1. We live in a world of “dirty politics” where powerful people have no scruples about using low, dirty, underhanded and even criminal tricks to gain the slightest political advantage. This is especially true of the Democrats and the American Left. It seems almost a climate of desperation on the Left. They so fear that President Trump and his MAGA base will take their power away that they are frantic and desperate and willing to do or say anything (no matter how wrong, deceitful or criminal) to stop him.

    After all the previous botched “rushes to judgment”, made by the Media, one would think that they would have learned their lesson. You would think that they would still be reeling in embarrassment over Zimmerman/Martin, Michael Brown/Ferguson, Covington Catholic HS boys, plus a dozen other train-wreaks. However, learning requires intelligence and reason whereas the Media and the Left seem to be running on pure emotion.

    Some suspect that the rushed charges, in the Rayshard Brooks shooting, are motivated by such dirty politics. Sundance is of this opinion:

    In more and more cases, legal prosecution is giving way to political persecution. Honor, truth and justice have little meaning in 21st Century America. Unless Lady Justice unsheathes her sword and soon administers some bloody and painful punishment to these dirty political players, the situation is just going to get worse and worse.

    It is said that Diogenes constantly carried a lamp in his quest to look for an “Honest Man”. In today’s America, he would need a 10 billion candela searchlight to find one!

    • Zimmerman, Brown, and the rest weren’t mistakes. They were designed to cause mayhem and destruction. Zimmerman initially avoided arrest because the cops and prosecution understood the facts. It was only after Crump and Julison played the PR manipulation game that they exacted their pound of flesh for shooting Trayvon. Zimmerman is essentially unemployable, and his life has been destroyed, all over a drug using thug.

      Same thing in all of these cases.

      • George Zimmerman got sold down the putrid political river by a hucker ranstander of a prosecutor for political points. They were SO desparate to “win” and be validated as “heroes” that when the female with whom Martin was communicating via cell phone that evening refused to testify, they found soeone else to pretend she was thatsame female, and “testified” anyway per the scropt she had been given. Her corss-ex was a joke, and I suspect a good part of why the jury acquitted.

        Zimmerman has some pretty solid proof of this, and certainly can call the actual “other end” of the conversation as a wintess.. (NO I did NOT testify in that trial, yes, I AM the one whith whom he was talking) And from what I’ve seen Zimmerman is taking steps to expose the fraud, and I hope some of those involved in the fraud spend some time inside their local CrowBar Hotel for their perjury. A prosecutor and at least one lawyer need to be disbarred and go find a soup line for their daily bread.

        But then, no justice was ever imposed on the perpetrators of the Duke U la Crosse team wrongfully charged wiht multiple rapes.

        I vaguely recall the prosecutore in that fraudulent case being the same one as went off against George Zimmerman. Jail time would be too kind for her.

    • Friend TN_MAN, the Rayshard Brooks shooting can amount to suicide-by-cop. Furthermore, a taser in the hands of the untrained is a potential blinding device. For a suspected impaired criminal (likely DUI or worse) to point or shoot a taser at someone calls for allowing lethal force on the part of the potential victim. I know that I would likely feel obliged to use lethal force if necessary.
      Part of the political situation is the idea that underdog-class criminal suspects automatically deserve to be cut slack and encouraged to evade apprehension by an over-dog class, largely from possessing some inherent portion of innocence. Class mentality that actually limits application of justice between classes. A kind of class-based paranoia appears to exist in this country, and maybe the world. Are there not cases similar to this one where a “black” officer shoots a “black” one that don’t get press? According to whose mind is “race” even wholly pertinent? I hate the lynch-mob mentality, and often the reverse, that follow incidents like this that appear on public video. Mas is right, let’s be patient and wait and see the official verdicts. Meanwhile, the news media can stop pouring gasoline on the fire.

      • By Georgia law, a taser is a firearm. It is considered to be the same as pointing a handgun at someone.

  2. Mas,

    It’s going to get worse I fear.
    Far too often the accused is found guilty in the court of public opinion long before the court of jurisprudence. This does a disservice to the innocent and to justice itself.
    Take care and watch your six.


  3. Is it me, or does this seem similar to what happened when the communists overthrew the Czar, and Lenin / Stalin started sending people to the Gulags?

