If all mourners attending George Floyd’s funeral are truly there to pay him their last respects, they should forgo all self-aggrandizing publicity allowing his loved ones to give him the dignified Christian burial he deserves
Publicity seekers will use the sad occasion of the George Floyd funeral for self-aggrandizing publicity—and his bereaved family should not allow it.
Publicity hounds of every color, every ideology should be forced to respect the Floyd funeral.
George Floyd funeral should be all about him and not them
George Floyd’s funeral, intended by his loved ones as his an earnest last farewell, is an occasion where all attendees should only be there to pay their last respects to the man whose death sparked worldwide protests, and to pray sincerely that he Rest in Peace.
In other words, the George Floyd funeral should be all about him and not them.
All potential Scene Stealers like Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, shown in viral videos “sobbing uncontrollably” over the coffin of the man tragically killed while in Minneapolis police custody, should be held at bay.
All egos should be left outside the church door before stepping inside
All egos—including those of election-bound Democrats like Joe Biden—should be left outside the church door before stepping inside.
Past experience has taught us how far political publicity hounds will go in calling attention back to themselves rather than allowing it to focus on the one being mourned.
At the Dec. 10, 2013 Nelson Mandela Memorial, a ‘selfie’ of then President Barack Obama, with then British Prime Minister David Cameron and Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, which went viral over the Internet, was the big takeaway.
The Memorial, held at the 95,000-seat FNB Stadium was only two-thirds full “because of the cold, rain and transport challenges “ (Wikipedia)
Obama selfie that travelled the globe
“Only crass, publicity seeking politicians show their grief with selfies.” (Canada Free Press, Dec. 11, 2013)
“In the Obama selfie that travelled the globe, a sour-pussed Michelle Obama can be seen in the backdrop.
“Another photo depicts Michelle, who changed seats separating her husband from his “new friend” having her hand kissed by Barack Obama.”
All of this during a Nelson Mandela’s official Memorial!
‘Obama Behind Bars in Robben Island Prison’
“A photo of Obama tweeted by the White House on Dec. 5 in response to Nelson Mandela’s death had been taken six months earlier at the Robben Island prison where Mandela spent 18 of his 27 years imprisoned. (CFP)
“You can call ‘Obama Behind Bars in Robben Island Prison’ Obama’s prepper picture.
“While America is being held in an ObamaCare stranglehold, blood pressure shot up when a photo of Obama shaking Cuban President Raul Castro’s hand went viral on the Net yesterday. As that photo was still burning its way through public resentment, came the selfie of Obama with Cameron and Thorning-Schmidt.
“The Obama-Castro handshake photo made room for morons like CNN’s Chris Cuomo to cash in on publicity by declaring that the handshake was really “the spirit of reconciliation”:
“The handshake was obviously a huge moment,” Cuomo said. “But not to be misunderstood, the handshake with Raul Castro, the president of Cuba, we believe was President Obama showing respect to Nelson Mandela and the occasion of today—the spirit of reconciliation”.
There is still time for the family of George Floyd to keep publicity hounds in check at his Tuesday funeral
There is still time for the family of George Floyd to keep publicity hounds in check at his Tuesday funeral.
‘George Floyd will be laid to rest in Houston, Texas. (ABC News, June 2, 2020.)
“Family, friends and supporters of George Floyd will honor his memory in three cities starting on Thursday.
“The first memorial service will be on June 4 in Minneapolis at North Central University’s Frank J. Lindquist Sanctuary, where Rev. Al Sharpton will deliver a “national eulogy” and one of the Floyd family attorneys, Ben Crump, will give a “national criminal justice address.”
“Another memorial service will be held on June 6 in Raeford, North Carolina, the state where Floyd was born, at Cape Fear Conference B Headquarters.
“The celebration of life services will head to Houston, Texas, where Floyd had previously lived, on June 8. A public visitation will occur at The Fountain of Praise on Hillcroft Avenue from noon to 6 p.m. local time.
“A private funeral service will be held at the same location on June 9 at 11 a.m. local time, which former Vice President Joe Biden is expected to attend.”
Meanwhile, If all mourners attending George Floyd’s funeral are truly there to pay him their last respects, they should forgo all self-aggrandizing publicity allowing his loved ones to give him the dignified Christian burial he deserves.
Yesterday the new black panderers organized a million Antifa march with the Black Lives Matter crowd in Washington DC. Unfortunately, they fell approximately 990,000 people short of the million person goal; only about 10,000 marchers present.
The window of exploitation & opportunity is closing even faster than we expected.
Not surprisingly the media hyped the thousands that did attend resulting in a skewed reality that was/is disconnected from the actual result. In media you would think there was a massive alignment of social interests. However, if you look at the reception rate for the message, there’s a big disconnect.
Again, as previously noted, the downstream reception rate, the people who receive the message, take action on the message and/or join in the amplification of the message; much like the protest attendance rate, was very small considering the scale of the push.
We can debate what is creating the disconnect, but the chasm is undeniable. People are just not as organically tuned-in as the media would have you believe they are. The efforts of the social influencers are not yielding results; and you can see this reality in the way the media is increasingly desperate to keep pushing the messaging.
“Defund The Police” is not working outside the most severe leftist woke groups.
Perhaps people are burned-out with the constant demand for outrage; or perhaps people have caught-on to the manipulation. I’m not sure what specifically is driving the lack of engagement; but people are just going on with their lives while the constant drumbeat of shouting voices is being blasted at them. The drumbeat is loud, perhaps one of the loudest ever, but the drumbeat is also astroturf and not organic. This appears to be part of the reason for the disconnect.
