Hiring asses to important positions

The king wanted to go fishing, so he asked the royal weather forecaster his forecast for the next few hours.

The palace meteorologist assured him that there was no chance of rain.

So the king and the queen went fishing. On the way, he met a man with a fishing pole riding on a donkey, and he asked the man if the fish were biting.

The fisherman said, "Your Majesty, you should return to the palace. In just a short time I expect a huge rainstorm."

The king replied: "I hold the palace meteorologist in high regard. He is an educated and experienced professional. Besides, I pay him very high wages. He gave me a very different forecast. I trust him."  So the king continued on his way.

However, in a short time, torrential rain fell from the sky. The King and Queen were totally soaked.

Furious, the king returned to the palace and gave the order to execute the meteorologist.

Then he summoned the fisherman and offered him the prestigious position of royal forecaster.

The fisherman said, "Your Majesty, I do not know anything about forecasting. I obtain my information from my donkey. If I see my donkey's ears drooping, it means with certainty that it will rain."

So the king hired the donkey.

And so began the practice of hiring dumb asses to work in influential positions of government.

And thus the symbol of the Democrat Party was born.

The practice continues to this day.

H/T Hrothgar at Ace of Spades.

Here's what the Mainstream Media calls "peaceful protests"

The scene below is what the Lying Mainstream Media has called "peaceful protests."

"Some people did something"

Watch the vid below.  "Some people" burned an entire strip center to its exterior walls.

And just in case you're not clear here: That destroyed the businesses in the burned-out part.

As Democrat congresscreep Ilhan Omar so adeptly summarized 9/11: "Some people did something."

You saw this on the "news," right?

No, you didn't.  Because it's not where the Mainstream Media told you the "protests" were.

It's in...Saint Paul, Minnesota.  Of course the particular city isn't all that relevant to the point, which is that looters and arsonists--the people the Mainstream Media have given the warm, fuzzy name of "protesters"--have burned and looted in cities the Mainstream Media have never mentioned.

Cuz why would CNN bother moving a crew to Saint Paul when you get the same footage in Minneapolis, eh?

Now, here's the real point of this post:  Look who's out there cleaning up the destruction done by..."the protesters."   (And I'll cheerfully note that many of the protesters were white.)

In case you're curious, here's what those awful capitalist businesses looked like before dey wuz "liberated" by da peeps.

Source: https://twitter.com/MongolCowboy/status/1266690569847234561

Liberal "logic"

Lib "logic:"  When one bad cop puts his knee on a man's neck and kills him, all cops, and all people of the cop's race, are guilty. 

By contrast, when tens of thousands of people burn down businesses, loot and riot, none of the looters and arsonists is to blame.  Not one.  Instead the burning and looting shall be blamed on "bad actors from out of state," and even "cartels." 

Seriously, the mayor of Minneapolis blamed "cartels."
 
This is how you demonize whites and cops.  And the totally unbiased Mainstream Media supports this Narrative without a single word of criticism or caution.

The goal?  Help Dems take back the presidency and win the senate in November.  And it's working like a charm.

Did Biden staffers donate to bail fund for Minneapolis rioters, or is that merely a...conspiracy theory?

If you were to see a news report saying that staffers on the Biden campaign had contributed money to pay bail for jailed protesters in Minneapolis, most of you would be VERY skeptical, eh?

And with good reason:  It seems very...unlikely.  And I agree completely:  Many good Americans reading such an article would conclude that this meant the Biden campaign was pro-violence, pro-looting, pro-anarchy.

Yeah, just TOO "over the top, eh?

Well here's the source:  Reuters.  And what does that mean to you, eh?  Well, Reuters hates Trump, hates capitalism, hates America, so this story is an "admission against interest."

If you aren't familiar with that term and its concept, you should be.  When a party to a legal action--whether civil or criminal--makes an admission that undercuts their position, that admission is given extra weight, because it's assumed that no one would admit something that undercut their own position unless the admission was true.

So because this story is from the anti-Trump Reuters agency, it's totally reasonable to give it extra credibility.

Also, unlike blogs, Reuters has lots of assets.  Why does that matter to this story?  Because if they print something that's false and defamatory, or with a "reckless disregard for the truth," they can be sued.  For a lot.

Of course bloggers can be sued too, but because most of us don't have enough assets, it's not worth the cost to sue.

Of course leftists see donating to the bail fund as a sign that Democrats are on the side of the angels.

https://t.co/bAyaFRPZJT

— bsforbananas (@karmagirlincali) May 31, 2020

Dropped by "protesters" (looters/arsonists) in Portland?? You decide.

Someone posted that this was dropped by looters in Portland.  Is it authentic, or could it be a fake, created by eeebil gruberment disinformation operatives to try to tarnish Antifa?

If you've studied Leftist/Antifa websites, about all you can say is if it's a fake, it's exactly what these morons believe.

Hey, here's a great idea!

A commenter at another site put it all together:

Hey fellow citizens, I have a great idea!  Let’s order everyone to wear a mask. That way if there are riots peaceful protests that just happen to result in arson and looting, we won’t know who the rioters peaceful protesters are when they burn down buildings and loot businesses.

Also, mayors should be sure to not prosecute or arrest members of Antifa, cuz we don't want to prevent people from peacefully protesting injustice and police misconduct.  Similarly, politicians should release all criminals from prisons.  We don't want to infringe on their right to...uh..."peacefully protest."

"Protesting" in Portland

Journalist Andy Ngo gets far better videos of the burning, looting vandals than you'll see on cable television--let alone on the over-the-air nets (which carefully show as little of the REAL agenda as possible).  Unlike CNN and the other nets, which work in teams of 4 or 5, Ngo masks up and wades into the thick of the action.  So his vids capture what the Nets miss.

He's noticed something...interesting--something that totally destroys the Narrative of the Left and the Mainstream Media that the "protests" (ah, such an innocuous term, eh?) are related to the death of George Floyd.

There's no doubt that many of the protesters weren't there to burn, loot and destroy.  But it didn't take long--a matter of hours, in fact--before the arsonists and thieves arrived.  And now we see a huge number of anarchists, like Antifa, whose seem to be only interested in attacking banks and other businesses.

In the vid below you'll see an almost entirely white mob attacking a bank-like business in Portland. Members of the mob take turns using a sling with a metal ball on the end to try to break the front doors, but fail.  Then another group succeeds in breaking a side window (on the left of the frame).  They enter, and promptly start breaking out huge windows from the inside.

At the same time another anarchist/vandal paints "Burn the banks" on the wall.

This has fuck-all to do with George Floyd.  It's anarchy.  Cops should shoot every last one of the little bastards.

Governor of Minnesota

The governor of Minnesota is Tim Walz.  He's a Democrat--something rarely mentioned in news stories about the mass arson, mass looting and rioting in Minneapolis, cuz reasons.

When the arson and looting began, Walz and the Democrat mayor of Minneapolis both decided the right action to take was to praise the riots as "protests," "legitimate rage and anger."  Of course calling arson and looting the equivalent of peaceful protests shows a certain lack of...basic intelligence.

Never fear: Walz had a solution.  "We'll order a curfew.  That will show our sensitivity to the legitimate rage and anger, while also showing that we won't put up with people burning buildings and looting--even though we're not sure that happened.  Cuz, bad press, eh?"

Guess no one on the governor's staff pointed out that anyone who's looting or burning buildings has already shown they don't care jack about your damn curfew.  And it worked as well as you might guess.

Here's Walz in his own words:

“The tactics and the approach that we have taken have evolved and need to evolve the same way, with a sensitivity to the legitimate rage and anger that came after what the world witnessed in the murder of George Floyd and was manifested in a very healthy gathering of community to memorialize that Tuesday night, which was still present to a certain degree on Wednesday.  By Thursday it was nearly gone and last night is a mockery of pretending this is about George Floyd’s death or inequities or historical traumas to our communities of color.”

Sounds like a really incisive thinker.  So now what, Tim?  Oooh, too late:  The riots and arson and looting have spread to copycat cities across the U.S.  But of course that wasn't your fault.  You just showed the looters that there wasn't going to be any punishment for looting and burning, and the rest of the pro-looting crowd made the obvious conclusion.

Don Lemon reports from CNN headquarters in Atlanta--1,100 miles from Minneapolis

Don Lemon, CNN:  This is Don Lemon at CNN headquarters, Allison.  I think I hear some noises outside, probably the peaceful protestors we've been watching in Minneapolis.  Other networks--the ones supporting that awful orange dictator in the White House--say there has been some violence, but we haven't seen any.  It's all been perfectly peaceful.
    Oh sure, we've heard reports from other networks that some capitalist pigs were whining that their businesses had been burned or some such nonsense, but that's just pro-Trump propaganda.

