“Black Lives Matter:” What’s It All About?

Yesterday we introduced the realities of ANTIFA and all it stands for. We did that by giving you the group’s extensive past that goes back almost 100 years. Today, as promised, we go into details about Black Lives Matter — NOT the movement, but the formal political organization.

We previously wrote about BLM here and published a story giving the fundamental structure of the group and details obtained from their website. That being said, we all should know that any group involved in such controversial things as is Black Lives Matter probably doesn’t volunteer “objective” information about itself. So we did it for them.

BLM: “Facts Matter”

Black Lives Matter” is more popular than either President Trump or Joe Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, according to recent polling. The online research firm Civiqs found in June that voters approved of the movement by a 28-point margin. Rasmussen found 62% of likely voters viewed it favorably and 32% very favorably.

This demonstrates a national consensus that the lives of black fellow citizens matter, which has not always been the case in our history. It also suggests strong support for better, fairer policing in minority communities. But that seems far more likely to be because large majorities believe in the principle of the Declaration of Independence that all men are created equal rather than because they support the agenda of the organization with the innocuous-sounding name, Black Lives Matter.

The fact is, “black lives matter” is a matter of common decency entirely separate from the activist, ideological, left-wing agenda of the BLM group. That organization has stated aims that go far beyond addressing police brutality. Its goals include, without apology, the upending of American society. Yet it has gained more attention, support, and money since the death of George Floyd, an unarmed black man, in Minneapolis police custody. It is therefore vital that the public, much of which thinks that by supporting BLM, they are backing decent and humane reforms, knows enough to make the distinction between the idea and the ideologues hijacking it.

The co-founders of Black Lives Matter are avowed Marxists. At least one names a convicted cop killer among her heroes. A key mentor in building and shaping the group is a two-time vice-presidential candidate for the Communist Party USA. The national organization is financially supported through a leftist group whose board of directors includes a convicted terrorist. A 2017 report from Black Lives Matter describes its founders, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Khan-Cullors, and Opal Tometi, as “three radical Black organizers.” The women espouse Marxism and openly push radical identity politics.

Susan Rosenberg was listed as vice-chair of the board of directors for Thousand Currents, BLM’s financial sponsor until the website was pulled down in late June. She had been a member of a radical leftist revolutionary militant group known as the May 19th Communist Organization, which was affiliated with the Weather Underground terrorist group and the radical Black Liberation Army. She was convicted on weapons and explosives charges and sentenced to 58 years in prison, serving 16 years behind bars before being pardoned by President Bill Clinton at the end of his second term in January 2001.

Rosenberg was a radical in the 1960s and 1970s who landed on the FBI’s Most Wanted list for a number of crimes. She was caught in 1984 while unloading hundreds of pounds of dynamite and weapons, including a submachine gun, from her car at a New Jersey storage facility. She was believed to have been part of politically motivated bombing plots. Rosenberg and her associates were also charged with bombings during the 1980s that detonated at the Capitol and the Navy War College, among other targets. They were tied to a 1981 Brink’s armored car robbery in which a guard and two police officers were killed. She wrote an autobiography in 2011 titled An American Radical: Political Prisoner in My Own Country about her own radical escapades.

Garza has repeatedly talked about how convicted cop killer and wanted domestic terrorist Joanne Chesimard, also known as Assata Shakur, is one of her main inspirations. Rosenberg was suspected of helping Shakur escape from prison after murdering a police officer.

Garza wrote an article for Feminist Wire in 2014 claiming that “hetero-patriarchy and anti-Black racism within our movement is real and felt” and explaining that “when I use Assata’s powerful demand in my organizing work, I always begin by sharing where it comes from, sharing about Assata’s significance to the Black Liberation Movement, what its political purpose and message is, and why it’s important in our context.” Garza has repeatedly tweeted approvingly about Shakur.

Shakur is on the FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists list with a $1,000,000 reward for information directly leading to her apprehension. She is believed to be hiding in Cuba. Shakur, a member of the revolutionary extremist group the Black Liberation Army, is wanted for escaping from prison in New Jersey in 1979 while serving a life sentence for murdering a police officer. In 1973, Shakur and two accomplices were stopped for a motor vehicle violation on the New Jersey Turnpike by two state troopers. She was wanted at the time for her role in a number of serious crimes, including bank robbery. When pulled over, Shakur and her comrades opened fire on the officers, wounding one trooper and killing Werner Foerster execution-style at point-blank range.

The BLM website is operated under an umbrella group known as the Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, chaired by Cullors, who said she and Garza are “trained organizers” and “trained Marxists” during a 2015 interview with the Real News Network, noting: “We actually do have an ideological frame.  We are super versed on, sort of, ideological theories, and I think what we try to do is build a movement that could be utilized by many, many black folks.”

