Democrat’s Draft 2020 Party Platform filled with Extremist Socialist Policies

The Democrats are circulating their draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform. The document reveals just how extreme and Socialist the party has become.

Breitbart’s Joel B. Pollack in a column titled “23 Extreme Left-wing Ideas in the Democrats’ Draft 2020 Platform” wrote:

Amidst much verbiage, it includes many extremist ideas, including:

  1. “Systemic racism.” The platform begins from the premise that the United States suffers from “systemic racism in our economy and our society.” Having condemned the country they seek to govern, Democrats offer their radical solutions.
  2. Rejoining the Paris Climate Accords. The agreement did little but force the U.S. to cut back our economy while letting China and other nations off the hook. We are the only major signatory reducing emissions — without the accord.
  3. Declaring housing a “right.” Providing housing for everyone is a worthy goal, but declaring it a “right” is a socialist ruse that creates massive problems. Just ask South Africa, which has a “right” to housing — and millions living in shacks.
  4. Repealing right-to-work laws. These laws protecting the rights of workers not to join a union have fueled the manufacturing boom in the South, which has prospered while heavily unionized states have lost jobs and population.
  5. “Card check.” This system eliminates the secret ballot in union elections and allows organizers to intimidate workers until they agree to form a union. Even left-wing George McGovern opposed “card check” last time Democrats tried it.
  6. Raising taxes. Democrats want to raise taxes in the middle of a recession, falsely describing the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act as a giveaway to the wealthy, when in fact the middle class benefited most. Higher taxes mean fewer jobs.
  7. Medicare for All. Though the platform adopts a “public option” — too left-wing for Democrats under Barack Obama — it “welcomes … those who support a Medicare for All approach,” paving the way for government-run health care later.
  8. Cutting police. Though it is careful to avoid the actual words “defund the police,” the Democratic draft platform describes minority communities as “overpoliced,” meaning they will cut police in the areas that need the most help.
  9. Gun control. Democrats have not wavered in their determination to restrict firearms ownership — even though the recent unrest made it clear there is no other option for Americans when political leaders refuse to restrain the mob.
  10. Preventing arrests at school. There is nothing racist about punishing criminal behavior. As Parkland dad Andrew Pollack noted, the shooter was protected from arrest by the school and police, allowing him to buy his murder weapons.
  11. Reparations for slavery. We fought a bloody Civil War to end slavery. Democrats want to “study” reparations, even though it would be impossible to determine who should pay and who should benefit, or how it would help anyone.
  12. Federal funding for abortion. Democrats want to repeal the Hyde amendment, providing for publicly funded abortion through birth. In one section, Democrats even refer to abortion as a “human right” — ignoring unborn children.
  13. Green bonanza. Democrats promise 500 million solar panels, 60,000 wind turbines, and 500,000 electric buses — in five years. It is an absurd proposal, ignoring domestic manufacturing capacity — and, for turbines, environmental permits.
  14. Restricting political speech. Democrats are reviving Hillary Clinton’s proposal to pass a constitutional amendment to restrict political speech to overcome the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United — overturning the First Amendment.
  15. D.C. statehood. Democrats want to make Washington, DC, the 51st state, meaning two permanent Democrat seats in the U.S. Senate. They hint at possible statehood for Puerto Rico as well. Republicans would be a permanent minority.
  16. Stopping the border wall. Democrats would abandon the construction of the wall on the U.S.-Mexico border, leaving it vulnerable to illegal immigration and to cartels. They describe the border itself as a manifestation of “systemic racism.”
  17. “Path to citizenship” for illegal aliens. Democrats want to turn millions of illegal aliens who have “been in the country for an extended period of time” — not just people who were brought as minors — into citizens with voting rights.
  18. Restricting charter schools and ending vouchers. In deference to the teachers unions that have kept urban schools in a state of permanent failure, Democrats want to prevent African American and Latino children from escaping.
  19. Rejoining the UN Human Rights Council. The misnamed Human Rights Council is a club of dictators that exists to condemn the United States and especially Israel. Rejoining it would be a massive setback for the cause of human rights.
  20. Net Neutrality. Our economy functions remotely during coronavirus because the FCC repealed Net Neutrality, which regulated the Internet like an old-style utility and discouraged investment. Democrats want to restore their failed policy.
  21. End the China “trade war.” Democrats attack the “trade war,” which has been successful, while claiming they will “mobilize more than half the world’s economy to stand up to China,” yet cooperate with it on issues like climate change.
  22. Returning to the Iran deal. Obama’s deal allowed Iran to become a nuclear power and did nothing to stop Iran’s militarism and terror. The Democrats would strengthen the regime at the expense of the Iranian people and U.S. allies.
  23. Paying Palestinian terrorists. The Democrat promise to “restore” funding to the Palestinians that was cut because U.S. taxpayer money was being used to pay stipends to jailed terrorists and perpetuate the Palestinian refugee “problem.”

To read the full Draft 2020 Democratic Party Platform click here.

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

The One Issue Bernie Delegates Want on the Party Platform… Or Else

Joe Biden’s New Economic Plan Has All the Earmarks of “Type 2” Socialism

Beyond defunding the police: Democratic leaders condone crime

RELATED VIDEO: Minimum Wage Cost Me My Job

VIDEOS: White Antifa Anarchist Stabs Black Trump Supporter Drew Duncomb In Portland

UPDATE: 

https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1287031094647435264

RELATED:


Here’s the Trump supporter who was stabbed:

©All rights reserved.

RELATED VIDEO: Media Silence on the Truth of Black Lives Matter | Scott Walter on the Bill O’Reilly Show

UK VIDEO: Muslim Rape Gang Survivor Reveals At Least 500,000 Non-Muslim Girls Have Been Raped by Muslims

Ella Hill is a survivor of a Rotherham Muslim rape gang. Recently she was interviewed on Triggernometry, a British interview and discussion program run by two comedians, Konstantin Kisin and Francis Foster. During the interview, she revealed that Muslim rape gangs had sexually abused at least 500,000 non-Muslim girls. The victims were particularly white girls, but there have been many other victims as well, such as Sikh girls.

This is unbelievable. It is a national scandal which politicians still fail to mention. Many argue that the number of victims abused by Muslim rape gangs actually exceeds one million, but even if Ella Hill is correct and there have been only half a million victims, that is bad enough. Many more survivors of these “grooming gangs” are now speaking out. Their cases are unbelievable, as they explain how the Muslim gangs tortured and intimidated young non-Muslim girls.

The UK Home office has still failed to publish its report on the “grooming gangs.” Its reason for keeping the report under wraps most likely involve the fact that the rape gangs were made up of the wrong perpetrators, and targeted the wrong victims, for the mainstream narrative.

Furthermore, Ella also emphasised the fact that when she was abused by the Muslim rape gang, authorities and police did not even care in the slightest, because they feared being called ‘racist’ for doing their job. The scandals that have been exposed in numerous cities are horrific. The failure of the police is horrendous. Another survivor, Sammy Woodhouse, stated that when she was raped by Muslims, the police arrested her while she was in bed with the rapist, instead of arresting the rapist. That is how shocking this rape jihad is.

In this interview, Ella also mentioned that her rapists were ‘religiously motivated’. This is a key fact which many people, particularly Britain’s corrupt MPs and police continue to ignore.

The Koran advocates the rape of infidel women and girls numerous times; see verses 4:3, 4:24, 23:6, and 33:50. It also emphasises that Muslims can have sex with underage girls; see surah 65:4. These Muslim rape gangs have proliferated in numerous cities is because of Islamic ideology. This fact has been concealed by the elites, such as the Muslim former prosecutor Nazir Afzal. He denies that the perpetrators were committing their evil deeds because of Islam. He must know that this is a complete lie.

White non-Muslim girls that have been predominantly the targets because of another belief which originates from Islam, that white sex slaves bring a higher reward to their owners. Mohammed had a white sex slave called Miriam a Coptic Christian. This practice has been emulated all over the Islamic world through fourteen centuries of jihad. Even the supposed Islamic Golden Age in Spain included Muslims taking sex slaves, because they were emulating Mohammed.

It is absolutely disgusting how the authorities have allowed this to happen for decades.

COLUMN BY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Attacks on Christians in Europe rise 285% since 2008, converts from Islam particularly targeted

Who was the Muslim Jesus? A Rebuttal of Marianne Farina

Islamophobia Islamophilia is the problem

German State of Baden-Württemberg Bans Burqa in Schools

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

Personhood Florida’s Pro-life PAC Endorses Over 65 Candidates for the 2020 Primary and General Election

Personhood Florida’s Pro-Life PAC has endorsed the following 65 Pro-life Candidates for the 2020 Primary and General Election:

2020 Federal ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
US Representative – District 19 REP Dane Eagle

2020 State ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
State Representative – Dist 27 REP Zenaida Denizac
State Representative – Dist 42 REP Fred Hawkins
State Representative – Dist 84 REP Eileen Vargas

2020 Brevard County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
City of Palm Bay Mayor NP Rob Medina
Republican State Committeewoman REP Kim Adkinson

2020 Citrus County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Property Appraiser REP David Gregory
Superintendent of Schools REP Paul John Reinhardt
Supervisor of Elections REP Maureen “Mo” Baird

2020 Clay County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Clerk of the Court REP David Coughlin
School Board District 2 NP Beth Clark
Superintendent of Schools REP Charlie Van Zant

2020 Flagler County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Sheriff REP Rick Staly

2020 Indian River County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Board of County Commissioners – Dist 3 REP Tim Zorc
School Board – Dist 3 NP Laura Zorc
School Board – Dist 5 NP Alla Kramer
Sheriff REP Charles Kirby

2020 Jackson County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Superintendent of Schools REP Dallas Ellis

2020 Lake County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
County Commission District 1 REP Tim Sullivan
County Commission District 3 REP Kirby Smith
County Commission District 5 REP Josh Blake
North Lake Co. Hospital Board NE Seat 3 REP Ralph Smith
North Lake Co. Hospital Board NW Seat 5 REP Anita Swan
School Board Member District 2 NP Patricia Nave
School Board Member District 4 NP Betsy Farner
School Board Member District 4 NP Sandy Gamble

2020 Lee County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
COUNTY COMMISSIONER 1 REP MICHAEL J DREIKORN
PROPERTY APPRAISER REP MATT CALDWELL
SCHOOL BOARD 2 NON MELISA GIOVANNELLI
SCHOOL BOARD 3 NON BRIAN DIGRAZIO
SHERIFF NPA CARMEN MCKINNEY
SHERIFF REP JAMES A LEAVENS

2020 Manatee County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Linda Ivell REP Republican State Committeewoman

2020 Marion County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
COUNTY COMMISSIONER – DIST 1 REP Mike Behar
COUNTY COMMISSIONER – 3 REP Bobby D. Dobkowski
COUNTY COMMISSIONER – 3 REP Jeff Gold
PROPERTY APPRAISER REP David Moore
PROPERTY APPRAISER REP Neil Nick Nikkinen
REPUBLICAN PARTY STATE COMMITTEEMAN REP John H. Townsend IV
REPUBLICAN PARTY STATE COMMITTEEMAN REP Randy Osborne
REPUBLICAN PARTY STATE COMMITTEEMAN REP William Richhart
SCHOOL BOARD – 1 NP Allison B. Campbell

2020 Martin County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Property Appraiser REP Kelli Glass Leighton

2020 Okaloosa County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
County Commissioner, Dist. 1 REP Wayne Richard Harris
County Commissioner, Dist. 5 REP Richard Scott Johnson
County Commissioner, Dist. 5 REP Mel Ponder
Superintendent of Schools REP Ray Sansom

2020 Palm Beach County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Republican State Committeewoman REP Cindy Falco-DiCorrado

2020 Pasco County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
County Commissioner – Dist 4 REP Gabriel (Gabe) Papadopoulos

2020 Santa Rosa County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
County Commissioner – Dist 1 REP Geoff Ross

2020 Sarasota County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
Sarasoto County Hospital Bd., At Large Seat 1 REP AUDIE ELIZABETH BOCK

2020 St. Lucie County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
City of Fort Pierce Commission, District 1 NP Kenneth Robinson
City of Fort Pierce, Mayor NP Donna Diehl Benton
City of Port St. Lucie, City Council District 2 NP David H. Pickett, Jr.
City of Port St. Lucie, City Council District 2 NP John Francis Haugh
County Commissioner, District 1 REP Betty Jo Starke
County Commissioner, District 5 DEM Fritz Masson Alexandre
School Board, District 4 NP Jason William Palm
School Board, District 4 NP Jennifer Anne Richardson
Sheriff REP Richard Williams, Jr.