Allison Camerota:  Wow, it's so wonderful that young Americans can peacefully protest injustice, Don.  Such a pleasure to see young people standing up for justice and peaceful protest of wrongdoing, right?

Lemon: Yes it is, Allison.  And long overdue in this awful country, run by an evil dictator who demands rights for himself while taking rights away from peaceful young Americans who are only interested in equality and diversity and free speech and...

[sound of large glass window breaking]

Allison: What was that, Don?

Lemon:  I'm not sure, Allison.  Sounded like glass breaking.  You just can't get good help these days.

Allison:  Truth.  Of course on the off chance something's happening, it's a good thing you're on the 8th floor of our headquarters.

Lemon [laughing]:  I'm sure it's just peaceful protesters protesting peacefully, probably accidentally backed into a window or something.

Allison [laughing]:  You're probably right.  It's sure reassuring to know the protests have been peaceful.

[sound of glass breaking]

Lemon:  Well, almost entirely peaceful, at least.  I think I'll get a portable crew and interview some of the peaceful protestors outside.

Lemon:  I'm in the lobby now, Allison, and...uh...there seems to be a large crowd, and some sort of problem.  I can't tell exactly what it is yet, but some of those people are picking up rocks or something.  Fortunately they're wearing masks so it shows they're obeying the social distancing rules.

Allison:  That's so reassuring, Don.  Good to see young, peaceful Americans following the rules that keep us all safe!

Lemon:  Yes it is, Allison.  And particularly when...DAMN!  Asshole threw a big chunk of concrete right through the window.  Came within 20 feet of hitting me!  Don't these morons know who I am?

Allison:  You should just tell them who you are, Don.  I'm sure if they knew they were attacking the headquarters of CNN--the most-watched television network in the world--they'd stop.

Lemon:  Uh, Allison...the CNN logo is right next to the front door, 15 feet high, so I think they know that we're...SON OF A BITCH!!  Jerk in a hoodie just waltzed up to the door, picked up that big piece of concrete and used it break another window!  Can someone call 911?  We need some cops down here right away!

Allison:  My producer already called 'em.  They said they'd love to help but they're trapped in their precinct station and won't be able to reach you for a few hours.  Or maybe tomorrow.  But they told you to just stay calm, that these were just peaceful protestors. 
    Well, mostly peaceful, anyway.

Last night rioters and looters burned a dozen U.S. cities. CNN headline? "OMG, our 'news' crew was arrested!!""

As the rioting, looting and burning continue in a dozen U.S. cities, Tucker Carlson noticed a few things:

Here's a simple question: A police station in a major American city was occupied, looted and burned on Thursday night. Most of us assumed we’d never live to see something like that happen here. But it did happen.

So the question is, has anyone been arrested for doing it? Will anyone ever be arrested?

No one in authority seems especially interested in apprehending the people who did it. All of it happened on camera, but the perpetrators just walked away. And it’s likely that most of them will never be punished for it.

It’s a very different experience from the ones most Americans have living here.

As Minneapolis and other cities burn, the rest of us are continuing on as we always do -- dutifully following the rules. There are many of those.  In fact, every year there are countless new rules to follow. They multiply like insects.

We do our best to keep up. We get our permits, apply for our licenses, put on our reading glasses to check the latest regulations on the internet.
We wear our little masks.
We keep our dogs on leashes.
We drive sober.
We don’t eat on the subway. We never litter.
We make orderly lines and patiently wait our turn.
In airports and government buildings, we remove our shoes and submit to body searches from strangers. We lose our dignity every time we do this, but they tell us we must, so we accept it without complaint.

In public, we hide what we really think.
We bury our natural instincts. We keep our deepest beliefs to ourselves.
We know the boundaries. We understand we will be punished for telling the truth.
This is the America those of us who don't riot live in.
For the privilege of citizenship in a country like this, we work as hard as we can.
And government at all levels takes half of what we earn and "shares it" with others.

It sends money we’d rather give to our own children to politicians in faraway cities. With that money, they make new rules--which we are forced to follow under penalty of jail.

That’s what we were told to do as children. That’s the deal we’ve struck.

At least we thought it was.  Now we know that some people have somehow negotiated a far better deal than the one we have.

They get to ignore the rules. There don’t believe in order or fairness. They reject society itself.

Reason and process and precedent mean nothing to them. They use violence to get what they want--and get it immediately.

People like this don’t bother to work. They don’t volunteer or pay taxes to help other people. They live for themselves. They do exactly what they feel like doing. They say exactly what they feel like saying.

They spray paint their opinions on buildings.

On television, hour by hour, we watch these people — criminal mobs — destroy what the rest of us have built.

They have no right to do that. They don’t contribute to the common good. They never have.  Yet Democrat politicians allow them to burn and loot.

Those who support the rioters will tell you that the problem is race relations, or capitalism, or police brutality, or global warming. But only on the surface.

The real cause is deeper than that and it’s far darker.

What you’re watching is the ancient battle between those who have a stake in society, and would like to preserve it, and those who don’t, and seek to destroy it.

Which side in that war have our leaders taken?  It’s obvious.

The rioters in Minneapolis and in other places act as if they’re allowed to loot and burn.
In fact, they are allowed--because no one stops them.

The authorities don’t arrest them. Instead, they pander to them, flatter them, desperately try to win their love.

Why are masked lunatics setting fire to Wendy’s?  Liberal politicians tell us it's because the rest of us are sinful.  They tell us the crimes of the mob are the punishment we deserve.

That’s their argument, and many Americans--roughly half--seem to buy it.

We should have seen this coming.

When you express an opinion liberals don’t like, they call it violence.  But when criminals commit acts of actual violence, liberals call it "free speech."  Or "mere protests."  In other words, the game is rigged.

So why are the rest of us still playing it? We have more power than we think we do. Our system only functions because dutiful normal people — people with self-control and decency, and a sense of responsibility toward others — created our system.

They sustain it. They pay the bills. None of the thugs looting Target, or the well-paid nihilists on television who are egging them on, have added a thing.  Nothing.  Yet all the destroyers expect this arrangement will last forever. For them, it’s been a very good deal.

But what exactly are you getting in return for your contributions to this system?

Liberal mayors and congresspersons clearly don’t care about the people who fund the system and make it work.  One proof is that in liberal-ruled cities the police will let the mob burn your business to the ground, without lifting a finger to intervene.

During election years sweaty politicians claim to be on your side. It’s a lie. They’re not. They’ll feed you pointless symbolic victories and expect you to celebrate like you’ve actually won something. But when the mob comes, they’re gone. You’re on your own

Should you keep playing along with them?  Ponder that the next time they demand you get a permit to put a storage shed in your own backyard.

You might think about it even harder the next time you write a check to pay the taxes your rulers demand.

 

More riots. Wait...have Democrats said we can call it "rioting"? After all, it's just burning and looting

Black rioters--wait, my bad: "protesters" attack the state capitol building of Ohio.  Cuz da Ohio cops done killed one of their tribe.

Nah, just kidding.  It was a bad cop in Minneapolis.  So naturally, the tribe takes it out on the capitol building in...Ohio. 

According to the Lying Mainstream Media, rioting is really just a legitimate form of protest.  Jus' like white folk do when some black guy shoots elderly white people visiting their son's grave, or beating a bed-ridden 75-year-old in a nursing home--for eight minutes!  While videoing himself beating the guy, then posting it on the internet!

You DID hear about those ghastly attacks, right?  Surely you did, cuz all da white folk were so furious dey burned down all dem buildings all across da country.  Oh wait...

Okay, sarcasm off:  I have yet to hear anyone who doesn't think the abuse of George Floyd by a Minneapolis cop--abuse that may have caused his death--was awful.  But why burn buildings in 12 cities?

Oh, dat's right:  because there is NO down-side for looting and burning.  And why is that?

Because dumbshit liberal politicians refuse to let cops clear the streets--with miniguns.

See, most adults know that if your child does something horribly wrong, and you do nothing, the child simply does it again and again.  No punishment means you get more of it.  Same now.

Blame who? Oh yeah: Trump

Mainstream media and "experts": "HCQ is really, really dangerous! So don't take it!"

For the record:  for all the leftist assholes who have claimed hydroxychloroquin is "dangerous," here's a fact:  In 2017 more than five million prescriptions were filled in the United States alone.

Of course that figure is from a really questionable source, so you might be skeptical:  It's from Wikipedia.