You could hold a free pizza party in DC on a weekend day and get more attendance than yesterday’s audience. The Philadelphia march was large but fizzled quick. The New York march fizzled even faster… folks are simply moving on. This has to be very frustrating for the astroturf organizers. They have every corporate and institutional apparatus in alignment right now, but there’s a shortage of people purchasing the program.
If you only looked at mainstream media you probably wouldn’t notice it; but if you dig down beyond the parts that are being forcibly pushed to “trending” status by the social-media engineers you’ll quickly see the facade. It’s a Potemkin narrative.
Here’s where it gets really interesting. The designers of the movement have been clearly following a script and a schedule. After we watched the Ben Crump interview last week the schedule was clear. The national script was supposed to culminate in coordination with the Floyd funeral schedule. However, funeral #2 (Saturday) was a total flop.
Joe Biden is heading to Houston Texas for funeral #3. A viewing on Monday and the final funeral/memorial service on Tuesday. Biden’s attendance was predictable; however, even that is now sketchy and shows evidence of campaign failure:
(Reuters) – Democratic U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden will travel to Houston on Monday and meet with the family of George Floyd, two weeks after Floyd’s death in police custody triggered nationwide protests over racial injustice, aides said.
Biden is expected to offer his sympathies to Floyd’s relatives and record a video message for the private funeral service scheduled to take place on Tuesday in Floyd’s hometown of Houston, two aides said. He is not expected to attend the service to avoid any disruption to mourners that could be caused by his Secret Service protective detail. (read more)
Ignore the silly ‘secret service’ justification for not attending the service on Tuesday. The campaign should be embarrassed for even attempting that. If there was political value in the appearance, the campaign would shove his ass in the room. “secret service disruption”? Too funny. Laugh-Out-Loud, child’ please. As if the DNC would care about disrupting funeral services when there are votes to be gained. That’s precious, right there.
James Clyburn is the ringmaster.
Clyburn is working with Sharpton, Crump, 2-J’s and the new black panderers to position Biden for maximum racial grievance and political value. Funeral disrupting? Again, too funny.
So, despite the fact he is literally there, in Houston, meeting the family for the first time at the end of a week-long national tour; Joe Biden is going to “record a video message” Monday to play at the funeral Tuesday? Weird.
Either: (A) Joe’s backsliding on the cognitive issues again and they need to control the optics of speech via editing; or (B), the video is needed because the campaign needs something, anything, to extract from the event that can be used to stir up the AME church network later on; or (C) part of the pre-plan has failed to come through; or (D) All of it.
[I vote “D”]
The Clyburn plan; and please don’t forget James Clyburn is the campaign manager and in total control of every aspect of everything; would likely have Biden meeting up with Obama and Bush in Houston. The optics of ‘national healing’ and ‘political unity’ only made possible by Joe Biden was the goal.
The three panderers seated at the front of the final farewell show is the best optic; and most useful for corporate media to shape and push. Everything was going in that direction until today. Doing something less than optimal politics means something has changed.
Maybe the private polling around four funerals and a national grievance tour has shown signs of backlash. Maybe the lack of organic interest has rung some alarm bells.
Perhaps the American people seeing thousands of people protesting while they cannot hold funerals for their loved-ones, open their businesses. or attend their own churches has found its way to the attention of those who review optics. Dunno, but something’s up.
The earlier racist comment by Joe Biden about if you don’t support him “you ain’t black”, could very well be a much bigger issue than the alliance is willing to admit. That would not surprise me at all…. Combine that with the ridiculous “Defund The Police” nonsense, and there’s two big roadblocks to any organic mass political movement.
Even limo-liberals eventually wonder: if you take away the police, who is Karen going to call when she only gets nine nuggets in her 10-piece happy meal?
What is clear, very clear, is the window of opportunity is closing fast; and so far, other than some very woke symbolism, the crew who coordinated this – has gained very little from it.
.
The internal racism within the “people of color” coalition was always the inherent problem for Obama, Eric Holder and Tom Perez (Team BLM), because the Nation of Islam and New Black Panther Party absolutely dislike Latinos.
Latinos lean heavily Christian; while the radical NoI and NBPP elements who agreed to align within the BLM movement are heavily influenced by Islam. This is why there are two internal black coalitions. BLM is influenced by Islam, while the AME coalition is Christian.
The media, especially the political media, are never allowed to talk about the internal ideologies behind the two camps: Team Obama (BLM – Islam) and Team Clyburn (AME – Christian); but the issues are very real and keeping the coalition together is not easy.
Watching Al Sharpton (AME team) deliver his racial narrative to the Minneapolis funeral audience last Thursday, but team BLM removing him before funeral #2 on Saturday in North Carolina, is a reflection of how important and tenuous the dynamic really is.
The BLM foot-soldiers do not like the lack of purity within the Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton messaging. Two-J’s and Sharptongue are both old-school AME members where religious worship kneels at the altar of money. The DNC has the same objective, ergo historically the DNC and AME were in alignment. .
Those behind the BLM network are more ideological and they see the AME’s lust for money as a risk. It’s a weird interplay and ultimately that’s why the two factions keep splitting apart.
Floyd family lawyer, Benjamin Crump, is more AME than he is BLM. Al Sharpton was Crump’s mentor going all the way back to the Martin Lee Anderson case in 2006. But at the same time Crump, Clyburn and by extension Joe Biden, needs the BLM foot-soldiers to drum the social justice message in order to achieve maximum impact.
Bottom line – the Minneapolis opportunists, specifically the Muslim community, will benefit from the current anti-police narrative. The Somali Muslim community wants Sharia-enforcement officers instead of traditional law enforcement. Ergo the Ellison/Omar agenda will benefits from recent events.
However, beyond the local benefit, the new BLM/AME alliance does not seem to be moving the national needle. If you look closely it appears more and more people have caught on to the unspoken and divisive agenda.