2020 Volusia County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
County Council Member, District 3 NP Johan D’Hondt
County Council Member, District 4 NP Heather Post
Daytona Beach Commissioner Zone 4 NP Stacy Cantu
Edgewater Council District 4 NP Eric Rainbird
South Daytona Council Seat 4 NP Theodor Eric Sander
State Committeeman REP Santiago Avila, Jr.
State Committeewoman REP Debbie Phillips
State Committeewoman REP Maria Trent

2020 Walton County ProLife Candidates

Race Party Name
School Board – Dist 4 NP Jeri Michie
School Board – Dist 4 NP Marsha Winegarner

©All rights reserved.

Epstein floodgates open as judge rules explosive docs detailing Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex life can be UNSEALED in Virginia Giuffre’s defamation case within a week

This is getting interesting.

Bill is hiding under Hillary’s immense pantsuit. Move over, Huma!

  • Judge Loretta Preska in Manhattan ruled on Thursday to unseal more than 80 documents that Ghislaine Maxwell had wanted to keep under wraps
  • Preska said the documents – which will run to hundreds of pages – should be made public within a week
  • They include flight logs from Epstein’s jets, a deposition in 2016 in which Maxwell’s lawyers said she was asked ‘intrusive’ questions about her sex life
  • The documents also include police reports from Palm Beach, Florida, where Epstein had a home
  • It will include communications between Maxwell and Epstein from January 2015 when Virginia Roberts Giuffre made allegations about them in court papers
  • In the papers Giuffre claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when she was just 17 at Epstein’s command
  • The documents were part of a defamation lawsuit brought by Giuffre against Maxwell, which was confidentially settled in 2017
  • The case is separate from the criminal proceedings against Maxwell, who is accused of procuring girls as young as 14 for Epstein to abuse

By Daniel Bates For Dailymail.com, 23 July 2020

A judge today has ordered the unsealing of a vast tranche of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein, which could shed light on his friendship with powerful men accused of having sex with his victims.

Judge Loretta Preska said that 80 documents – which will run to hundreds of pages – should be made public within a week.

The documents will include depositions from Ghislaine Maxwell, which could explain her alleged role in Epstein’s sex trafficking operation.

They could include details about Maxwell’s sex life that her lawyers have previously tried to stop from being released, relating to a seven-hour, 418-page deposition Maxwell gave which her legal team said was ‘extremely personal, confidential’.

In filings Maxwell’s lawyers have called the depositions a ‘series of (efforts) to compel Maxwell to answer intrusive questions about her sex life’.

The documents will also include communications between Maxwell and Epstein from January 2015 when Virginia Roberts made explosive allegations about them in court papers.

In the papers Roberts claimed she was forced to have sex with Prince Andrew three times when she was just 17 at Epstein’s command.

The case is separate from the criminal proceedings against Maxwell, 58, who is accused by federal prosecutors of procuring girls as young as 14 for Epstein to abuse. She has pleaded not guilty and is due to stand trial next year.

A judge today has ordered the unsealing of a vast tranche of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein , which could shed light on his friendship with powerful men accused of having sex with his victims. The documents will include depositions from Ghislaine Maxwell , which could explain her alleged role in Epstein’s sex trafficking operation

They include flight logs from Epstein’s jets, a deposition in 2016 in which Maxwell’s lawyers said she was asked ‘intrusive’ questions about her sex life. The documents also include police reports from Palm Beach, Florida, where Epstein had a home

Although the case is separate from Maxwell’s criminal case, one of the unsealed deposition documents is linked to her perjury charge.

The case ruled on Thursday was originally brought by Roberts, now a 36-year-old mother-of-three who lives in Australia and goes by her married name Virginia Giuffre.

She sued Maxwell in 2015 for defamation because Maxwell accused her of lying.

Roberts said in court filings that Maxwell recruited her and other girls into a sex trafficking ring for ‘politically connected and financially powerful people’.

The case was settled in 2017 for an undisclosed sum but media organizations sued for documents in the case to be made public.

Judge Loretta Preska said that 80 documents – which will run to hundreds of pages – should be made public within a week

During the hearing at Manhattan’s federal court, Judge Preska said Maxwell’s right to privacy was outweighed by the need for the documents to become public.

She went through the dozens of documents, which included Giuffre’s depositions and various dull-sounding legal papers.

The contents however could be explosive and may contain fresh evidence against the wealthy elite who socialized with Epstein.

After the ruling Maxwell’s lawyer Laura Menninger asked for a two week delay in the unsealing so they could file an appeal in the Second Circuit in New York.

Menninger said: ‘There have been some significant changes with respect to my client’s positions and perhaps known to everyone listening to this, while we were speaking about a potential ongoing criminal investigation (before), since that time Miss Maxwell has been indicted and a trial has been scheduled.

‘Now we are in a vastly different position and have grave concerns about our clients ability to receive a fair trial given the intense media scrutiny around anything that is unsealed’.

Giuffre’s lawyer Sigrid McCawley said she wanted the documents made public ‘as swiftly as possible’.

Judge Preska said if the Second Circuit had not ruled within a week then the files should be made public.


HAVE A TIP WE SHOULD KNOW? YOUR ANONYMITY IS NEVER COMPROMISED. EMAIL TIPS@THEGELLERREPORT.COM


RELATED ARTICLES:

Family of Judge in Jeffrey Epstein Case Is Shot, Killed At Home By Gunman Dressed As a FedEx Driver

Killer Who Dressed as FedEx Driver and Shot Family of Epstein-Linked Judge Dies by SUICIDE: Reports

Jihad Jew-hating Rep. Ilhan Omar Comes Under Fire for Mailer That Names 3 Donors to Her Challenger, All Jewish

Portland bans police from working with federal law enforcement

President Trump cancels the Republican National Convention in Jacksonville Florida Over Chinese Virus Concerns

WATCH LIVE: President Trump holds press briefing at 5pm

EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

‘Fascist’: What Top Democrats Say About Federal Law Enforcement Help for Their Cities

Democratic mayors and other leaders of some large cities have grown edgier in opposing President Donald Trump’s push to use federal agents to quell violence, using terms such as “resist” and “fascist.”

Some elected Democrats in affected cities have vowed to sue and even arrest federal agents as they criticize federal action to protect government property in Portland, Oregon.

For “Operation Legend,” the White House has announced plans to send federal law enforcement officials to Chicago; Kansas City, Missouri; and Albuquerque, New Mexico.

Over the next three weeks, the Justice Department intends to expand the effort into Cleveland, Detroit, and Milwaukee.


Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today. But what side are you on? And how can you sharpen up on how to defend your position? Learn more now >>


Democratic mayors and other leaders in these and other cities mostly object, according to news reports.

Marching with protesters Wednesday night in Portland, Mayor Ted Wheeler was tear-gassed by federal agents. Wheeler said he was “pissed off” and called the situation “flat-out urban warfare” wrought by the president.

Cities across the nation have seen various levels of unrest and violence since the May 25 death of a black man, George Floyd, in police custody in Minneapolis.

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who heads one of America’s most violent cities, previously opposed intervention by federal officials. However, after Trump’s announcement Wednesday of “Operation Legend,” Lightfoot offered a more diplomatic comment.

“I’ve been very clear that we welcome actual partnership,” Lightfoot said. “But we do not welcome dictatorship. We do not welcome authoritarianism, and we do not welcome unconstitutional arrest and detainment of our residents. That is something I will not tolerate.”

Leo Schmitz, chief of public safety at the Cook County Sheriff’s Office, attended the White House event Wednesday announcing “Operation Legend.” His jurisdiction includes Chicago.

Before his announcement on putting down violent crime in cities, Trump had mentioned the possibility of sending federal law enforcement to New York, Philadelphia, Detroit, Baltimore, and Oakland, California, which are among U.S. cities with the highest crime rates.

“I’m going to do something—that I can tell you,” Trump told reporters Monday in the Oval Office. “Because we’re not going to let New York and Chicago and Philadelphia and Detroit and Baltimore and all of these—Oakland is a mess. We’re not going to let this happen in our country. All run by liberal Democrats.”

That same day, Philadelphia officials provided some of the most aggressive rhetoric, even threatening to arrest federal officials in the city, making fascist comparisons, and vowing to “resist.”

Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner said: “My dad volunteered and served in World War II to fight fascism, like most of my uncles, so we would not have an American president brutalizing and kidnapping Americans for exercising their constitutional rights and trying to make America a better place, which is what patriots do.”

“Anyone, including federal law enforcement, who unlawfully assaults and kidnaps people will face criminal charges from my office. At trial, they will face a Philadelphia jury,” added Krasner, who was elected in 2018 with the help of a super PAC funded by liberal billionaire George Soros. “It’s the least we can do to honor those who fought fascism, including those who are fighting it even now.”

In another interview with Democracy Now, Krasner said:

These are Pennsylvania offenses over which the district attorney in Philly has jurisdiction over that area, and we can bring those charges. The law is very clear. We can proceed with those charges in state court. Under certain circumstances, they might end up being processed in federal court. But, initially, we can bring those charges. We can pursue them. And as much as possible, we can put those individuals in front of a Philadelphia jury, who might have something to say about those tactics.

[ … ]

I would say President Trump is definitely a wannabe fascist. I’m not sure he can spell the word, but he definitely is someone who’s in love with dictators.

Philadelphia Mayor Jim Kenney didn’t push back quite as hard, but still resisted the idea of federal law enforcement assistance.