Of course I wouldn't trust the leftists who run Wiki if they claimed the sun was hot, so I urge you skeptics to check out the references for yourselves.

https://clincalc.com/DrugStats/Drugs/HydroxychloroquineSulfate

But of course the "5 million" figure is from 2017, before NEW research by Fauci and comrades showed that HCQ was really a lot more dangerous than anyone thought. 

Oh wait, that's horse-shit designed to see if you were gullible.  Actually the number of scrips for HCQ is still increasing.

Which is really weird cuz Fauci and the other anti-Trump "experts" have assured us that it's really, really dangerous!

Ever notice that the Media only show you total cases and deaths due to the virus? "Innumeracy"

Sadly, most people are "innumerate."

If you're a college-age American you may not have run across that term before.  It's like "illiterate" but for math instead of reading.  So how does that apply here?

Here ya go:  If you've been paying attention you've probably seen the running count of  "cases of the Chinese virus," and "deaths."  If so you've almost certainly noticed that both those numbers are
     a) really scary-high; AND
     b) always increasing!

(That last was tongue-in-cheek.)

Of course every single member of the Lying Media, without exception, shows you the TOTAL number of cases and deaths reportedly caused by the Chinese virus, which naturally leads you to believe that's the critical metric.  And totally by coincidence, of course, Dems and the media use total deaths to condemn Trump for being too slow to close our borders to Chinese flights. 

At least that's what they did after they called Trump a racist for closing our borders to Chinese flights.

But a far more relevant figure is

How many NEW cases and deaths happened yesterday, or this week?

See, the number of NEW cases and deaths each day tells you how rapidly the "plandemic" is subsiding.  Which could be used to reassure Americans that lifting the lockdowns is reasonable.

Which, of course, is why the Lying Mainstream Media will never give you the "cases yesterday" figure.

So the only thing Americans ever see--graphs of TOTAL cases and deaths--constantly increase.  Which looks really scary.  "OMG we're all gonna DIE!!" 

The media WANT you to be scared, cuz if people are scared they'll support re-imposing the lockdowns because of fears of the "spike" every so-called expert has predicted.  Keeps the economy dead--which wins the election for the Democrats.

Innumerate, baby.  The Mainstream Media count on it.  And they're not disappointed.

Twatter: " We don't allow tweets that advocate violence." "Unless it's violence we like."

Hey, didja know Twatter says they'll censor tweets that "violate their policies"?  It's how they justify removing the president's tweets, or adding the warning "This is not true."   So YAY, Twatter!!  Keep us safe, Twatter!

One of those policies is SUPPOSEDLY that you're not allowed to post a tweet that advocates violence against anyone.  So take a look at the tweet below--specifically the last few words:  According to Twatter's own alleged policy, they should have deleted it.  But of course they didn't.

You might wonder why they didn't delete it, since they CLAIM their policy is that tweets advocating violence aren't allowed, eh?  After all, "rules are rules," right?  Gotta enforce those alleged policies, eh?

Wait...you don't suppose Twatter's alleged policies are only enforced against...are you sitting down?...people the leftist assholes at Twatter disagree with, do ya?

The officer can be charged immediatley & still do a thorough investigation. he should be charged already and the only question is what degree of murder it is? Pre-meditated, etc. If found guilty, he should do real prison time & be raped daily.

— Mark William Singler (@Equalizer008) May 28, 2020

A rare win for sanity

As Americans watch Minneapolis and other cities burned by looters and rioters, it buries the occasional few notes of sanity.  So allow me...

Eighteen states, plus Washington DC, have RULED that males can compete AS WOMEN in womens' sports.

Let that insanity sink in for a minute.

The males, of course, have delcared that they're really female--and as a result, the rulers of leftist states immediately jumped to do their bidding.

Now:  Does anyone other than whiny, mentally-unbalanced snowflakes think this it's reasonable or fair to let males compete against females in sports?

If you have a daughter who's a competitive athlete it only took you a millisecond to find the answer.  But if you're a Democrat legislator or governor, or a social saboteur (like a "man" we're about to meet), you get the opposite answer.  Hmmm....

So here we go:  Connecticut is a totally Democrat-ruled state.  Like the "progressive" rulers of 17 other states, the legislators passed a LAW saying you couldn't "discriminate" against people on the basis of "their preferred gender."

Sounds SO righteous and innocuous, eh?  Totally wunnerful!  How could ANYONE complain about not discriminating, right?

Well...in a millisecond the screwy head of the state's "Interscholastic Athletic Conference" interpreted this law as demanding that males be allowed to compete against women.  You might well wonder how he did that.  Here ya go:

"Connecticut law is clear and students who identify as female are to be recognized as female for all purposes -- including high school sports.  To do otherwise would not only be discriminatory but would deprive high school students of the meaningful opportunity to participate in educational activities, including inter-scholastic sports, based on sex-stereotyping and prejudice sought to be prevented by Title IX and Connecticut state law."

See how deftly he did that?  The legislature passed what seemed to be a very unobjectionable law forbidding discrimination...and in a millisecond an activist in a power position rules that the law FORCES him (?) to make this bizarre rule.

Cool, eh?

So...after two trannies began sweeping female track events, real females complained to the dipshit who ran the "Interscholastic Athletic Conference"--which had exactly the effect you expected: none whatsoever.

Hey, "rules are rules," right?  So sit down and shut up!  The LAW forced us to do this!

Fortunately in this case a reason-defending legal organization helped 'em write a formal complaint to the federal Dept of Education, which tells schools what Title IX actually means.  And after six months or so, the department agreed with the real girls.

Now for the twist: After the rational ruling from the federal department, the feds sat down with the states to negotiate how to proceed.  Amazingly, the state reps told the feds to go pound sand.

Just like California and other "sanctuary states" have told the feds "We won't comply" with federal immigration law.  And corrupt federal judges have supported the lawless states.

Cool, eh?

See, sometimes the courts rule that all states must comply with federal law, and sometimes they go the other way.  For example, when emperor Obama was prez, a federal judge ruled that Arizona could NOT enforce federal immigration law by jailing illegal immigrants and turning 'em over to the feds.  The rationale was that immigration law was the SOLE province of the federal government, and the states were not allowed to help.  That is, state law had to yield.

But the moment Trump was elected, leftist federal judges turned on a dime, ruling that states could now defy federal immigration law in any way they wished.  That is, federal law was no longer superior to state law.

Gotta love those flexible rules, eh?

Source for the Title IX complaint:

NBC anchor says "this will guide OUR reporting" on MN: Don't call 'em riots--call 'em "protests"

If I told you that a "news" anchor for both NBC and MSNBC said "This will guide our reporting about the...situation on the ground in Minneapolis:

 'While there has been violence, it is most accurate at this time to describe what is happening there as 'protests', not riots,'

...would you think those two networks were trying to keep Americans from knowing the truth?

Would you think this was honest, unbiased reporting, or would you think it showed those networks were trying to conceal the truth...thus favoring looters and rioters?

Craig Melvin is the anchor.  Here's a tweet from his verified Twatter account:

This will guide our reporting in MN. “While the situation on the ground in Minneapolis is fluid, and there has been violence, it is most accurate at this time to describe what is happening there as "protests"--not riots.”

— Craig Melvin (@craigmelvin) May 28, 2020

Remember, citizen:  You can only trust information that comes from Trusted Sources!  They're the only ones who you can count on to tell you the truth, eh?

Twatter censors Trump tweet, claims it "violates our policies by glorifying violence" ??

Minneapolis:  The city was building a a six-story public housing complex--funded by taxpayers.

Looters and rioters burned it to the ground, along with a dozen businesses.

The president tweeted to express his belief that looting, rioting and burning was unacceptable.  That tweet contained the phrase "when the looting starts, the shooting starts."

The leftists at Twatter said this "violated their policies regarding the glorification of violence."

Maybe it's just me but I don't see "glorifying violence" anywhere in the president's tweet.  What I do see is a thousand Twatter commenters on an earlier tweet about the riots saying "This is GREAT!"  and "We need MORE of this!"  There's your "glorifying violence," yet their tweets didn't get taken down by the leftists who run Twatter.

There's no question that police do illegal things, and exhibit lousy judgment much of the time.  But when rioters are burning down your city, how do you get 'em to stop?

Twatter implicitly demands that the state and city take no action to end the looting and burning.  Cuz the "right to protest" is guaranteed by our wonderful Constitution.  And of course burning buildings and businesses to the ground is simply a protected form of "protest," right?

Of course it's not.  But in censoring a tweet by the president saying "when the looting starts, the shooting starts" it seems clear that Twatter doesn't think a city or state should take any action to stop looters or arsonists.