The long standing issues between Latinos and Blacks is an important angle to watch; especially with 2020 Democrat candidate Joe Biden going down on his knees in favor of the BLM/AME network.
There is a risk 2020 Democrats might lose more Latinos than they will gain amid blacks.
This type of political calculation based on identity politics always carries a risk. We could be seeing -once again- the outcome of what happens when political ideology intersects with a very divided assembly of special interests.
U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr appears on CBS Face The Nation earlier today to discuss recent events. CBS’s primary narrative engineer Margaret Brennan was determined to advance several false media reports as the attorney general slapped them down.
Ms. Brennan was determined to stay argumentative and combative and was not happy that AG Bill Barr deconstructed her false talking points. The overall agenda for the media this weekend is to enhance a divisive narrative; and Ms. Brennan has her role to play.
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Earlier this morning I went to the Justice Department to speak with Attorney General Bill Barr. In his role as the nation’s top law enforcement officer, he used the full force of the federal government, including agents from the FBI, ATF, Border Patrol, Bureau of Prisons and the Drug Enforcement Administration to assist the National Guard and local police in an effort to end the violence and looting that happened earlier in the week in Washington. Sixteen hundred active-duty troops were also put on standby.
MARGARET BRENNAN: A senior administration official told our CBS’ David Martin, that in a meeting at the White House on Monday morning, the President demanded that ten thousand active-duty troops be ordered into American streets. Is that accurate?
WILLIAM BARR (U.S. Attorney General): No, that’s completely false. That’s completely false. Sunday night–
MARGARET BRENNAN: The President did not demand that?
WILLIAM BARR: No, he did not demand that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: What happened?
WILLIAM BARR: I came over on– on Monday morning for a meeting. The night before had been the most violent, as one of the police officials told us, the DC police, it was the most violent day in Washington in thirty years, something that the media has not done a very good job of covering. And there had been a– a riot right along Lafayette Park. I was called over and asked if I would coordinate federal civil agencies and that the Defense Department would provide whatever support I needed or we needed to protect federal property federal– at the White House, federal personnel. The decision was made to have at the ready and on hand in the vicinity some regular troops. But everyone agreed that the use of regular troops as a last resort and that as long as matters can be controlled with other resources, they should be. I felt, and the Secretary of Defense felt, we had adequate resources and wouldn’t need to use federal troops. But in case we did we wanted them nearby.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So what–
WILLIAM BARR: There was never– the President never asked or suggested that we needed to deploy regular troops at that point. It’s been done from time to time in our history. We try to avoid it and I’m happy that we were able to avoid it on this occasion.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So there were active duty troops put on standby. They were not deployed. The 82nd Airborne was put on standby–
WILLIAM BARR: So the–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –but not sent into the streets.
WILLIAM BARR: Some 82nd Airborne military police were brought into the area. But they were not brought into DC.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. So what part– I just want to make sure that we’re precise here, what part of that conversation, as it’s been relayed to CBS and to other news organizations, is false? Did the President not demand active duty troops? Did–
WILLIAM BARR: Well, your question to me just a moment ago was, did he demand them on the streets, did he demand them in DC? No, we had them on standby in case they were needed.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. Which they were put on standby. They were not deployed.
WILLIAM BARR: Right.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So in our reporting, we were also told that you, the Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and General Milley, all opposed the idea of actually deploying these active-duty troops onto the streets. Is that accurate?
WILLIAM BARR: I think our position was common, which was that they should only be– be deployed if– as a last resort and that we didn’t think we would need them. Every– I think everyone was on the same page.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think that the President has the authority to unilaterally send in active-duty troops if the governors oppose it?
WILLIAM BARR: Oh, absolutely. The– under the anti-Insurrection Act, the– the President can use regular troops to suppress rioting. The Confederate– the Confederacy in our country opposed the use of federal troops to restore order and suppress an insurrection. So the federal government sometimes doesn’t listen to governors in certain circumstances.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The last time that this has happened was the L.A. riots in 1992 when the governor of California asked for active-duty troops.
WILLIAM BARR: That’s correct.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re saying your understanding and the law, as you interpret it and would support is that the President has the ability to put active-duty troops on American streets, even if governors object?
WILLIAM BARR: It’s happened numerous times. And the answer to that is yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You would support that?
WILLIAM BARR: Well, it depends on the circumstances. I was involved in the L.A. riots and the Rodney King matter. We tried to use non-military forces. I sent two thousand federal law enforcement officers out there in one day, but it was overwhelming. And the National Guard couldn’t handle it and Governor Pete Wilson asked for federal troops.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And he asked for them.
WILLIAM BARR: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s a key distinction.
WILLIAM BARR: Or he approved the use of federal troops, but those troops were on standby as well.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because I think a number of people would be surprised to hear and it’s been reported that you opposed sending in active duty troops on principle. You’re saying you would support it?
WILLIAM BARR: As a last resort.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So in this Monday meeting with the President, when the Defense Secretary, who has now publicly said that he opposed using the Insurrection Act, you said what to the President?
WILLIAM BARR: I don’t think the Secretary of Defense said he opposed it. I think he said that it was a last resort; he didn’t think it was necessary. I think we all agree that it’s a last resort, but it’s, ultimately, the President’s decision. The– the reporting is completely false on this.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you believe there is systemic racism in law enforcement?
WILLIAM BARR: I think there’s racism in the United States still but I don’t think that the law enforcement system is systemically racist. I understand the– the distrust, however, of the African-American community given the history in this country. I think we have to recognize that for most of our history, our institutions were explicitly racist. Since the 1960s, I think we’ve been in a phase of reforming our institutions and making sure that they’re in sync with our laws and aren’t fighting a rearguard action to impose inequities.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you think that’s working?
