general public.

And again, the attorney general is directed to allocate grant funding by the Justice Department to “only those law enforcement agencies that submit” such data.

As for the myriad new issues that police confront on a daily basis, to which Barr alluded in Dallas, the executive order cites the need to “take actionable steps to safely and humanely care for those who suffer from mental illness and substance abuse in a manner that addresses such individuals’ needs and the needs of their communities.”

While promoting “the use of appropriate social services as the primary response to individuals suffering from impaired mental health, homelessness, and addiction,” the order recognizes that law enforcement officers often encounter such individuals and must be “properly trained for such encounters.”

Trump’s order tasks the attorney general and the secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services to work together over the next 90 days to develop training and resources to support officers who encounter individuals suffering from impaired mental health, homelessness, and addiction. It instructs them to increase the capacity of social workers to work alongside law enforcement officers as part of new “co-responder programs” so that they arrive and together address situations in which people are in distress.

The order also directs the HHS secretary to conduct a survey of community support models that address mental health, homelessness, and addiction, and to submit a report within 90 days containing recommendations on how appropriated funds may be reallocated to support adoption of successful models, along with recommendations for additional funding, if needed.

Finally, the executive order tasks the attorney general with developing and proposing new legislation that, if enacted, would “enhance the tools and resources available to improve law enforcement practices and build community engagement.”

These would include grant programs to defray some costs associated with the new credentialing, information reporting, and co-responder/community support programs, as well as training and technical assistance pertaining to use-of-force policies and de-escalation techniques.

Such grant programs also might cover recruitment and retention of high-performing officers, confidential access to mental health services for law enforcement officers, and programs designed to improve relations between law enforcement agencies and their communities and to support nonprofit organizations that assist in the endeavor.

These measured but meaningful proposals are an excellent start and should receive broad bipartisan support in Congress and widespread adoption by law enforcement agencies.

If successfully implemented, these proposals should lead to greater accountability and transparency, increased trust between the police and the communities they serve, improved professionalism of police forces, and officer wellness.

The proposals also should result in more humane and safe treatment for those in distress who are homeless or suffering from the throes of addiction or a mental disorder and enter the criminal justice system as either perpetrators or victims.

This is welcome news in troubled times.

This commentary was modified shortly after publication to incorporate the Trump administration’s final language in the order.

COMMENTARY BY

John G. Malcolm

John G. Malcolm is the vice president of the Institute for Constitutional Government and director of the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies, overseeing The Heritage Foundation’s work to increase understanding of the Constitution and the rule of law. Read his research.Twitter: 

RELATED ARTICLES:

Anarchy in Downtown Seattle Not a ‘Festive Zone’

The Tyranny in the Left’s Goal of Outlawing ‘Hate Speech’

Who Will Bear Ultimate Cost of Rioting?

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Molotov-throwing Lawyer was Trained by Palestinian Radicals

/in , , , , , , /by

For several days I’ve been meaning to give you an update on the pair of Brooklyn lawyers, both new Americans, who were caught tossing an incendiary device into a police cruiser in a recent Antifa/Black Lives Matter riot in New York.

See my previous post here.

There is a lengthy discussion about the fools at the New York Times  where they are identified as being from immigrant families. He is Jamaican and Rahman was born in Pakistan according to the NYT. I wonder how many of our tax dollars went into educating this pair.

The New York Post published a video of Ms. Rahman extolling the virtues of violent protests.***

Here is Joshua Klein at Breitbart telling us more about where Fordham-educated attorney Urooj Rahman, 31, got her terror training.

Molotov-throwing Lawyer in Brooklyn Was Intern for Soros-funded Anti-Israel Group

One of the two lawyers accused of trying to torch an NYPD cruiser during protests that engulfed Brooklyn over the weekend spent a summer in the West Bank as a fellow and intern with radical Palestinian activist organizations.

Two attorneys, Colinford Mattis, 32, and Urooj Rahman, 31, reportedly were caught attempting to distribute homemade Molotov cocktail devices to protesters who were clashing with police near the 88th Precinct in Fort .

Rahman attempted to distribute Molotov cocktails to the witness and others so that those individuals could likewise use the incendiary devices in furtherance of more destruction and violence,” a witness was quoted as saying to authorities in a detention memo from federal prosecutors for the Eastern District of New York.

Rahman was captured in a photo obtained by the New York Daily News wearing a Palestinian keffiyeh on her face and holding a makeshift Molotov cocktail. The keffiyeh, a chequered black and white scarf, has become a symbol of Palestinian nationalism.

Rahman is a graduate from Fordham University law school. In 2014, she did a summer fellowship internship program at the Israel based Mada Al-Carmel’s Arab Center for Applied Social Research in a partnership program with Palestine Works.

The Mada Al-Carmel center is heavily financed by George Soros through his Open Society Foundations.

[….]

Rahman called for an “overhaul of policing in America” to end “gentrification’s violent effects on communities of colors,” echoing the central demand of some of the protest movement over George Floyd’s death.

Appearing before Judge Margo Brodie, Salmah Rizvi, a former high-level Obama intel official reportedly posted $250,000 bail to secure the release of Rahman.

Rahman reportedly had to return to federal custody after the U.S. Court of Appeals decided to reverse the decision by the District Court to allow her to post bail.

When she first posted bail, Rahman’s friend, Rizvi, told the court, “I earn $255,000 a year.” “Urooj Rahman is my best friend and I am an associate at the law firm Ropes & Gray in Washington, D.C.”

According to a report from Law360, the judge noted the strong evidence against Rahman, who was additionally accused of distributing incendiary devices to other rioters, but agreed to grant her bail due to the “willingness of family and friends to sign on as suretors.”

The Washington Free Beacon reported that Rizvi “served in intelligence posts in the Defense and State Departments during the Obama administration, where her high-value work would often inform the President’s Daily Briefs.”

To learn more about Rizvi, Rahman and the Soros connection, continue reading here.

On Friday the feds upped the charges against three bomb-throwers including Rahman. She and the two others face sentences of life in prison.

See the indictment here.

Bail was earlier revoked for Rahman and Mattis.  See here.

Endnote:  If one went behind the scenes to see the Leftists training their journalists, I expect the number one instruction is for them to tell the stories of the lives of individuals—poor immigrants, poor abused African Americans, poor____ (fill in the blank)—to play on the emotions of the reader or viewer.

Why aren’t we doing more of that—telling the sad stories of those abused and injured by the Leftists and their policies? 

***Just as I was wrapping up, the link to the video at the NY POST was not working, but here is the entire clip at Youtube:

EDITORS NOTE: This Frauds, Crooks and Criminals column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

NYPD Cops Poisoned at Shake Shack: Where We Are Heading?

/in , , , , , , , /by

Americans are now facing a new reality: Three New York Police Department (NYPD) cops had their drinks poisoned with bleach at Shake Shack.

https://twitter.com/NYCPDDEA/status/1272721892131188743?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1272721892131188743&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fclarionproject.org%2Fnypd-cops-poisoned-at-shake-shack%2F

This comes at the heels of National Guardsmen who found shards of glass baked into a pizza they ordered while deployed at the Washington, D.C. protests.

