VIDEO: ‘This Operation Is Personal To Us.’ LeGend Taliferro’s Mother Asks Communities To Support Operation Legend

The mother of a four-year-old boy who was shot and killed while he slept in a Kansas City, Missouri, apartment in June spoke in support of the Justice Department’s program to send federal officers to aid local law enforcement Wednesday.

LeGend Taliferro was shot on June 29, KSHB Kansas City reported. Shortly after his death, President Donald Trump launched a federal law enforcement operation called “Operation Legend” in Kansas City, and on Wednesday, Trump announced an expansion of Operation Legend to cities hardest hit by violent crime.

“Operation Legend is not to harass, it’s not to harm, or to hurt. It is to help investigate unsolved murders,” said Taliferro’s mother, Charron Powell. “This operation is personal to us. We want justice for our son and others. We have to take a stand in our communities and speak up to help this operation be successful.

WATCH:

As part of the expanded program, Trump said the Department of Justice will send hundreds of federal law enforcement officers from agencies including the FBI, Drug Enforcement Administration, U.S. Marshals Service, Homeland Security, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to combat violent crime in Chicago, Illinois.

Trump said “we have no choice but to get involved,” after noting that local leadership is responsible for policing neighborhoods.

“In recent weeks, there has been a radical movement to defund, dismantle, and dissolve our police departments. Extreme politicians have joined this anti-police crusade and relentlessly vilified our law enforcement heroes,” Trump said.

“To look at it from any standpoint, the effort to shut down policing in their own communities has led to a shocking explosion of shootings, killings, murders, and heinous crimes of violence. This bloodshed must end, this bloodshed will end,” Trump said. “Today I’m announcing a surge of federal law enforcement into American communities plagued by violent crime.”

The DOJ will contribute more than $61 million in grants towards hiring “hundreds” of new police officers in cities that are the target of Operation Legend, the White House announced Wednesday.

“We will never defund the police. We will hire more great police,” Trump said.

Nationwide calls to defund the police followed George Floyd’s death after a Minneapolis police offer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes, video of the incident shows.

COLUMN BY

KAYLEE GREENLEE

Reporter

RELATED ARTICLES:

‘Police Officers Are Jumping From The Sinking Ship’: Dean Cain Lays Out The Impact Of Defunding Police

Democratic Oakland Mayor Votes Down Further Police Budget Cuts After Vandals Defaced Her House

Oregon AG Demands Restraining Order Against Feds Deployed In Portland

‘Disturb The Peace Every Night’: Thousands Gather In Portland For Another Night Of Protests

Portland Mayor tear gassed during protests, says ‘nothing’ provoked officers

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

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.

College women, take heed: Prioritize marriage and family!

A marriage and relationship coach encourages young women to follow their hearts, prioritizing marriage and family.


In the last week alone, I’ve spoken with three millennial women (who reached out for coaching) who are all in the same boat: they’re up to their eyeballs in debt, having gotten degree upon degree due to the pressure they felt from their parents and the culture to do something big with their lives. To not let their intellect go to waste. To not worry about finding a man to marry or even having children because, well, they have bigger fish to fry.

These women aren’t just in debt—they’re crestfallen. All they want is to have a family of their own, but they’ve been so conditioned to believe marriage and motherhood constitutes a lesser life, they don’t dare admit this desire. I can’t tell you the number of single women who tell me they’d give up their career in a hot second for a husband and kids.

And it’s not just unmarried women. Many of the wives and mothers I hear from are working at professions they don’t care much about, and want more time at home to be with their kids and to live a slower-paced life. Problem is, they married men who lack ambition (either that, or they had it but took a step back to accommodate their wives’ ambition) and as a result the women became their family’s main breadwinner. And it’s a role most of them hate.

Their predicament was inevitable. For one thing, modern women weren’t taught to look for a man who can provide for a wife and kids. Women are supposed to take care of themselves! That’s the narrative with which these women were raised, so it never occurred to them to look at a man’s professional prospects.

Second, by delaying marriage indefinitely, these women wound up with fewer choices. Good men of strong character, who are conscientious and gainfully employed, tend to marry younger, family-oriented women. These women may or may not have a college degree and/or a career, but they nevertheless view work as a secondary value to their main priority: marriage and family.

Ergo, by the time the career-focused women are around 30 years of age, the pickings are slim. They can look for a man who’s as ambitious as they, and occasionally they will find him—but sheer math means many will not. So they settle on the best they can get: men who are nice and who are safe, but who lack the necessary drive to produce on behalf of their families.

And we can’t dismiss the reason why so many modern men lack drive: because they’ve failed to launch. What did we think would happen in a culture that hails women’s ambition and independence from men and tells men, both verbally and subliminally, that they’re superfluous?

It’s the culture, along with the previous generation of parents, who created this mess. They instilled all the wrong messages and all the wrong values in the modern generation. As a result, women and men are paying the price.

Still, I have hopes for the women of Generation Z. I think they’re witnessing all of this; and while this group has problems of their own—anxiety, mainly—I don’t believe they’ll end up in the same boat as their millennial sisters. I think they will marry earlier, and they will prioritize motherhood. A career will likely be part of their lives, but it will not be the focus of their lives. It will not be their raison d’être.

That’s the crux of the problem for the women who reach out to me: they were taught that their value lies in what they do, rather than in who they are—that if they don’t live lives the way men live theirs, they are failures. And it’s tearing them up inside. One woman broke down after admitting she has spent a decade getting two degrees she doesn’t even want.

This is madness. Going into debt to prove one’s worth and struggling to do what previous generations used to do with ease—find a man and settle down—is hardly progress. There’s nothing empowering about any of this. College women, take heed: Do not let this be your fate! Prioritize marriage and family. Make it the center of your life, and fit everything else in around that.