What do you think?  Doesn't matter--CNN, MSNBC and social-justice folks have already decided how this will play out.

This Tweet violates our policies regarding the glorification of violence based on the historical context of the last line, its connection to violence, and the risk it could inspire similar actions today. https://t.co/sl4wupRfNH

— Twitter Comms (@TwitterComms) May 29, 2020

 

NBC anchor demands that reporters call MN riots "protests"

What a surprise: "Vaccination passports" are coming

If you pay attention to politics, you may have heard about a Democrat proposal to require people who want to fly commercial have a "vaccination passport."

Typical liberal:  "Hey, it's for your own safety, citizen!  No good person can complain about doing things to make us safer, right?  The only people who would object would be...conservatives, cuz they don't listen to science!  Yeh, dat's it!"

So how would a "vaccination passport" work, exactly?   Turns out the folks pushing the idea aren't eager to provide many details, but the current Narrative is that if you tested negative that's all ya need, eh?

No.  It looks like the real plan is that you'll have to have been vaccinated.

Hey, no problem, right?  Cuz there's no risk at all in taking a vaccine.  Especially when it's just about the same as the flu vax.

Oh wait...the flu vaccine changes every single year due to tiny mutations of the virus.  So last year's vax is useless.

Ah, now it's starting to be clear:  You'll have to have the new "this year" vax, every year.

Cuz after all, we demand that anyone wanting to fly must have had the flu vaccination, right?

Wait, you say we DON'T do that?

Wow, that's...odd.  Oh well, don't worry, citizen.  Your betters will keep you safe.  Like Fauci saying for weeks that the Chinese virus would NOT be a serious problem for America.

Wait, you say you didn't hear about that?  Hmmm.... cuz he sure as hell said it.  On video. Several times.  Cuz see, he's an "expert" who knows how things work.

Gotta listen to science, dummies.

So if you think they're not gearing up for this, click here to learn about "Covi-pass."

That company already has its own website.  Fast action, eh?

LA Times gushes about "Dems plotting a **counter**-attack on...disinformation?? Wait...

Propaganda in the LA Times three days ago:

Democrats plot a counterattack on disinformation in hopes of taking back the White House

"A counterattack on disinformation," eh?  Wow.  Projection much?  Would that be statements like "Open borders are good for Americans"?  Or maybe "There's no such thing as an illegal person.  Undocumented immigrants are actually better Americans than native-born Americans!"

As conservative conspiracy theories and deepfake videos race through the internet, defying the fact-checkers and bruising political candidates, Curtis Hougland is trying to fight back by borrowing from the playbook of his adversaries.

God knows we can't have citizens trying to "defy the fact-checkers," eh citizen?  Cuz dem fact-checkers are the only agents that are keeping you safe from "disinformation," "conservatve conspiracy theories" and "deepfake videos."  Wow.

Again, the Times is projecting.  The article is pure propaganda.

Hougland, a technologist and online-extremism expert, is hiring small armies of social-media mercenaries to do battle for Democrats.

Ah, an "expert" in "on-line extremism!  Wow, dat's exactly what we need, cuz, you know, dat "extremism" stuff bees real real bad!  Like, saying da Chinese virus originated in...a lab in Wuhan, China or sumpin'.

See, I just violated their rules against "online extremism."  My bad.

These are not troops predisposed to political warfare.... But they hold a weapon that’s lacking among internet activists in the echo chambers of the left: large and devoted followings of persuadable voters.

“We are making a bet that human networks can out-compete the bots and trolls and sock puppets,” said Hougland.

So he's recruiting "large and devoted followings of persuadable voters" to "out-compete bots and trolls and sock puppets," eh?   But see, he would NEVER have done this had he not been FORCED to by da eeeebil right-wing conspiracy, right?  He was FORCED to this tactic.   Yep yep yep.

Project much?

It’s a fraught bet, one of many Democrats are making as they confront the growing threat that disinformation presents to their hopes of retaking the White House. Since the pandemic took hold, the false narratives ricocheting through social media have surged.

Conspiracy theories and false claims springing from the pandemic are fast blurring into political attacks, typically pointed at Democrats and sometimes propelled by President Trump. While their party has grown adept at tracking the origin and spread of the disinformation, Democrats have yet to find an effective strategy for depriving it of oxygen, particularly as the social media companies — including Facebook and Twitter — are proving to be feckless partners in the fight.

This is a hoot.  If you're a college-age American you may not be familiar with the word "feckless."  A fair translation would be unreliable or incompetent.  So the Times is trying to get you to believe that the social-media giants are NOT reliably Left-wing, pro-Democrat.  This is utter horse-shit, yet they printed it with a straight face.  And idiot propagandists like CNN's Don Lemon spew the same shit.

The companies are taking down and labeling as suspect more content than in the past, but are unable to keep pace with all the posts that violate their terms. And they are unwilling to ban the large volume of material, such as Trump’s false claims, that could be branded political speech.

Actually, yesterday Twatter slapped a big graphic on a tweet by the president that said voting by mail would lead to more vote fraud.  Twatter's graphic said that "fact-checkers" had ruled that was "a lie."  Of course they'd put the same "lie" graphic on a tweet by a leftist or Democrat too, right?

Hahahahahahaha!  What horse-shit.

For example, in recent days the president proudly announced he was ingesting hydroxychloroquine, despite studies questioning its efficacy and safety in combating the coronavirus, and endorsed conspiracy theories about voting fraud using absentee ballots.

A more effective response, disinformation experts say, might provide useful information about the risks of ingesting such untested drugs ...

HCQ was approved in 1940, and since then has been taken by tens of millions of Americans and hundreds of millions of people around the world.  It's been thoroughly tested.  The LA Times lies so effortlessly, counting on the fact that 99% of its readers believe their lies.

Talk about "disinformation" and "conspiracy theories," eh?

A network of trustworthy messengers is essential, the experts say, to slowing the spread of debunked material. 

"A network of trustworthy messengers," eh?  Wow, how do you suppose such a network would be recruited, eh?  Who would do the recruiting?  Who would the recruiters consider "trustworthy"?  The answer, of course, is that the social-media giants--totally left-wing--would do the recruiting, and every one of the "trustworthy messengers" will be dedicated leftists.

Cool, eh?

[Dem strategists are] mobilizing influencers who have common cause with the candidate or ballot issue. They point to Kentucky, where an influencer they engaged to help undermine support for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was a mom with the social media tagline “bourbon, basketball and God,” who wasn’t a political activist but drew their attention for posting her disgust over McConnell’s push to dismantle Obamacare.
****["Influencers] may have helped Democrats win the close Kentucky governor’s race last year, and their disciplined social media strategy also stifled false claims of ballot tampering from conservatives casting doubt on the election result.

The dilemma for Democrats is that the disinformation threat has grown so big and complicated that small measures won’t dent it. European countries have had some success...

The author is referring to the fact that in several European countries you can be thrown in jail and fined tens of thousands of dollars if you post something on-line that some politically-correct snowflake doesn't like.  Seriously, it's happened scores of times already.  Same thing in Canada.  And the Times wants that make a law here. 

...but by making structural changes that are all but impossible in the U.S.: significant oversight of online platforms, expansive public education campaigns, aggressive enforcement of laws criminalizing certain disinformation.

In the 2016 presidential election, both the Democratic nominee and voters were caught off guard by the assault from bots, troll farms and fake Facebook groups, many of them controlled by foreign operatives.

Ah, re-introducing the now-totally-discredited screams of "Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election from our rightful empress!!!" but without actually mentioning Russia.  Merely "foreign operatives."  Not named, cuz they didn't need to:  The Left only screamed about one "foreign operative": Russia.  And not a single witness had any information proving collusion.  But hey, innuendo works, eh?

Wait, isn't innuendo a type of disinformation?

Ooooh, see?  The Times is getting really good at this!

Source (if you have a strong stomach.)

NY state health website deletes Cuomo's order forcing nursing homes to accept virus patients

On March 25th the incompetent dictator of New York, Andrew Cuomo, issued an "order" requiring nursing homes to accept patients infected with the virus.  This killed about 5,300 elderly residents of the homes.

Now the state health department deleted that order from its website.  So like magic, Cuomo defenders can say "He never ordered that.  It never happened.  This is 'disinformation,' and if you try to post this on Twatter or Fakebook we'll get our FACT CHECKERS delete your post and close your account!"

Cool, huh?  As George Orwell predicted, a government that can remove history can con people into believing any version the rulers want.

The web page that contained the order now says "file not found."  Internet archives show that the deletion occurred sometime after May 5, around the time that criticism over New York's nursing home fatalities intensified.