    I took a class with John Farnam, that was filled with a pile of law enforcement types. They all told the rest of us that they expected to see levels of violence and rioting that were formerly seen in third world countries. I think between now and November, things are going to get really nasty.

    • Today’s riots and looting are reminiscent of the communist party actions in Weimar Germany post WW1. The leftists in Germany caused much of the same chaos and tried to create a communist revolution. They almost succeeded. During this time, the Nazi party rose to prominence in the 1920’s and early 30’s. Finally, the German people accepted the Nazi’s because they promoted law and order and that is what the majority of Germans wanted. Most Germans were not ideological Nazis – they just wanted the chaos to end. Does all this sound familiar?

      • So does that mean that Antifa using BLM as a front is going to provoke the average joe to vote for a repressive government out of fear? I can’t see it getting that bad.

      • @Longshot:

        No. It suggests that if we have a pro law and order demographic (and I think we do) that they will rally behind an energetic law and order political movement…and that they might be pushed hard enough to not do their due diligence.

        We can learn from Germany’s mistake, there.

  4. One of the odd things (to me anyway) about the Atlanta situation is the people claiming the officers should have “de-escalated” instead. But the situation turned violent quite suddenly; what de-escalation would have worked?

    Some have suggested “just let him run away”. I can see a bunch of ways that could have gone wrong: maybe Brooks runs out into traffic and gets run over; maybe Brooks goes and fetches a gun…etc. In any of those scenarios the police would have been criticized as well.

    One other thing: the officer who didn’t shoot is up on a charge of Aggravated Assault. Can anybody explain to me why that is? I don’t see anyplace he assaulted Brooks at all. He didn’t fire at Brooks and the only time he was “hands on” was when Brooks initially began to fight; isn’t the officer allowed to use force when a person violently resists arrest?

    • “One other thing: the officer who didn’t shoot is up on a charge of Aggravated Assault. Can anybody explain to me why that is?”

      I’ll try. Please understand that all these charges are politically motivated. This has nothing to do with the search for justice. The DA driving this case, Paul L. Howard, is using the aggravated assault charge to pressure the non-shooter officer to testify against the officer who pulled the trigger. This is a technique favored for political persecutions in today’s America especially by the American Left. Like in the General Flynn case where they set up a perjury trap and charged the General with lying to the FBI in order to get him fired and to force his cooperation and testimony against President Trump.

      This is a quote from a news story on this case:

      “Howard added that Rolfe’s former partner Devin Brosnan, who was also at the scene where Brooks was shot, would testify against his former partner. Howard said that after Brooks was shot in the back by Rolfe while fleeing arrest, Rolfe kicked him and Brosnan stood on his shoulders.” (source of the assault charge against Brosnan?)

      Here is a link to the full news story if you wish to read the whole thing:

      Anyway, I suppose the DA threatened to charge the non-shooting officer with murder too. However, the bait was then offered that, if he would rat out his fellow officer, the charges would be reduced to just assault. So, to save his own skin, this second officer is being squeezed to provide testimony against the primary target. The officer who pulled the trigger.

      Whether these charges bear fruit or not is irrelevant. The goal here is a “Political Persecution” and to whip up media coverage and protests. It is not necessarily to obtain a conviction. In fact, the Democrats and the media might like an acquittal even better. It would provide even more excuse to protest, riot, loot and burn.

      So, the DA does not care whether he ever gets a conviction or not. He is in a bunch of legal troubles (himself) and is probably on his way out anyway. See this story to learn more about the corrupt DA running this persecution:

      • Thanks. That honestly was my take on it, but I wanted to pose the question since I’m not a lawyer. I figure the whole thing, including charging the officers before the investigation was concluded, is just a political game.

    • A person is charged with aggravated assault when he/she illegally threatens to harm another with an object which can cause serious bodily injury or death and is in proximity to use it. Does it sound like anything the second police officer did?

      The sleazy liberal politicians are using the situation to placate their bloodthirsty, emotionally driven followers and fan the flames of racial unrest to further damage conservatives, especially President Trump before the crucial November election.

  5. Mr. Ayoob:

    Perhaps I missed it, but have you ever commented fully on the Mohamed Mohamed Noor/Justine Damond shooting in Minneapolis back in 2017? Now that the trial is over (convicted of 3rd degree, acquitted of 2nd degree), sentencing complete, and appeals process completed, I’d be interested in your take on that one. I lived in Mpls at that time and knew that area, even that particular block, quite well.