No offense, but I’d love to not hear from you ten years down the line.

Republished with the author’s permission. Read the original article at SuzanneVenker.com

Suzanne Venker

Suzanne Venker (@SuzanneVenker) is the author of five books and a relationship coach, as well as host of The… 

RELATED ARTICLES:

On critics and bullies

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

Twitter hack revelation: people are still human

A bleak pandemic inspires glimmers of goodness

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

America’s Top 20 Cities for Crime, and What Party Runs Them

RELATED:


This piece was authored by The Daily Signal, and its content solely reflects the published views of The Daily Signal and its journalists.


Annoyed that Senate Democrats are blocking a police reform bill, President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the 20 U.S. cities with the highest crime rates are all run by Democrats.

“The Senate Republicans want very much to pass a bill on police reform,” Trump said during a Rose Garden press conference with Polish President Andrzej Duda. “I would like to see it happen. We won’t sacrifice. We won’t do that. We won’t do anything that is going to hurt our police.”

The president added:

We have a record positive rating on crime, a record positive rating on crime this year. The best. You hear about certain places like Chicago and you hear about what’s going on in Detroit and other cities, all Democrat-run. Every one of them is Democrat-run. The 20 worst, the 20 most dangerous are Democrat-run.

A quick fact check shows that Trump is at least mostly correct. One ranking says the top 20 most dangerous cities are run by 18 Democrat mayors and two mayors who were elected in nonpartisan races.

According to the website Neighborhood Scout, which in January published a list of the 100 most dangerous cities in America, heavily Democrat Detroit tops the list. At No. 20 is Chester, Pennsylvania, also with a Democrat mayor.

Trump went on to refer to the so-called autonomous zone in central Seattle, where extremists have taken over six city blocks.

“We have one city, two cities in particular, worse than Honduras, worse than Afghanistan. These are cities within the United States, Democrat-run. Radical left-run. You see what’s going on in Seattle. Seattle of all places, who would even think that’s possible,” he said, adding:

The Democrats want to weaken very substantially our law enforcement, our police. Frankly, they want to defund [police departments], at least largely. Some want to defund and abolish our police. If nothing happens with [police reform], it’s one of those things. We had different philosophies. They want open borders. They want sanctuary cities. We don’t.

Here is the Neighborhood Scout ranking of the most crime-ridden cities and their mayors.

1. Detroit

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 20.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 50

Mayor:  Michael Edward Duggan, Democrat

2. Memphis, Tennessee

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 19.5

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 51

Mayor: Jim Strickland, Democrat

3. Birmingham, Alabama

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 19.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 52

Mayor: Randall Woodfin, Democrat

4. Baltimore

Violent crime rate  (per 1,000 residents): 18.5

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 54

Mayor: Jack Young, Democrat

5. Flint, Michigan

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 55

Mayor:  Karen Weaver, Democrat

6. St. Louis 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.2

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 55

Mayor: Lyda Krewson, Democrat

7. Danville, Illinois

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 18.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 55

Mayor: Ricky Williams Jr. (nonpartisan election)

8. Saginaw, Michigan

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.7

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 60

Mayor: Floyd Kloc (nonpartisan election)

9. Wilmington, Delaware 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 61

Mayor: Mike Purzycki, Democrat

10. Camden, New Jersey

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.2

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 62

Mayor: Francisco Moran, Democrat

11. Pine Bluff, Arkansas

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 16.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 62

Mayor: Shirley Washington, Democrat

12. Kansas City, Missouri

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 15.9

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 63

Mayor: Quinton Lucas, Democrat

13. San Bernardino, California

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 15.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 65

Mayor: John Valdiva, Democrat

14. Alexandria, Louisiana 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.6

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 68

Mayor: Jacques Roy, Democrat

15. Little Rock, Arkansas 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.6

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 68

Mayor: Frank Scott Jr., Democrat

16. Cleveland

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.5

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 69

Mayor: Frank Jackson, Democrat

17. Milwaukee 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.3

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 70

Mayor: Tom Barrett, Democrat

18. Stockton, California 

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.2

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 70

Mayor: Michael Tubbs, Democrat

19. Monroe, Louisiana

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.1

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 71

Mayor: James Earl Mayo, Democrat

20. Chester, Pennsylvania

Violent crime rate (per 1,000 residents): 14.0

Odds of being a victim: 1 in 71

Mayor: Thaddeus Kirkland, Democrat

EDITORS NOTE: The post America’s Top 20 Cities for Crime, and What Party Runs Them appeared first on The Daily Signal. ©All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Google Scam — Go to Google Search type in any 3 numbers followed by ‘new cases’. You will be shocked!

Dear Trumpers, Patriots and Pro-Lifers:

WARNING: COVID 19 FAKE NEWS UPDATE:

Hands down, here is the biggest scam this country has seen since Trump became our President – Barr none, AG!

Beyond comprehension that something this outrageous and troubling can take place in this country! I have been doing a ton of research on the Covid pandemic and trying to see why these numbers have been spiking through the roof, especially here in Florida. You know it’s a Despicable Dem tactic that they have pushed in order to destroy this nation and defeat Trump in November! It’s the Damn Dems last ditch effort to defeat President Trump!

When I first saw this post, I could not believe it. I clicked on Google like the video asks you to and plugged in different numbers. And, it showed all those Covid 19 cases being fabricated right before my own eyes! You should see all the bogus numbers and articles focusing on FLORIDA when you plug different numbers in! Outrageous!! Disgusting!

Watch the below video and simply follow the directions and you can see for yourself!

These alarming numbers and follow up articles are all FAKE NEWS and this crap needs to be stopped immediately! President Trump & Governor DeSantis need to be aware of this travesty immediately!