“The president’s threat is wrong on many levels,” Kenney said. “To send federal agents to police U.S. cities that have not requested such aid can only impede the work of local governments and exacerbate already heightened tensions in these cities. And to target cities that are led by Democratic mayors is clearly a politicization of federal resources that should outrage all taxpayers.”

“While the city of Philadelphia has not received any formal notification that federal agents will be sent here,” the mayor said, “we would use all available means to resist such a wrongheaded effort and abuse of power.”

New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said Wednesday that the city would sue to keep federal law enforcement out, Fox News reported.

“I want to be very, very clear that we will not allow this to happen,” de Blasio said, adding: “We are New Yorkers and we won’t take lightly if we see federal officers in New York City. If we do, we’ll be in court.”

Trump said “Operation Legend” is named for 4-year-old LeGend Taliferro of Kansas City, who was shot and killed in late June. His killer hasn’t been found.

Kansas City Police Chief Rick Smith was among those attending the White House event Wednesday where Trump announced the operation.

Kansas City Mayor Quinton Lucas, however,  called the law enforcement initiative “dog-whistling.”

“What we don’t support is an expanded and broadened mission, which is what we’ve seen in Portland and what we’ve seen hinted at in interviews from the president that look like a federal takeover of policing in Kansas City,” Lucas said, according to The Kansas City Star.

Sheriff Manuel Gonzales of Bernalillo County, New Mexico, a top law enforcement official in the Albuquerque area, also attended the White House event.

Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller, however, told CNN that the law enforcement operation is “about inciting violence.”

“You almost know that something is up because one, the president is talking about Albuquerque, which doesn’t usually happen,” Keller said, “but two, we’ve been told nothing and usually we get formal MOUs [memos of understanding], we get details, there’s task forces that are put in place. We have received no formal documentation on this at all.”

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett said a federal presence would be divisive, the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reported.

“With few exceptions, protests in Milwaukee have been peaceful,” Barrett said in a statement. “It is preposterous to suggest Milwaukee needs federal agents to quell unrest or manage peaceful protests. Their presence at this time could be counterproductive.”

After Trump named Cleveland as one city that would get assistance from federal law enforcement, Mayor Frank Jackson’s administration told the Plain Dealer newspaper that it “has not been made aware of any additional federal law enforcement resources coming to the city.”

“The Cleveland Division of Police has in the past and will continue to partner with federal, state and local law enforcement agencies to combat violent crime in our neighborhoods,” the statement reads. “In [December], the Division of Police announced the Relentless Pursuit initiative, which is designed to combat violent crimes in our neighborhoods with our federal, state and local partners.”

Detroit Mayor Mike Duggan told local media: “Early on, we made the decision [that] the bond between the Detroit Police Department and the community was strong enough we could handle the protests ourselves.”

Separately, Duggan issued a joint statement with Detroit Police Chief James Craig opposing federal assistance, which said:

There could be no possible justification for such an action. The Detroit Police Department has had the support of the Detroit community in making sure our city did not have a single store looted or a single fire started during the protests.

Unlike nearly every other major city in the country, the Detroit Police Department never requested assistance from the National Guard–we handled our issues as a community. We definitely have no need for any federal presence being sent in now.

Although Trump mentioned Baltimore earlier this week, a spokesman for Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young told the Baltimore Sun that the city had no indication that the Trump administration had moved on any plans to send federal law enforcement.

Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf accused Trump of trying to distract Americans from COVID-19.

“I don’t need law enforcement in Oakland; I need testing, I need personal protective equipment,” Schaaf said. “We need direct income support for people who are out of work, that’s what we need. This president seems to confuse a political bent.”

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:

Why This Revolution Isn’t Like the ’60s

Q&A: Here’s What’s Happening on the Ground in Portland

Rioters Are Using Racial Discontent to Promote Marxist Agenda


A Note for our Readers:

These are trying times in our nation’s history. Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today, with polar opposite viewpoints on public policy and the government’s role in our lives.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation asked world-class speaker, educator, and researcher David Azerrad to walk you through his research and outline the differences between the “two regimes” in our society today—conservatism and progressivism—and their primary differences.

When you get access to this course today, you’ll learn key takeaways like what it means to be a conservative, what “modern progressivism” is, how a conservative worldview differs from a progressive one, and much, much more.

You will come away from this online course with a better understanding of the differing points of view, how they align with your principles, and how to defend your beliefs.

Don’t wait—start taking “The Case for Conservatism” course online now.

GET YOUR FREE ACCESS NOW »


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

VIDEO: When the New York Times covered up one of communism’s worst atrocities

A drama about the Holodomor, the 1930s genocide in Ukraine, is also a warning about fake news.


One of the great, universal truths is that everybody lies. From tiny white lies to great big whoppers, everyone does it, even babies. Don’t believe me?

“Sorry I’m late, traffic was terrible.”

“It’s so great to see you!”

“Doing well, thanks for asking!”

“I have read and agree to the above terms and conditions.”

These are just a handful of the easy, casual lies that we all offer up on an everyday basis. And much of the time, these kinds of lies are fairly harmless. These tiny deceptions are baked into most of our social interactions and, in many ways, grease the wheels of polite society. After all, how awkward and uncomfortable would our conversations be if we actually told the truth every time someone asked how we’re doing?

These are the lies we expect to be told and are expected to tell. And while I would personally like to see more honesty in everyone’s day-to-day interactions, I understand the purpose of these kinds of deceptions.

That said, the truth always matters. We may expect some level of insincerity in certain situations, but in others, honesty is more than simply suggested—it’s required.

When it comes to reporting news, telling the truth is vitally important.

The term “fake news” has been abused to the point of uselessness, but false reporting does exist and has for a long time. The information we receive through various media outlets and platforms is frequently critical for how we plan our days and how we plan our lives. When that information is false, intentionally or not, it can cause us very real problems.

Sometimes, the consequences are as simple and relatively benign as getting caught in the rain without an umbrella. Sometimes, though—and especially with intentionally misleading or false information—the results can be devastating to livelihoods and lives.

One of the most egregious examples of this was the coordinated cover-up of the Holodomor—a famine in the Ukraine deliberately created by the Soviet Union in 1932 and ’33.

In the span of a year, decreased output due to the forced collectivization of farms and the confiscation of foodstuffs by the Soviet army led to the deaths of between seven and ten million people, mostly ethnic Ukrainians. It was, in short, a genocide by means of starvation.

Freelance reporter Gareth Jones broke the story. He did what he was supposed to do as a journalist. He told the truth.

Unfortunately, Jones’s reporting shined an incredibly unflattering light on the fact that the news reports coming out of Moscow regarding the impressive successes of Soviet agriculture were false. Walter Duranty, the Moscow Bureau Chief for the New York Times, and the rest of the foreign press corps in Moscow promptly launched a coordinated campaign to discredit Jones’s reporting, despite the fact they all knew Jones was telling the truth.

Eugene Lyons, who was the Moscow correspondent for United Press at the time, even wrote in his 1937 book Assignment in Utopia:

Throwing down Jones was as unpleasant a chore as fell to any of us in years of juggling facts to please dictatorial regimes—but throw him down we did, unanimously and in almost identical formulations of equivocation. Poor Gareth Jones must have been the most surprised human being alive when the facts he so painstakingly garnered from our mouths were snowed under by our denials. … There was much bargaining in a spirit of gentlemanly give-and-take, under the effulgence of [Foreign Press Corps Soviet Official Konstantin] Umansky’s gilded smile, before a formal denial was worked out. We admitted enough to soothe our consciences, but in roundabout phrases that damned Jones as a liar. The filthy business having been disposed of, someone ordered vodka and zakuski.

It should be noted that both Duranty and Lyons were true believers in the communist cause and didn’t hesitate to use their positions as arbiters of truth to deceive the western world regarding the actual situation in the Soviet Union. As a result, around ten million people were starved to death during the Holodomor, and yet the Soviet Union continued to be propped up by Western governments and their investments. Furthermore, in total, approximately 100 million people have been killed by communist states since the Bolshevik Revolution which was allowed, in part, by the deceptions of professional “truth-tellers.”

This is not to say that bias, in and of itself, is to blame. Another great, universal truth is that everyone has some kind of bias. No matter how hard we try to be objective and relate only the facts, at least a little bit of that bias is going to show through. But there isn’t anything inherently wrong with having a bias, especially when it’s acknowledged.

The problems come when the bias in people we rely on to report the actual facts internally absolves them of telling outright lies to further their ideological goals.

This is not a problem of the past, either. Whether it’s an incident of claiming to have COVID-19 when they don’t or building an entire career out of fabricated “news” articles, the long and sordid story of falsified reports continues to this day.

This kind of “reporting” isn’t limited to simply lying, either. Blithely passing along uninvestigated press releases or unconfirmed allegations as fact also damages our trust in news media. Given how common such reporting is, it’s no wonder trust in news media in the US is only about 29 percent.

And then we wonder why so few people comply with suggestions and warnings given by the news media.

A commonly-offered solution to this problem with news media trust is fact-checking by a small handful of officially approved arbiters. However, the reason that Duranty and the New York Times, Lyons and the United Press, and the other members of the foreign press corps in Moscow were able to cover up the horrors of the Holodomor is precisely because only a handful of media outlets were considered legitimate.

Policies, regardless of who institute them, that centralize the distribution and judgment of truth would end up doing the opposite of what they intend. We would be right back to the bad old days of journalism where media monopolies could spread misinformation largely unchallenged.

It’s not hard to find some pretty spectacular fact-checking failures, and this is beside the fact that people tend to reject fact-checks that contradict their core beliefs regardless.

We in the US enjoy fairly robust legal protections for free speech and a free press, which, to be clear, is good thing. But what can we do when reporters don’t do their jobs correctly?

The solution is not to curb or restrict speech that doesn’t meet certain criteria. And it’s certainly not to limit the sources of various kinds of information. The only way to improve speech is to encourage more speech. We need an actual marketplace of ideas where consumers of information are able to judge for themselves what sources of that information meet their quality requirements and which do not.

The solution isn’t a single, official voice of truth. It’s billions of voices. It’s the competition of different ideas and their purveyors. It’s individuals thinking for themselves and accepting the responsibility that comes with that.

The reason the true believers of the Moscow foreign press corps faked their stories was that they feared the truth would hinder the cause they’d placed their faith in. But if a cause can be crushed by the simple telling of truth, it’s not much of a cause at all.

The truth matters and the truth will out, even in our world of “fake news” and clickbait.

But only if we let it and only if we demand it.

This article is republished from The Foundation for Economic Freedom under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Jen Maffessanti

Jen Maffessanti is a Senior Writer at FEE and mother of two. When she’s not advocating for liberty or chasing kids, she can usually be found cooking or maybe racing cars. Check out her website

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

Jessi Melton, GOP Candidate for U.S. House of Representatives in Florida’s District 22, Dominates Contenders in One Quarter Despite COVID Restrictions

BOCA RATON, Fla. /PRNewswire/ — The race for Florida’s 22nd congressional district has picked up in pace. One clear winner is headed for the finish line against her Republican contenders. Jessica “Jessi” Melton is the only Republican candidate for Florida House District 22 that seems to be capable of taking on “The Squad” in Washington, D.C. The district encompasses the coastline of Broward County to southern Palm Beach County. Including Boca RatonFort Lauderdale, part of Pompano Beach, and Coral Springs. Jessi is a 32-year old telecommunications business owner and mother, positioned to meet the needs of the Republican voter in South Florida.