    The city was in the process of relamping all of the street lights at the time, and chose to relamp the light at the end of that alley completely out of schedule following the shooting. There was speculation that the city had done so in an attempt to improve the chances of winning the civil suit that followed, since the new lamps gave hugely less light than the old sodium-vapor lamps (I know this from seeing the streetlight in the alley right behind my garage).

    I believe that both sides in that shooting have now been fully heard, so if you could point me to your previous assessment of that incident I would greatly appreciate it.

    Best regards.

    • Don’t recall doing a previous assessment. Basically, there were those in Minneapolis PD’s training section who found Noor to have poor judgment in use of force, and to be perhaps what some of us call a fear-biter. There was speculation that he had been retained to show diverse presence on the force. His extreme poor judgment and over-reaction were consistent with the charges on which he was convicted, in my opinion.

  6. i”m going to tip-toe cautiously into this. While there may be, and will always be, those who harbor prejudice, the vast majority of LEOs handle each individual incident on the basis of the individual transaction.

    De-escalation is often a favorite topic. The major issue is that for it to work, you’ve got to have both some time and the other person(s) need to be amenable to de-escalation. A great many people don’t realize that not everyone is reasonable. Nor are they aware of how fast the situation can change and the extremely narrow window of response. Educating the public (mostly forget the pols) on the realities of the reactionary gap might help some of this.

  7. I believe the beginning of repairing this whole situation is, to make the media responsible for the violence and destruction that they incite by mis-positioning or sensationalizing the matters at hand.We must view multiple mediums to ascertain even a glimpse at just one side of each incident. I have always believed that there are three sides to a truth, and we only get a portion of that, and with a very obvious hyperbolic accentuation on what they choose to share. There is a definite, and obvious, agenda to how they report. And what drives this? Is it simply greed for headlines and ratings? Or is it bigger? And how easily the sheep flock to the barks of the wolves, is a bigger issue. They feed the ego and power of the leftist media. At some point this will come to a boiling point. An incident occurs, that we have no complete reference point on, and riots, killing, and more innocent citizens being injured, their businesses and livelihoods destroyed ensue? No, this must stop! There must be a way to take back our nation. This is not America anymore.

  8. I don’t know how long it will take for these trials to take place, but the cynic in me says the overcharging and ultimate acquittal might be part of the plan—a plan timed to coincide with an important election.

  9. In the Floyd case, a proper investigation and report would cover everything that happened from the time he entered the store until he was pronounced dead. So far, all we’ve seen are a couple of brief videos from the middle of the incident. What was Floyd’s demeanor at the store? Why was he arrested? Apparently, he resisted being put into a cruiser. Was it refusal to cooperate or a panic attack? Was there history between him and Chauvin?

    I feel sorry for the two rookies. Consider the precedent this sets. Go through the academy; report for duty; get charged with a major crime because you failed to override a vastly more experienced officer. What will be the state of field training when rookies are afraid to trust the judgement of their training officers?

    • It is long, but VERY through.. thus I would recommend taking the time to read the full piece to which Mas linked above. It covers Floyd’s behaviour from the time he first entered the store, the calls to police regarding his conduct, and, I believe one of the most critical pieces of the “puzzle (and which I strongly suspected was the case when I read the first reports on this incident) the toxicology workup from the autopsy. VERY enlightening.

      • I agree. I admit that, while I read Mas’ post (above), I did not read the linked articles before I started to post comments. I suppose that (sometimes) I am too much of a “Quick Draw” when it comes to posting comments on this blog! 🙂

        After reading your comment, however, I went back and read the linked articles. As you say, the one pertaining to the George Floyd case is “VERY enlightening”.

        The video of the incident looks very bad but, when one understands the policy-behind and the reasons for the police actions, then it puts a different spin on this case. The defense team, for the charged officers, will have plenty of material to use. That is assuming that the defense team is competent. I have seen cases where the defense team “dropped the ball” and neglected golden opportunities to rack up points on the side of the defense.

        I always thought that these officers were being “over-charged”. I never thought that murder charges (especially 2nd degree) would be sustainable. However, I will admit that, based solely upon the video evidence that I have seen, a good case for manslaughter could be made.