It is interesting to note other cases where shards of glass were weaponized against political opponents. During Ayatollah Khomeini’s Islamic revolution in Iran, a band of women drove around searching for women who deviated from the new norms. If they found a woman wearing lipstick, they would hand them a napkin to wipe it off. The napkin would be laced with shards of glass.

Taking things by force is at the heart of what extremists do. It’s a repeated pattern that crosses all extremist ideologies. While its current incarnation started with good intentions, there is unfortunately an extremist undercurrent steering its direction, which includes taking things by the illegitimate use of force and cancelling all other points of view.

This isn’t happening in a vacuum

In addition to reporting and training communities about how to prevent violent extremism in the next generation, Clarion Project also studies and reports on the trends that romanticize and glamorize extremism.

What we can say is that the current situation in America is not happening in a vacuum.

We all remember that Rolling Stone cover of the Boston Bomber in 2013 that portrayed terrorist Dzhokhar Tsarnaev much in the same way as previous magazine covers of rocks stars like Bob Dylan or Jim Morrison.

Then there was the 2018 TV series called Waco, which retold the story of cult leader David Koresh, the Branch Davidians and their stand off with law enforcement, which was a psychological power struggle asserted ultimately through physical force.

The show pretends to be nuanced, offering alternative points of view that give insight into the extremist cult. However, it leans heavily in favor of highlighting the Brand Davidians as rebels looking to find belonging outside an empire, while portraying law enforcement as brutes save one exception.

Ryan Mauro, director of Clarion’s Intelligence Network, weighs in:

“The series would leave anyone with the perception that the government is essentially tyrannical and evil, holding little regard for human life. If I belonged to a group urging preparation for an armed revolt against the government, I’d play Waco on loop in my compound.”

Koresh’s cult, jihadism, white supremacism and anti-government extremism are all predicated on the idea that the U.S. government is evil, is planning to extinguish all resistance, and an armed uprising is inevitable and necessary.

If you believe the U.S. government is evil, you’ll interpret everything law enforcement does in the most malicious way. All these ideologies require the dehumanization of law enforcement.”

Dehumanizing law enforcement has been a theme in our society since at least the 1960s. It is one that is pressed into our collective subconscious long before anyone takes to the streets or pours bleach in a drink.

Last year, Clarion pointed to a popular new show that inverted the most iconic role of superhero into psychopath. Amazon’s successful and entertaining new show The Boys had a message that couldn’t be ignored: Superheroes are the villains and vigilantes are the real heroes.

Right now, we’re seeing that plot line playing out on our streets. It features a mass movement that has turned all law enforcement into the villain and all opposition to it into the hero — without discrimination between protester, rioter and now attempted murderers.

In real life, first responders are human beings, some who take the high ground morally and some who don’t. Oftentimes, our men and women in blue are the closest thing we have to heroes in our communities. There are a unique set of individuals willing to put their lives on the line for us every day they come to work (and even when they are off duty or retired, as we saw in the case of Captain David Dorn, who was shot and left to die defending his friend’s store from rioters).

Of course there is a very real need to deal with corruption in our police forces. No doubt we need change, but how that change happens matters very much. Yet, it is a form of mass societal self-sabotage to dismantle the only barrier that stands a peaceful civilians and those who choose to be a threat.

What we  can start with is a common premise: extremist ideology from any direction will not point us forward, and that includes New York’s new bail law that lets even the most violent criminals back out on the street within hours without posting bail.

RELATED STORIES:

Atlanta Police Walk Out After District Attorney Charges Former Officer With Murder

To Bend the Knee or Not Bend the Knee

Does Amazon’s Boys Explain Mass Shootings?

How to Spot an Extremist Movement

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Florida Alert! Young Americans for Liberty Force Nikki Fried to Reopen Concealed Weapons License applications in Florida

/in , , , , , , /by

Young American for Liberty declared VICTORY today after forcing Florida Agriculture Commissioner to back down. Their Press Release follows:

Victory! YAL forces Nikki Fried to reopen Concealed Weapons License applications in Florida

Tallahassee, FL — Under pressure from YAL President Cliff Maloney, Florida Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services Nikki Fried has finally reopened the Sunshine State’s online application process for concealed weapons licenses.

The controversy began on March 23, 2020, when Fried — Florida’s only statewide elected Democrat — completely froze the online application process for concealed weapons licenses, citing concerns that Floridians won’t be able to obtain fingerprinting and might become “frustrated.” Then, in May, Maloney filed suit against Fried, arguing that Fried’s preference for her own agenda over the Constitutional rights of Floridians cannot be tolerated.

“Nikki Fried tried to use COVID-19 as an opportunity to advance her authoritarian, gun-grabbing agenda. She lost and the people of Florida won,” said Maloney. “Let this victory serve as a reminder that our right to self defense is non-negotiable and that millions of law abiding gun-owners will not sit idly by while tyrants attempt to silence us.”

View the Official Press Release Here

RELATED VIDEO:

https://twitter.com/jason_howerton/status/1272627125938532352

EDITORS NOTE: This NRA-ILA column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Gorsuch Helps Transform the Supreme Court Into the Supreme Legislature on LGBT Rights

/in , , , , , , /by

In what dissenting Justice Samuel Alito called one of the most “brazen abuse[s]” of the Supreme Court’s authority, a six-member majority of the court led by Justice Neil Gorsuch has rewritten Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of “sex.”

Why bother trying to pass the proposed Equality Act when you can get the justices to make law for you?

Title VII prohibits an employer from failing or refusing “to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual … because of such individual’s race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”

Gorsuch—joined by the four liberal justices, along with Chief Justice John Roberts—decided that employment decisions that take any account of an employee’s sexual orientation or gender identity necessarily entail discrimination based on sex in violation of Title VII.

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

In Bostock v. Clayton County, Georgia, which was combined with two other cases, Gorsuch wrote that the straightforward application of the terms in Title VII, according to their ordinary public meaning at the time of its enactment, means that an employer violates the law when it intentionally fires an individual based in part on sex.

In a logical and legal leap, Gorsuch then argued that includes sexual orientation and gender identity, since those concepts are related to sex.

Thus, Gorsuch reasoned, it means the employer is treating individuals differently because of their sex. An employer cannot escape liability by showing that it treats men and women comparably as groups. The employer has violated the law even if it subjects all male and female homosexual and transgender employees to the same treatment.

Gorsuch dismissed as irrelevant the historical fact that none of the legislators who passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964 would have ever expected or contemplated that Title VII’s ban on employment discrimination on the basis of sex would apply to a man hired by a funeral home who then told his new employer, the R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Home, that he planned to “live and work full-time as a woman.”

That was one of the three cases before the court. That provision of the 1964 law was intended to stop the blatant employment discrimination rampant against women at that time.