WILLIAM BARR: I think– I think the reform is a difficult task, but I think it is working and progress has been made. I think one of the best examples is the military. The military used to be explicitly racist institution. And now I think it’s in the vanguard of– of bringing the races together and providing equal opportunity. I think law enforcement has been going through the same process.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think there should be some tweaking of the rules, reduced immunity to go after some of the bad cops?
WILLIAM BARR: I don’t think you need to reduce immunity to– to go after the bad cops, because that would result certainly in– in police pulling back. It’s, you know, policing is the toughest job in the country. And I– and I, frankly, think that we have generally the vast, overwhelming majority of police are good people. They’re civic-minded people who believe in serving the public. They do so bravely. They do so righteously.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But the bad cops.
WILLIAM BARR: I– I think that there are instances of bad cops. And I think we have to be careful about automatically assuming that the actions of an individual necessarily mean that their organization is rotten. All organizations have people who engage in misconduct, and you sometimes have to be careful as to when you ascribe that to the whole organization and when it really is some errant member who isn’t following the rules.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But doesn’t the opening the pattern-or-practice investigation into a place like Minneapolis where there are questions about the broader issues with policing, it wasn’t just the one officer, wouldn’t that answer that question?
WILLIAM BARR: Well, that’s exactly the reaction that I think has been a problem in the past, which is it just, again, just reacting to this incident by immediately putting the department under investigation doesn’t necessarily result in– in improving the situation. But I would say that in the first instance, the governor has announced an investigation of the police department. The governor, Governor Walz, a Democratic governor, is investigating the police department. The attorney general of– of Minnesota is looking into the police department. We stand ready to act if we think it’s necessary. But I don’t think necessarily starting a– a pattern-or-practice investigation at this stage is warranted. Another thing is we have to look at some of the evidence. I mean, people, you know, the fact is that the criminal justice system at both the state and the federal level moved instantaneously on this. And we moved quickly with our investigation. But we still have to look into what kind of use of force policies are used in that department, what the training has been and things like that. That’s not something we can do overnight.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Coming up after our break, the attorney general tells us about the forcible clearing of Lafayette Park ahead of the President’s visit there on Monday. Also, I want to make sure to note that CBS News stands by our David Martin’s reporting. And we want to clarify here that the Secretary of Defense Esper does oppose the Insurrection Act. You can hear for yourself.
MARK ESPER: I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’ll be back in one minute.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’re back now with more from Attorney General William Barr.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about some of the events of the week. On Monday, Lafayette Park was cleared of protesters. You’ve spoken about this. The federal agents who were there report up to you. Did you think it was appropriate for them to use smoke bombs, tear gas, pepper balls, projectiles at what appeared to be peaceful protesters?
WILLIAM BARR: They were not peaceful protesters. And that’s one of the big lies that the– the media is– seems to be perpetuating at this point.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Three of my CBS colleagues were there. We talked to them.
WILLIAM BARR: Yeah.
MARGARET BRENNAN: They did not hear warnings. They did not see protesters–
WILLIAM BARR: There were three warnings.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –throwing anything.
WILLIAM BARR: There were three warnings given. But– but let’s get back to why we took that action. On Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, okay, there were violent riots in– at Lafayette Park where the park police were under constant attack at the– behind their bike rack fences. On Sunday, things reached a crescendo. The officers were pummeled with bricks. Crowbars were used to pry up the pavers at the park and they were hurled at police. There were fires set in not only St. John’s Church, but a historic building at Lafayette was burned down.
MARGARET BRENNAN: These were things that looters did.
WILLIAM BARR: Not looters, these were– these were the– the violent rioters who were dominated Lafayette Park.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But what I’m asking about–
WILLIAM BARR: They broke into the Treasury Department–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –on Monday when it was a peaceful protest.
WILLIAM BARR: I’m going to– let me– let me get to this, because this has been totally obscured by the media. They broke into the Treasury Department, and they were injuring police. That night–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Sunday night?
WILLIAM BARR: Sunday night, the park police prepared a plan to clear H Street and put a– a larger perimeter around the White House so they could build a more permanent fence on Lafayette.
MARGARET BRENNAN: This is something you approved on Sunday night?
WILLIAM BARR: No. The Park Police on their own on– on Sunday night determined this was the proper approach. When I came in Monday, it was clear to me that we did have to increase the perimeter on that side of Lafayette Park and push it out one block. That decision was made by me in the morning. It was communicated to all the police agencies, including the Metropolitan Police at 2:00 PM that day. The– the effort was to move the perimeter one block and it had to be done when we had enough people in place to achieve that. And that decision, as I say, was communicated to the police at 2:00 PM. The operation was run by the Park Police.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Mm-Hm.
WILLIAM BARR: The Park Police was facing what they considered to be a very rowdy and a non-compliant crowd. And there were projectiles being hurled at the police. And at that point, it was not to respond–
MARGARET BRENNAN: On Monday, you’re saying there were projectiles–
WILLIAM BARR: On Monday, yes, there were.
MARGARET BRENNAN: As I’m saying, three of my colleagues were there.
WILLIAM BARR: Yeah.
MARGARET BRENNAN: They did not see projectiles being thrown–
WILLIAM BARR: I was there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –when that happened.
WILLIAM BARR: I was there. They were thrown. I saw them thrown.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you believe that what the Park Police did using tear gas and projectiles was appropriate?
WILLIAM BARR: Here’s– here’s what the media is missing. This was not an operation to respond to that particular crowd. It was an operation to move the perimeter one block.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And the methods they used you think were appropriate, is that what you’re saying?