        After reading the linked article, however, I am not sure even manslaughter will fly. Likely, it will come down to the lawyers on both sides. If the prosecution is well handled and the defense makes mistakes, a manslaughter conviction might be found. I think a murder conviction is still a very low probability.

        If the defense team is good and exploits the kind of information given in the linked article and “educates” the jury as to the policies and medical issues at play in this case, I could see a “Not Guilt on All Charges” verdict being handed down.

        The only questions is: Would the jury have the courage to hand down such a verdict? Or would they be so afraid of the potential mob reaction that they find the officers guilty of “something” just to slake the blood-lust of the mob?

        I hope that the jury is serious and tries to do “justice” without being biased by worries about the media/mob/political reaction. This nation badly needs justice. Most of the problems that we currently experience is due to a lack of justice. I don’t mean a lack of “Social Justice” either. What we lack is good, old-fashioned, “Justice-Justice”.

  10. It’s the old knee jerk reaction. The we have to do something routine. A fellow shooter, who is retired LE has stated that, you weren’t there and don’t have all the facts. He also goes on to say, place 10 people in a circle and have something staged within the circle. Then ask for witness statements and see how many match. As you stated Mas wait for all the facts to be presented

  11. Mas,

    There is a series of articles here that provide some information as to the motivation behind the murder charge and the assault charge against the second officer.

    The author obviously has no love for the DA or respect for his motivation. There seems to be a lot of dis-information being spread.

    As you say, wait, and the truth will slowly surface.


  12. I’ve posted something along these lines at the Conservative Treehouse.Its time we seriously consider a divorce. The idea of a “Republic” is becoming increasingly repugnant to a large sector of our society. A major political party hates the idea of a Constitutional Republic and considers the Constitution a “living document”. Its clear at least to me that this experiment called the United States is trending downward.I refuse to live under the tyranny that the other side is increasingly attempting to impose and they are unhappy unless they get their communist utopia. This will only result in an unCivil War. That will tear this country apart and lead to dominating warlords and risk foreign invasion. Think not? Look at the military officers openly against the Commander In Chief. Some even engaging in a soft coup. We should at least contemplate secession and how it would look.Many of us may have to move to the “Free Territory” and be compensated for our property. Only one proplem: this will be unacceptable to the “other side” .They want subjects to kneel before them.Something else I refuse to do.

    • Interestingly, an author, Kurt Schlichter, has written a series of novels that explore a future based upon the break-up of America into two nations. The Red States retain the old name, United States of America, and retain the original constitution. Their capitol is in Dallas, Texas.

      The other country, formed from the Blue States, designs a new, “progressive” constitution and is named the “People’s Republic”. It is basically a Marxist/Socialist type country.

      This break-up was negotiated so as to avoid a Civil War. It was created by the Treaty of Saint Louis. It was felt that a “divorce” was better than one side killing off the other.

      These books are entertaining reading, especially if you have an interest in firearms and “action”. I don’t know how true they would be to an actually break-up but Mr. Schlichter certainly has the mindset of the American Left down pat in these books.

      I can recommend these novels if you want something entertaining to read. I think that the first two books in the series, called People’s Republic and Indian Country, are the best ones so far.

      I just pray that life does not imitate art!

    • The political left has spawned a new religion after decades of political correctness, America-hating taught in schools, cultural elites who despise most Americans, cultural Marxism, participation trophy culture, and post-modernism. A religion is all there is to call it.

      Call it the Church of Identity Politics. America itself and anyone born white has original sin that can never be washed away, only eternally atoned for. It is not enough to simply mind one’s own business: all must be converted and bow down or else the heaven on Earth will never happen. It is not even enough to simply obey their dictates, one must prove absolute belief in the program. Like any good ideology, no facts or logic can refute it in the minds of the true believers–ideology is basically the narrative to them. Narrative is all journalism is these days: If it supports the narrative, even weakly, hammer it to death nationally. If it does not support the narrative, it is called “a local story.” Far from “by their fruits you will know them,” it is “if you have bad results, you lack faith and must double down, and convert the unbelievers.”

      It will end when there is one person left if the world. Only one. As only then and only then no one can be at a disadvantage to another based on sex / race / “gender” / class / disability / age /national origin / level of education / innate ability / innate character / etc. It is a suicide-pact cult that will not stop until something or someone stops it.