The majority opinion by Gorsuch upending more than five decades of prior precedents was only 33 pages long. Alito, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, filed a blistering dissent in which he said that “there is only one word for what the Court has done today: legislation.” He pointed out that the majority’s claim that it is “merely enforcing the terms of the statute” is “preposterous.”

As Alito undisputedly says, “if every single American had been surveyed in 1964, it would have been hard to find any who thought that discrimination because of sex meant discrimination because of sexual orientation—not to mention gender identity, a concept that was essentially unknown at the time.”

The majority tries to “pass off its decision” as just an application of the term “sex” in Title VII, claiming it is applying the textualism championed by the late Justice Antonin Scalia. But according to Alito, that claim and the majority’s opinion “is like a pirate ship.” He added:

It sails under a textualist flag, but what it actually represents is a theory of statutory interpretation that Justice Scalia excoriated—the theory that courts should ‘update’ old statutes so that they better reflect the current values of society.

Alito said that the majority’s “arrogance” is “breathtaking,” since “there is not a shred of evidence that any Member of Congress interpreted the statutory text that way when Title VII was enacted.”

Neither “sexual orientation,” nor “gender identity” appear on the list of five specified grounds for discrimination in Title VII, and the majority’s “argument is not only arrogant, it is wrong,” he wrote.  The terms “sex,” “sexual orientation,” and “gender identity” are “different concepts,” and neither of the two latter terms are “tied to either of the biological sexes.”

Alito is, of course, entirely correct, as one of us pointed out in a recent article in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy.

And, of course, Congress knew that “sex” didn’t include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity.” Alito recalled that there have been numerous bills introduced in Congress over the past 45 years to amend the law and add those terms, but they all failed.

The majority is “usurping the constitutional authority of the other branches” of government and has taken the latest congressional bill on this topic and “issued it under the guise of statutory interpretation.”

Justice Brett Kavanaugh also filed a dissenting opinion, in which he wrote that “this case boils down to one fundamental question:  Who decides?”

The issue is whether Title VII “should be expanded to prohibit discrimination because of sexual orientation,” he wrote, adding that responsibility “belongs to Congress and the President in the legislative process, not to this Court.”

Kavanaugh lauded the “extraordinary vision, tenacity, and grit” of the gay and lesbian community for working “hard for many decades to achieve equal treatment in fact and in law.”  But, he added, under separation of powers, “it was Congress’s role, not this Court’s, to amend Title VII.”

Alito made it clear that the “updating desire to which the Court succumbs no doubt rises from humane and generous impulses.” But the “authority of this Court is limited to saying what the law is.”

In their dissents, Alito, Thomas, and Kavanaugh got it right, and the majority got it wrong. The word “sex”— still today as when Congress passed the Civil Rights Act in 1964—refers to our biological reality as male or female. It doesn’t refer to our sexual orientations or malleable gender identities as some see it.

If those terms were contained within Title VII, there would have been no need for Congress to repeatedly try to amend the law to add sexual orientation and gender identity as protected classes.

In an act of judicial activism, a majority of the Supreme Court has simply legislated from the bench and amended the statute itself.

Congress has not legislated such an outcome, and it was wrong for the court to usurp lawmakers’ authority by imposing such an extreme policy on our nation without the consent of the governed.

COMMENTARY BY

Hans von Spakovsky

Hans von Spakovsky is an authority on a wide range of issues—including civil rights, civil justice, the First Amendment, immigration, the rule of law and government reform—as a senior legal fellow in The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and manager of the think tank’s Election Law Reform Initiative. Read his research.Twitter: .

Ryan T. Anderson

Ryan T. Anderson, Ph.D., is the William E. Simon Senior Research Fellow in American Principles and Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation, where he researches and writes about marriage, bioethics, religious liberty and political philosophy. Anderson is the author of several books and his research has been cited by two U.S. Supreme Court justices in two separate cases. Read his Heritage research.Twitter: .

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO EXCLUSIVE: Counterterrorism Expert Says ‘The Goal Of Antifa Is To Overthrow The Government’

/in , , , , , , /by

Kyle Shideler, director and senior analyst for homeland security and counterterrorism at the Center for Security Policy, spoke with the Daily Caller’s Samantha Renck about the history of Antifa, Seattle’s Capitol Hill Autonomous Zone and more.

“You probably started hearing the term ‘Antifa’ maybe back in the trouble with Berkeley and some of the cancellations that were taking place of conservative speakers on college campuses,” Shideler said. “But that’s only about two, three years ago.”

The reality of Antifa, as Shideler explained, dates back to the 1930s.

“We traced it in the article all the way back to 1932 when the Communist Party of Germany founds Anti-Fascist Action.”

Shideler expressed concerns for the amount of support Antifa receives from local and state officials.

“What is distressing is the level of support that Antifa does get from local and state officials from some of these more radical areas,” Shideler said. “We’ve seen these in Portland, we’re seeing it in Seattle with the mayor and some of the city council members who are essentially supporting this insurrection.”

Shideler emphasized that the ongoing situation in Seattle can and will also be used as fuel for future movements.

“Even though this won’t last, this zone is not going to last, the people who took this action are learning lessons, they are creating propaganda, they are motivating new followers, and we’re going to see all of those things happen again.”

Shideler talked more about the situation in Seattle, the future of Antifa, its threat to the country and more.

RELATED ARTICLES:

We Have Correspondents On The Ground In Seattle’s No Cop Zone. Here’s What It Looks Like

Tom Cotton: NYT Column Calling To Abolish Police ‘Puts Lives In Danger’

‘Should Send Shivers Down The Spine Of Every American’: Tim Scott Rips CHAZ, Defund Police Efforts

‘Don’t Mess With The Alamo,’ Texas Land Commissioner George P Bush Warns Protesters

Weekend At CHAZ: A Commune Block Party Punctuated With Brief Power Struggles, Infighting

EXCLUSIVE: ‘I’ve Been Scared Every Day’: Seattle Resident Speaks Out About Life On The Border Of CHAZ

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: We Will Hold Those Accountable — The Hunt Is On

/in , , , , , , /by

AG Bill Barr while being interviewed by Brett Baier of FOX NEWS stated that he gets the frustration of the American people when they say why haven’t people been prosecuted for their crimes and arrested. He said “the wheels of justice grind slowly”. Barr went on to say that “we will hold those accountable”.

We Will Hold Those Accountable The Hunt Is On

Before we get into the highlights of the treasure trove of solid insights as to the Durham investigation and the soon to be take down of the deep state, it is noteworthy to mention that AG Barr is conducting an active investigation on ANTIFA and others to get to the source of funding and leadership. But with regards to the Durham investigation, AG Barr stated that “this isn’t being driven by producing a report, we are trying to get to a point where we can hold accountable anyone who crossed the line and committed a criminal violation”. AG Barr also indicated there will be public disclosure at the appropriate time. Bill Barr said they seemed to ignore all of the exculpatory evidence during the Russia investigation. Barr stated they moved forward with the investigation even after discovering that there was nothing there. When asked by Baier if we would recognize some of the names, Barr replied by saying, yes, some of them. Barr also indicated that he is very troubled by what has been brought to his attention. When Baier asked about any pending charges AG Barr responded by saying “I cannot discuss any future charges”. So, yes we will hold those accountable as the hunt is on.