Cuomo's order stated

 "No resident shall be denied readmission or admission to the NH [nursing home] solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. NHs [Nursing homes] are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to admission or readmission."

But remember, citizen:  He never ordered that.  It didn't happen.

Then two weeks ago Cuomo issued a new order, this time decreeing that hospitals couldn't send patients back to nursing homes unless the patient tested negative for the virus.  But wait...I thought the March 5th order said nursing homes couldn't decline people with the virus.  Now the "new" order says people can't be admitted to a nursing home unless they've been tested, and are negative.

Well THAT's a total reversal, eh?  Suggesting Cuomo's earlier order--which killed 5,300 or so--was a total f-up. 

"Oh NO, citizen.  That's not a reversal.  Really!"   A Cuomo communications director insisted that it was "not accurate" to state that Cuomo had "reversed" the March 25 order.

"He didn't reverse or rescind anything," the doofus wrote. "The order is still in effect. He did add a directive, this one directed at hospitals, saying they must test patients and the patients must be negative before being sent back to a nursing home. And he is requiring nursing homes to test staff twice a week."

Ah, got it.  The reversal is NOT a reversal--his Excellency merely "added a directive."  Got it.  Here's more from the spokesliar.  See if you can make sense of it:

"DOH posted updated guidance that builds on the original March 25 guidance which barred nursing homes from discriminating against COVID patients.  The updated guidance didn’t supersede the March 25th guidance – rather, it added a new requirement that says hospitals cannot discharge patients to nursing homes until they test negative. Then and now, nursing homes cannot discriminate against COVID patients and they cannot accept patients if they aren’t able to provide adequate care, including staff screenings, PPE and infection control measures like cohorting."

Note how cunningly Team Cuomo has re-cast this as "we don't allow discrimination!"  Oh, right: So on March 25 nursing homes could NOT require prospective patients to be tested, cuz da goobernor he don' like dat discrimination.  And now you MUST test prospective patients, cuz dat would be...wait for it...discrimination.

This insanity was too much even for some reporters, so on Saturday, Cuomo simply blamed any problems on President Trump and his administration.

"New York followed the president's agencies' guidance," Cuomo said during his press conference. "... What New York did was follow what the Republican Administration said to do. That's not my attempt to politicize it. It's my attempt to depoliticize it. So don't criticize the state for following the president's policy."

Social media are deleting more posts they don't like--and entire accounts. And it's gonna get worse...

Most Americans are addicted to "social media"--Fakebook, Twatter, Instagrim and the like.  After all, you get to discuss important ideas with other intelligent, sophisticated people.

Well that's a good theory, anyway.  The reality is that if you try to post something the employees, managers or execs of the media giants don't like, they'll delete your post.

Literally, they remove posts they don't like.

If Trump or the government did this, the Left would scream bloody murder.  "You can't do that, cuz CENSORSHIP!  The First Amendment gives us the right to say anything we want!"  But the First Amendment only bars government from censoring speech.  Private companies can refuse to allow any post ("speech") they don't like.  In fact the media giants have often deleted entire accounts that post ideas the giants don't like.

So we have an irony:  The Left has always hated Big Corporations.  "They're EEEBIL, dontcha know.  They're run by eeeebil billionaires who want to screw us Little Folks, so we have to destroy da corporations and dere CEO's!!!"

But suddenly the Left has no problem with da eeeebil corporations, run by billionaires.  And why?  Because the formerly-eeeebil corporations are now the main weapons used by the Left to win power.

We can conclude that the Left has no way to detect either irony or hypocrisy.

Tucker Carlson reports on how this has been happpening.  Amusingly, the reason the media giants usually give is "your post violated our terms of service," or "we don't allow hate speech."  But of course this is utter horse-shit:  Posts by leftists screaming that Trump should be killed are allowed to remain up forever, without any action by the social giants, as do posts by terrorist outfits screaming that "infidels"--that's you--should be killed.  So clearly, social-media execs find SOME kinds of "hate speech" perfectly acceptable.

And it's about to get worse:  Fakebook has announced that it's expanding its crew of censors, even announcing their names.  And they're all leftists. 

Surprise.

In memory of all who made the ultimate sacrifice

Maxine Waters: "I think you should be impeached." And then...

Scorecard for...

Virus lockdown killing the nation's economy is "An elephant scared by a house cat."

As our nation remains locked down, mostly by insane Democrat governors, keen analysts like Roger Kimball have stated what should be obvious to all intelligent Americans--but sadly isn't:

Back in March, before the destruction of more than 30 million jobs and tens of thousands of shuttered businesses, before the missed graduations, and soaring suicide and drug-addiction rates, I wondered when people would realize that the real crisis was not the virus, but our politician-and-media fired panic over the disease? 

For the past two months the country has been consumed with fear and panic.  When it finally ends, look for many to feel shame at our collective gullibility...and rage against those who exploited it.

Kimball uses the image of an elephant scared by a house cat.  Frightened, the elephant jumps off a cliff and dies.

At the daily briefings the "expert" Anthony Fauci dispensed ever-more alarming scenarios of the countless deaths that awaited us—the models said so!—unless we cowered in our homes until...well, some Democrat rulers said "until a cure is found."

This prompted a few skeptics to ask if we'd found a cure for SARS, or the H1N1 flu, or the swine flu, or MERS, or...you get the idea.  Of course we haven't, and can't, because the flu strain is slightly different every year.  So as a result, we should shut down our entire country for a couple of decades!

No, of course not.  Obviously not.  Ridiculously obviously not.  So obvious a 5th-grader could see it.

You get the idea.

Of course what will happen is, as NEW virus deaths approach a few dozen per week, the Lying Mainstream Media will simply pivot to the next ghastly, deadly, horrible disaster or outrage--as the NY Times did by claiming our military "celebrates White Supremacy."  Yeah.

The other option is if the Dems win in November.  In that case, all the scary stories about the virus will instantly, magically vanish.  Suddenly "the experts" will unanimously declare that it's perfectly safe to open all businesses again, and go back to normal life.

It's just as the Mainstream Media does every presidential election:  If a Republican is president, every other story is about the awful, tragic, heartbreaking crisis of homelessness.  If the Democrat wins, suddenly you can't find a single story about homelessness in the MSM.  It's like it stopped being a problem, overnight.

Cool, eh? 

Day before Memorial Day, NY Times runs editorial "Why does the U.S. military Celebrate White Supremacy?"

Memorial Day is supposed to commemorate members of the U.S. armed forces who have died or been gravely wounded in combat.  So naturally, on the Sunday before Memorial Day the anti-American communists at the NY Times ran an editorial with the following headline:

Why Does the U.S. Military Celebrate White Supremacy?

Sub-head: "It is time to rename bases for American heroes — not racist traitors."

Excuse me?  As a former member of our armed forces I NEVER saw the military "celebrating white supremacy" at all.  What, I wondered, could the Times possibly be referring to?

The clue that this is pure anti-military propaganda--anti-American, on the day before Memorial Day--is in the very first sentence of the editorial:

The white supremacist who murdered nine black churchgoers in Charleston, S.C., five years ago dispensed with the fiction that the Confederate battle flag was an innocuous symbol of “Southern pride.”

The Times claims a psychotic killer represents "Southern pride," eh?  In that case why wouldn't you be equally justified in claiming that every black who killed whites represented "Black pride"?  Like 29-year-old black man Sheldon Francis, who fatally shot a white couple (ages 86 and 85) as they visited their son's grave just two weeks ago?  Yeah, the Times was all over that as representing "black pride," right?  Made no national headlines at all, cuz...reasons.

But don't bother mentioning any of this to the editors of the Times, cuz they're on a roll.  They've got racial hate to fan.  Causing division helps their politics, sells papers and...wins elections for Dems.  Win-win, citizen.

But surely you'd think that the thousands of stories about the South Carolina nutter five years ago were enough to make the point...right??  What does this have to do with Memorial Day?  Oh yeah--the Times brings up this story again, five years later, to inflame readers.  They make it the very first sentence of a story claiming the U.S. military "celebrates white supremacy" because the killer was in the military, right?

Of course he wasn't.  He was a deranged 21-year-old who'd never served.  Which ties in perfectly with the Times' screaming headline that our military "celebrates white supremacy," right?

It takes the Times six paragraphs of loaded imagery before they get to an actual point:  that ten military bases in the south are named for Confederate generals.

Wait...what?

I'm a student of military history, but I didn't know who most of the names were.  And I guarantee that not a single recruit knows them either.  But fortunately the anti-military, virtue-signalling editors of the Times are eager to remedy this lack of knowledge.  In other words, no one knew, but the Times will remind us--inciting racial animosity where it wouldn't otherwise have been present.