As with most Americans, Jessi’s road to success was met with challenges. After working different jobs, Jessi was finally able to achieve the American dream. Her leadership skills, and social media savvy, shine in this hotly contested race. She has been the target of attacks from opponents. Fran Flynn approached Jessi in close proximity on stage, defying social distancing restrictions during the Americans For Trump event held last week. Flynn does not have any financial data available on the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The tension stemmed from a claim that Flynn hired a blogger to author negative articles about Jessi. Flynn responded and admitted paying for advertising on the blog. The incident, caught on video, circulated throughout social media.

Jessi Melton is the leader in fundraising according to the statistics in the race against incumbent Democrat Ted Deutch. This may be why her opponents are resorting to low-blows. A review of the data available on the FEC website, www.fec.gov, shows why Jessi is feared by her competition and revered by her supporters. In this quarter, she raised ~$93,000, demonstrating her ability to connect with voters. This far surpasses her closet opponent. James “Jim” Pruden. Pruden reported $0 of fundraising in this quarter and only raised ~$32,000 in the several months after his initial candidate contribution. Darlene Swaffer would be assumed to be in last place, with only ~$12,000 raised. The only thing saving her from that fate, Fran Flynn. She has no financial data, putting her number at $0.  Melton is in first place, raising more in a single quarter than all of her opponents for the Republican primary.

Learn more at: www.votejessi.com

6 Possible Outcomes in Justice Department Probe of Spying on Trump

White House chief of staff Mark Meadows has predicted indictments in the Justice Department’s probe of the origins of the FBI’s Russia-Trump investigation.

Although U.S. Attorney John Durham of Connecticut has been on the case since May 2019, however, it’s not clear what the precise criminal charges might be, if any.

“I expect indictments based on the evidence I’ve seen,” Meadows told Fox News Channel on Sunday. “You’re going to see a couple of other documents come out in the coming days that will suggest that not only was the [Trump] campaign spied on, but the FBI did not act appropriately as they were investigating.”

“It’s all starting to come unraveled,” the former North Carolina congressman said. “And I tell you, it’s time that people go to jail and people are indicted.”

Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today. But what side are you on? And how can you sharpen up on how to defend your position? Learn more now >>

Attorney General William Barr detailed Durham to conduct an investigation that has spanned several countries to determine whether high-ranking officials in the FBI, the CIA, or elsewhere used federal government power to block Donald Trump’s election in November 2016 and, later, to undermine his presidency by promoting a narrative of a conspiracy between the Russian government and the Trump campaign to influence the 2016 election.

“This may be literally the greatest abuse of power in history, but it could be hard to identify a specific statute that was violated,” Curt Levey, president of the Committee for Justice, a conservative legal group, told The Daily Signal.

However, Levey added, “In impeachment, the Democrats were convinced that Trump was guilty of abuse of power even if no identifiable laws were violated.”

Former FBI Director James Comey, former CIA Director John Brennan, and President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, all have faced questions about alleged misuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act and questionable “unmasking” of retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn and other Trump associates whose calls were intercepted under that law.

Lower-level officials in the Obama administration also are potential targets.

Some legal experts anticipate a report that details Durham’s findings, while others expect at least some indictments. Here are six potential outcomes of the U.S. attorney’s probe.

1. A Dud

The COVID-19 pandemic likely slowed down Durham’s probe, legal experts note.

“It slows everything down, just scheduling witnesses for an interview before you even bring anyone to a grand jury. I’m sure any good defense attorney is asking for as many delays as possible right now,” said John Yoo, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley who wrote the book “Defender in Chief: Donald Trump’s Fight for Presidential Power.”

“If you look back on the timeline, people may be demanding too much in expecting charges to be brought,” Yoo, a former deputy assistant U.S. attorney general, told The Daily Signal. “I think it’s really only been a little over a year.”

He said the investigation is complex, “with all these high-powered people being investigated and all these legal issues involved.”

The timeline isn’t at all promising for legal accountability, said Tom Fitton, president of Judicial Watch, a government watchdog group

“Many, many Americans will be disappointed by the Durham investigation,” Fitton told The Daily Signal. “High level officials are unlikely to face legal accountability. I see no evidence the focus is on senior Obama administration officials.”

It’s not even clear that a grand jury has been impaneled to hear evidence, said Fitton, author of “A Republic Under Assault.”

“A serious investigation would have had a grand jury,” he said. “Senior officials would have been called before the grand jury. Now it is July and there have been no indictments. It’s been a year and a half, and nothing.”

“The Department of Justice has dropped the ball,” Fitton added. “The stonewalling is still going on.”

2. Lying to Judges or Investigators

If indictments happen, the most likely charge would have to involve lying to the secretive FISA court, to federal officials, or to investigators, former Justice Department lawyer J. Christian Adams said.

“If you lie in a FISA application, it is under oath,” Adams told The Daily Signal.

He specified 18 USC 1001 as the likely statute that could be used as the basis of criminal charges.

“That is exactly what Michael Flynn was charged with. So, the irony would be delicious,” said Adams, president of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, an election integrity group.

Flynn, Trump’s national security adviser for three weeks, was charged with lying to FBI investigators looking into conversations Flynn had with the Russian ambassador as incoming national security adviser.

Although Flynn was convicted, the Justice Department dropped the case May 7 after uncovering numerous irregularities.

3. Potential Targets

Based on public reports, multiple individuals face scrutiny in Durham’s investigation, including at least one high-profile figure, another who emerged with infamy, and a third lesser-known person.

FBI documents released in April show that Peter Strzok, who resigned in disgrace from the FBI, had ordered that the Flynn investigation remain open. This was despite a lack of “derogatory” information regarding whether Flynn violated the Logan Act, a law dating to 1799 that never has been used for a prosecution.

The Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General determined that two of the FBI’s four applications to the FISA court to spy on Trump campaign operative Carter Page had numerous errors and relied almost entirely on a document containing unverified and salacious material about Trump.

Compiled by former British intelligence official Christopher Steele, the document turned out to be funded by the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign and the Democratic National Committee.

Under the Trump administration, the Justice Department eventually admitted it lacked probable cause for a warrant to surveil Page.

The Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General report said that the CIA told former FBI lawyer, Kevin Clinesmith, that Page reported his Russian contacts to the CIA. However, the report said, Clinesmith omitted such exculpatory information in the FISA warrant seeking to investigate whether Page was a Russian agent.

The New York Times reported in October that Durham’s team had interviewed about two dozen former and current FBI officials. The team looked into “whether CIA officials might have somehow tricked the FBI into opening the Russia investigation,” the Times said.

The Times reported that Durham’s team “appeared focused at one point on Peter Strzok.”

“I suspect that Durham may be focused on Brennan and culpability in suppression of evidence on intelligence to justify surveillance on the Trump campaign,” Peter Flaherty, president of the National Legal and Policy Center, told The Daily Signal. “If he misled other parts of the bureaucracy, that could be a problem.”

In February, the Times reported: “Mr. Durham appears to be pursuing a theory that the C.I.A., under its former director John O. Brennan, had a preconceived notion about Russia or was trying to get to a particular result—and was nefariously trying to keep other agencies from seeing the full picture lest they interfere with that goal, the people said.”

Brennan became a high-profile critic of Trump on cable news shows and social media.

In April, The Wall Street Journal reported that investigators were focusing on Brennan, “examining whether he pushed for a blunter assessment about Russia’s motivations than others in the intelligence community felt was warranted.”

4. Illegal Leaking

In April, The New York Times reported that the Durham team was focusing on leakers, particularly those who leaked the information about Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak to Washington Post columnist David Ignatius.

Leaking classified information can be prosecuted under the Espionage Act, a World War I-era law meant to shield national security information, the Committee for Justice’s Levey said.

“The Espionage Act is interpreted broadly as dealing not just with the national defense, but national security,” Levey said. “It’s not all classified.”

Levey added that national security leaks also could be prosecuted under a theft law, 18 U.S. Code 641. If convicted, someone who “knowingly converts to his use or the use of another, or without authority, sells, conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the United States” could face 10 years in prison.

“There is a possibility of [prosecution under] a general federal theft statute,” Levey said. “That could be prosecuting leaks for taking things of value to the U.S.”

5. Conspiracy

Given the number of individuals apparently targeted by Durham, conspiracy could be a potential criminal charge, Levey said.

“A conspiracy charge could widen the circle of people charged, but [a criminal statute] would have to be clearly identifiable,” he said.

Several FBI officials, including Comey as director, were involved in the initial FISA application for a warrant to spy on Page. So a possible charge is conspiracy to violate the surveillance law, the University of California’s Yoo said.

Comey, a vocal Trump critic since the president fired him in May 2017, has said he trusted those who worked under him.

“I don’t think it’s a great defense to say, ‘I approved the use of extraordinary surveillance measures on an American and I didn’t read it,’” Yoo told The Daily Signal.

“I was involved with FISA in the [George W.] Bush years, and I’m pretty sure people read them,” he said. “As a mid-level person myself, I wanted to make sure they read them so they would know what they are doing.”

Yoo also cited a White House meeting in the closing days of the Obama administration in which Comey, Rice, Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, and Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates discussed the FBI’s Flynn investigation.

“You’re talking about the head of national intelligence, the White House national security adviser, they could all be potentially involved,” Yoo said. “You already have reports of this meeting at the White House … in early January with Comey and Biden and Susan Rice.”

“Somebody potentially might have known,” he said, about possibly improper actions to target the Trump presidency.

Judicial Watch’s Fitton, not bullish about indictments, said a conspiracy charge is possible if Durham can show that multiple individuals knowingly provided false information to the FISA court.

“There may be charges for conspiracy. That only takes two,” Fitton said.

6. Just a Report

Given the limits on time, and a desire to get the truth out well before the next presidential election to avoid an appearance of politicization, some legal experts think Durham may provide only a report and no criminal charges.

“I never liked the approach Mueller took of writing a report and not indicting people, except on the periphery, though a report was part of his job,” the National Legal and Policy Center’s Flaherty said, referring to special counsel Robert Mueller’s lengthy, two-part report concluding that neither Trump nor his campaign conspired with Moscow.

“But, in the case of Durham, a report might give us a sense of what happened in what was an ongoing effort to push a president out of office after they tried to prevent him from getting elected,” Flaherty said, adding:

Durham could find things that should be alarming to people of all political persuasions if we weren’t so polarized. I would hope they would agree that an effort at the highest level of government to push a president out of office or keep a candidate from being elected president is wrong. Whether Trump is a sympathetic victim or not shouldn’t make a difference.

Yoo said a report from Durham could be more important than indictments in informing the public before it makes a decision at the ballot box.