WILLIAM BARR: When they met resistance, yes. They announced three times. They didn’t move. By the way, there was no tear gas used. The tear gas was used Sunday when they had to clear H Street to allow the fire department to come in to save St. John’s Church. That’s when tear gas was used.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There were chemical irritants the Park Police has said–
WILLIAM BARR: No, they were not chemical irritants. Pepper spray is not a chemical irritant. It’s not chemical.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Pepper spray, you’re saying is what was used–
WILLIAM BARR: Pepper balls. Pepper balls.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, and you believe that was appropriate. What I want to show you is what a lot of people at home who were watching this on television saw and their perception of events. I want you to see what the public at home saw.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I am your president of law and order and an ally of all peaceful protesters. But In recent days, our nation has been gripped by professional anarchists, violent mobs, arsonists, looters, criminals, rioters, Antifa and others. A number of state and local governments–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So while the President is saying that he appreciates peaceful protest, around the same time, this crowd–
WILLIAM BARR: Well, six minutes– six minutes difference there I would say.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, around the same time the area is being cleared of what appear to be peaceful protesters using some force. And after the speech is finished, the President then walked out of the White House to the same area where the protesters had been and stands for photo op in front of the church where the protesters had been. These events look very connected to people at home. In an environment where the broader debate is about heavy-handed use of force and law enforcement, was that the right message for Americans to be receiving?
WILLIAM BARR: Well, the message is sometimes communicated by the media. I didn’t see any video being played on the media of what was happening Friday, Saturday, and Sunday–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But– but this confluence of events–
WILLIAM BARR: All I heard– all I heard was comments about how peaceful protesters were. I didn’t hear about the fact that there were hundred and fifty law enforcement officers injured and many taken to the hospital with concussions. So it wasn’t a peaceful protest. We had to get control over Lafayette Park, and we had to do it as soon as we were able to do that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you understand how these events appear connected? The timing of this–
WILLIAM BARR: Well, it’s the job of the media to tell the truth. They were not connected.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, this is what I’m asking you. Did you know when you gave the green light for these actions to be taken that the President was going to be going in that very same area for a photo op?
WILLIAM BARR: I gave the green light at two o’clock. Obviously, I didn’t know that the President was going to be speaking later that day.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You had no idea?
WILLIAM BARR: No. No, I did not.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you see–
WILLIAM BARR: The go ahead was given at two o’clock. And to do it as soon as we were able to do it, to move the perimeter from– from H Street to I Street.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re both Catholic. I know you’re observant. You’re a devout Catholic. Archbishop Gregory of Washington condemned what happened by gassing peaceful protesters.
WILLIAM BARR: There– there was no gas.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is– is doing– is what we saw there doing what you meant when you were on that call with governors and you said to dominate the streets?
WILLIAM BARR: Mm-Hm.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that what law enforcement is supposed to be taking away from this?
WILLIAM BARR: No, on the contrary. My point to the governors and what I was saying was that it’s important when you’re dealing with civil disturbances to have adequate forces at hand and out.
A dozen years ago or there about, Bill Gates became worried about Climate Change and gave a TED talk on what the world had to do to save us from extinction. In that presentation Gates stated that one of the variables in his equation had to go to zero to stop Carbon Dioxide from killing all of us. Now keep in mind that Gates does not have any degrees and knows little about anything but making money with software. We do however recognize that he was very good at that but we must also understand that he had no formal training or studies in anything else.
Gates’ vision is a world with less than a billion people and probably closer to 500 million. This world will be very clean and use only solar PV or Wind to power this Utopian Dream. Everything will be perfect and safe for those that reside in that world. Dreams of that kind are neither practical nor doable but that never stops those that have these visions: like Karl Marx who also had a vision of a perfect world Marxism. Unfortunately that vision brought us WW I, WW II and the cold war and hundreds of millions of dead people, and Marxism has still not been eliminate as an evil system.
Gates has managed to merge Marxism, Environmentalism, Climate change and World health into one Political system using technology, which he is very good at, that makes George Orwell’s “1984” look like it was done by a rank amateur. If Gates even comes close to achieving his objectives we will be living in Hell!
President Trump was slammed by two US Defense Secretaries over threats to use Fed intervention against George Floyd riots. Current Sec. Defense Esper and former Sec. Defense Gen. Jim Mattis both hit Trump for referencing the Insurrection Act. Mattis, in midst of widespread looting, violence and murder, still blithely supports “protests” with Obama. The sly retired general even cited Nazis. Is Mattis a fair and unbiased warrior-king? Actually, Trump notedhis Dem Party leanings, before parting ways over the Iran Treaty. But the goal here is to humiliate Trump to cripple him during the Floyd riots so American Social Justice triumphs and Joe Biden prevails.
Defense Sec Esper: More Woke Than Rip Van Winkle?
By televised speech, obtuse Defense Sec. Esper rejected Trump’s threat of the Insurrection Act against urban rioting. Criticizing Floyd’s death, Esper stated the military opposed racism. But what of violence and deaths across America? Why publicly air opposition to Trump? Finally, don’t threats work better without stating they are unavailable? It’s unseemly for Esper to oppose Trump publicly. Amazingly, Esper claims the US Military exists to wipe out all hatred. Really?!!
…expressing our outrage at what happened, expressing our commitment to the Constitution, expressing our commitment as an institution to—to end racism and hatred in all its forms, and just a general expression with regard to what the department is about.”
GEN MATTIS: LEFTWING CHARACTER ASSASSIN
Gen ‘Cheapshot’ Mattis
Meanwhile, crusty military fossil Gen. Mattis gutshot Trump, claiming constitutional dangers of stateside military action. Yet, his essay is not persuasive. Does Mattis really oppose the US military saving women, children and men from assaults, arson and murder? Why is “allowing protests” the “right” choice when tens of thousands are in danger? Yet despite Mattis’ blase’ attitude, riots are causing “‘the most costly civil disorder in United States history.” With 10,000 arrests, violent attacks and murders, and economic loss in the billions. Mattis calls these a “small number of lawbreakers.”