But finally, after 4,000 words of anti-military propaganda, the Times finally admits the truth.  They buried it in the next-to-last paragraph of their ghastly piece:

Fifteen years later, a young African-American Army officer named Colin Powell marveled at the contrast between the fairness and opportunity he experienced at Fort Benning, Ga., and the racist treatment he suffered at off-base restaurants that refused to serve him. In his memoir Mr. Powell describes the racially integrated bases of the segregated 1960s-era South as “healthy cells in an otherwise sick body.”

That totally negates the inflammatory headline.  Which is why the editors of the Times buried it in the next-to-last 'graf of their race-baiting article.  Which they deliberate published the day before Memorial Day.

Hate those rat-bastards with a passion.

So why do you think the Times would run this editorial--let alone on the Sunday before Memorial Day?   Here's my guess:  This is "prepping the battlespace" for a bill that will cost Trump millions of votes in November.  The communists at the Times got together with Pelosi, Schumer, Schiff and Nadler to devise a bill ordering the military to re-name all ten bases, by election day.

My guess is that it's already been drafted--and will pass the House by a huge majority.

Republicans have a paper-thin majority in the senate, so the Dems only need to get two or three GOP senators to vote for the measure.  Thanks to the Times, that should be easy.

At that point the measure goes to the president--and you can see the cunning of the Dems:  If Trump signs it, the Media crows that he's betrayed his raaaaacist base voters, just as they crowed about Trump promising that "Mexico will pay for the Wall."  If he vetoes, there are probably enough votes to override, which is a huge hit to a president's popularity.  But even if no override, a veto would push a million independent and black votes back to the Democrats--likely resulting in Biden becoming president, with Dem majorities in both chambers of congress.

It's a cunning strategy.  Win-win for the Dems...and the Times.

Klobuchar reluctantly admitted that when her husband got the virus, he was cured in "one day" by...OOooh!

Even before president Trump was inaugurated, Democrats and socialists had already formed "The Resistance" to sabotage everything he attempted.

You don't believe that, so search the hashtag #Resistance and see for yourself.

The latest #Resistance marching order is to trash every positive report on using the drug hydroxychloroquine as either a treatment for, or preventative against, the Chinese virus--because Trump described it as "a possible game-changer" that "may or may not help."

This Resistance tactic got a very brief pushback when a black female Democrat state representative from Michigan got a bad case of the virus and said she was cured in a matter of days after taking HCQ, zinc and azithromycin.

Normally a black female Democrat would never be attacked by other Dems, but this woman was absolutely hammered by Democrats for going public about her experience...because it was seen by Dems as helping Trump.

Now the "Trump played doctor and killed MILLIONS OF INNOCENT AMERICANS bullshit has taken another hit, as former Dem presidential candidate Amy Klobuchar reluctantly admitted that when her husband got the virus and was coughing up blood, he was treated with...oooh,  hydroxychloroquine!  (Cue music notes of DOOM!)

And she said--again, reluctantly, that in “one day he got better."

She made her reluctant admission on April 7--six weeks ago.  Surely you heard about it, right?  Cuz with Klobuchar being a major female Dem presidential candidate, her admission that HCQ helped her husband get better in ONE DAY--an admission that would definitely help Trump--made all the network "news" shows, as well as the NY Times and WaPo.

Hahahahahahahahahaha!  Just kidding.  It didn't make a ripple.  Gosh, wonder why?

But Klobuchar recovered nicely: When asked if her husband’s recovery after HCQ had influenced her thinking about the 80-year-old, inexpensive drug, Klobuchar replied

“I listen to the science there. I believe he did briefly take that drug. I’d have to check with the doctor, of course I wasn’t there. But I think that--or some drug like it--we have to listen to the science and listen to the doctors what is going to work in each individual situation. Sometimes you might have other conditions that make it so you can’t take certain drugs. Sometimes your own condition with the virus wouldn’t demand it. I think people have to look at what works. [Yes but...] I just believe in science, something this president has not been listening to.”

See, Amy "listens to the science there."  Cuz Fauci and company--the so-called "experts"--sneered that HCQ was deadly, untested, useless.  Deadly.  Did ya get that, sparky:  Deadly.

Approved 75 years ago for use against...um...stuff, and given to hundreds of millions of patients since then.  But..."untested."  "Deadly."  "Useless."  Can you say "scare story"?

Any Democrat official who dares to admit to knowing anyone who was cured by the HCQ/zinc/azithromycin combination risks being attacked by the media and Dems...because the admission cuts against their effort to tar President Trump for daring to say "possible game-changer."  But when directly questioned about this, Klobuchar couldn’t lie convincingly.  She reluctantly admitted that HCQ helped save her husband’s life...then backed up with a cloud of smoke.

Think about this for a moment.  Dems and the mainstream media are so deranged and desperate to take the White House this election year, they’re demanding that no one be allowed to use a drug that has proven to be highly effective for many people suffering from this virus—simply because President Trump said it was a "possible game-changer."  That’s how irrational these loons are.

And yet they claim that they "listen to the science there."

Really?

Source.

University of Cali system votes to scrap SAT and ACT as admission requirement...because...

Ever since the founding of the United States, college has been viewed as a mark of higher learning, a mark of distinction.  This is now about to end, thanks to the morons who run the University of California system.  Here's how:
==

Last Thursday the regents of the University of California agreed with virtue-signalling queen Janet Napolitano to stop using the SAT and ACT exams as criteria for college admission.  The vote was 23-0.

Activists have argued for years that "it's UNFAIR" for colleges to use standardized tests for admissions.  And what's their reasoning?  Because minority students score, on average, lower than their white classmates.  Activists argue that the lower scores result entirely from the fact that more whites can afford to pay for pricey test preparation.

Typical is this quote from Regent Cecilia Estolano: "The test is a proxy for privilege."

More than 1,000 colleges and universities have made the two tests optional--and the pace of schools dropping the exam is accelerating in recent years, ostensibly in an attempt to level the admissions playing field.  But a big factor may simply be virtue-signalling.

Ms. Napolitano proposed that the UC system have four years to develop a new exam.  If it fails to create or adopt one, then it likely would cease to use any exam.  Most experts don't believe a new exam will be implemented.

In 2018 a faculty committee began a review of the use of the exam. In February it recommended that the system continue to use the exams, arguing that applicants' scores on the SAT and ACT are better predictors of college success than high school grades.

But the issue was decided last December, as "students and community groups" sued the UC system, alleging that requiring applicants to submit ACT or SAT scores discriminates against racial and ethnic minorities and low-income applicants.

Experts point out that every single library in the U.S. has prep books for both these admission tests. 
There is no barrier.  While it's certainly true that children of wealthy families can pay for prep courses, are we now arguing that inequality in wealth is evidence of discrimination?  That's a communist line that goes back 150 years.

What do you think happens if the morons running the UC system drop the standards for admission?

Yep...sets unqualified students up for failure.  The UC system is already spending hundreds of millions per year on remedial courses for students who can't do basic math.  But the regents and Napolitano claim we need MORE of that.

Our institutions are being run by morons.  But at least they feel very virtuous.  And that's what really matters, right?

Source.

"Activists" demand death certificates list "global warming" as a Cause of Death

You know how "authorities"--the dictators who are ruining the economy--are decreeing that gunshot deaths shall be ruled as being due to the virus?  Well, "activists" in Australia have demanded that death certificates list "global warming" as cause of death in many cases.

Oooh, you can see how this will work:  Dude is hot, is thinking about getting to the pub for a cold one, zones out, gets hit by a bus.  "Cause of Death:  Global warming."

Or...gal parks her car with all windows rolled up tight on a warm sunny day.  Her bottle of hand sanitizer--which is 70% alcohol--vaporizes and the vapor is ignited by a spark.  Cause of Death: "Global warming."

Or...moronic "Doctor" (Antony Falsi?) says "Some dumb Americans think the virus is killed by heat.  Nonsense!  Heat makes it more deadly.  SO...from now on in Australia, everyone killed by the virus will have the Cause of Death listed as "Global warming." 

Source. 

Unidentified American universities are refusing to comply with feds investigating Chinese bribery of professors

For at least the last decade the communist government of China has been paying huge amounts to professors at supposedly elite American universities for...information.

During the reign of emperor Obama, no one tried to look into this, cuz reasons.  But now an agency of the federal government--under Trump--is trying to find out who's spying.  And I know you won't be a bit surprised to learn this next line:


Several U.S. universities are reportedly refusing to cooperate with federal investigations into alleged infiltration by the Chinese government through bribes and financial kickbacks.