“I’ve always thought a better idea might be not to get prosecutions, but to get a report out that explains what happened,” he said, adding:

A report this summer could do a lot of good. He could also say,  ‘I’m not going to charge people like President Obama,’ but point out what was wrong. In a report, you could decide ‘We’re not going to charge so-and-so, but here’s all the things they did.’

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 ARTICLE: FINALLY: Durham Accepting Guilty Pleas


A Note for our Readers:

These are trying times in our nation’s history. Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today, with polar opposite viewpoints on public policy and the government’s role in our lives.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation asked world-class speaker, educator, and researcher David Azerrad to walk you through his research and outline the differences between the “two regimes” in our society today—conservatism and progressivism—and their primary differences.

When you get access to this course today, you’ll learn key takeaways like what it means to be a conservative, what “modern progressivism” is, how a conservative worldview differs from a progressive one, and much, much more.

You will come away from this online course with a better understanding of the differing points of view, how they align with your principles, and how to defend your beliefs.

Don’t wait—start taking “The Case for Conservatism” course online now.

GET YOUR FREE ACCESS NOW »


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

Photo Appears to Show Black Lives Matter Supporters Holding Down and Kneeling on Neck of White Baby

UPDATE:

What’s it going to take to free ourselves from the destruction of the Democrats and their monsters?

Photo Appears to Show Black Lives Matter Supporters Holding Down and Kneeling on Neck of White Baby

By Cassandra Fairbanks, Gateway Pundit, July 21, 2020:

UPDATE: The Clark County Sheriff’s Office in Ohio has launched an investigation over the photo.

A photograph of a black man kneeling on the neck of a white baby while a black woman holds the diapered child’s arms is stirring up a massive amount of rage on social media.

The shocking and disturbing photograph, which was captioned by the abusers as “Blm now mf” is beginning to make the rounds after being uncovered by Vincent James of Red Elephants.

Posts on Facebook from people claiming to be familiar with the man said that his name is Isaiah Jackson and that he has been arrested in Ohio.

The man in the photograph does appear to be Jackson, based on his Facebook profile, but we have not been able to verify other allegations against him. An Isaiah Jackson was arrested on July 20 in Ohio for a probation violation.

WHIO TV 7 reports that “investigators in Clark County said they are investigating the post, however no arrests have been made and charges have not been filed.” Their report said that according to emergency scanner traffic, deputies, police, and medics were called to two different addresses Tuesday morning in Clark County as a part of the investigation.

“We are looking into this case, however it is still an active investigation. At this point we are actively looking into it and we are VERY early on into this investigation,” Maj. Chris Clark said in an emailed statement to the station.

RELATED ARTICLES:

MASS Shooting: NINE Wounded in Shooting in Chicago

De Blasio says he’d sue to stop Trump from intervening in NYC crime surge

WATCH: Ted Cruz on 2020 elections: ‘If Democrats win Texas, it’s all over’

Jewish Star deemed ‘hateful imagery’ by Twitter


HAVE A TIP WE SHOULD KNOW? YOUR ANONYMITY IS NEVER COMPROMISED. EMAIL TIPS@THEGELLERREPORT.COM


EDITORS NOTE: This Geller Report column is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved.

Vandalizing American History: A List of 64 Toppled, Defaced, or Removed Statues

The list of American statues and other monuments that have been toppled, decapitated, defaced, or removed since the May 25 killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis grew longer almost daily through June and into July.

A mob cheered as it pulled down a statue of Christopher Columbus in Saint Paul, Minnesota. In Washington, D.C., rioters used ropes to tear down a bronze depiction of Albert Pike, a Confederate general, and then set the 11-foot statue on fire.

Vandals have not discriminated among the monuments they target, defacing statues of Confederate and Union soldiers alike, and going after those that have no association with racism, such as an 120-year-old statue of an elk in Portland, Oregon.

Vandals defaced—and/or officials removed—at least four statues and monuments in each of three states: Alabama, New York, and Texas. Five such incidents occurred in North Carolina, nine in California, and 11 in Virginia.


Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today. But what side are you on? And how can you sharpen up on how to defend your position? Learn more now >>


Here is a list of 64 statues and other monuments vandalized or removed since May 30, according to news reports. The list may not be complete, so numerous are the incidents.

1. May 30: Edward Carmack, Tennessee 

Rioters pulled down a statue in Nashville, Tennessee, depicting 19th-century newspaper editor Edward Carmack. According to the Tennessee State Museum, Carmack criticized Ida B. Wells, an African American journalist and civil rights advocate who wrote against racial injustice.

2. May 30: Confederate monument, Mississippi

Vandals painted red handprints on the University of Mississippi’s Confederate monument in Oxford, Mississippi, along with the words “spiritual genocide.”

3. May 31: Charles Linn, Alabama 

A mob toppled a statue of Charles Linn, a Confederate navy captain who was one of the founders of Birmingham, Alabama. The vandals set afire and defaced the depiction of Linn once it was on the ground.

4. June 1: Gen. Robert E. Lee, Alabama 

Police arrested and charged three men and one woman in connection with toppling a statue of Robert E. Lee outside a high school in Montgomery, Alabama, that bears the name of the celebrated Confederate general. Authorities dropped charges of first-degree criminal mischief against all four June 11.

5. June 2: Gen. Robert E. Lee, Maryland 

Someone applied graffiti to deface the plaque in front of the statue of Lee at Antietam National Battlefield in Sharpsburg, Maryland.

6. June 2: “Appomattox,” Virginia

The United Daughters of the Confederacy removed the “Appomattox” statue in Alexandria depicting a lone soldier to commemorate all of the city’s Confederate soldiers. The bronze statue had stood in Old Town Alexandria since 1899.

7. June 3: Confederate Cemetery, South Carolina

A vandal or vandals defaced a Confederate monument at a cemetery in Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, by painting a swastika, the letter “X,” and the letters “USA” on it.

8. June 3: Mayor Frank Rizzo, Pennsylvania 

Workers removed a statue of Frank Rizzo, the Democratic mayor of Philadelphia in the 1970s, from the steps of the Municipal Services Building. Someone had spray-painted the bronze statue of Rizzo, also a former Philadelphia police chief. Rizzo allowed violence against black Americans while mayor from 1972 to 1980, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

9. June 4: Gen. Robert E. Lee, Virginia 

A judge blocked the efforts of Virginia Gov. Ralph Northam, a Democrat, to remove a 60-foot statue of Lee from Monument Avenue in Richmond. Vandals had covered the statue in graffiti, and its location has been the site of numerous protests since Floyd’s death.

10. June 5: Orville Hubbard, Michigan 

Officials in Dearborn, Michigan, removed a statue of Orville Hubbard, the city’s mayor from 1942 to 1978. Hubbard was a firm advocate of racial segregation, accrding to the Detroit Historical Society. The family of the late mayor now possesses the statue, which had stood outside the Dearborn Historical Museum.

11. June 5: Adm. Raphael Semmes, Alabama

Crews removed a statue of Raphael Semmes, an admiral in the Confederate navy, in downtown Mobile, Alabama. “Moving this statue will not change the past. It is about removing a potential distraction so we may focus clearly on the future of our city,” Mayor Sandy Stimpson, a Republican, said.

12. June 6: Williams Carter Wickham, Virginia 

Demonstrators toppled a statue of Williams Carter Wickham, a Confederate general, in Richmond’s Monroe Park. Graffiti reading “BLM” (an acronym for Black Lives Matter) covered the base of the statue, which had stood in the park since 1891.

13. June 8: Confederate monument, Virginia 

Rioters littered a Confederate monument in Norfolk,  Virginia, with toilet paper and graffiti, including the letters “BLM.” City officials said they planned to remove the monument.

14. June 8: Confederate monument, Indiana 

Indianapolis city workers removed a monument dedicated to Confederate soldiers who died in a Union prison camp in Indianapolis during the Civil War. “We must name these instances of discrimination and never forget our past—but we should not honor them,” Mayor Joe Hogsett, a Democrat, said.

15. June 8: John Breckinridge Castleman, Kentucky 

City crews in Louisville, Kentucky, removed a statue of John Breckinridge Castleman, a Confederate officer, from the center of the Cherokee Triangle neighborhood. Castleman became a brigadier general in the U.S. Army after the Civil War and was instrumental in setting up Louisville’s segregated park system, The Courier-Journal reported. Officials planned to move the statue to Cave Hill Cemetery, where Castleman is buried.

16. June 8: Confederate monument, North Carolina 

The City Council of Rocky Mount, North Carolina, approved removal of a Confederate monument featuring a soldier standing atop a tall pillar.

17. June 8: Confederate statue, Florida

Crews removed a statue of a Confederate soldier from Hemming Park in Jacksonville, Florida. “We’ve got to find a way to come together,” Mayor Lenny Curry, a Republican, said the next day. “We’re not going to agree on everything—that’s just not human history, human nature. We’ve got to find common ground.”

18. June 9: Lawrence Sullivan Ross, Texas

A man spray-painted the word “racist” and the acronyms “BLM” and “ACAB” (an acronym for “All Cops Are Bastards”) on a statue of Lawrence Sullivan Ross, a Confederate general, on the Texas A&M campus in College Station. The man also placed a rainbow wig on the statue’s head.

19. June 9: Confederate monument, Texas

A small group of demonstrators used black spray paint to cover a plaque at a monument reading “In memory of our Confederate patriots 1861-1865,” outside the Walker County Courthouse in Huntsville, Texas.

20. Early June: Matthias Baldwin, Pennsylvania

Vandals defaced a statue of inventor, manufacturer, and abolitionist Matthias Baldwin in Philadelphia with graffiti reading “COLONIZER” and “MURDERER” on an unknown date in early June. They also covered the face of the statue with red paint.

21. June 10: Jefferson Davis, Virginia 

Demonstrators used ropes to pull down a statue of Jefferson Davis, president of the Confederacy, in Richmond, Virginia, which was the capital of the Confederate States of America. The bronze depiction of Davis originally was placed along Monument Avenue in 1907.

22. June 10: Confederate monument, Virginia 

A large crowd beheaded statues of four Confederate soldiers, all part of the same monument, in Portsmouth, Virginia. Rioters covered the monument with graffiti and pulled down one figure, which hit a man in the head, landing him in a hospital.

23. June 10: Christopher Columbus, Massachusetts

Vandals beheaded the statue of Columbus in Boston’s North End, prompting the city to remove it. Vandals previously had defaced the statue with paint in 2015 and beheaded it in 2006.

24. June 10: Christopher Columbus, Virginia

Rioters pulled down the statue of Columbus that had stood in Richmond, Virginia, since 1927. They placed a burning American flag on top of the statue before throwing it into a nearby lake.

25. June 10: Christopher Columbus, Minnesota

Protesters gathered outside the Minnesota State Capitol in Saint Paul used rope to pull down a 10-foot bronze statue of Columbus.

26. June 10: Christopher Columbus, Florida 

Rioters spray-painted black-power fists, a hammer and sickle, and the initials BLM over a plaque beneath the statue of Columbus in Miami. They also covered the statue’s face and hands in red paint. Police arrested seven suspects shortly afterward.