Riots Continue
Yet, mobs still rage unimpeded across America as looting spirals amidst cityscapes bathed in flames. Frankly, in every liberal led city, the failure to deploy the National Guard has multiplied chaos and damage. But Mattis is dead wrong since the Insurrection Act was used in the Rodney King riots without harm. So if Mattis cares so much about America—Why doesn’t he mention all the national victims, some beaten or shot to death?
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the US in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
Mattis Simply Delivers Political Hit
Instead of constitutional crisis, Mattis highlights a policy disagreement, over Trump’s pro- American-safety standard versus Mattis’ Social Justice mirage. In fact, Republicans previously complained of “warrior” Mattis’ real liberalism. He abandons riot victims simply to score points with leftist buddies, like former Chief of Staff John Kelly, who backstabs Trump claiming we must “choose better candidates”—like Obama? Here are Mattis’ words:
I watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words “Equal Justice Under Law” are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand — one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values — our values as people and our values as a nation.
HISTORY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE
Roots of Woke Culture
So, what are the roots of “Social Justice”? Michael Rectenwald claims in “Springtime for Snowflakes: “Social Justice” and Its Postmodern Parentage”—“Social justice gestated within the university as postmodern theory ruled the roost. It was nursed during the Occupy movement and the Obama era.” And, “Contemporary social justice embodies postmodern theoretical notions as well as the latter’s adoption of Maoist and Stalinist disciplinary methods.”
““Social justice” has been mainly a religious conception, in the sense that it originated in religious circles, underwent a large part of its conceptual development in official statements of religious authorities, and has been adopted most enthusiastically by the members of religious organizations. Since 1931 it has been part of the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”
Hayek: Social Justice is a Meaningless Conception
F. A. wrote The Mirage of Social Justice, arguing Social Justice is an empty phrase. He states, “Everybody talks about social justice, but if you ask people exactly what they mean by social justice, what they accept as justice, nobody knows. I’ve been trying for the last twenty years, asking people ‘What exactly are your principles?’”
Likewise, when America’s highest ranking soldiers attempt to adopt Social Justice, they make a mockery of logic and become asinine public pests demanding all officials adopt their convictions. The US Military would be better served to adopt the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”—except when killing our enemies.
Alarge group of United Nations human rights “monitors” decided to exploit the horrific killing of George Floyd at the hands of a former policeman by accusing the United States of “systemic racism that produces state-sponsored racial violence, and licenses impunity for this violence.” These self-righteous blowhards asserted in their “Statement on the Protests against Systemic Racism in the United States” that “the problem is not a few bad apples, but instead the problem is the very way that economic, political and social life are structured in a country that prides itself in liberal democracy, and with the largest economy in the world.” They might as well have been on Joe Biden’s payroll as they accused President Trump of “using language directly associated with racial segregationists from the nation’s past” and threatening “more state violence.”
These Self-righteous blowhards asserted in their “Statement on the Protests against Systemic Racism in the United States”
Sadly, every country has its share of racists including, no doubt, the UN monitors’ own countries of origin. The United States is no exception. However, there is no “systemic racism” in the United States. Far from it. Americans elected an African-American as president twice with the strong support of white Americans. Major U.S. cities that have experienced both protests and riots in recent days have black mayors or police commissioners.
The good cops who put their lives on the line every day far outnumber the rogue cops. According to data for 2019 as compiled in a “mapping police violence” database, police killed 28 unarmed blacks. Of course, each case should be thoroughly investigated and the officers responsible held accountable for any wrongdoing. However, some perspective is needed here. In 2015, during the Obama administration, the number of police killings of unarmed blacks had reached 78, which is 2.78 times the 2019 number. The number of unarmed whites killed by police in 2019 was 51. In 2015, the number was 91, which is 1.57 times the 2019 number. The trend line is down for police killings of unarmed blacks and whites, but the downward trend for police killings of unarmed blacks is more pronounced. Also, it is worth noting that, according to statistics reported to the FBI, nearly six times as many white law enforcement officers (40) were killed as a result of felonious acts in line-of-duty incidents in 2019 than black officers (7).
“The protests the world is witnessing, are a rejection of the fundamental racial inequality and discrimination that characterize life in the United States for black people, and other people of color,” the UN human rights monitors declared in their statement. But their monitoring failed to distinguish between legitimate peaceful protests, which President Trump has supported, and the violence besetting cities across the United States perpetrated by extremists and opportunistic thieves.
Tendayi Achiume, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance
The thugs hijacking legitimate peaceful protests were responsible for killing a security officer with the Federal Protective Service. They killed a retired black police officer who was trying to provide security at a looted store. They have hurled Molotov cocktails in the direction of police in New York. As reported in St. Louis, four police officers were hit with gunfire. An NYPD officer was struck by a hit-and-run driver. Rioters also burnt a police precinct building in Minneapolis. They have looted and burnt down businesses. They tried to burn down Washington D.C’s historic St. John’s Church and vandalized St. Patrick Cathedral in New York. They have beaten up people trying to protect their property from being destroyed, looted or vandalized.
What are U.S. law enforcement officers sworn to protect the lives and properties of innocent Americans supposed to do in the face of vicious attacks that threaten their own lives? According to the authors of the UN “Statement on the Protests against Systemic Racism in the United States,” they shouldn’t look for any assistance offered by President Trump. That would amount to “more state violence.” What is the monitors’ solution instead? “Reparative intervention for historical and contemporary racial injustice is urgent, and required by international human rights law,” they wrote. By “reparative intervention” they mean paying reparations as penance for all the past “sins” of whites against blacks going back to the first white slaveholder in the 17th century. A more accurate name for such payments is protection money: whites must pay up or their so-called “white privilege” institutions will be destroyed and their own lives and property will be in danger.