Black Lives Matter states that it was founded in 2013 in response to George Zimmerman being acquitted of the killing of Trayvon Martin. Zimmerman argued he’d acted in self-defense. President Barack Obama’s Justice Department under Attorney General Eric Holder found “insufficient evidence” to pursue any federal civil rights charges.

Cullors’s memoir, When They Call You a Terrorist: A Black Lives Matter Memoir, includes a foreword written by Angela Davis and an opening epigraph from Shakur. In the book, Cullors writes that “we do this work today because on another day work was done by Assata Shakur, Angela Davis, [transgender activist] Miss Major, the Black Panther Party,” and others. In describing her move toward activism, Cullors wrote, “I read, I study, adding Mao, Marx, and Lenin to my knowledge of hooks.”

Mao Zedong, the founder of the People’s Republic of China, was responsible for the deaths of tens of millions of his own people, including 45 million or more during the Great Leap Forward, and millions more during the Cultural Revolution. Vladimir Lenin, the first leader of the Soviet Union, presided over the Red Terror, which killed many tens of thousands as he launched one of the most repressive regimes in history.

Cullors told Teen Vogue in 2019 that “Angela Davis is a mentor of mine.” The duo has coordinated on BLM’s strategies, and they appeared together at a “TimesTalks” event put on by the New York Times in 2018. During that discussion, Cullors called the poverty she grew up in a “setup” imposed upon her by a capitalist society and remarked: “If this is a setup, then I can set it up differently.” Davis, seen as a hero and mentor to the BLM co-founders, is another Marxist and was the Communist Party vice president nominee in 1980 and 1984. She was a leading apologist for the Soviet Union during the Cold War, even praising the East German and Soviet tyrannies while in East Berlin. Davis was the winner of the Soviet Union’s Lenin Peace Prize and repeatedly praised the USSR’s October 1917 Revolution.

In the United States, Davis was affiliated with the Black Panther Party and connected to violent, murderous radicals. Firearms registered to her were used in the takeover of a California courtroom in 1970, where four people were killed. Davis detests Israel and has been dogged by accusations of anti-Semitism for decades. She has been a fervent supporter of the boycott, divestment, and sanctions movement waging economic warfare against the state of Israel in recent years. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz wrote in his 1991 book Chutzpah that he’d asked Davis if she’d be willing to speak up on behalf of Jewish prisoners of conscience in the Soviet Union when she went to Moscow to receive a prize and claims she told him that “they are all Zionist fascists and opponents of socialism” and would urge that they be kept in prison. But she has pushed for “political prisoner” Marwan Barghouti to be released from an Israeli prison. Barghouti, one of the leaders of the First and Second Intifada and a founder of the al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades, was convicted on 21 counts of murder for attacks carried out by Palestinian terrorists.

Davis recently endorsed Biden on Moscow’s state-owned Russia Today.

Garza and Davis appeared on Democracy Now! in 2017, with Garza effusive in her praise of Davis and repeatedly thanking her for helping guide the BLM leaders.

“I have to say, Angela, one of the things I appreciate so much about you is that you’re not waxing poetic about things that happened; you’re still very much in relationship to all of us and still teaching us,” Garza said. “Thank you for being a constant presence for us. You are always 100% available and paying attention, and it means a lot to all of us. You are one of my greatest teachers.”

Garza explained how thoroughly she’d been shaped by Davis’s radical ideology: “I have a bookshelf full of your writings. And there’s something extraordinary and powerful about what you have offered to all of us — this unapologetic way of making sure that we understand how intricately connected race and class and gender is, and then pushing that up against the state and the state apparatus and having us understand how we need to fight that with the relationship between race and class and gender in shaping our strategies and our movements is unmatched, so I want to thank you for that. Thank you for shaping not just our ideas, but the fights that we have on the ground.”

Garza spoke at a leftist Net Impact Conference in 2016, where she made it clear that BLM was a wider agenda than police brutality, also pointing to the wage gap, climate change, the Dakota Access Pipeline protests at the Standing Rock Reservation, and much more, arguing that at the root of these alleged problems was the capitalist system.

The closely affiliated Movement for Black Lives claimed in 2016 that Israel was an “apartheid state” committing “genocide” against the Palestinian people. Cullors has repeatedly talked about the importance of “solidarity” with Palestine, leading a “delegation” to Palestine. Cullors was one of the signatories of 2015’s Black Solidarity Statement with Palestine, a thoroughly anti-Israel screed that stated in part: “Out of the terror directed against us — from numerous attacks on Black life to Israel’s brutal war on Gaza and chokehold on the West Bank — strengthened resilience and joint struggle have emerged between our movements.” The statement also said that the signatories “reject Israel’s framing of itself as a victim” and, hand-waving away the countless terrorist attacks and thousands of rocket bombardments against Israel, falsely claimed that “anyone who takes an honest look at the destruction to life and property in Gaza can see Israel committed a one-sided slaughter.”