27. June 10: Juan Ponce de León, Florida 

Vandals spray-painted a statue of Spanish explorer Juan Ponce de León in Bayfront Park, the same Miami park where someone defaced the Columbus statue. Authorities said a protest began peacefully, but quickly grew violent.

28. June 10: Confederate monument, Alabama 

The Madison County Commission voted to remove a Confederate monument outside the courthouse in downtown Huntsville, Alabama.

29. June 11: Don Juan de Oñate, Texas 

Vandals spray-painted obscenities and other words on a sculpture of Spanish conquistador Don Juan de Oñate outside El Paso International Airport in Texas.

30. June 11: “One Riot, One Ranger,” Texas

A city work crew removed a statue of a Texas Ranger entitled “One Riot, One Ranger” that had stood at Love Field airport in Dallas since 1963.

30. June 11: Philip Schuyler, New York 

Officials decided to remove a statue of Philip Schuyler, a Revolutionary War general, from in front of Albany City Hall. In a tweet, Albany Mayor Kathy Sheehan, a Democrat, said Schuyler reportedly was “the largest owner of enslaved people in Albany during his time.”

32. June 12: Christopher Columbus, Pennsylvania

Vandals defaced the base of a Columbus statue with red handprints and graffiti reading “MURDER” and “OG PIG” in Pittsburgh’s Schenley Park. The incident marked the third time the statue has been defaced in recent years.

33. June 13: Christopher Columbus, Rhode Island

Workers removed a statue of Columbus in Providence, Rhode Island, after rioters splashed red paint across it and hung a sign reading, “STOP CELEBRATING GENOCIDE.” The city officials were determining whether they would relocate the statue.

34. June 13: Christopher Columbus, Illinois 

A vandal or vandals spray-painted the acronym BLM on a statue of Columbus on Chicago’s Museum Campus.

35. June 14: George Washington, Illinois 

Vandals defaced a statue of the Founding Father and first president in Washington Park, covering the base in red spray paint reading “SLAVE OWNER” and “GOD BLESS AMERIKKKA.” The perpetrators also placed a white gown and hood on the sculpture.

36. June 14: John Greenleaf Whittier, California 

A vandal or vandals spray-painted a statue of 19th-century Quaker poet and abolitionist John Greenleaf Whittier in the city named after him, writing “BLM” and “— Slave Owners” on it.  Whittier was a delegate to the first meeting of the American Anti-Slavery Convention, the Whittier Daily News reported.

37. June 15: Don Juan de Oñate, New Mexico

Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller, a Democrat, announced the removal of a statue of Spanish conquistador Don Juan de Oñate after the shooting of a man during rival protests around it. The next day, crews removed the statue from outside Albuquerque Museum.

38. June 15: John Sutter, California 

Workers removed a bronze depiction of California settler and businessman John Sutter from Sutter Medical Center in Sacramento after vandals defaced it with graffiti. Sutter abused and enslaved Native Americans in the 1840s, according to HistoryNet.

39. June 16: Howitzer Monument, Virginia 

Rioters toppled Richmond’s Howitzer Monument and littered it with graffiti. The monument, built in 1892, commemorates a Confederate artillery unit known as the Howitzers, the Richmond Times-Dispatch reported.

40. June 19: Francis Scott Key, California 

Rioters toppled a statue of Francis Scott Key, author of “The Star-Spangled Banner,” on the day known as Juneteenth, which commemorates the day in 1865 that slaves in Texas learned Lincoln had freed them a year and a half earlier.

41. June 19: St. Junipero Serra, California  

A mob pulled down a statue of St. Junipero Serra, an 18th-century Roman Catholic priest and missionary, that had stood in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park for over a century. Some sources say the Spanish missionary abused Native Americans on the West Coast and subjected them to forced labor.

42. June 19: Ulysses S. Grant, California

Rioters toppled a bust of Ulysses S. Grant, the Union general and later president who played an integral role in ending slavery in America. A crowd of 400 gathered and watched in San Francisco’s Golden Gate Park as vandals pulled down the monument. Police were present, but made no arrests.

43. June 19: Albert Pike, District of Columbia

A crowd cheered as rioters toppled a statue of Albert Pike, apparently the only Confederate statue in Washington, D.C. The group gathered around the fallen statue shouting, “Black lives matter” before setting it on fire with lighter fluid.

44. June 19: Confederate monument, North Carolina

Demonstrators pulled down statues of two Confederate soldiers from a monument just outside the State Capitol in Raleigh. They dragged a bronze depiction of a cavalryman down the road with a rope around its neck and hung the statue from a lightpost. They dragged the statue of an artilleryman to the front of the Wake County Courthouse. Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, ordered work crews to remove what was left of the monument.

45. June 20: Henry Lawson Wyatt, North Carolina

Crews removed a statue of Henry Lawson Wyatt, believed to be the first Confederate soldier killed at the start of the Civil War, from its location in Raleigh. Gov. Roy Cooper ordered the statue removed in the interest of public safety.

46. June 20: Women of the Confederacy, North Carolina

By the governor’s order, workers removed a monument dedicated to the women of North Carolina who lived during the Civil War.

47. June 20: St. Junipero Serra, California 

A crowd shouted “Take it down! Take it down!” as rioters toppled a bronze depiction of St. Junipero Serra in Father Serra Park in downtown LA. The Los Angeles Times reported that Native Americans of various ages gathered around the face-down statue as some doused it with red paint.

48. June 22: Andrew Jackson, District of Columbia

Rioters attempted to tear down a statue of Andrew Jackson in Lafayette Square near the White House, but police intervened. Vandals did succeed in defacing the base of the statue with graffiti reading “KILLER” and “RACIST SCUM,” among other things. The Justice Department on July 2 charged four men with defacing the statue, including a man identified as a ringleader.

49. June 24: John C. Calhoun, South Carolina 

Workers removed a statue of former Vice President John C. Calhoun from Marion Square in Charleston. The City Council had voted unanimously June 23 to remove the statue.

50. June 29: George Washington, New York 

A man and a woman threw balloons filled with red paint on two statues of Washington that stand on either side of the famed arch at Washington Square Park in Manhattan. One depicts Washington as president, the other as a Revolutionary War general.

51. June 30: Lincoln Emancipation Statue, Massachusetts

Boston’s Art Commission voted to remove a statue of President Abraham Lincoln holding the Emancipation Proclamation while a freed slave rises from a kneeling position with broken shackles on his wrists. Citizens began a petition drive to keep the statue at its Park Square location.

52. June 30: New York City Hall, New York 

Rioters used black spray paint and tape to deface statues of three figures standing on the side of New York City Hall in Manhattan. On and around the statues, they wrote phrases such as “ALL COPS LIE,” “You f— a— cops are getting abolished,” and “NO JUSTICE NO PEACE.”

53. July 1: Elk statue, Oregon 

A mob set fire to an iconic, 120-year-old statue of an elk atop a fountain in Portland, which also had been covered with graffiti in recent weeks. The city removed the statue the next day, citing safety concerns.

54. July 2: Matthew Fontaine Maury, Virginia

Work crews in Richmond removed a graffiti-covered statue of Matthew Fontaine Maury, a Confederate naval officer during the Civil War who is more broadly known as the “Father of Oceanography.”

55. July 4: St. Junipero Serra, California 

Rioters toppled and set fire to a statue of St. Junipero Serra, an 18th-century Roman Catholic priest, outside the California State Capitol in Sacramento. They also pounded the statue with sledgehammers.

56. July 4: Christopher Columbus, Connecticut

Someone decapitated a statue of Columbus outside Waterbury City Hall.

57. July 4: “El Soldado,” California 

Someone spray-painted the words “F— Colonizers” on the base of a statue honoring Mexican-American soldiers in Sacramento. The act was a “hate crime,” Chris Marzan, spokesman for the California Mexican American Veterans Memorial Foundation, said.

58. July 4: Christopher Columbus, Maryland 

Rioters toppled a white marble statue of Columbus and threw it into Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. Crews lifted the remains of the sculpture from the water the following Monday.

59. July 5: Frederick Douglass, New York 

Someone ripped a statue of Frederick Douglass from its base in Rochester on the 168th anniversary of the celebrated abolitionist’s famous speech there titled “What to the Slave Is the Fourth of July?” The statue suffered significant damage, authorities said.

60. July 7: Gen. J.E.B. Stuart, Virginia 

Workers used a crane to remove a statue of J.E.B. Stuart, Confederate general, from Richmond’s Monument Avenue. Rioters had spray-painted the bronze monument of the general atop a horse.

61. July 7: Christopher Columbus and Queen Isabella, California

Crews removed a statue known as “Columbus’ Last Appeal to Queen Isabella” from the rotunda of the State Capitol in Sacramento. The sculpture had been on display since 1883.

62. July 7: Confederate monument, North Carolina 

Police arrested three suspects in connection with the vandalism with graffiti of a 111-year-old Confederate monument in front of a United Methodist church in Cornelius.

63. July 8: Confederate Soldiers and Sailors, Virginia 

Workers removed a 100-foot monument known as “Confederate Soldiers and Sailors” from Libby Hill Park in Richmond. Vandals had covered the base of the monument—featuring a Confederate soldier atop a pillar—with graffiti.

64. July 11: The Virgin Mary, Massachusetts 

Someone set fire to artificial flowers in the hand of a statue of the Virgin Mary at Saint Peter’s Parish Church in Dorchester. Flames charred the statue’s face and upper body.

COLUMN BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a news producer for The Daily Signal. She is the co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast and Problematic Women. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5.

RELATED ARTICLES:

13 Images of the Chaos Created by ‘Violent Anarchists’ in Portland

McCarthy Unveils Bill to Protect Statues and Deny Funds to Cities and States That Don’t

Churches Across the Country Attacked

Larry Elder Film ‘Uncle Tom’ Gives Voice to America’s Black Conservatives


A Note for our Readers:

These are trying times in our nation’s history. Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today, with polar opposite viewpoints on public policy and the government’s role in our lives.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation asked world-class speaker, educator, and researcher David Azerrad to walk you through his research and outline the differences between the “two regimes” in our society today—conservatism and progressivism—and their primary differences.

When you get access to this course today, you’ll learn key takeaways like what it means to be a conservative, what “modern progressivism” is, how a conservative worldview differs from a progressive one, and much, much more.

You will come away from this online course with a better understanding of the differing points of view, how they align with your principles, and how to defend your beliefs.

Don’t wait—start taking “The Case for Conservatism” course online now.

GET YOUR FREE ACCESS NOW »


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

SOUND FAMILIAR? The Communist Goals as read into the Congressional Record on January 10, 1963

The following was entered into the Congressional record by Albert Sydney Herlong Jr. who was an American politician from Florida who served in the United States House of Representatives from 1949 to 1969 as a member of the Democratic Party.

Congressional Record–Appendix, pp. A34-A35
Current Communist Goals
EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. A. S. HERLONG, JR. OF FLORIDA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, January 10, 1963

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Patricia Nordman of De Land, Fla., is an ardent and articulate opponent of communism, and until recently published the De Land Courier, which she dedicated to the purpose of alerting the public to the dangers of communism in America.