Tendayi Achiume, the UN’s Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance, is the first signatory of the UN human rights monitors’ “Statement on the Protests against Systemic Racism in the United States. ” Her writings provide an example of the hatred for the United States harbored by UN human rights “experts” who also hate Israel.
Achiume: United States has no right to exclude Third World migrants
In an article that Achiume wrote, for instance, explaining why she thinks the U.S. and other western countries must admit any economic migrants who want to live in their countries, Achiume said: “As a sovereign or super-sovereign within neocolonial empire, I posit that the United States has no right to exclude Third World migrants.” In short, the United States must pay penance for its alleged past sins against not only African-Americans but against third world people everywhere who are bestowed with automatic victimhood status. U.S. borders must be opened to anyone from the third world because, in Achiume’s words, the migrants are “the harbingers of an imperial reckoning that cannot be delayed for much longer, even in the United States.”
Here is my message to Achiume and the other UN “monitors.” Butt out. As the world’s oldest existing constitutional democratic republic, the United States continues progressing towards achieving its aspiration of “a more perfect union” for all Americans. American history exemplifies the obstacles and the triumphs along the way, but the arc is towards more equal opportunity and equal treatment under the law. The United States is perfectly capable of taking care of itself without outside UN interference.
Minnesota’ attorney general, Keith Ellison, who is black, has taken over the prosecution in the killing of George Floyd. The ex-cop Derek Chauvin, who was responsible for killing George Floyd by using his knee to pin Floyd to the ground for nearly nine minutes, is now facing upgraded charges of murder. The other officers who stood by and watched have also been charged with aiding and abetting murder. The Department of Justice and FBI are investigating as a top priority the circumstances of the killing for possible federal prosecutions in the case.
Police abuse in the United States is the exception, not the rule. Nevertheless, abuse against any civilian of whatever race or background by any law enforcement officer cannot go unpunished. Federal, state, and local governments must enhance their efforts to address the problem with more reforms, training, and guaranteed accountability.
Those efforts are already underway. As President Trump said, “Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement, regardless of race, color, gender or creed, they have to receive fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it.”
Peaceful protests are as American as apple pie. However, when anger turns from peaceful protest to violence that harms innocent people, including African-Americans who have seen their places of business destroyed, responsible government leaders must draw the line. They do not need the help of UN human rights “experts” from countries with far worse systems of government and economies than the United States.
In a display of public unity with ‘The Movement’ writ large, FBI officials took a knee to declare their woke allegiance with the protesting mobs. With that visible display we now have a better understanding of the motives behind a history of FBI failures.
Setting aside the optic that some members of the FBI looking more like ‘meal-team-6’, there was always a suspicion the FBI were more concerned about political correctness than actually doing the work of a federal investigative agency. Historically the FBI has failed miserably to stop domestic terror threats; and when the investigative failures are researched there’s usually a prior connection between the attackers and the FBI.
The father of the Orlando Pulse nightclub terrorist, Omar Mateen, was a guy named Seddique Mateen (you might remember seeing him at the Hillary Clinton rally). After Omar killed 49 people it was discovered that Seddique had been an FBI informant for over eleven years (2005 to 2016).
Similarly, after the Parkland school shooting, it was discovered the FBI was fully aware of Nikolas Cruz, yet again they had taken no action. The exact same scenario had played out several years earlier when the FBI was warned about the Tsarnaev brothers before the Boston Marathon Bombing 2013 and yet they did nothing to stop it.
The FBI is now a political agency with police powers within the federal government. The activity of Lisa Page, Peter Strzok, James Comey, Andrew McCabe and a host of very familiar names has shown just how important politics is within the institution. Indeed, as we saw in the ridiculous Hillary Clinton investigation, politics was the prism for every decision; and protecting their ideological tribe was the biggest concern within the agency.
Understanding the sensitivity behind the FBI to the Muslim community; a sensitivity almost identical to the expressed position of the democrat party apparatus; it should not come as a big surprise to see FBI agents ignoring terror threats and simultaneously taking a knee to show their allegiance with Black Lives Matter.
After all, Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an assembly of political grievance activists that includes the Nation of Islam (Farrakhan) and the New Black Panther Party (NBPP). The overall network is currently working in coordination with the ultra-violent Antifa.
When the FBI takes a knee to support BLM they are openly aligning with Antifa and the violent advocacy it carries; and not being subtle about sticking a finger in the eye of the U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr.
Once we accept the FBI is a weaponized political agency it makes sense they would only target people adverse to their political agenda; and more harshly target anyone whom they would view as a political opponent (Roger Stone). Somehow the FBI found the motivation and resources to send more heavily armed agents to arrest 68-year-old Roger Stone than ever stepped foot in Benghazi, Libya.
This also explains why the FBI refused to deal with FBI chief legal counsel Dana Boente when his corrupt activity was discovered within an attempt to overthrow President Trump.
Severe politicization also reconciles how Robert Mueller and Andrew Weissmann were able to instruct over 50 FBI agents to investigate a transparently non-existent Russian collusion conspiracy for over two years; as part of a strategy to help democrats win the 2018 election.
One example within the FBI operation in 2018 was the fraudulent nonsense behind Cesar Sayoc. You might remember: FBI Director Christopher Wray outlined during his remarks the mysterious devices consisted of PVC pipe, clocks, batteries, wiring and “energetic material that can become combustible when subjected to heat or friction”.