Incredible that something this dangerous and vicious can be occurring in our beloved America right now, scaring the hell out of everyone!

GOD HAVE MERCY ON US!

©All rights reserved.

PODCAST: Rioters’ ‘Defund The Police’ Push Puts Democrat Candidates On Defense!

GUESTS AND TOPICS:

SUSAN CRABTREE

Susan Crabtree is a White House and national political correspondent for RealClearPolitics where she covers President Trump, his administration and their conflicts with Capitol Hill, the 2020 election, spending battles and national security. She previously served as a senior writer for the Washington Free Beacon, and five years as a White House Correspondent for the Washington Examiner. Prior stints include seven years as a senior editor and investigative reporter for The Hill. She is a frequent guest political analyst on Fox News as well as numerous conservative talk radio shows. Susan has written for several magazines, including The Weekly Standard and The Economist-owned Capital Style, where she was a senior writer.

TOPIC: Rioters’ ‘Defund The Police’ Push Puts Democrat Candidates On Defense!

ANN MARIE HANCOCK

Ann Marie Hancock is an award-winning journalist, radio and television personality, and talk show host who has interviewed many famous people. She has appeared on Bertice Berry, Rolanda, NBC’s The Other Side, The Angel Show and Inside Edition.Hancock is the author of two previous books: Be A Light and Wake Up America. Her latest book, You Can’t Drive Your Car to Your Own Funeral, is based on the three-year journey of caring for her terminal mother and the spiritual as well as practical lessons she learned along the way.

TOPIC: “You Can’t Drive Your Car to Your Own Funeral”

KARYN TURK

Karyn Turk is a political commentator, actor, and news broadcaster. She is a prominent Trump supporter and has been vocal about her support for Donald Trump on various media interviews. She is married to Palm Beach attorney Evan Turk, and the couple has been involved in fundraisers for Roger Stone and hosted the Roger Stone Legal Fund in March and September 2019. Karyn’s career started in marketing when she joined CBS Radio. She also worked with InnoMed Technologies Inc., a medical device company. In 2016, Turk won the Mrs. Florida U.S. continental pageant to mark a milestone in her modeling career. In the same year, Turk got a job as a broadcaster on Eye On channels, a Florida-based news channel. Karyn was named one of Florida’s Top Power Women and Influencers.

TOPIC: THE TRUTH ABOUT THE COVID19 PLANDEMIC. GATES EXPOSED!

©All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLE: Body found in Minneapolis pawnshop that was torched in George Floyd protests

RELATED VIDEO: Brad Johnson speaks to the curious actions of Seattle City Council to eliminate the police.

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

Four Months of Unprecedented Government Malfeasance

The following is adapted from a lecture delivered on June 18, 2020, for a Hillsdale College online symposium, “The Coronavirus and Public Policy.”


Over the last four months, Americans have lived through what is arguably the most consequential period of government malfeasance in U.S. history. Public officials’ overreaction to the novel coronavirus put American cities into a coma; those same officials’ passivity in the face of widespread rioting threatens to deliver the coup de grâce. Together, these back-to-back governmental failures will transform the American polity and cripple urban life for decades.

Before store windows started shattering in the name of racial justice, urban existence was already on life support, thanks to the coronavirus lockdowns. Small businesses—the restaurants and shops that are the lifeblood of cities—were shuttered, many for good, leaving desolate rows of “For Rent” signs on street after street in New York City and elsewhere. Americans huddled in their homes for months on end, believing that if they went outside, death awaited them.

This panic was occasioned by epidemiological models predicting wildly unlikely fatalities from the coronavirus.

On March 30, the infamous Imperial College London model predicted 2.2 million deaths in the U.S. by September 1, absent government action. That prediction was absurd on its face, given the dispersal of the U.S. population and the fact that China’s coronavirus death toll had already levelled off at a few thousand. The authors of that study soon revised it radically downwards.

Too late. It had already become the basis for the exercise of unprecedented government power. California was the first state to lock down its economy and confine its citizens to their homes; eventually almost every other state would follow suit, under enormous media pressure to do so.

Never before had public officials required millions of lawful businesses to shut their doors, throwing tens of millions of people out of work. They did so at the command of one particular group of experts—those in the medical and public health fields—who viewed their mandate as eliminating one particular health risk with every means put at their disposal.

If the politicians who followed their advice weighed a greater set of considerations, balancing the potential harm from the virus against the harm from the shutdowns, they showed no sign of it. Instead, governors and mayors started rolling out one emergency decree after another to terminate economic activity, seemingly heedless of the consequences.

The lockdown mandates employed mind-numbingly arbitrary distinctions. Wine stores and pot dispensaries were deemed “essential” and thus allowed to stay open; medical offices were required to close. Large grocery stores got the green light; small retail establishments with only a few customers each day were out of luck. Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer notoriously used her red pen within megastores to bar the sale of seeds, gardening supplies, and paint.

It was already clear when these crushing mandates started pouring forth that shutting down every corner of the country was a reckless overreaction. By mid-March, two weeks before the Imperial College model was published, Italian health data showed that the coronavirus was terribly lethal to a very small subset of the population—the elderly infirm—and a minor health problem to nearly everyone else who was not already severely ill. The median age of coronavirus decedents in Italy was 80, and they died with a median of nearly three comorbidities, such as heart disease and diabetes. The lead author of the Imperial College model has admitted that up to two-thirds of all coronavirus fatalities would have died from their comorbidities by the end of 2020 anyway.

Three months later, this profile of coronavirus casualties still holds true. Public health interventions could have been targeted at that highly vulnerable population without forcing the American economy into a death spiral.

DISINFORMATION

By now it is impossible to attribute the media’s failure to publicize the facts about the coronavirus to mere oversight.