At Mrs. Nordman’s request, I include in the RECORD, under unanimous consent, the following “Current Communist Goals,” which she identifies as an excerpt from “The Naked Communist,” by Cleon Skousen:

CURRENT COMMUNIST GOALS

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.
3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.
4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.
6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.
8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev’s promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.
9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.
10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.
11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)
12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.
14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.
15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers’ associations. Put the party line in textbooks.
18. Gain control of all student newspapers.
19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.
20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, and policymaking positions.
21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to “eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms.”
23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. “Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art.”
24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them “censorship” and a violation of free speech and free press.
25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.
26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as “normal, natural, and healthy.”
27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with “social” religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a “religious crutch.”
28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of “separation of church and state.” (Remember these goals were published to expose them in 1958) Coincidence?
29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the “common man.”
31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the “big picture.” Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.
32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture–education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.
33. Eliminate all laws or procedures, which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.
34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.
36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.
37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use [“] united force [“] to solve economic, political or social problems.
43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.
44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.
45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction over nations and individuals alike.

©All rights reserved.

Tweets of Washington Journalists Betray ‘Groupthink,’ Study Finds

Washington journalists’ tweets and interactions on Twitter show that those delivering news on government and politics to most Americans live in “more insular microbubbles than previously thought,” according to a new study.

These journalists display a “vulnerability to groupthink and blind spots,” the study says.

The study, by journalism professors Nikki Usher and Yee Man Margaret Ng of the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, doesn’t directly assert that the “groupthink” is liberal.

However, it refers to traditional perceptions of the news media going back to at least 1964 and establishes what it calls the “peer-to-peer dynamics” of journalists. Media bias and promoting narratives has been a particular issue in recent years.

Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today. But what side are you on? And how can you sharpen up on how to defend your position? Learn more now >>

The study, published June 30, measured these dynamics through Twitter and concludes:

The dangers of journalists having limited perspectives are real. While this study does not purport to show possible worsening over time, it does provide support that shows siloed communities of journalists and thus offers an important, empirically grounded caveat about their vulnerability to groupthink and blind spots.

The study identifies nine clusters of news organizations, called “communities of practice,” that routinely retweet and interact with fellow members of their group. These include:

—The “elite/legacy community” is made up of journalists from The Washington Post, NPR, The New York Times, NBC News, and Politico.

—The “congressional journalism community” includes journalists from Bloomberg, Politico, the Associated Press, The Wall Street Journal, CQ Roll Call, and C-SPAN.

—The TV cluster includes journalists from ABC News, Fox News, and CBS News.

Separately, the study gives CNN its own cluster because so much of the Twitter interaction is between or among CNN employees:

In particular, it is concerning that CNN journalists are tweeting mostly to other CNN journalists about CNN. Even if this is an organizational mandate, it nonetheless serves as a powerful echo chamber that leaves CNN’s internal sense about what news matters unchecked and reconfirmed by those who work there.

The “critique of ‘Eastern Liberal Media’ generally dates to [Sen.] Barry Goldwater in the 1960s,” the report notes, referring to the Arizonan who was Republicans’ 1964 presidential nominee and adding that “‘elite media’ and ‘coastal elitism’ have reached a fever pitch in the Trump era.”

It says:

Journalists widely predicted that Hillary Clinton would win the 2016 election. The aftermath prompted renewed interest among journalists and scholars focused on the United States as to whether political journalists, particularly those in Washington, were in a ‘media bubble.’ …

U.S. journalists are more likely to be insulated in liberal political bubbles in big cities that are growing ‘bluer.’

The researchers do not try to say whether each journalist leans left or right based on Twitter. But, the study says the “clusters” suggest that journalists now tend to interact “within even smaller communities of like-minded journalists that have been previously considered.” 

“If journalists are talking to even smaller groups of journalists who share similar orientations,” the study says, “there is a real concern about the limitations of these epistemic communities in generating knowledge and information for the public.”

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:

The NFL Is on the Brink

Judicial Council Rightly Rebukes Judge Lynn Adelman for Law Review Diatribe

Attorney General Says Hollywood ‘Kowtowing’ to China, Warns US Executives Against Acting as Chinese Foreign Agents


A Note for our Readers:

These are trying times in our nation’s history. Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today, with polar opposite viewpoints on public policy and the government’s role in our lives.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation asked world-class speaker, educator, and researcher David Azerrad to walk you through his research and outline the differences between the “two regimes” in our society today—conservatism and progressivism—and their primary differences.

When you get access to this course today, you’ll learn key takeaways like what it means to be a conservative, what “modern progressivism” is, how a conservative worldview differs from a progressive one, and much, much more.

You will come away from this online course with a better understanding of the differing points of view, how they align with your principles, and how to defend your beliefs.

Don’t wait—start taking “The Case for Conservatism” course online now.

GET YOUR FREE ACCESS NOW »


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

UK Rightly Pushes Back on Gender Transitioning for Minors

On both sides of the Atlantic, advocates for transgender rights are increasingly substituting ideology for biological reality.

But while here in the U.S. the Supreme Court last month was writing into Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act legal protections for people who identify as transgender that the authors of the law never intended, the United Kingdom appeared to be moving in the other direction, standing up for common sense.

On the other side of the pond, just five days before the Supreme Court handed down its decision, bestselling “Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling published an intensely personal essay in response to criticism of her position on the issue of gender identity.

In the essay, Rowling, who is British, revealed her past experiences with sexual assault and domestic abuse, and expressed concern about transgender activists’ attacks on single-sex spaces for women.


Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today. But what side are you on? And how can you sharpen up on how to defend your position? Learn more now >>


As a former teacher and a supporter of children’s charities, Rowling also stated her discomfort with the rush to medically transition children with gender dysphoria and especially the massive increase in young girls suddenly identifying as transgender.

Despite the vitriol she received in response from the left, Rowling refused to back down from her stance.

The comments by Rowling, along with other recent developments in the United Kingdom, show promising signs that the relentless advance of transgender ideology in medicine and public policy finally might be encountering some resistance across the Atlantic.

Britain’s minister for women and equalities, Liz Truss, recently announced plans to ban sex-change procedures for anyone under the age of 18.

Truss told a parliamentary committee April 20: “I believe strongly that adults should have the freedom to lead their lives as they see fit, but I think it’s very important that while people are still developing their decision-making capabilities that we protect them from making those irreversible decisions.”

Transgender activists frequently recommend those medical interventions—which include puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones, and surgery—for children who suffer from gender dysphoria.

Parents of children questioning their biological sex are advised to unquestioningly affirm the child’s new, self-identified gender and help them to transition socially with the help of a new name, pronouns, and wardrobe.

Little attention is paid to the adverse effects of that treatment, however. As Ryan T. Anderson and Robert P. George have written, such interventions “should be prohibited”:

Prudent legislation is needed to prevent adults from interfering with a child’s normal, natural bodily development.

‘Gender affirmation’ procedures violate sound medical ethics. It is profoundly unethical to intervene in the normal physical development of a child as part of ‘affirming’ a ‘gender identity’ at odds with bodily sex.

Activists have frequently brushed off concerns about possible regret following gender transitions, ignoring evidence that shows that they carry a number of physical and psychological risks.

The use of puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones can lead to increased cancer risk, decreased bone density, and adverse effects on brain development. In addition, hormones and surgeries can sterilize children who would normally be considered far too young to make such a serious—and permanent—medical decision.

In contrast, a “watchful waiting” approach allows children time to accept their biological sex instead of rushing to alter it and can help address any underlying issues causing the distress.

Studies show that 80% to 95% of children experiencing gender dysphoria who do not transition eventually come to accept their bodies, while nearly all children who are placed on the path of social transition go on to pursue medical interventions.

The U.K.’s decision to prevent those under 18 from being subjected to those unproven procedures demonstrates the importance of considering the best medical and scientific evidence, even if it contradicts the activists’ narrative.

Britain’s National Health Service recently made another change related to its treatment of gender dysphoria in minors.

The Health Service’s website, which provides information about medical conditions and treatment, includes a section on gender dysphoria in children. A section on the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues to prevent puberty in children who identify as transgender previously stated, “The effects of treatment with GnRH analogues are considered to be fully reversible, so treatment can usually be stopped at any time.”

That’s a common talking point for transgender activists, often employed to support early transitions while avoiding discussion of detrimental side effects or the lack of medical evidence supporting the use of puberty blockers to treat gender dysphoria.

Surprisingly, that section on the National Health Service website was recently updated to read:

Little is known about the long-term side effects of hormone or puberty blockers in children with gender dysphoria. …

It’s also not known whether hormone blockers affect the development of the teenage brain or children’s bones. Side effects may also include hot flushes, fatigue, and mood alterations.

Rowling noted those concerns in a tweet, writing, “Many health professionals are concerned that young people struggling with their mental health are being shunted towards hormones and surgery when this may not be in their best interests.”

The National Health Service site also notes that the use of cross-sex hormones can lead to irreversible physical changes, such as deepening of the voice in females and breast development in males, as well as permanent infertility.

The changes to its site were made without fanfare, suggesting that the Health Service still fears activists’ outrage against even reasonable medical cautions.

Despite its own update, the Health Service continues to recommend and administer these medical treatments to minors. The Minister for Women and Equalities’ report on banning some of those treatments is not expected until later this summer, and its exact recommendations remain to be seen.

The changes to the Health Service’s website and the minister’s comments provide reason to hope that they will move toward a more cautious approach to treating children with gender dysphoria, protecting vulnerable youth from rushed, ideologically motivated—and often irreversible—interventions.

Policymakers in the United States would be well advised to do the same.

COMMENTARY BY

Andrea Jones is a research assistant in the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion & Civil Society.


A Note for our Readers:

These are trying times in our nation’s history. Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today, with polar opposite viewpoints on public policy and the government’s role in our lives.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation asked world-class speaker, educator, and researcher David Azerrad to walk you through his research and outline the differences between the “two regimes” in our society today—conservatism and progressivism—and their primary differences.

When you get access to this course today, you’ll learn key takeaways like what it means to be a conservative, what “modern progressivism” is, how a conservative worldview differs from a progressive one, and much, much more.

You will come away from this online course with a better understanding of the differing points of view, how they align with your principles, and how to defend your beliefs.

Don’t wait—start taking “The Case for Conservatism” course online now.

GET YOUR FREE ACCESS NOW »


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

PODCAST: New York City Eliminated Its Anti-Crime Unit. Violent Crime Has Surged.

New York City has seen a 53.5% increase in shootings and a 27% increase in killings this year, according to GianCarlo Canaparo, a legal fellow with The Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies.

The New York City Police Department disbanded its plainclothes Anti-Crime Unit amid calls to defund the police in the wake of the killing of George Floyd. The increased violence might be a result in part of the city’s decision to disband the unit.

Canaparo joins the show to explain the factors contributing to New York City’s crime spike and what should be done to curb the violence.