Indeed, in hindsight things make a lot more sense when we see the FBI take a knee to express their politics publicly, and we have two years of FBI Director Christopher Wray explaining how the FBI is an earnest group of employees who just needed a little more “bias training” to ensure their bias did not surface in their investigations.
Understanding the political prism through which all decisions are made in the FBI, also helps reconcile why FBI Director Christopher Wray would choose David Bowditch as his deputy director.
David Bowditch was the FBI official in charge of the 2015 San Bernardino terrorist attackcarried out by Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik. 14 people were killed and 22 others were seriously injured. Everything behind the attack was sketchy, and there was clearly a green card scam being run as part of the background operation.
Yes Alice, once you accept that everything the FBI does is based on their politics, then everything starts to make a lot more sense; including how those suspects were able to carry out their operations while under surveillance.
From the recent Pensacola Naval Air Station attack, to the attack in Las Vegas, to the Garland Texas terrorist event everything makes sense from the perspective the FBI are first and foremost a political operation.
One other event also takes on a remarkable amount of clarity now (watch):
Last week Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey allowed the mob to burn the police precincts in an expression of his alignment with their woke demands. However, the Minneapolis mob was not satisfied with his permission to riot, loot and torch the city, the mob wants more.
The mob always wants more. You can never be woke enough.
The mob has an unquenchable blood lust for power.
Today the social justice warriors demanded Mayor Frey prove his virtue by promising to eliminate all police officers and allow the woke community to take over the organization of their politically correct civic society. The Mayor could not make the promise…. So the mob turned on him and forced him to do the walk of shame through the crowd. WATCH:
Mayor Frey’s skinny jeans, antique T-shirt and woke hairstyle could not shield him for the demands of the mob. The crowd shouts “GO HOME JACOB” and then “SHAME, SHAME, SHAME” while giving him the middle-finger salute. Moments later as he walked alone, dejected down the sidewalk, they start throwing bottles of water at him. Jacob has sad.
The NFL has been moving further and further toward the political left for several years. Many NFL players and teams openly castigate their fans and denigrate anyone who doesn’t conform to their political correctness. Overall, the NFL has become a toxic stew of identity politics and divisive intolerance.
However, the Denver Broncos are taking division up a notch today by declaring if their fans do not stand with their brand of virtue signaling politics, then you stand against them.
Quite a remarkable position. Apparently, in the endless quest to be the most virtuous, the team has decided to eliminate over half of their potential support base. Against the recent pressure upon NFL quarterback Drew Brees to apologize for supporting the U.S.A flag; it appears the NFL is a lost cause.
Martin Gugino is a 75-year-old professional agitator and Antifa provocateur who brags on his blog about the number of times he can get arrested and escape prosecution. Gugino’s Twitter Account is also filled with anti-cop sentiment [SEE HERE]. Last Thursday Gugino traveled from his home in Amherst, New York, to Buffalo to agitate a protest crowd.
During his effort Gugino was attempting to capture the radio communications signature of Buffalo police officers. CTH noted what he was attempting on Thursday night as soon as the now viral video was being used by media to sell a police brutality narrative. [Thread Here] Today, a more clear video has emerged that shows exactly what he was attempting.
In this slow motion video, you will see Gugino using a phone as a capture scanner. You might have heard the term “skimming”; it’s essentially the same. Watch him use his right hand to first scan the mic of officer one (top left of chest). Then Gugino moves his hand to the communications belt of the second officer. WATCH CLOSELY:
The capture of communications signals [explained in detail here] is a method of police tracking used by Antifa to monitor the location of police. In some cases the more high techcapture software can even decipher communication encryption allowing the professional agitators to block (black-out), jam, or interfere with police communication. In addition, many police body-cams are bluetooth enabled which allows syncing.
Unfortunately in the modern era the professional agitators have become very sophisticated and use technology to help create chaos. Their activity is highly coordinated, and as James O’Keefe has revealed in his undercover operations these professionals even stage events to manipulate public opinion.
When he was pushed away by the officers Gugino fell and presumably hit his head. As a consequence of the shove, the two officers were suspended and the Buffalo authorities have arrested and charged the two police officers. In a show of support the entire Buffalo police unit that makes up the Emergency Response Team resigned their position.
On Friday Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown admitted Gugino was a professional ‘agitator’ who tried to work up the crowd and had been asked to leave the area ‘numerous’ times.
However, despite the known ideology and intent of Mr. Gugino; and despite a more careful look at the video highlighting exactly what Gugino was attempting; the Buffalo authorities are frozen by political correctness and have now arrested and charged the two officers.
(Via Daily Mail) – Two Buffalo cops have been arrested and charged with second degree assault after they shoved a 75-year-old peace activist to the ground Thursday causing him to crack his head open on the sidewalk, as hundreds of colleagues gathered outside the city court in solidarity to cheer their release without bail.
Aaron Torgalski and Robert McCabe were each charged with one count of assault in the second degree in a court hearing Saturday morning over the shocking incident that left peaceful protester Martin Gugino in a ‘serious condition’ in hospital.
The cops were arraigned in a virtual court hearing where they both pleaded not guilty to the charges and the two cops hid from the view of the camera.
They each face up to seven years in prison if convicted of the class D felony. They were released without bail and will appear back in court on July 20.(read more)
It would appear Mr. Martin Gugino succeeded in his endeavor:
‘There has been vandalism, there have been fires set, there have been stores broken into & looted. According to what was reported to me, that individual was a key major instigator of people engaging in those activities.’
BREAKING: Two cops who shoved activist, 75, ‘expected to be CHARGED’
The two officers are expected to face charges Saturday over the shocking incident that left peaceful protester Martin Gugino in a ‘serious condition’ in hospital.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
Centinel2012 