    • Mike in a Truck,

      Your words plagiarized my thoughts. Of course, that is impossible at the present time, so I’ll just conclude you wrote what I was thinking, somehow.

      In 1996 I lost my faith in the American people, because they elected Bill Clinton for the second time, knowing his faults. In 2008 I saw the great divide in our national thinking as Obama was elected. I thought we were on the path to a national divorce or a civil war at that time.

      I told this to a woman in church. She said she saw the breakdown of America in the 1960s.

  13. What would be your thought on the no-knock warrant executed by Brett Hankinson, Jonathan Mattingly, and Myles Cosgrove which ended with Breonna Taylor’s death as she slept, and the presence of bullets in not just the Taylor apartment, but two others? Also, the rights of a citizen in reaction to said no-knock warrant? When three men in plain clothes and guns come through the door without identification, why would you be charged for protecting your home from such an invasion?

  14. From what I could gather, the suspect killed in Atlanta had not been searched/patted down before he grabbed the police officer’s Taser and ran off. Are we supposed to assume the object he then pointed at the cops was the Taser and not a handgun he was a carrying on his person which the police had not previously seen? As a former cop, I was taught to neutralize any person who I had a reasonable belief was pointing a deadly weapon at me or other people nearby. If that object later turned out to be a toy gun or cell phone, then it’s just too bad for the suspect who should know better than to threaten anyone, especially an armed law enforcement officer.

    • Good reply from somebody from the grass roots, who has seen the elephant and therefore knows one!

  15. Seems to me the media are * mis-characterizing the real issue. The issue is “resisting arrest.” Suspects who resist arrest sometimes get hurt and sometimes get killed. In a nation of 330 million people, I’m sure there are examples of black cops shooting white suspects who are resisting arrest. We won’t see those stories. The media want everyone to believe America is a hopelessly racist country. They are choosing stories which fit their ideology, and succeeding at convincing many gullible citizens that white cops go to work every day in order to stalk and kill black men.

    If America is such a terrible place to live, why don’t blacks flee to Canada, Liberia, Haiti, or anywhere else? Why do immigrants want to come here and be exploited by “The (White) Man?”

    The news story is, “suspect resists arrest and ends up dead,” not “racist white cop slaughters another black man in the country built on oppression and slavery.”

    WHITE PEOPLE ENDED SLAVERY! Centuries ago, white Europeans were enslaved to Muslims in North Africa. Some white Europeans are called “Slavs” to this day. Guess what? Not all American blacks were slaves. Some were free men. Guess what? Some of those free black men owned black slaves.

    Slavery is normal. To outlaw slavery is abnormal. There are more slaves in the world today than in the past, because of the population increase.

    * “media” is the Latin plural form of the singular “medium.” That’s why I used “are” after it instead of “is.” Sounds odd, but that is grammatically correct. That’s what happens when English borrows words from other languages.

    • Roger, I’ve read somewhere that the first person in America to buy a slave was a black man. I haven’t checked on this account so can’t say if it’s true or not, but find it ironically amusing. Of course black dudes in Africa have owned and even eaten slaves before America was officially discovered by Chris Columbus.

      • Tom606,

        You are correct. The first slave owner in what today is the USA was Anthony Johnson. He was born in Angola about 1600, brought to the British colony of Virginia as an indentured servant. After being released, he acquired indentured servants, four white, one black. The black man, John Casor, eventually was indentured for life to Anthony Johnson. I’m confused, because the Wikipedia entry then claims John Punch was the first slave in the USA. Anthony Johnson died in 1670 in the colony of Virginia.

  16. The unfortunate and very sad truth is that somewhere through this process before any healing starts there’s going to be if you officers that decide. ” we’re not going to respond to that right now/ or until we have the necessary support let’s give that a little time to cool down. And lives are going to be lost so it’s not forget we all suffer the human condition and everybody at one time or another these things differently and under a stressful situation be it soldier, judge or police officers have to react at that moment by instinct.

  17. I was talking to a good friend of mine, via telephone, the other day. My friend describes himself as a “Conservative Democrat” (oxymoron?). Naturally, the recent troubles and the George Floyd case came up. This caused our discussion to veer into politics.