Every story that does not mention, preferably at the top, the vast overrepresentation of nursing home deaths in the coronavirus death count—above 50 percent in many countries and 80 percent in several of our states—is a story that is deliberately concealing the truth. Casual readers and viewers have been left with the false impression that everyone is equally at risk, and thus that draconian measures are justified.

The media have been equally uninterested in the scientific evidence regarding outdoor transmission. Coronavirus infections require what Japan calls the three Cs: confined spaces, crowded places, and close contact. The fleeting encounters on sidewalks and public parks that characterize much of city life simply do not result in transmission. And yet if you briskly approach someone on one of Manhattan’s broad and now empty sidewalks, the oncoming pedestrian may lunge into the street or press up against the closest wall in abject fear if you are not wearing a mask. You may be cursed at.

The public health establishment has been equally complicitous in creating this widespread ignorance. It has failed to stress at every opportunity that for the vast majority of the public, the coronavirus is at most an inconvenience. The public health experts did not disclose that outdoors was the safest place to be and that people should get out of their homes and into the fresh air.

Not coincidentally, the experts’ newfound power over nearly every aspect of American life was dependent on the maintenance of fear.

While the U.S. death toll from the coronavirus has been demographically circumscribed and lower than the previous flu pandemics of 1968, 1956, and 1918 when adjusted for population, the economic toll has cut across every sector of the country and every population group. Whole industries have seen their capital wiped out overnight.

Despite a better than expected employment report in early June, the long-term effects of the shutdowns and the continuing mandates to socially distance will prevent a full economic recovery for years to come. Forty-four million Americans are still out of work. Supply chains have been thrown into chaos. Fresh fruits and vegetables are being plowed under and livestock burned uneaten for lack of access to processing plants and markets. Small businessmen who have put their life savings into creating a service that customers want have seen their hard work go up in smoke. Without rent from their retail tenants, commercial landlords can’t pay their taxes. City budgets have been decimated. The additional $8 trillion in public debt taken on to try to substitute for the private economy will depress opportunity for generations.

And what has been the response to this economic carnage on the part of our ruling class? Branding strategies! Politicians have put cute names on what has been a taking of private property on an unprecedented scale. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo calls the state lockdowns “New York on Pause,” as if commerce can be indefinitely suspended and then magically resuscitated with the flick of a switch.

The politicians’ ignorance about the complexity of economic life was stunning, as was their hypocrisy. To a person, every elected official, every public health expert, and every media pundit who lectured Americans about the need to stay in indefinite lockdown had a secure (“essential”) job. Not one of them feared his employer would go bankrupt. Anyone who warned that the effects of the lockdowns would be more devastating than anything the coronavirus could inflict was accused of being a heartless capitalist who only cared about profits.

But to care about the economy is to care about human life, since the economy is how life is sustained. It is a source of meaning, as well as sustenance, binding humans to each other in a web of voluntary exchange. To its workers, every business is essential, and to many of its customers as well. Even judged by the narrowest possible definition of public health—lives lost—the toll from the lockdowns will exceed that of the virus, due to the cancellation of elective medical procedures, patients’ unnecessary fear of seeking medical treatment, and the psychological effects of unemployment.

In May, politicians started inviting a few scattered sectors of their state economies to reopen, with blue state governors and mayors being particularly parsimonious with their noblesse oblige. These blue state officials invoked “science” to justify yet another arbitrary set of guidelines to determine which businesses would be allowed to start up again and when. “Science,” we were told, dictated the timetable for reopening, based on rates of hospital bed vacancies and new infections.

In fact, the numerical benchmarks, enforced with draconian punctiliousness, seem to have been drawn out of a hat—they certainly had no evidence behind them. But even with official reopenings, many customers will be long reluctant to resume their normal habits of consumption and travel thanks to the uninterrupted fearmongering on the part of the media, the experts, and elected leaders.

Being fantastically risk averse is now a badge of honor, at least among the professional elites. A young tech columnist for The New York Times wrote an op-ed in May about cancelling a restaurant reservation in Missoula, Montana. Missoula County had been virus-free for weeks, and Montana’s case load had been negligible. Nevertheless, the columnist experienced a panic attack after booking a table, contemplating the allegedly lethal risk that awaited him in the reopened restaurant. Rather than being ashamed of his cowardice, the columnist was proud, he wrote, to have bailed out of his reservation in order to continue sheltering in place.

The absurd social distancing protocols make operating many businesses and much of city life virtually impossible. The six-foot rule is as arbitrary as the “metrics” for reopening. (The World Health Organization recommends three feet of social distance, and many countries have adopted that recommendation.) Keeping customers and employees six feet apart will render a city’s basic institutions unworkable, from restaurants to concert halls. The Metropolitan Opera has cancelled the first half of its 2020-2021 season while it figures out how to maintain social distancing among audience members and on the stage. Every other performing arts organization will face the same almost insuperable dilemma.

My 34-story apartment building in Manhattan, like many others, has imposed a one person per elevator ride rule, even though the elevator interiors are more than six feet across. I invite anyone who may also be waiting for an elevator to share my ride up; no one has ever accepted the offer, even though both I and my invitee are masked. Nor has anyone ever extended such an offer to me. Now translate this hysteria to Manhattan’s massive office towers. If New York City ever fully reopens, a similar social distancing rule for office elevators will lead to lines of workers around every midtown block each morning. As long as this fear lasts, city life is not possible.

FROM COLD WAR TO HOT

Then the cities started burning. What had been a cold war on the economy and civic life became a hot war.

Government officials, having shut down commerce due to unblemished ignorance of how markets work, now enabled the torching and looting of thousands of businesses due to the shirking of their most profound responsibility: protecting civil peace.