Full Interview:

Summary

Here’s what you may be missing as Covid, Floyd, CHAZ, and the disbanding of police are the FF dujor’s clogging up the real news cycle. Things are speeding up now. False flag events are being spotted for what they are by an increasing number of people and at a rapid rate, meaning not much time lapses before the people see it for what it is.

The deep state is panicking and exposed. Tucker Carlson for one, has already called the Covid -19 just that, a FF although you wont hear the term “False Flag” on the news as these are no go words. Meanwhile, DNI Ratcliff is continuing to declassify the intel and Lindsey Graham has begun hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee with Rod Rosenstein as the first one in the hot seat.

The Senate Judiciary just gave Lindsey Graham sweeping subpoena powers in review of Russia probe. Why it matters: Graham now has sweeping authority to subpoena documents and more than 50 individuals related to the Russia investigation, including former FBI director James Comey, former CIA director John Brennan and former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper. The Epstein case is still very much alive as we saw yet another attempt at questioning Prince Andrew with regards to the Epstein matter. And Flynn? Flynn (and Stone for that matter), will be free and the Flynn case alone, will bring down the house.

So yes, we will hold those accountable as the hunt is now on. The deep state has been trapped and now real hearings in the Senate have begin under oath as opposed to the treasonous failed coup attempts of the past in the DOJ, FBI, CI and in various House hearings. It is my opinion, that there is a chance we may see indictments, charges and arrest late summer or fall of 2020 by John Durham and for certain after Trump’s landslide victory in November. Friends and fellow patriots, it’s happening. It’s happening. Stay safe. False flags will escalate. Don’t buy the lies. Refuse to be fearful.

We are winning. Nothing can stop what’s coming, nothing. The best is yet to come. Stay the course, trust the plan, Freedom, it’s up to us. WWG1WGA.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED RESOURCES:

ANTIFA Manual

US Government Insurgency Guide

Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association

HHS Failure of Compliance with 1986 NCVIA

Inverted Alchemy: An Integral Economy

Share Together Now – Stop Child Trafficking

VIDEO: MIAMI, FL — Muslim cleric says Christianity responsible for riots and looting, Islam is the solution

/in , , , , , /by

Yes, nothing could be clearer than that the rioters and looters are deeply committed Christians. In reality, of course, this is wildly absurd, but Kablawi is not interested in facts. He is interested in reinforcing the idea, increasingly widespread nowadays, that the US, its traditions, its culture, its heritage, its dominant religion, are at fault for all the ills in the country and the world today, and that the solution to all our problems is Islam. There are many non-Muslims, ignorant of the true history of the West and filled with the anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Western propaganda that our colleges and universities relentlessly pump into them, who will be susceptible to this.

“Miami Imam Dr. Fadi Yousef Kablawi: Christianity Is Responsible For The Looting In America; Darwin Called To Exterminate Dark-Skinned People He Saw As Half-Humans; Muslims Should Not Attend BLM Protests,” MEMRI, June 5, 2020:

In a Friday, June 5, 2020 sermon delivered at the North Miami Islamic Center, which is known also as Masjid As-Sunna An-Nabawiyya North Miami, Imam Dr. Fadi Yousef Kablawi said that he is saddened by Muslims who participate in Black Lives Matter protests because “every life matters.” He said that Christianity is the main problem in America and the West today since Christians believe that Jesus died for their sins and that as a result, they believe that they can commit crimes such as looting and repent for them later. He stated that the solution to America’s problems is Islam. Later in the sermon, Imam Kablawi said that according to Darwinism, the European race must “exterminate the savage race” of people with bigger lips and darker skin. The sermon, titled “This Is How We Should Look at the George Floyd Issue as Muslims,” was streamed live on the mosque’s Facebook page. Dr. Kablawi, who is a dentist and originally from Jordan, had written an article in Ghurabaa Islamic Magazine in 2010, saying that the Jews incurred the anger of God. In November 2019, Salman Rashid, who is affiliated with the North Miami Islamic Center, was arrested for plotting an ISIS attack against the deans of Broward College and Miami Dade College.

Imam Dr. Fadi Yousef Kablawi: “You look at Muslims going to support the cause of Black Lives Matter – every life matters! Every life matters. And it hurts when you see Muslims raising signs like that. Every life matters. If you are going to stand against injustice, you stand against injustice that could be committed against every individual.

[…]

“That is the very problem I see in America – Christianity. Seriously. And Europe is not any better. Christianity – the way it got corrupted – is the main reason for what we see happening in this country. Christianity.

[…]

“[Jesus] – that’s their god, as they claim – he was killed. But he was not killed for a bad reason, he was killed for your sins. So it does not matter what you do, as much looting as you do – at the end of the week, you are forgiven.

[…]

“Go [to church] on Sunday and confess or repent and you are good. As long as you believe that Jesus Christ died for your sins, you are fine. You tell me how such a religion will create good citizens.

[…]

“So what’s the solution for this aspect? Islam. Islam.

[…]

“Christianity – we already established – is the cause of the problem. The way they implemented it… But Christianity – the pure, original one that came from Allah – is Islam. It is the religion of Allah. But the way they changed it and corrupted it is the [reason] they are now suffering.

[…]

“[Charles Darwin] said that the Europeans, this civilized race – [in order for them] to be able to continue to improve and to become more civilized – they must exterminate the savage race. That is Darwinism. So the fact that people have bigger lips, darker skin, or this… And he believes that we come from monkeys… Your father is a monkey, not my father! Your dad is a monkey, and I refuse for my dad to be a monkey or to admit that. Who is happy to say his dad is an ape, are you crazy? But anyway, the fact that people still have big lips and all that, they are closer – that’s what he says… They are in a stage between humans and beasts – animals. I’m telling you brothers. This is Darwin.”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Lawsuit alleges that Qatar Charity funded jihad terror attacks that killed Americans and Israelis

Hamas-Linked CAIR Files Suit: Professor Is ‘Disapproving of Islam’

Jordanians explain why they don’t want a Palestinian state

UK: Muslim stabs rabbi in “hate crime,” cops say it’s not “terror-related”

India: In a dingy gully of progressive Mumbai, Bohra Muslims are removing the clitorises of little girls

Iran to execute informant who led CIA and Mossad to Qassem Soleimani

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Trump Finalizing Executive Order, Says He Wants To Increase Police Funding

/in , , , , , , /by

President Donald Trump said Thursday that his administration was finalizing an executive order focusing on police reform amid widespread protests over the death of George Floyd.