College Fix reports that several universities being investigated by the Department of Education are refusing to provide internal documents thought to contain evidence of undisclosed financial grants from the Chinese government.  The Department of Education refused to name the institutions that have refused to comply.

Attorneys for the universities claim they don't have to provide information because of  “Freedom of Information Act exemptions and legal privileges.”

This is horse-shit.  The Freedom of Information Act was a tool to compel government agencies to release documents to ordinary citizens.  It doesn't permit universities like Hahvahd to refuse to provide documents sought in the course of a legitimate investigation.  But hey, citizen, you knew that, right?

The "attorneys for the universities" are confident you don't.

Source. 

20-year-old boxer films himself beating elderly nursing-home residents, posts vids on-line

Michigan nursing home:  Man beats elderly patient.  Warning:  Extremely disturbing video.

How did the assailant get in?  Was/is he an employee?  Who's running that hell-hole?

Will anyone be prosecuted?  The assailant of the home operator?

Michigan's governor--the charmless Gretchin Whitmer--is too damn busy prosecuting a barber for daring to re-open his business to be concerned with actual assaults like the one below.

Update: Turns out he set up his phone to video himself beating the man, then posted it on-line.  And he's done this several times before!  Here's a link to show you.  It uses Bing because Google doesn't give any results.  That tells you something.

A very articulate black male says this is intolerable.  Read the comments.

He is talking about this video.

NEW: Police have arrested a man for allegedly beating an elderly man in a nursing home in Detroit, Michigan, after videos of the incident surfaced online.

***Warning: Graphic Content***#homenursingpic.twitter.com/ZlOGHgsQAd

— Ben Suliman (@mgotoo16) May 22, 2020

Dem Swalwell knew 53 witnesses had NO evidence, yet tweets that he still believes the FBI

Eric Swalwell is a Democrat congress-creep from the Dem-ruled state of California.  He's a member of the Democrat-run House Intelligence committee.

That committee investigated the Dems' claim that Trump "colluded with Russia" to steal the 2016 election from Hilliary.  To do this they called 53 witnesses who had appeared on CNN and MSNBC claiming to have "certain knowledge" that this had in fact happened.

Every single witness had appeared on CNN and MSNBC--some of them scores of times--claiming he or she had "certain, solid evidence" that Trump had "colluded with Russia" to steal the election.  But when put under oath, behind closed doors in secret testimony, a totally weird thing happened--so weird you won't believe it.

Every single witness--every one of the 53 called by the Dem-ruled committee--witnesses they were confident would provide "certain, solid evidence" of "collusion"--said they had NO evidence at all.

Isn't that weird?  In front of the cameras they said "I have certain evidence of collusion."  But then when under oath, in secret testimony, they said the exact opposite.

Did you hear about that on the Lying Mainstream Media?  If so, did they tell you what that meant?  (Not that one needs to be told, but the Media was SO eager to ram "collusion" down our throats for years, that you might think that when not a single witness said they actually had "evidence," the media would be just as willing to report that, eh?

Hahahahahahahaha!  I see you just arrived on this planet!  Enjoy your visit!

Well...Swalwell had the GALL to jump on Twatter and say he didn't trust the acting director of national intelligence, who had just de-classified and released transcripts of most of the 53 Dem-picked witnesses saying "no, I didn't have any evidence of collusion."  Swalwell said "I trust the FBI, not the Director of National Intelligence."

Except the released transcripts showed that the committee Swalwell sat on--Adam Schiff's corrupt committee--had NO evidence of collusion.  The transcripts showed that beyond any dispute or doubt.  The Dems' entire claims had just been blown up, yet Swalwell was saying he didn't trust the DNI, Ric Grenell.  But the transcripts speak for themselves, and show that Swalwell and the Dems have been lying since the beginning.

But hey, Twatter lets Swalwell hang himself.  Fine by me.

So Ric Grenell--the guy who de-classified and released the transcripts showing Swalwell and the Dems were lying--blasted Swalwell:

I’m letting the public see more info. You are the one who worked to hide the information you didn’t like. You listened to multiple people in classified hearings say they had no evidence and yet go on TV and say the opposite. Transparency is now a must! https://t.co/C0pKnneuoh

— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) May 22, 2020

So finally, after three long years, the truth has come out.  Yet Swalwell still IMPLIES collusion, and that the FBI has been telling the truth all along--despite the texts showing they were plotting to try to block Trump and impeach him.

Of course you DID hear about all this, right?  Right?  Sure you did, cuz the media reported it, right?

No?  Wow, I'm...shocked.  Totally shocked.  This is my shocked face.

As election day approaches watch for the Dems to claim that there really WAS solid, certain evidence that Trump colluded with Russia, despite the truth revealed in the 53 transcripts.  And half of voters will believe 'em.

Top Dem leaders--in office forever: "This time we're gonna fix things! We promise!"

Stacey Abrams, who claims to be the rightful governor of Georgia...

Stacey Abrams Says She Will Step Down As Governor If Asked To Run For VP https://t.co/XqKUVg1DBv

— The Babylon Bee (@TheBabylonBee) May 21, 2020

ATLANTA, GA—Sitting at the governor's desk at the Georgia state capitol, Stacey Abrams told reporters she would step down from her governorship if asked to run for vice president.

"If Biden asks me to run, I'll need to focus on that full-time," she said. "As much as I love running this great state, if the country needs me, I'll be there."

A security guard patrolling the capitol building then entered the governor's office. "Come on, Stacey. Time to go. How many times do we have to have this talk?"

"Classic, Greg," she said, laughing. "He's a real jokester. Anyway, yes, if Biden decides he is not a racist and wants me to run, I'll be there, giving my all to make sure we win the White House. It will be tough, but I know the people of Georgia will understand why I need to leave them for a while to save this country."

"But really, you can't be here," the security guard said uncomfortably. "Don't make me drag you out of here again."

This only makes sense if you heard Stacey declare that she really is the rightful governor of her state (she lost by 50,000 votes).

Pelosi and House Dems slip a clause into "Heroes act" that would give illegals permanent amnesty

Pelosi and the House Democrats just finished passing a three-TRILLION-dollar "stimulus package", over and above the two-TRILLION package passed a few weeks ago.

Yay Democrats, right?  Cuz this will give an extra $12,000 per year to people the Dems are wanting to pull onto their plantation.

Okay, fair enough:  The idea of bribing low-information voters to vote for a party, by giving 'em "free" stuff (Ha!) is at least 100 years old.  But now the Dems have found a new twist:  They've inserted a provision that would give AMNESTY to any illegal alien in the U.S. on the date the bill is signed into law, provided the illegal works in a "critical infrastructure labor or services."

Ah, you mean like designing nuclear reactors or spaceflight components?

Well, not quite:  The Dems put in a clause that would give permanent amnesty to all illegals working in any aspect of the food industry.  Literally, any aspect.

(Source: https://twitter.com/HomelandKen/status/1260582986065510401/photo/1)

By the way:  Twatter doesn't want you to know about this.  How do we know that?  Because someone posted on Twatter a great clip from Tucker Carlson accurately summarizing the provision explicitly stated on the above pages (1737 and 1738 of the 1,800-page monstrosity) of the Dems' ghastly bill.

Twatter put that clip behind the "We won't let you see this unless you specifically click here, cuz it might 'trigger' you delicate snowflakes."  

Ah, thanks, communists at Twatter.  Cuz we sure wouldn't want Americans to know the fucking TRUTH about an explicit provision that the rat-bastard Democrat leadership quietly put in the last 4 percent of the pages of their monstrous bill, eh?

Oh NO, citizen, can't have THAT, right?  You don't need to know what they've tried to slip past ya, cuz that would...trigger you.  And who wants to be triggered, right?

Tucker On How Pelosi's Bill Prioritizes Foreign Workers Over Americans

"American health care workers laid off, now they could be replaced by foreigners willing to work for less. We don't have to guess if that that could happen, it's happened throughout American industries." pic.twitter.com/y7Hwa91m5s

— The Columbia Bugle 🇺🇸 (@ColumbiaBugle) May 13, 2020

 

Now, no one is saying "We should deport all illegal alien guest workers," but rather "Is it reasonable to give them permanent amnesty?"  If you're a Democrat, the answer is a resounding yes.

By the way, here's what passes for logic with Pelosi:

“The Supreme Court ruled that children, undocumented children should have a right to education in our country. Why not then should citizens’ children, children in taxpayers’ families, not have the opportunity to the checks that they need?” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said on a press call this month.