On Monday, May 25, a video of the horrific arrest and death of a black man suspected of passing a forged $20 bill in Minneapolis went viral. A police officer kept his knee on George Floyd’s neck for nearly nine minutes as Floyd begged for help breathing. Floyd was already handcuffed and thus posed a minimal risk. The officer ignored Floyd’s distress even as Floyd stopped talking or moving.

The officer’s behavior was grotesquely callous and contrary to sound tactics, and the officer will be prosecuted and punished under the law. His behavior was not, however, representative of the overwhelming majority of the ten million arrests that the police make each year. Indeed, there is no government agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police. Nevertheless, within 24 hours, the violence had begun.

On the night of Thursday, May 28, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey ordered the city’s Third Police Precinct evacuated as the forces of anarchy descended upon it for a third day in a row. The building was promptly torched, sending a powerful sign that society would not defend its most fundamental institutions of law and order.

Soon cities across the country became scenes of feral savagery. The human lust for violence, the sheer joy of plunder and destruction, were unleashed without check. Police officers were shot at, run over, slashed with knives, and clubbed; two current and former law enforcement officers were killed in cold blood. Police cruisers and station houses were firebombed; courthouses were trashed. Looters drove trucks through storefronts and emptied the stores’ contents into the back of these newly repurposed vehicles of civil war. ATMs were ripped out of walls; pharmacies plundered for drugs.

Blue state governors and mayors ordered law enforcement to stand down or use at most (in New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s words) a “light touch” with the rioters. By the time these progressive public leaders realized that something more forceful needed to be done, it was too late. The fire of sadism and hatred could not be contained, but would have to burn itself out. Belatedly imposed curfews were universally ignored: why should anyone obey an edict from a government that refused to protect human life and livelihoods?

Perversely, the rioting exhibited features of the coronavirus shutdowns in even more literal form. If before, businesses were boarded up due to bankruptcy, now they were boarded up to prevent further theft. Small businesses, lacking the resources to outlast the shutdowns, now saw the final depletion of their inventories. The fortress mentality in residential buildings from coronavirus hysteria was replaced by an actual fortress, as building managements hastily erected plywood barriers over lobby windows and doors. The hyped-up fear of going outside into allegedly virus-infected public spaces became a justified fear of leaving one’s fortress and being sacrificed to the mob. Shelter-in-place became a necessity, not a product of government overreach. The fall of night became a source of terror for ordinary citizens and business owners.

Previously, securely-employed public officials breezily dismissed their constituents’ anguish over unemployment and growing business failures. Now those same officials, safe behind their security details and publicly-owned mansions, foreswore the activation of the National Guard and military. None of those officials owned businesses, so they faced no loss either from economic quarantine or from physical rampage.

DOUBLE STANDARDS

One thing did change markedly between the coronavirus lockdowns and the riot lockdowns, however: elite wisdom regarding social distancing. The politicians, pundits, and health experts who had condescendingly rebuked business owners for reopening without official permission, who had banned funerals and church services of more than ten people, and who had heaped scorn on protesters who had gathered in state capitols to express their economic distress, suddenly became avid cheerleaders for screaming crowds numbering in the thousands.

Most remarkably, public officials overtly admitted to choosing the forms of assembly that would be allowed based on the content of the protesters’ speech. Mayor de Blasio explained that protests over “400 years of American racism” are not the same as a “store owner or the devout religious person who wants to go back to services.” While the store owner or worshipper may be “understandably aggrieved,” he conceded, their grievances must still be suppressed in the name of coronavirus safety. Not the grievances of the protesters and rioters, however. New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy congratulated the Black Lives Matter activists and distinguished them from mere “nail salon” entrepreneurs protesting their ongoing business stasis. The two are in “different orbits,” Murphy said.

The politicians’ hypocrisy was a mere warm-up for that of the public health establishment. These were the people whose diktats had inspired the lockdowns and whose allegedly supreme knowledge of medical risk was allowed to cancel all other considerations in maintaining a functioning society. Nearly 1,200 of these same experts, including from the CDC, signed a public letter supporting the unsocially distanced protests on the grounds that “white supremacy is a lethal public health issue that predates and contributes to COVID-19.”

One could just as easily argue that a global depression, induced by the gratuitous crushing of trade and the hollowing out of capital, is a lethal public health issue of at least equal magnitude. But it turns out that public health is as much about politics as it is about science.

This shameless reversal should have torpedoed the lockdowns once and for all. If it turns out that mass gatherings were now not just allowable but to be encouraged, no rationale remained for preventing restaurants and stores from reopening. But instead, once media attention became a little less monomaniacally focused on the anti-police agitation, the familiar chorus rose up again, directed at everyone else: Stay socially distanced! Wear your outdoor masks! No gatherings of more than a few dozen! No entering “non-essential” stores! The same arbitrary “metrics” for business reopenings were still in place and still being enforced.

By now, the collapse of government legitimacy is complete. For three months, public officials abdicated their responsibility to balance the costs and benefits of any given policy. They put the future of hundreds of millions of Americans in the hands of a narrow set of experts who lack all awareness of the workings of economic and social systems, and whose “science” was built on the ever-shifting sand of speculative models and on extreme risk aversion regarding only one kind of risk.

The public officials who ceded their authority to the so-called experts were deaf to the pleas of law-abiding business owners who saw their life’s efforts snuffed out. They engineered the destruction of trillions of dollars of wealth, through thoroughly arbitrary decision making. And then they stood by as billions more dollars of work burned down. Public order and safety, equal treatment under the law, stability of expectations—all the prerequisites for robust investment have been decimated. The failure to quell the riots means that more are inevitable. Any future business faces possible destruction by another lockdown or by looting—which it will be is anyone’s guess.