The statement, which came during a roundtable with law enforcement officers in Dallas, addressed police funding, social workers and de-escalation tactics, Politico reported. It also came amid demonstrations and rioting over Floyd, who died May 25 after a Minneapolis police officer knelt on his neck for about nine minutes, video showed.

“We’re working to finalize an executive order that will encourage police departments nationwide to meet the most current professional standards for the use of force, including tactics for de-escalation,” Trump said. “Also, we’ll encourage pilot programs that allow social workers to join certain law enforcement officers so that they work together.”

Trump emphasized his support for law enforcement and said he wanted to increase funding toward it.

“We’re not defunding the police. If anything we’re going the other route. We’re going to make sure our police are well trained, perfectly trained, they have the best equipment,” Trump said.

The announcement came amid growing calls to defund police departments nationwide or even abolish police altogether.

The president also announced Thursday preliminary plans to build “safety and opportunity and dignity” in communities of color by increasing access to capital for minority-owned small businesses and by confronting the health care disparities that have long existed.

COLUMN BY

ANDREW TRUNSKY

Contributor

RELATED ARTICLES:

Charles Barkley Rips Movement To Defund The Police

Poll: 55% Of Democrats Support Defunding The Police

Chicago Police Union President Says He Won’t Tolerate Officers Kneeling With Protesters

Two-Thirds Of Americans Don’t Want To Defund Police: Poll

‘Absolute Monarchy’: Catholic Priests, Jewish Congregants Sue Cuomo, De Blasio Over Alleged Double Standards On Worship,…

RELATED VIDEO:

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Caller column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

White Privilege and Other Matters

/in , , , , /by

I grew up the beneficiary of white privilege. It was my “privilege” to spend my first fifteen years in a cold-water tenement at 131 Beverage Hill Avenue in Pawtucket, Rhode Island.  There was no central heating.  The tenement was heated by the same kitchen stove on which the cooking was done.

If you wanted to wash your hands or face in warm water, you had to heat a bucket of water on the stove and then pour it into a sink.  If you wanted a warm bath, you had to heat many buckets of water and pour them into the bathtub.  There was of course no shower.

In the winter, to conserve heat, you closed off the front room of the tenement.  The kitchen became our all-purpose room.  To replenish the fuel that supplied the heating segment of our stove, you went down to the basement, filled a container with kerosene, then walked up two flights of stairs.

When my young sister needed medical treatment, we had the “privilege” of selling our old second-hand (or was it third-hand?) car, and then living for years without an automobile.  But this in turn gave us the “privilege” of riding the bus to downtown Pawtucket to do our shopping.  On Friday evenings my mother and I would go to one of the supermarkets then located in downtown Pawtucket, and I, a shrimp of a lad, had the “privilege” of lugging heavy grocery bags back home on the bus.  My mother had the same “privilege.”

Around 1950, my father suffered a crippling attack of arthritis that kept him out of work and often in bed for a year.  At that time we had the “privilege” of slipping from near-poverty into downright poverty.  Fortunately, almost miraculously, my father recovered, and as soon as he did he got a job and went back to work, traveling via three buses from our home to his workplace at the distant western edge of Providence.

But in addition to my many “privileges,” I had some real advantages growing up in Pawtucket.  First and foremost, I had two married parents with a very strong sense of parental duty.  They worked hard, they played by the rules, they put family above individual self.

Second, I had Pawtucket public schools: Prospect Street School and Goff Junior High School.  The teachers, the great majority of them unmarried women, were marvelous.  They stuffed my head with knowledge and, more importantly, the desire for further knowledge.  Later, when my family had rebounded from poverty and could afford to pay the $100 annual tuition, I went to St. Raphael Academy, a Christian Brothers school with marvelous teachers.  (The tuition now is well over $10,000 per annum; and there are no longer any Christian Brothers there.)

Third, I had the Catholic religion and its many Pawtucket churches.  The religion reinforced the lessons in good conduct that I had learned at home and at school.  It taught me to behave myself, and it taught me to feel guilty when my behavior fell below ideal standards (which it sometimes still does).

Fourth, I had the Pawtucket Boys’ Club, which supplied me with friends and with good clean recreation.

*

Finally, I had the city of Pawtucket itself – “the birthplace of the American industrial revolution,” for it was here that America’s first textile factory was built in 1790.  In my boyhood (the 1940s and ‘50s) Pawtucket was in the last stages of what may be called its golden age.  It was a splendid city for a boy to grow up in – a blue-collar city just right for boys from blue-collar families.

Downtown Pawtucket was vibrant, filled with people and stores and banks and restaurants and movie theaters – plus the Boys’ Club.  (Nowadays downtown is a ghost town).  The streets were safe.  Violence rarely went beyond an occasional fistfight.  Even though much of the city was densely packed with tenement houses, there always seemed to be plenty of room for kids to play.

Everybody who is not a complete idiot knows and admits that America has a long and horrible history of anti-black racism – 250 years of slavery and 100 years of post-emancipation racial segregation.  And everybody, not just virtuous liberals, deplores that history.  But everybody who is not self-deceived also knows that white racism is at most a minor factor in the misery that prevails today in much of black America.

If blacks, on average, are worse off than the average white in almost every category of well-being – health, income, education, jobs, and many others – this is chiefly because of an appallingly dysfunctional culture that is pervasive among the black lower classes and tends even to “percolate” upwards into the black middle classes.

This culture fosters and condones attitudes that lead to astronomical rates of out-of-wedlock births (more than 70 percent of black births are to unmarried women), millions of fathers who give little or no support to their children, high rates of crime and violence, high levels of drug abuse, a poor work ethic, very poor academic achievement.

Unless these aspects of the culture are reformed and healed, we may expect that great numbers of blacks will live in misery for the next few hundred years.

The greatest enemies of American blacks today are, in my humble opinion, white liberals who have a vested interest in keeping alive the myth of white racism.  White liberals – who by and large are truly privileged, having good educations, jobs, incomes, houses, cars, wine, coffee, etc. – like to believe that all whites other than themselves are racists.  For this allows white liberals to feel morally superior to everybody else.

And so white liberals – who dominate the “command posts” of American moral propaganda (the mainstream media, the entertainment industry, and our leading colleges and universities – are endlessly telling blacks that they are the victims of white racism, thus encouraging blacks to feel powerless, angry, and resentful, and diverting them from focusing on their real problem, a dysfunctional subculture.

Dear God, send us some truth.

COLUMN BY

David Carlin

David Carlin is a professor of sociology and philosophy at the Community College of Rhode Island, and the author of The Decline and Fall of the Catholic Church in America.

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. All rights reserved. The Catholic Thing. All rights reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Judicial Watch Asks DC Mayor for Permission to Paint ‘Because No One is Above Law!’ on Capitol Hill Street

/in , , , , , /by

Seeks Equal Access to New Free Speech Forum After DC Government Authorized Painting of Political Slogan on DC Street.