    To my surprise, my friend was less upset over the Floyd homicide then I. My friend is a “law and order” type and he supports the use of force, even supports chock-holds, if someone is resisting arrest. In his view, the only error the police made was in keeping the chock-hold applied for too long which resulted in death.

    As the talks veered into general politics, it became heated. My friend has a low opinion of President Trump. He views him as an unprincipled politician who will do or say anything to please his base and remain in power.

    When I pointed out that the Democrat Party had moved to the Left, he denied it. He assured me that it was still a mainstream party. When I pointed out that they provoked the riots and looting, he denied it. The peaceful protesters may be Democrats, he conceded, but the looters were just a bunch of malcontents with no connection to the Democrats.

    When I pointed out media bias, he blamed President Trump and the Republicans. He said that they were continually saying stupid things that provoked the media to scorn and negative coverage. The media would be fair, he insisted, if only the Republicans would not continually provoke them.

    When I pointed out the Democrat attacks on the 2nd Amendment, he dismissed them. The Republicans, the “Gun Lobby” and the NRA would never allow that. According to him, even if the Democrats obtained complete control of Washington, the Republicans would still filibuster any anti-gun legislation and stop it DEAD. He scoffed at me and implied that I was being a typical “paranoid gun-nut” for believing that the Democrats would EVER be a threat to the 2nd Amendment. By this point, our discussion was becoming “heated” as I noted above.

    We finally “agreed to disagree” since neither one of us wanted politics to damage our friendship and we ended the call on good terms. However, his views were amazing to me:

    1) He is a Conservative who blindly supports a Party of left-wing radicals.
    2) He is a “law and order” guy who supports a Party that hates the Police.
    3) He is a Christian who supports a Party that hates traditional religions (except Islam).
    4) He is a gun-owner who supports a Party of dedicated Firearm-Prohibitionists.
    5) He is an honest man who supports a Party that is “Eat Up” with corrupt politicians.
    6) He is a Capitalist who supports a Party of Marxist-Socialists.

    It made clear to me the strength of the Political views that people form in their youth. In my friend’s mind, the Democrat Party is still a Party with a Southern Conservative Wing. It is a Party that supports unions against the big corporate interests. It is a Party that looks out for the “Little Man” as opposed to the Republicans who only care about the rich. It is a Party that supports Civil Rights for all Americans. It is still the Party of JFK and nothing that has happened in the last 50 years has shaken that initial judgment that he had formed in his youth.

    Ronald Reagan once said: “I did not leave the Democrat Party. They left me.”

    The Democrat Party left my friend behind decades ago. Unfortunately, he cannot overcome his initial trust of the Democrats (and distaste for the Republicans) to see that. Come November, he will step into the Ballot Box and vote the “straight Democrat Ticket”, I am sure. It’s really sad. I wonder how many people, like my friend, are out there? How many are still caught in an early 1960’s time-loop and have never made the transition to the 21st Century?

    • TN_MAN,

      7) He is a Christian (and probably pro-life) who supports a pro-abortion Party.

      Your friend lives on Delusion Street in Fantasyland.

      Speaking of delusions, I often see highly intelligent mothers talk about Common Core education, especially the way math is taught, as though it is legitimate. They refuse to believe the government schools are intentionally dumbing-down their children.

      I think America has been experiencing a slow-motion Marxist revolution, probably since 1917, and deception is a big part of it. Our side has great arguments, but it is all talk, while the other side is about action, results and power. Donald Trump is doing his best to help us, but since his power is limited, he is like the Dutch boy with his finger in the hole of the dam. After Trump, the deluge. (From Madame de Pompadour and King Louis XV of France).

      • TN_MAN:

        Have you considered sending your friend a nice, sturdy white canvas jacket with the sleeves sewn together for Christmas? Does he celebrate Christmas, or maybe Kwanza instead? Don’t feel too bad, as I have a friend (not a close one) who’s like that too. This person is honest, hard working, pro law enforcement, etc. but believes Obama was the greatest American president, with Clinton and Carter in a distant second and third place, plus is an absolutely fanatical watcher and believer of CNN. I pray for this poor person’s misguided soul.