The coronavirus lockdowns demonstrated our leaders’ ignorance of economic interdependence. After the riots, that ignorance has been shown to run far deeper. It is an ignorance about government’s most fundamental obligation: to safeguard life, liberty, and property. It is an ignorance about human nature and human striving.

Property and capital are not soulless abstractions, easily replaced by an insurance payout, as the rioters and their apologists maintain. (The Massachusetts Attorney General noted that burning is “how forests grow.”) Capital is accumulated effort and innovation, the sum of human achievement and imagination. Its creation is the aim of civilization. But civilization is everywhere and at all times vulnerable to the darkest human impulses. Government exists to rein in those impulses so that individual initiative can flourish. America’s Founders, schooled in a profound philosophical and literary tradition dating back to classical antiquity, understood the fragility of civil peace and the danger of the lustful, vengeful mob.

Our present leaders, the products of a politicized and failing education system, seem to know nothing of those truths. Pulling the country back from the abyss will require a recalling of our civilizational inheritance.

COLUMN BY

Heather Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of City Journal. She earned a B.A. from Yale University, an M.A. in English from Cambridge University, and a J.D. from Stanford Law School. She writes for several newspapers and periodicals, including The Wall Street JournalThe New York TimesThe New Criterion, and Public Interest, and is the author of four books, including The War on Cops: How The New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe and The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture.

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

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.

‘Help Is On The Way’: Trump Orders 200 Federal Agents To Chicago To Quell Unrest

President Donald Trump is sending more than 200 federal agents to Chicago to assist local law enforcement in quelling unrest, he announced in a Wednesday press briefing.

The agents are set to arrive as part of Trump’s Operation Legend, in which the Trump administration is seeking to put an end to weeks-long protests in cities across the country. Joining the president were Attorney General Bill Barr and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf.

“Help is on the way,” Trump said at the White House event announcing the operation.

Kansas City is also receiving a detachment of roughly 200 agents, and 35 more are headed to New Mexico, according to Barr.

Administration officials were joined by several citizens who have had family members killed by violent crime, including the family of Vernado Jones Jr., 14, who was killed in Chicago; of LeGend Taliferro, 4, who was killed in Kansas City in 2016; and of Jacqueline Vigil, 55, who was killed in New Mexico.

“I’m very proud to stand with you in this struggle,” President Trump told the family members.

Trump’s reelection bid is occurring amid widespread protests and rioting, which he has strongly denounced.

He signed an executive order in June criminalizing destruction of monuments on federal property. The order was a response to attempts to topple the statue of former President Andrew Jackson in Lafayette Square park, as reported by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

“I have authorized the Federal Government to arrest anyone who vandalizes or destroys any monument, statue or other such Federal property in the U.S. with up to 10 years in prison, per the Veteran’s Memorial Preservation Act, or such other laws that may be pertinent,” the president tweeted June 23. “This action is taken effective immediately, but may also be used retroactively for destruction or vandalism already caused. There will be no exceptions!”

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump’s National Guard ‘Surge’ Allowed George Floyd Protesters To ‘Demonstrate Safely,’ White House Says

Philly SWAT Officer Charged For Pepper Spraying Protesters

NYPD Raids, Dismantles New York’s ‘Occupy City Hall’ Overnight

Police Arrest Man Who Created What The Chief Describes As ‘One Of The Largest Crime Scenes’ In City’s History

New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio Blames COVID-19 For Crime Surge

Chicago Mayor Says She Won’t Allow ‘Trump’s Troops … To Terrorize Our Residents’ As 14 People Are Shot Amid City’s Gang Violence

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

What Is The New Normal?

Click here for AUDIO VERSION.

A good friend of mine recently told me he has given up on sports for the foreseeable future. This was a bit startling as I knew him to be an ardent fan of Major League Baseball, the NFL, the National Hockey League, and various college sports for many years (however, he gave up on the NBA years ago). He contends the interest in sports was beaten out of him by the news media, COVID-19, and the politicizing of sports. He is so disgusted with it, he won’t even read the sports section in the local newspaper anymore, it is that bad. Frankly, I couldn’t argue with him as there are many such changes happening all around us which is commonly referred to as the “new normal.”

To take this further, on the highways there is no cooperation or courtesy, just individualism leading to angst and hostilities on the road. Instead of paying attention to the road, people are more concerned with texting and talking on their smart phones. Consequently, people clog the express lane (the left lane) and weave in and out of traffic or ride the bumper of the car in front of them; anything to get ahead, not wait your turn. This is the “new normal” on our roadways.

Customer Service is a fallacious concept. There is no longer any sense of keeping the customer happy in order to retain the customer’s business which may lead to additional sales. Nobody cares. It is now a matter of processing the sale as fast as possible and let the customer fight afterwards with “voice mail jail” and the Internet. In stores, we now look like hooded thugs; no smiles, no pleasantries, no nothing. The “new normal” for customer service is “Look out for number 1” (the company), leaving the customer to avoid stepping in number 2.

News is depressing. Many have stopped watching it on television or reading it through official news sources. Not only is a lot of it repetitive, it is predictable as to how it will be interpreted (spun). Consequently, it has lost its integrity and legitimacy. The fact we no longer trust the news is another “new normal” by which we live by.

In our urban areas, gun violence is on the rise as is thuggish behavior, arson and looting. In the nation’s capitol, the rhetoric in Congress is much more visceral and gridlock is commonplace. This too is the “new normal.”

Basic courtesy is from a bygone era, such as holding a door open for someone, saying please and thank you, extending a helping hand and basic charity; all are rapidly fading into the past as evidenced by a dwindling number of places of worship and nonprofit charities. This will only grow worse as schools are closing in observance of CORONA-19 and the politics of teachers unions. Without schools, children will grow more dependent on technology and their socialization skills will further deteriorate. This too is part of the “new normal.”