We also cover these stories:


Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today. But what side are you on? And how can you sharpen up on how to defend your position? Learn more now >>


  • House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., announced a bill to protect statues and monuments from protesters.
  • There is evidence that Russia is trying to hack research about a COVID-19 vaccine from the U.S., U.K., and Canada.
  • Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp has put his foot down on the mandating of face masks by cities in the state.

“The Daily Signal Podcast” is available on Ricochet, Apple PodcastsPippaGoogle Play, and Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at letters@dailysignal.com. Enjoy the show!

Virginia Allen: I am joined by GianCarlo Canaparo, Heritage Foundation legal fellow. GianCarlo, thanks so much for being here.

GianCarlo Canaparo: Thanks for having me, Virginia.

Allen: Well, I wish that we were here to talk about happier news today, but we are discussing, really, the frighteningly high spike in violent crime in New York City. Last weekend was a really tragic weekend in New York City. Could you begin by just telling us a little bit about what happened last weekend?

Canaparo: Sure. I’ll start by telling you the story of Davell Gardner. Davell was 1 year old. He was with family and friends at a neighborhood barbecue when unknown assailants drove up, hopped out of their car, and opened fire on the barbecue. They hit three men, wounding them. Thankfully, all of them seem to be fine, but Davell died of his wounds.

The same day, two other children, ages 12 and 15, were shot in Brooklyn and Harlem, and they were among a total of 64 people shot in New York, just this last weekend.

Allen: Wow. And sadly, GianCarlo, this is a trend that we’re seeing right now in New York City. So far this year, New York has seen a 53.5% increase in shootings and a 27% increase in murders. You just wrote a sobering, but really fantastic, piece for The Daily Signal about this crime surge. Could you just give us the big picture of what is going on in New York City right now, as it relates to this rise in violent crime?

Canaparo: Yeah, sure. So far, as of the last time that the NYPD put out stats, which was on the fifth of this month, we’ve seen 528 shootings in New York. Like you said, these numbers are up big time; 50% shooting, 63% shooting victims, almost 30% increase in murders just this year.

This comes following a lot of anti-police protests and riots, as well as New York City’s decision to disband the police force’s anti-crime unit. And New York is not alone in this. We are seeing this trend in a lot of big cities. Chicago is on track to have its most violent year since the mid-’90s. We’ve seen, in that city, 336 murders as of July 2, so this is a really distressing trend of violence throughout America’s big cities.

Allen: You mentioned that the NYPD, they dismantled their anti-crime unit. What did this unit actually do, and what is not happening in New York City right now because of it being disbanded?

Canaparo: Sure. The anti-crime unit was undercover, plainclothes cops assigned to each precinct and city housing. They went after illegal guns, local crime sprees, and focused on burglaries. Incidentally, we’ve seen that burglaries are up 45% in New York this year so far.

The reason that they were disbanded, I think, is because they were involved in more police shootings than other departments, by the nature of what they did, focusing on violent crimes and guns. But what you’ve seen, then, is that the New York Police Department is now deprived of, basically, its first responders to the most violent types of crimes.

Allen: Yeah, I mean, it makes sense that if these are the police officers, like you say, that are in plain clothes and living in the community, probably 99% of the time they’re the first ones that are able to be on those crime scenes and respond.

Canaparo: Right, exactly right. They’re the officers who are going to be there before people know that the police are there or coming, and so they’re going to be in a lot hotter situations than the average officer who comes in sirens blazing after an incident has commenced or finished.

Allen: OK, wow. Right now, there’s a lot of finger pointing going on in the Big Apple, with Mayor Bill de Blasio saying it’s the courts and the courts saying no, it’s de Blasio and the NYPD, and everyone is blaming someone else. Who should actually be held accountable and responsible for this massive crime spike?

Canaparo: Boy, there’s really no shortage of people to blame. We saw earlier this year that New York undertook some criminal justice reforms, including, I think, the consensus in now is that its bail reform was somewhat disastrous. It released a lot of felons for COVID-19 to get them out of prisons because those were vulnerable populations.

We see that there are elements to these Black Lives Matter protests, which are more than just a cry for justice. There is a movement, a Marxist, anti-police, anti-establishment movement behind this motto, which has been encouraging violence and a culture of lawlessness.

We’ve seen that the New York Police Department has, in some cases, not engaged, not put its foot down, which means that people slowly, or rather quickly, actually, learn that there are not consequences to criminal action. So you’ve got this culture of lawlessness and violence that is spinning out of control in New York.

To see this firsthand, you can go online, and, I mean, there are hundreds, if not thousands, of videos, really disturbing videos of just violent lawlessness going on. The sort of thing that a healthy society does not glorify.

Allen: To what extent do you think COVID-19 should be factored into this, to where you have a lot of people out of work, or maybe have less work, and they’re bored or they’re restless? Are they maybe now more prone to get involved in criminal activity?

Canaparo: Yeah, it’s hard for me to say to what extent COVID-19 is affecting this. But … it makes sense intuitively, to me at least, that with the release of criminals from jails for COVID-19 purposes and the fact that people are not otherwise engaged productively with jobs or what have you, it makes sense to me, these are factors that come together and seem to be causing this problem.

Allen: Yeah. Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, whose district includes parts of the Bronx and Queens, she made a very interesting comment that the spike in crime was due to poverty and people not being able to feed their families, so they’re stealing bread.

What does this comment reveal about just how out of touch Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and others, radical leaders on the left, are … with reality?

Canaparo: Sure. Well, first, let me walk through how this conversation started, because there’s a timeline here that affects how people are talking about this.

She gets on a video and she says, “Well, maybe the rising crime has to do with,” like you said, “people feeling the need to shoplift some bread or go hungry,” was her quote.

That statement taken at face value is belied by the evidence. Right? This is not shoplifting. We’ve seen a 53% rise in shootings. We’ve seen murders on the rise. Burglary is on the rise, and to be clear, an increase in people shoplifting for bread would not lead to a rise in burglary stats because New York charges shoplifting as larceny.

Now, larceny stats are actually down in New York. Petite larceny, meaning anything less than $1,000, is down 7.5%. Grand larceny for bigger thefts [is] down 20%. So shoplifting is not what’s leading to this rise in violent crimes.

When she was presented with these facts and got a lot of pushback, she did what she and a lot of politicians often do, which is to retreat from the specific claim into a generality.

She said, “Republicans are just all upset that I’m connecting the dots between crime and poverty,” is what she said. Well, that’s gaslighting, pure and simple. Right? Because, if this was just about poverty, we would expect to see that month over month, recently, these crime stats would be going down because as economies have slowly reopened, we’ve seen the unemployment levels drop quite dramatically, in fact.

By the end of July, unemployment dropped about 5%. It’s still very high. It’s still too high, hovering around 11%, but down significantly.

If her explanation [was correct], crime, poverty are related was the explanation here, we’d expect to see month over month a drop. But, in fact, what we’ve seen is month over month, 165% more shootings, 204% more shooting victims, and 21% more murders, month over month. That causality is backwards.

Even if she’s allowed to retreat away from her specific claim that this is shoplifting, her general claim that this is just the relationship between crime and poverty doesn’t explain what’s going on.

Allen: Wow. Well, New York has showed us that defunding parts of your police department, it doesn’t work. It only leads to more chaos, more crime. But it’s obvious, after the death of George Floyd at the hand of police officer Derek Chauvin that reforms do need to take place and … need to happen.

How should cities and communities across America respond to the death of George Floyd so that another man or woman is not wrongfully killed at the hands of a police officer?

Canaparo: What we need to see from reformists is a commitment to reform based on what we actually know, and not just what we think or feel we know about how police behave.

We need targeted reforms that prevent or punish or eliminate bad actors from within the police forces. But to paint with a broad brush and to simply disband, defund, or eliminate police forces will only encourage bad actors in the community to do what they’re going to do with impunity.

Allen: GianCarlo, to what extent is this a state and local level issue versus something that Congress should take action on?

Canaparo: Oh, it’s almost exclusively a state and local issue because the vast, vast majority of police-citizen interactions are at the state and local level. Federal police forces are not out there on the street dealing with people on a day-to-day basis.

Every community is going to have different needs. Communities that are quieter, communities that have a lot more police presence, they’re going to have different needs and considerations, and how each community interacts with its police force is a deeply local decision.

Allen: Yeah, interesting. New York had terrible crime in the 1970s and Mayor Rudy Giuliani is largely credited with cleaning up crime in the ’90s. Although, his methods have been attacked by some. What is New York City’s history of crime?

Canaparo: In a city like New York, it’s really easy for somebody to get lost in the crowd. That dynamic, that mentality can lend itself well to, in some people, the conception that, “Well, I can commit crime because I won’t get caught.”

What big cities like New York and Chicago need is a police presence that is there, that’s visible, that’s engaged and involved with the community. To cultivate not only a sense that police are there for our protection for the vast majority of people who are good and law-abiding citizens, but also to cultivate amongst people who are not that they are not going to get away with criminal behavior.

Allen: If you could sit down with some of New York City’s leaders today and say, “Hey guys, this is really what we need to implement first. Today, right now, this is what needs to change in order to strengthen that police force and bring this crime surge down,” what would you say to them?

Canaparo: A couple of things. No. 1, again, I would just reiterate that to tackle these issues, we need to be going at it from a data-driven approach—what do we actually know—and not listen to social activists who are espousing of a philosophy that is not necessarily tied to the facts. …

No. 2, there are going to be bad actors within the police forces, like there are bad actors everywhere. We need a system where they can be found out and punished.

Now, one of the problems that police forces face is, as with teachers and other unions, a union can create a lot of stickiness for bad actors in the police force, that they can’t be fired or they can’t be removed from the beat. Those sort of concerns need to be whittled down.

On the other side of the extreme, though, you can’t just get rid of your police forces in an overcorrection because there are always going to be bad actors in the community as well.

You’ve got to find that balance. You need the police engaged with the community, building trust with the community, present in the community. But you can’t divorce from that relationship the fact that police are necessary, most police are good, hardworking people who are just trying to do their jobs.

Allen: We encourage all of our listeners to follow GianCarlo’s work and follow him on Twitter, @gcanaparo. GianCarlo, thank you so much for your time today, just really appreciate your insight on this really important subject.

Canaparo: My pleasure. Thanks, Virginia.

COLUMN BY

Virginia Allen

Virginia Allen is a news producer for The Daily Signal. She is the co-host of The Daily Signal Podcast and Problematic Women. Send an email to Virginia. Twitter: @Virginia_Allen5.


A Note for our Readers:

These are trying times in our nation’s history. Two regimes are fighting an ideological war in America today, with polar opposite viewpoints on public policy and the government’s role in our lives.

Our friends at The Heritage Foundation asked world-class speaker, educator, and researcher David Azerrad to walk you through his research and outline the differences between the “two regimes” in our society today—conservatism and progressivism—and their primary differences.

When you get access to this course today, you’ll learn key takeaways like what it means to be a conservative, what “modern progressivism” is, how a conservative worldview differs from a progressive one, and much, much more.

You will come away from this online course with a better understanding of the differing points of view, how they align with your principles, and how to defend your beliefs.

Don’t wait—start taking “The Case for Conservatism” course online now.

GET YOUR FREE ACCESS NOW »


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