        Initially I felt sorry for the Floyd family, but after they and especially George’s brother, Felonious allowed that very evil racist Al Sharpton to loudly spew his despicable lies at the memorial and funeral, it’s obvious they are part of the problem, and not the solution.

  18. Whatever else may end up being true in these cases, we have clearly got a problem with people rushing to judgment on the basis of a video without waiting for all the evidence. A video is one piece of evidence but there is lots more. This is especially true when the media manipulates the footage like they did in the Rodney King case by showing only part of it. And in the Zimmerman trial, the media deliberately misled about the audio of the 911 call. Just to make the mess complete, we have conservatives rushing to condemn the officer in Minneapolis based only on the video while supporting the officer in Atlanta based only on the video. The Left, of course, would lynch both officers.

    I don’t know how we put the video genie back in the bottle but it does have an undue influence on people. And it leads to violence and will lead to worse violence.

    • Richard,

      True, what you wrote. The fact that the media have to distort what we see proves “systemic racism” is either extinct or hard to find. In fact, it is extinct because it is illegal. Only individual racism exists today, not systemic racism.

      Contrast today’s situation with the situation before 1964. The media could find unjust lynching of innocent black men in those days. There were draft riots in NYC during the Civil War, July 13th, 1863—July 16th, 1863, and those citizens lynched about a hundred black men.

      So much progress has been made, but the Left is so powerful they can convince many citizens that the bogey man of systemic racism is still alive and well in the USA.

      Glenn Beck once said the only glue that holds America together is the fact that we can get stuff here. In other words, we have wealth, or at least the illusion of wealth, to pacify us for now.

      • The media doesn’t seem to understand that their narrative or “rouge cop” is in conflict with their narrative of “systemic racism”. If you have a rouge cop, the racism isn’t systemic and if you have systemic racism, the cop isn’t rouge. Personally, I think we have neither unless the Democrats want to take ownership of the the problems that exist in cities they have run for generations. Sadly many conservatives don’t understand this either and are more than willing to lynch the cop.

  19. I am still reflecting upon my recent conversation with my Democratic friend as outlined in my comment above. What is it with people?

    There is no U.S. Political Party with a worse record of actual results then the Democrats. Yet, at the same time, there seems to be no party with a more devoted base of voters than the Democrats. How can that be? Do results count for nothing?

    Consider that many major U.S. Cities have been under direct control of the Democrats for decades and in each case, without exception as far as I am aware, the Democrats have run these cities into the ground.

    For example, consider San Francisco. This city was under Republican Rule from 1912 until 1964. During this period, San Francisco became one of the most clean, beautiful and well-run cities in the entire World. If you doubt this, then rent a copy of the classic Hitchcock Movie “Vertigo”. This film was shot, on location, in San Francisco in 1958 during the height of Republican Rule. The one thing that jumps out at the viewer is how breathtakingly clean and beautiful San Francisco was at that time.

    In 1964 the Democrats assumed control of the city. They have run it ever since. The result? San Francisco is literally as cesspool today with crime, homelessness and filth EVERYWHERE.

    Want more examples? Easy, look at Chicago. Democrat rule for decades and the gangs rack up “mass-shooting level” body-counts every weekend. There are plenty of other examples. Just look at Detroit, LA, Saint Louis, Memphis, etc. etc. etc.

    Yet, despite this proven track-record of dismal failure, the voters in these cities keep re-electing the same type of Democrat operators that produced the current mess.

    Consider the case of African-Americans. There has been no group in America that has been more oppressed by the Democrats. Pre-Civil War, the Democrats kept them as actual slaves. The Democrats fought a Civil War in an effort to keep them as slaves. When the Democrats lost that Civil War, they formed a terrorist group, the KKK, and used terror to keep them oppressed. Moving on to pseudo-legal methods, the Democrats then created a set of “Jim Crow” laws to continue the oppression. All of which continued right up until the middle of the 20th Century.

    When the Democrats realized that “Jim Crow” was going to die on them, they moved on to a more subtle and devious method of control. They got in front of the movement and then headed it in the direction that they wanted it to go. They took charge of the “Civil Rights” Movement. This, seemingly, would finally kill off “Jim Crow”. This allowed the Democrats to harvest credit for killing off the legal system of oppression that they had created in the first place!