The CORONA-19 virus is causing people to become somewhat introverted. They hide in houses and avoid human contact of any kind. In addition, companies are no longer allowed to conduct business as usual. Not only does this hurt sales but it also hinders teamwork as people are now asked to work from home. All of this, of course, affects our socialization skills.

In addition to CORONA-19, the cause of the “new normal” is actually based on a combination of several things, such as declining moral values, an irresponsible media, politics (e.g., “The Summer of Hate”), and a reliance on technology to do the thinking for us. Unfortunately, it showcases the negative side of the human spirit, such as hate, jealousy, spite, greed, and a disregard for cooperation, courtesy and respect.

The “new normal” is “abnormal” to those of us who remember the go-go years of the 20th century. In fact, it is rather depressing. Interestingly, cases of anxiety and depression have been steadily increasing prior to 2020, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see it spike in this election year.

The “new normal” is not about something as banal as tattoos, body piercings, orange hair, or vernacular. It is about our ability to socialize effectively, something that is radically declining as we are asked to choose sides in political ideology. It is a callous attitude regarding our fellow human-beings, and an egocentric view of our perceived individual importance. No, the “new normal” does not include cooperation, sacrifice, teamwork, or friendliness, but rather it involves confrontation, combativeness, ridicule, selfishness, and a sense of entitlement.

So, where did this come from? Look no further than the Baby Boomers who failed at raising their children responsibly, along with the media and far-Left who have been trying to change our moral values for years.

I would like to believe our attitudes will change following the November 3rd election, that we will somehow snap out of it, but I know this simply will not happen. Everything is drifting on the wind. Our choice is rather simple; we either accept the “new normal” and allow the country to chart a new course or reject it by saying, “Enough is enough!,” and take on the task of correcting it. Understand this, it is not so much what the older generation wants to do, it is ultimately up to the younger generation. All the elders can do is offer advice (and vote).

Keep the Faith!

P.S. – Also, I have a NEW book, “Before You Vote: Know How Your Government Works”, What American youth should know about government, available in Printed, PDF and eBook form. This is the perfect gift for youth!

RELATED:

EDITORS NOTE: This Bryce is Right podcast is republished with permission. ©All rights reserved. All trademarks both marked and unmarked belong to their respective companies.

Church Attacks Explode With ‘an Unbridled, Roaring Fury’

One of the last times people saw flames in France’s Saint-Pierre-et-Saint-Paul church was during the Allied bombing in 1944. What’s happening now isn’t World War III, but it certainly feels like it, as things get increasingly violent on every continent.

While believers around the world pray for an end to the chaos, arsonists, knife-wielders, and vandals are taking the battle to them.

After a string of attacks rocked U.S. churches last week, Americans gathered this Sunday with the hope that things might finally calm down. They didn’t. If anything, the insurgents expanded their campaign to the global scene.

Arson in Paris, excrement along church walls in southern France, statues defaced in Calgary, it all points to a dangerous turning point in this mob mentality.

“I don’t like to use the word too lightly,” Eric Metaxas said, “but there’s something satanic about it.”

Here at home, churches from Queens to Chattanooga fell victim to the forces of anarchism and anti-Americanism gripping this country since George Floyd’s death.

In New Haven, Connecticut, parishioners of St. Joseph’s Church woke up to satanic symbols sprayed across the doors. “It was certainly shocking and disturbing,” the Rev. John Paul Walker told reporters.

But even that was minor compared to what happened at Virginia’s Grace Covenant Church right outside of Washington, D.C., where a man walked into a Bible study Saturday and viciously stabbed the pastor leading it.

Miraculously, local Police Chief Ed Roessler was in the class and together with another churchgoer subdued the man—but not before being injured themselves. “We are grateful for the courage exhibited that prevented worse from happening,” Pastor Brett Fuller said in a statement.

It was the latest episode in what’s becoming a growing wave of domestic terrorism.

“There is something about it that is an unbridled, roaring fury,” Metaxas insisted, “and if you don’t treat it in the way that it needs to be treated, if you don’t deal with it with some force, really then you are allowing other people to be harmed.”

He ticked off examples throughout history of rebels wanting to overthrow authority and then turned their attention to the church—people in France, Russia, China. They all “found themselves swept up in a rage that had no bounds and that could never be satisfied.”

On “Washington Watch” with Sarah Perry, Metaxas cautioned that they don’t even know what they want. “If we give them anything, we’re fools. This is about revolution … Even if we [try], they’ll say, ‘It’s not good enough.’ They want to be victims. They want to destroy everything.” This is, quite frankly, “a rage against God and all authority. They want to burn down Western civilization.” Maybe some of them don’t realize that consciously, but many do.

You have to know that by promoting the truth and not giving a millimeter to these monsters … that’s the only way you can fight. And people need to find a voice of courage and not give in. Don’t get confused that this is about George Floyd, about racial justice. This is a Marxist, anti-American organization that is cynically using the incident of George Floyd and other things to promote things that are going to crush America.

What can we do about it? Pray, he urged.

I’m convinced that unless good people and people of faith especially stand up and boldly denounce what they see without fear of being called a racist or whatever the nom de guerre is today we will continue to see innocent people victimized in my own city of New York and in other cities and towns across the country. This is a deep spiritual ugliness that has hijacked what began as a legitimate grievance against an abuse of police power. It’s time we spoke up and prayed hard that God would restore order.

Originally published in Tony Perkins’ Washington Update, which is written with the aid of Family Research Council senior writers.

COMMENTARY BY

Tony Perkins is president of the Family Research Council. Twitter: .

©All rights reserved.