Of course, citizen!  "Why not, then..."  Wow, where have we heard this before?  Wait, that's it: the founder of communism, Karl Marx, had a famous saying that he said justified taking anything from producers and giving it to...others.  How did that go?  Oh yeah:

"From each according to his ability, TO each according to his need."

Media: HCQ doesn't work!! Yet back in 2005 some U.S. team found it worked on SARS

Once Trump mentioned a drug called hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) as a "possible game changer" for the chinese virus, the Lying Mainstream Media immediately began ridiculing it as not only not effective, but actually horribly, terribly DANGEROUS. 

Fauci agreed, saying no evidence of help AT ALL, and instead pushed a new antiviral being developed by Gilead--which appeared likely to cost thousands of dollars per treatment.  Fauci mentioned the company by name, praising it, so many times that one wonders if he has a beneficial interest in it.

An opthamologist at University of Virginia collected the names of some VA patients who'd been given the drug, and claimed no benefit.  The media called this absurd collection a "study" and claimed the drug was now thoroughly discredited.  Then they smugly congratulate themselves on another successful anti-Trump mission.

Now we find that in 2005 some quack outfit actually ran tests on a related drug, chloroquine, and found this:

Chloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS CoV in cell culture. Favorable inhibition of virus spread was observed when the cells were either treated with chloroquine prior to or after SARS CoV infection.

Gosh, what outfit would have the brazen temerity to disagree with Fauci, eh?  Oh yeah: it was the NIH--National Institutes of Health...the same NIH Fauci works for.  Hmmm....

And let me add here that HCQ is both safer and more effective than chloroquine.  Hmmm...

Meet the non-MD who's the director of public health for LA county

The person below is the Public Health Director of Los Angeles County, Barbara Ferrer.  Her salary is $465,000 per year--more than the president of the United States.

 

Many of you would think the director of public health should be an M.D., but Ferrer isn't.  But she goes by "Doctor" because she has a PhD in "social welfare."  And in California and other states run by moronic Democrat dictators, that's a perfect qualification to be selected as "health director."

Not surprisingly, Ferrer totally supports the mayor of LA, who decreed that he would keep the city lockdown in place "until a vaccine is proven and widely available." 

Of course both the mayor and Ferrer have never missed a taxpayer-funded paycheck.  Unlike ordinary working stiffs.  So they have absolutely no hesitation to keep the lockdown on for another year.

Of course all they need to do is keep it on thru election day.

Details here.

NY Times: "'Believe *all* women' is a right-wing trap!" Seriously!

Way WAY back in the dim, distant past--2019--Democrats were determined to block the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court.  Their weapon of choice was the claim by one Christine Blasey Ford that the nominee had "assaulted" her decades earlier at a party.

Ford claimed the alleged "assault" consisted, in its entirety, of Kavanaugh jumping on top of her on a bed, with both fully clothed, then rolling off.  That was the entire claim.

Ford claimed another male was in the room, but couldn't recall who it was with certainty.

She also could't recall the year, or who hosted the party.  She didn't tell anyone about the alleged "assault" at the time, though she claimed several of her friends would confirm her story.  None did, and in fact two testified that they didn't believe her current claim.

But Democrats had two powerful weapons on their side:  The Lying Mainstream Media, and social media.  Both quickly started pushing some variation of the theme "We must believe all women" who claimed to have been victims of sexual assault.

But that was way WAY back in 2019.  Now the Left is pushing a far more...nuanced demand:  They're telling you to Believe all women, unless a woman accuses a Democrat.  Conservatives noted that this represented a huge, hypocritical reversal of the position they'd relentlessly screamed at us for months just a few months earlier.

Because this was so obviously true, the Left began to see a few people straying off their plantation, and realized they needed some damage control, stat.  So yesterday the NY Times jumped in with the New Narrative:  "Believe all women," read the headline of the Times piece, is a "right-wing TRAP!"

Really, that was their headline on a piece by militant feminist Susan Faludi, author of “Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women.”  When Faludi makes a declaration of the position of feminists, that's as authoratitive a statement of the position of Leftists and feminists as it gets.

Here's the opening graf of Faludi's propaganda piece:

Joe Biden has been accused of sexual assault, and conservatives are having a field day, exultant that they’ve caught feminists in a new hypocrisy trap. A woman, with no corroboration beyond contemporaneous accounts, charges a powerful man with a decades-old crime? Hmm, doesn’t that sound mighty close to Christine Blasey Ford’s complaint against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh?

"With no corroboration beyond contemporaneous accounts," eh?  Except that's one of the many things missing from the claims Ford made against Kavanaugh.  Ford didn't tell anyone at the time, nor in the decades between the time she claims Kavanaugh assaulted her and 2019.  By contrast, the woman who has accused Biden told several friends and family members at the time (1993).  This is confirmed by a court filing from 1996.  Does Faludi seriously believe the accuser set a trap for Biden that she waited 27 years to spring?

Even a deranged propagandist like Faludi can't seriously believe that, yet Faludi summarizes the charge against Biden as "mighty close to Christine Blasey Ford’s complaint against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh." 

In fact, “Believe All Women” does have an asterisk:  It’s never been feminist “boilerplate.” What we are witnessing is another instance of the right decrying what it imagines the American women’s movement to be.

Spend some mind-numbing hours tracking the origins of “Believe All Women” on social media sites and news databases...and you’ll discover how language, like a virus, can mutate overnight. All of a sudden, yesterday’s quotes suffer the insertion of some foreign DNA that makes them easy to weaponize. In this case, that foreign intrusion is a word: “all.”

Except that even the Womens' March organization used the hashtag #BelieveALLsurvivors.  But Faludi blythely ignores that...because she and she alone determines whether a use of that hashtag is "authentic."

Great trick, eh?  'I have given myself the authority to tell you the real position of feminists, cuz reasons.'

Oh, and about those "mind-numbing hours" poor Faludi spent looking for the origins of that awful, right-wing-trap phrase "Believe ALL women"?  One wonders where Faludi was looking, because she missed this from the very paper that runs most of her propaganda.  Here's the Times on November 28th of 2017:

And hasn’t the hunt been exhilarating? There’s no small chance that by the time you finish this article, another mammoth beast of prey, maybe multiple, will be stalked and felled.

The huntresses’ war cry — “believe all women” — has felt like a bracing corrective to a historic injustice. It has felt like a justifiable response to a system in which the crimes perpetrated against women — so intimate, so humiliating and so unlike any other — are so very difficult to prove. 

Yeah, Faludi, you spent lots of hours "looking for the origins" of "Believe ALL women" and concluded it was all a right-wing plot, eh?  Obviously you weren't trying very hard.

BTW, the author of that piece--Bari Weiss--blythely wrote that it didn't bother her or her feminist comrades in the slightest if "a few good men" were destroyed by false claims of assault--because that was simply what she and her comrades viewed as "justice."  Really.

Faludi comes by her warped worldview ('reality is what I say it is') honestly.  Her father--from whom she was estranged for 25 years, had a sex-change operation late in life.  Faludi clearly hated the guy, and explained her feelings in 6,000 words in the Times three years ago.  The piece was titled "In my world photographs lie," and much of her sad lament comes from the shocking revelation that...wait for it...lots of photos are...are you sitting down?...posed.

Do ya think her f-d-up relationship with her father had anything to do with her worldview, or the many articles and books she's written embracing the bitter, man-hating views of far too many on the Left?  Read her own words and decide.

It's clear to anyone who reads her article about her dad that Faludi comes to her warped worldview honestly.  I wouldn't wish her experiences--or those of her extended family--on anyone.  But readers deciding whether to believe her should know her...unique outlook.

Finally, if you want to see how deftly the Left re-writes history when they're caught lying, read the comments to yesterday's Times piece--in which Faludi claims no one on the Left EVER claimed we should "Believe ALL women."  Commenters are now claiming that even if one or two non-authoratitive Dems MAY have used that hashtag--without official permission from headquarters, of course--that was NEVER what they actually, y'know, meant.  Oh no no no, citizen!  What "BelieveWomen" actually meant was simply that all women who claimed to have been assaulted have the right to be heard.  Meaning Democrats will graciously allow accusers the right of free speech, but will demand that any such claims be diligently, thoroughly investigated.

Ah!  Just as they're doing with the claims against Biden?

Oh, wait...they're blocking any serious investigation.  Instead, the Times proposed that the unbiased, diligent, fair, non-partisan investigation be done by...the Democrat National Committee.

Seriously, that's what the Times proposed.  Cuz who better to investigate claims against the Dem Party's presidential nominee than that party's national committee, eh?  Sure, makes perfect sense.