    Then, under the guise of “Civil Rights”, the Democrats built a “Welfare State” for African-Americans that was designed to (1) reduce them to dependency upon Government handouts and (2) destroy the stable structure of the Black Family. The end result is that many African-Americans are still living on a form of the “Democrat Plantation” today. They live in substandard Public Housing with little family structure, and with crime and drug addiction rampant. Great numbers of African-American men languish in prison as a direct result of these Democrat policies.

    Yet, despite all the ills visited upon African-Americans, by the Democrats, they reliably continue to turn out and vote for the Democrats and, when provoked by the Democrat-controlled Media, reliably turn out to riot, loot and burn down the businesses that serve their own communities.

    So, what is it with people? Why do they blindly continue to vote against their own interests? How do the Democrats manage to generate such loyalty from people they routinely oppress?

    Is it the indoctrination received from our left-wing, Democrat-controlled Education System? Is it the power of all the propaganda that the Democrats flood onto the air-waves? Is it fear of being punished by the Democrat Social-Shaming / Cancel-culture system? Is it simple ignorance? Is it simple stupidity? What the Hell is the Magic that the Democrats possess to keep so many people self-enslaved?

    Scientists have named our species: Homo Sapiens. If you look up the Latin for Sapiens, it means:

    Sapiens – sane, of sound mind; wise, judicious, understanding; discreet;

    Clearly, when it comes to politics, this is a misnomer. I suggest that our species be re-named as Homo Imprudens. The Latin meaning for Imprudens is:

    Imprudens – ignorant; unaware; unintentional, unsuspecting; foolish/incautious/unthinking;

    Clearly, when it comes to human politics, this is a much more accurate name for our species! 🙂

    • TN_MAN,

      “And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:”

      II Thessalonians 2:11 KJV

    • TN_MAN:

      What you said about San Francisco is absolutely correct. The place has become so bad since the mid 1960’s that even former SFPD inspector Harry Callahan has resigned and moved to Idaho, where he now grows prized winning potatoes and still practices with his S&W .44 Magnum regularly. Harry had now given up chili dogs and visits his favorite restaurant daily, where he tells the owner “Go ahead, make my (potato) salad!”

      • Interestingly, I was in Boise, Idaho many years ago on a business trip. One evening (after our day-long business session), everybody got together for an evening of fun. The plan was to hold a picnic and then go to see a minor-league baseball game.

        For the picnic, we were served the usual mix of hamburgers and hot dogs. Plus, we also were introduced to the Idaho version of “Potato Salad”. The Idaho version differs considerably from the “Southern-Style” Potato Salad to which I was accustom. Nevertheless, it was good.

        I still remember the “Idaho Potato” Salad, the ball-game and the great, local-micro-brewed beer served at the ball-game. I had a great time.

        I just hope that Boise is still a fun place. Harry Callahan would be a useful addition to the city. However, if a bunch of crazy, left-wing Californians have moved there, and brought their stupid politics with them, then the whole place may be rotating down the toilet (along with the rest of the “Left-Coast”) by this time. I sure hope not.

        Quote of the Day by Saul Bellow:

        “In Los Angeles all the loose objects in the country were collected, as if America had been tilted and everything that wasn’t tightly screwed down had slid into Southern California.”

        Unfortunately, the asylum doors have been blasted open and all the inmates have been loosed upon the land. No longer confined to just Southern California, they are now EVERYWHERE. They are marching, shooting cops, burning, looting and pulling down statues in many cities. All the while insisting that there are at least 58 genders in the human species. See this link:

        Who do I see about getting my suggested name change for humanity, from Homo Sapiens to Homo Imprudens, adopted? It is becoming an urgent matter that the name be changed! 🙂

    • TN_MAN:

      Remember what I said about people on the other side. They are all either stupid or evil. I won’t say who is which, but it’s fairly obvious the less mentally capable are easily manipulated by the more diabolical of all races. We, who are good and sane will never be able to convert or help them as they’re either unsuspecting or willing pawns of Satan.

  20. As to pulling down statues, wouldn’t it be fun to replace them all with statues of Donald Trump?

    • Roger, one of these nights, I’m going to put Confederate clothing on a statue of MLK and watch in the morning as hordes of vicious BLM imbeciles tear it down and set the remains on fire. All statues of The Donald have to be gold plated. That way, it will keep them from tarnishing but someone will probably steal them.