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it has formally asked District of Columbia Mayor Muriel Bowser and DC Attorney General Karl Racine for permission to paint “Because No One is Above the Law!” on a Capitol Hill street (Independence Ave, SW between 2nd and 4th Streets SW). The Judicial Watch message would be the identical size and coloring of the DC Government’s “Black Lives Matter” political message on 16th Street NW.

On June 5, 2020, after days of protests and riots in Washington, DC, Mayor Bowser authorized the painting of “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW, and later allowed “Defund the Police” to be painted alongside it.

“Mayor Bowser made a decision to turn DC streets into a forum for public expression. Judicial Watch seeks equal access to use this new forum to educate Americans by painting our organization’s motto and motivation, ‘Because No One Is Above the Law!,’ on a Capitol Hill street,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “This rule of law message is timely, as it a reminder that rule of law applies to – and protects – all Americans. If we are unlawfully denied access and face viewpoint discrimination, we are prepared to go to court to vindicate our First Amendment rights.”

The following is Judicial Watch’s June 10 letter to Mayor Bowser and Attorney General Racine:

Re: Request to Paint Message on Independence Avenue SW

Dear Mayor Bowser and Attorney General Racine:

We note with interest Mayor Bowser’s recent decision approving the painting of “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW and the approval of and/or acquiescence in the painting of “Defund the Police” alongside the first message. Both messages are expressive activity.

Judicial Watch, Inc. is a Washington, DC-based, non-profit organization headquartered in Southwest DC. For more that twenty-five years, Judicial Watch, Inc. has promoted transparency, accountability and integrity in government and fidelity to the rule of law. Our motto is “Because No One Is Above the Law!” – a message that is particularly relevant today because it applies equally to law enforcement and public officials as well as to protesters, looters, and rioters.

Because DC streets surfaces are now being used as public fora for expressive activity, we would like to have our motto painted on a street, preferably Independence Avenue SW, between 2nd and 4th Streets SW, which is near our offices. The lettering would be identical in size and color to the lettering used to paint “Black Lives Matter” on 16th Street NW. Judicial Watch, Inc. would pay the cost of the painting, but we would likely need the assistance of the DC Government to aid in traffic diversion and parking restrictions while the painting is completed. Of course, the painting could be completed when traffic is typically light, as was done with the “Black Lives Matter” message.

As the timeliness of our message is important, please respond within 3 working days. If the Independence Avenue location is not possible, we are open to considering alternative locations. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

Tom Fitton
President, Judicial Watch

EDITORS NOTE: This Judicial Watch column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Legal Challenge to No-Fault Divorce

/in , , , , /by

LINCOLN, Neb. (ChurchMilitant.com) – After five decades of legality, so-called no-fault divorce — in which the dissolution of a marriage does not require the showing of wrongdoing by either party — is being challenged in court.

On Sept. 3, 2020, Attorney Bob Sullivan will appear on behalf of his client before the Nebraska Supreme Court to discuss the appeal he made against a no-fault divorce order from a county judge.

The appeal brief says the Nebraska statute is unconstitutional and that the court made multiple errors, including denying the husband’s motion to dismiss the case.

The injustice of Easy Divorce

Bai Macfarlane of Mary’s Advocates, a nonprofit working to reduce unilateral, no-fault divorce on behalf of those who are unjustly abandoned, posted on Twitter a live video that Mike, the estranged husband, took when he returned home one December night, 2019.

https://twitter.com/Marys_Advocates/status/1204603391973961728

“No-fault divorce is absolutely evil,” said Mike, as he met an eviction notice taped to his front door when returning home. He reads it to himself. “[The notice] basically says I’ve been kicked out of my own house.”

Then his wife opens the door and with a stern voice threatens to call the police on him for trespassing. He only wanted a few of his belongings.

“Can you believe this? Two cop cars [coming],” Mike said. “I’m evicted from my home. I’m peaceably here trying get some toiletries and some personal items so I can sleep someplace other than my home of 28 years,” he lamented.

Then a police officer showed up to escort him off his own property, per order of a judge. Mike explained to the officer the injustice of what is going on.

“I’m a pretty strong Catholic and I don’t believe in divorce at all,” Mike told the officer. “I can’t cooperate with the divorce itself. Had I followed the orders and took off and left, it would have probably shown that I was cooperating with the divorce.”

The officer did not acknowledge what Mike said, but ordered him to immediately leave his own property. As Macfarlane says, Mike was never accused of abuse or adultery; the judge just found the marriage to be “irretrievably broken.”

Mike’s wife, who filed for the no-fault divorce, was granted sole ownership of the marital home, and he was ordered to pay all his wife’s attorney fees.

“No-fault divorce violates the defendant’s constitutional right to due process and equal protection under the law,” said Sullivan, Mike’s attorney. And, according to Mike’s Catholic faith, it attempts to tear apart what God has joined together (Matthew 19:6).

Origin Within Soviet Communism

The first modern, no-fault divorce law was enacted in Russia in December 1917, following the October Bolshevik Revolution that ushered in Soviet communism. California was the first U.S. state to adopt no-fault divorce laws in 1969, and all states gradually followed. Australia followed in 1975 and Canada in 1986.

Easy divorce laws did not occur in a moral vacuum. Observers note that America’s skyrocketing divorce rates immediately followed the cultural acceptance of contraception shortly after Griswold v. Connecticut (1965) legalized use of the birth control pill.

Christian social scientists have seen widespread use of contraception taking sex outside of its exclusive relationship to marriage, and Pope St. John Paul II noted that it creates a wedge between spouses by lying with one’s body. The marital act inherently says “I give my whole self to you without reservation,” he taught; but contraception holds back life-giving love, devolving the act of union to one of self-gratification.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) calls divorce “a grave offense against the natural law” (CCC 2384) that “introduces disorder into the family and into society” (CCC 2385). No-fault divorce hastens the process whereby sexual and other sins become permanent injustice.

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant column is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

Did “Roe” Really Recant?

/in , , , , , , /by

A new FX documentary, AKA Jane Roe, raises many questions about the real Jane Roe.

Jane Roe, who pseudonymously sought an abortion in Texas, was at the heart of the infamous 1973 Supreme Court decision, Roe v. Wade. She claimed she had been impregnated in a gang-rape.

In the mid-1980s, Roe was revealed to be Norma McCorvey.

In the mid-1990s, she stunned the world by professing to have become a Christian and an opponent of abortion. She then claimed she had never been raped at all.

And now comes a documentary in which she, in the final year of her life, apparently claims that her switch to the pro-life position was all an act, for which she was paid.

It should be noted she was paid to appear in the FX documentary. Nick Sweeney, the documentary producer, has made movies about sex robots and girls becoming “boys.”

The Daily Beast reports on perhaps the most critical scene in the FX documentary:

“This is my deathbed confession,” [McCorvey] chuckles, sitting in a chair in her nursing home room, on oxygen. Sweeney asks McCorvey, “Did [the evangelicals] use you as a trophy?” “Of course,” she replies. “I was the Big Fish.” “Do you think you would say that you used them?” Sweeney responds. “Well,” says McCorvey, “I think it was a mutual thing. I took their money and they took me out in front of the cameras and told me what to say. That’s what I’d say.” She even gives an example of her scripted anti-abortion lines. “I’m a good actress,” she points out. “Of course, I’m not acting now.” 