WATCH President Donald J. Trump’s News Conference on 7/21/2020

At 5 p.m. ET on July 21, 2020 , President Trump held a news conference from the White House Briefing Room. The White House posted President Trump’s full news conference on YouTube.

NOTE: President Trump begins his remarks at the 40:30 minute mark.

WATCH:

©White House. All rights reserved.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Condemning Police Led To Nationwide Spikes In Violence, Tom Cotton Says

White House Says 40 U.S. Code 1315 Gives Trump, DHS Jurisdiction To Act In Portland

Sen Hawley Calls Charges Against St Louis Couple ‘Miscarriage Of Justice’

RELATED VIDEO: The violence in Portland must end

“The well-organized mob in Portland has become increasingly aggressive, especially against law enforcement officers,” Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany told reporters during a press briefing this morning.

“Individuals have thrown bricks, chunks of concrete, glass bottles, feces, balloons filled with paint, pigs’ feet, slingshots to hurl ball bearings, and batteries at Federal agents and the courthouse. Multiple attempts to barricade officers in the Hatfield Courthouse have occurred.” The violence has raged on for more than 50 days.

VIDEO EXPOSE: New York Times’ Plot to Dox Tucker Carlson’s Family and Put Their Lives in Danger

Life News reported:

Fox News host Tucker Carlson closed out Monday’s edition of his show on an extremely serious note that pertained to the life and safety of his wife and four kids. For over two minutes, he exposed how the radically leftist New York Times had assigned a so-called “journalist” and photographer to hunt him down, find out where he lives, and print it for all his haters to find him. And according to Carlson, their mission was nearly complete with the publication happening later in the week.

READ MORE.

©All rights reserved.

Sarsour on Biden: “I want him to defeat Trump so we can mobilize our movements to hold him accountable”

That’s a decidedly tepid endorsement. But it makes it clear that Sarsour and the Islamic and Leftist organizations in the U.S. that support the “Palestinian” jihad (and the jihad elsewhere) will be keeping President Biden on a tight leash. If he doesn’t jump to do their bidding, they’ll turn on him, not with the fury with which they hate and wish to destroy Trump, but certainly they will have no sense of loyalty or trust, and not let him make him one misstep. This means that Biden in the White House will essentially be their tool.

“‘Nation’s Largest’ Muslim PAC Embraces Biden, But Activist Sarsour’s Endorsement is Tepid,” by Patrick Goodenough, CNS News, July 21, 2020:

(CNSNews.com) – Thanking a Muslim American PAC for supporting his presidential bid, Joe Biden said Monday he wished U.S. schools taught more about Islam, and pledged to scrap, on his first day in office, what he called President Trump’s “vile Muslim ban.”

The presumptive Democratic presidential nominee gave a virtual address to Emgage Action, three months after “the nation’s largest Muslim American political action committee” endorsed him, following the decision by its first choice candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders, to end his campaign.

Some high-profile Sanders supporters in the Muslim community have not been enthusiastic about moving their support to Biden, as seen in a series of tweets later Monday by Palestinian American activist Linda Sarsour, a controversial former co-leader of the Women’s March.

“I choose Biden,” Sarsour said. “But I choose him as my opponent in the White House. I want him to defeat Trump so we can mobilize our movements to hold him accountable and push him to do and be better. We can’t do that with Trump.”

Sarsour said most of “our people” backed Sanders in the primary “because he earned our votes & we need Biden to continue to do the same.”

She recalled that Sanders had addressed “the plight of the Palestinian people,” and had “vehemently criticized the Netanyahu Government, opposed the moving of the embassy [to Jerusalem], called for an end to occupation, a conditioning of military aid, etc.”

‘One of my avocations is theology’

Addressing the Emgage Action event earlier in the day, Biden began on a theological note.

“Look, one of the things that I think is important is I wish – I wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith,” he said. “I wish we talked about all the great confessional faiths. It [Islam] is one of the great confessional faiths.”

“And what people don’t realize – as one of my avocations is theology – don’t realize is we all come from the same root here, in terms of our fundamental basic beliefs.”

He thanked the PAC for endorsing him, noted it has launched a campaign aimed at boosting the Muslim vote, and made his case for why Muslims should support him over Trump in November.

“Muslim communities were the first to feel Donald Trump’s assault on black and brown communities in this country with his vile Muslim ban,” he said, vowing to undo the move “on day one,” should he become president….

Biden, who spoke for a little over ten minutes, accused Trump of “fanning the flames of hate,” through his words, deeds, policies and appointments, and charged that there has been “an unconscionable rise in Islamicphobia [sic]” under his administration….

“I won’t fail to speak out against the abuses of human rights including targeting for violence and prosecution Muslim minorities around the world,” he said, citing Uighurs in China and Rohingya in Burma.

Biden said he would work with partners “to meet the moral demands of the humanitarian crises in Syria, Yemen, and Gaza,” and would “continue to champion the rights of Palestinians and Israelis to have a state of their own, as I have for decades.”…

Sarsour, an ardent BDS supporter, took part in Monday’s Emgage Action video event, where she spoke about the importance of holding a President Biden accountable after the election.

“When Joe Biden does the right thing, you better believe Linda Sarsour’s going to say, ‘You know what? Thank you so much President Joe Biden for doing the right thing.’ And when President Joe Biden doesn’t do the right thing our community needs to come together and hold him accountable.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Biden quotes “Prophet Muhammad”: “Whomever among you sees a wrong, let him change it with his hand”

Biden wants schools to teach more about Islam, vows to stamp out “Islamicphobia”

What A Surprise! Qatar Funds Hezbollah

Pakistan: Muslims smash Buddha statue, Muslim cleric says “you will no more be a believer” if statue isn’t destroyed

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