In addition, she is alleged to have said that she didn’t really care if a woman got an abortion. This doesn’t seem to fit the picture of the reborn Norma. However, in the big picture of things, the preview appears to contradict the vast majority of her words and deeds, from the time of her conversion in 1995 to her death in 2017. She even unsuccessfully sought to have the Supreme Court overturn Roe since it was all based on lies.

As reports came out last week about this disturbing new documentary, many prolife leaders that knew Norma McCorvey personally have spoken out to say that this is not the Norma McCorvey they have known all these years—nor does it represent who she truly was.

Cheryl Sullenger is the Senior Policy Advisor for the activist pro-life group, Operation Rescue—a group that played a critical role in McCorvey’s stated conversions to Christianity and to the pro-life position.

Cheryl told me: “I knew Norma personally….I have seen her in unguarded moments. She was a person that was a bit rough around the edges, but that never bothered me. If she was in a mood, she could say things that were controversial or even shocking, but I can attest that she was always pro-life.”

On my radio show, Sullenger added that the claim McCorvey received money from the prolife movement proves nothing. Receiving honoraria for speaking engagements is a common practice, no matter one’s politics.

Furthermore, Norma claims in the FX documentary that they (pro-lifers/the evangelicals/the Catholics) told her what to say. That can sound worse than it was. Sullenger noted that Norma had little education and she was not a polished public speaker. Thus, in various venues in which she spoke, speech writers crafted the copy she read. That type of thing happens all the time, again, no matter one’s politics.

Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life, knew Norma McCorvey for 22 years. He said about her, “Her desire to protect children in the womb was no act.” On my radio show, Father Pavone noted that the documentary interview was in May 2016, but she died in February 2017. This was no “deathbed confession.” He also noted that Norma was unpredictable. You never knew what would come out of her mouth.

He notes that the producers of the FX film never asked him for an interview, despite how close he was to Norma. Father Pavone, who preached her funeral, even spoke with Norma on the day she died (by phone), and he says she told him to keep up the fight on behalf of the unborn.

I also spoke with Abby Johnson, former Planned Parenthood abortion clinic director, whose dramatic pro-life conversion is described in her book (with Cindy Lambert) and movie, Unplanned. She said pro-lifers should not be distracted by this recent controversy: “Stay focused on the goal—abortion is wrong no matter what.”

Only God knows the heart. Norma McCorvey was a fiery, unpredictable woman with rough edges. But regardless of who was telling the truth between the Norma of 1995 and the Norma of 2016 (in that one interview), the realities of abortion, legalized in her court case, do not change. Abortion unjustly takes an innocent human life, and does incredible damage to the mother. That’s not a matter of changing opinions or the passage of time. That’s a fact.

©All rights reserved.

Red Flag?: What We Know About 18 Complaints on Cop Who Put Knee to George Floyd’s Neck

/in , , , , , /by

Before Derek Chauvin became a national name, Minneapolis resident Michelle Gross was familiar with the veteran police officer and his badge number.

When the video of George Floyd’s death in police custody went viral, Gross—president of Minneapolis-based Communities United Against Police Brutality—got a call from a friend telling her to check social media.

Viewing the video, she heard someone in the crowd shout: “Badge number 1087, you’re not going to get away with this.”

“I’m like, badge 1087, damn, I know that badge number, because I handle this data so much,” Gross told The Daily Signal, adding:

The liberal Left continue to push their radical agenda against American values. The good news is there is a solution. Find out more >>

I looked up 1087, and it said Derek Chauvin. I had seen pictures of this guy before and was familiar with him from other complaints. I thought, that looks like Derek Chauvin. I think that is him. I didn’t want to put it out immediately.

It has been reported widely that Chauvin faced 18 formal complaints alleging misconduct during his 19 years on the force before Floyd’s May 25 death in his custody.

Only two of the complaints resulted in a reprimand, both involving shootings by police. Several of the incidents resulted in three deaths, based on published news reports.

After viewing a close-up of the badge number and confirming it was Chauvin’s, Gross said, she identified Chauvin as the officer in the video on her organization’s website and social media sites by 2 a.m.—just hours after Floyd died.

“The idea that he could get away with this for 19 years is outrageous, but we know what the source of it is,” Gross said of Chauvin, adding:

Our city leadership is very poor in addressing police accountability. They don’t want to hold police accountable. They don’t want to discipline officers. And the lack of discipline is exactly why a guy like Derek Chauvin can continue to the point where he can kill Mr. Floyd.

However, with little information available on the bulk of the complaints, it’s difficult to make a judgment on the number alone, contends Jason Johnson, president of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, a police advocacy group.

“To just look at this superficial number [of complaints] really is not very telling,” Johnson,  a former deputy commissioner of the Baltimore Police Department, told The Daily Signal. “In fact, over the course of a 19-year career, the number is not even really that high.”

According to published reports, two of the deaths occurred during a high-speed chase and another involved a criminal suspect aiming a gun at police.

In one case, Chauvin reportedly shot and wounded someone suspected of domestic violence. One of the three shootings listed in the complaints was done by Chauvin’s partner, not by him.

Chauvin, who has been charged with second-degree murder and manslaughter in Floyd’s death, was awarded a police medal of valor in both 2006 and 2008. The awards, interestingly, were related to two of the complaints against him.

Anyone can make complaints against a police officer. However, Gross said, Minnesota law penalizes those who make false complaints against officers.

It’s not yet possible to conclude that the 18 complaints against Chauvin should have prompted the Minneapolis Police Department to act on him, and thus prevented Floyd’s death, Johnson said. 

“There is a pretty prescribed way that most police departments handle complaints in terms of investigation and adjudication of complaints,” Johnson, head of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, said.

“It would be similar to a report of a person who has been arrested a number of times and we have no idea what the charges were or what the outcome was of that case,” he said. “Everyone is entitled to due process under the law and a presumption of innocence.”

Minneapolis Police Department spokesman John Elderman did not respond to phone and email inquiries this week and last week for this report.

Over a career of nearly two decades, a total of 18 complaints isn’t shocking for an officer working a patrol-heavy job, said Rafael Mangual, deputy director of legal policy at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank in New York.

“The way he behaved with George Floyd was extremely excessive and abusive,” Mangual told The Daily Signal, adding:

But I don’t think anyone who hasn’t evaluated those complaints carefully can say that’s prima facie evidence that he shouldn’t have been on the streets to begin with. The nature of his interactions with George Floyd certainly is circumstantial evidence of that, but that’s about as far as it goes.

Generally, only about 6% to 8% of complaints against officers are sustained, whether by a citizen review board or a police board, Mangual said.

“Look at the data in New York. A very slim minority of complaints processed in New York are sustained. Most of them are not sustained or [are] found to be unfounded,” he said. “Some police have interactions that are not pleasant. That makes people upset. It doesn’t necessarily mean a rule is violated.”

A majority of the Minneapolis City Council has vowed to dismantle the city police force because of Floyd’s death while under arrest.

Chauvin’s lawyer, Eric Nelson, did not respond to phone and email inquiries from The Daily Signal.

Neither the national Fraternal Order of Police nor the Minnesota FOP responded to phone and email inquiries from The Daily Signal.

When a judge set Chauvin’s bail at $1.25 million Monday, Nelson didn’t contest the amount or the second-degree murder and manslaughter charges. Nelson reportedly hasn’t commented publicly on the case.

Past controversies with Chauvin in Minneapolis include these incidents:

  • In 2005, Chauvin and another officer were involved in a vehicle chase, during which the car they were pursuing hit another vehicle, killing two passengers in that third vehicle, according to the Los Angeles Times and other outlets.
  • In 2006, Chauvin and five other Minneapolis police officers opened fire on stabbing suspect Wayne Reyes, according to the Associated Press. Reyes aimed a sawed-off shotgun at the officers and they fatally shot him, AP reported. The officers were justified in their actions, a grand jury determined. Chauvin received a medal of valor for his actions.
  • Also in 2006, a Minnesota inmate filed a civil rights lawsuit against the Minneapolis Police Department, naming several officers, including Chauvin, the Los Angeles Times reported. However, the newspaper reported, court records don’t show specifics and the case was dismissed when the plaintiff didn’t pay a filing fee.
  • In 2008, after responding to a report of domestic violence, Chauvin shot and wounded an accused batterer, according to Twin Cities Pioneer Press. A woman had called 911, yelling for someone to stop hitting her. When Chauvin and another officer arrived at the apartment, a man identified as Ira Latrell Toles locked himself in a bathroom. Chauvin forced his way into the bathroom and, when Toles tried to grab the officer’s gun, Chauvin shot him twice in the stomach, according to the police account.

Toles was charged with two counts of felony obstruction, but pleaded out to misdemeanor charges. The Minneapolis Police Department placed Chauvin on administrative leave while reviewing the shooting.

In an interview with The Daily Beast after the Floyd killing, Toles denied trying to take Chauvin’s gun in the 2008 case. Toles claimed that Chauvin broke into the bathroom and began beating him up, and that he was defending himself. Toles said the mother of his child had called police.

For his actions, police gave Chauvin the second medal of valor.

  • In 2011, Chauvin was among officers who chased after a man with a handgun on foot. Police said Chauvin’s partner shot the man, identified as Leroy Martinez. The department placed both officers on administrative leave. Martinez, a Native American, subsequently was charged in a separate shooting incident.
  • In 2013, a group of teens filed a complaint against Chauvin and another officer, saying at least one pulled his service revolver after one teen shot a Nerf gun that might have struck another person, BuzzFeed reported. The department notified the complainants of a review for “inappropriate language and attitude.” The teens reportedly were white.

The Daily Signal specified each of these listed cases in an email to Nelson, Chauvin’s lawyer.

The Minneapolis Police Department’s internal affairs records are in an online database, but it provides no details on the nature of the complaints and accusations, according to several media reports.

Details of the formal complaints described here came through a combination of court documents, old news reports, and information from Gross’ group, Communities United Against Police Brutality.

Johnson, of the Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund, said a clearly out-of-control, lawless officer probably would have been the subject of more complaints.

“Certainly police departments have a responsibility to ensure that problem officers are dealt with, whether they need to be retrained or they need discipline or [to] be removed from the police department,” Johnson said. “But because there is so little information about what underlies these complaints, what the outcomes of any investigations were, and what if any disciplinary action was taken, we don’t have enough information to know that the Minneapolis Police Department acted properly.”

Three other officers have been arrested and charged as accomplices with aiding and abetting second-degree murder.

They were at the scene May 25 as Chauvin pressed a knee into Floyd’s neck as he lay handcuffed on the pavement.

The Daily Signal left voicemail messages with lawyers for all three former officers.

One of the three officers, Tou Thao, reportedly has six complaints listed in the department’s database, none showing a disciplinary action. One complaint against Thao remains open, but likely won’t be adjudicated since he was fired the day after Floyd’s death, along with the others.

The two former officers charged as accomplices along with Thao are Thomas Lane and J. Alexander Kueng, both reportedly rookies on their fourth day on the job. Lane held Floyd’s legs and Kueng held Floyd’s back while Thao stood nearby, “keeping onlookers back,” AP reported.

“This guy literally left a trail of broken and dead bodies on his way to the jail,” Gross, of the Communities United Against Police Brutality, said of Chauvin. “The idea that he was allowed to continue on the force meant that almost certainly something like this was going to happen.”

Law enforcement officials and organizations strongly condemned the conduct of the officers involved in Floyd’s death.

Minneapolis used to have a citizens review board to adjudicate complaints, Gross said, but the city disempowered the board to the point of essentially putting the government in charge.

“In seven and a half years, they have adjudicated about 2,600 or so complaints,” Gross said. “They have sustained and disciplined 12 of those. That’s less than half of a percent. The national average for civilian oversight bodies is 7% to 8%. We are like the low-end outlier for the country.”

Because a police department spokesman did not respond to inquiries, The Daily Signal was unable to confirm those numbers.

The criminal charges against Chauvin are compelling in the Floyd case, but that doesn’t mean the prior complaints against him were an indictment of the Minneapolis police force, said John Malcolm, director of the Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation.

Malcolm said the 18 misconduct complaints about Chauvin “could be a red flag,” but added that the number in and of itself doesn’t mean he should have been fired or put behind a desk.

In the big picture, not specific to Chauvin, systems across the nation for resolving citizen complaints against police can be abused.

“We also know of instances when gang members and drug dealers make complaints on really good officers, to get them put on administrative leave,” Malcolm told The Daily Signal. “In some cases, complaints could be racked up because an officer is a good cop.”

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.” Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Problematic Women: There’s a Solution to Police Abuse, but It’s Not Defunding Police Departments

J.K. Rowling Doubles Down, Exposes Misogyny of the Woke

Dear Readers:

With the recent conservative victories related to tax cuts, the Supreme Court, and other major issues, it is easy to become complacent.

However, the liberal Left is not backing down. They are rallying supporters to advance their agenda, moving this nation further from the vision of our founding fathers.

If we are to continue to bring this nation back to our founding principles of limited government and fiscal conservatism, we need to come together as a group of likeminded conservatives.

This is the mission of The Heritage Foundation. We want to continue to develop and present conservative solutions to the nation’s toughest problems. And we cannot do this alone.

We are looking for a select few conservatives to become a Heritage Foundation member. With your membership, you’ll qualify for all associated benefits and you’ll help keep our nation great for future generations.

ACTIVATE YOUR MEMBERSHIP TODAY

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.