In the wake of Floyd’s death and the subsequent protests, Black Lives Matter quickly set up a petition on its website to #DefundThePolice.

“We call for an end to the systemic racism that allows this culture of corruption to go unchecked and our lives to be taken,” Black Lives Matter said. “We call for a national defunding of police. We demand investment in our communities and the resources to ensure Black people not only survive but thrive.”

The Black Lives Matter website explains this proposal with a July post declaring: “We know that police don’t keep us safe — and as long as we continue to pump money into our corrupt criminal justice system at the expense of housing, health, and education investments — we will never be truly safe. That’s why we are calling to #DefundPolice and #InvestInCommunities.”

The group argued that “George Floyd’s violent death was a breaking point — an all too familiar reminder that, for Black people, law enforcement doesn’t protect or save our lives. They often threaten and take them.”

BLM is clear about its opposition to President Trump and Republicans. A letter from BLM’s organizing director Nikita Mitchell has lamented that “we face blatant anti-Blackness, capitalist values, and imperial projects,” and she decried “a rise of conservatism that has resulted in a fascist president.”

BLM says that it is looking to influence November’s election, arguing that “Black voters tipped the balance in the 2018 midterm elections” and that “moving towards 2020, we seek to increase the power of our voices and votes.” The group recently launched a “#WhatMatters2020” campaign “aimed to maximize the impact of the BLM movement by galvanizing BLM supporters and allies to the polls in the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.” The campaign says that it is focused on “racial injustice, police brutality, criminal justice reform, Black immigration, economic injustice, LGBTQIA+ and human rights, environmental conditions, voting rights and suppression, healthcare, government corruption, education, and commonsense gun laws.”

Beyond their Black Lives Matter work, Cullors calls herself the “self-described wife of Harriet Tubman” and works on radical Los Angeles jail reform. At the same time, Tometi also spent years as executive director of the leftist Black Alliance for Just Immigration. Garza, Cullors, and Tometi were named three of Time Magazine’s 100 Women of the Year for 2013.

Black Lives Matter raises money through the ActBlue donation platform, though claims that this makes it a “shell company” for the Democratic Party are unfounded. Black Lives Matter appears to make up the majority of the donation work that Thousand Currents does, with the 2019 public audit statement for the latter group showing just over $6.4 million in total financial assets, including holding more than $3.3 million in assets for Black Lives Matter as of the end of last June. The audit shows Thousand Currents released nearly $1.8 million in donations to Black Lives Matter during the year ending on June 30, 2019.

The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation has pulled in massive amounts of cash since Floyd’s death, telling the Associated Press that it had received more than 1.1 million individual donations as of mid-June, with each donor giving an average of $33 per donation — meaning the group brought in more than $33 million in less than a month. Donations have continued to roll in since then.

BLM announced funds totaling $12.5 million in recent weeks. It first unveiled a $6.5 million fund to support its grassroots organizing work on June 11, stating in a press release that it was “grateful for the generosity and support of donors” and that the fund would be available to all chapters affiliated with the BLM Global Network Foundation. Beginning July 1, “affiliated chapters may apply for unrestricted grant funding of up to $500,000 in multi-year grants,” the group said, later adding that another $6 million will go to helping black-led grassroots organizers.

“In the upcoming year, we will provide resources to those new to the movement and interested in Black Liberation strategies by developing curriculum,” Cullors said when announcing the new fund. “In this stunning moment in American history, we will honor those lost and those who have come before us in the fight for Black Liberation.”

Radicals attempting to co-opt otherwise constructive social movements are nothing new. The far-Left participated in, and in some cases infiltrated, civil rights groups without discrediting the just and necessary fight against Jim Crow. But the arguments that won the day against segregation were rooted in the best American traditions, not in overthrowing those traditions. Distinguishing Black Lives Matter the group from the growing sentiment in favor of racial justice driving the phrase’s popularity is a necessary first step in repeating that history.

The Truth About Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLM)

Do not be tempted for one moment to believe the lies that have been floated by leftist leaders for several years now that Black Lives Matter (BLM) and Antifa are little more than social/political organizations founded to promote the good things that have been integral parts of the United States since its founding. Neither group represents the fundamentals of “Equal Justice Under the Law,” a guarantee to the “pursuit of happiness,” or even “Freedom and Justice for All.” Though they cloak their mantra wrapped in utopian “wrapping paper,” NOTHING about either is as pictured by their leaders.

So what are the truths about each organization? Who can we believe? Both tell the World they are for the guarantees of freedom for all, tearing down the instruments of tyranny that supposedly exist in the American government, its leaders, and the way the nation treats its citizens; that human rights are controlled by a small group of racist fascists in Washington D.C. who must be removed from power no matter what the costs.

Their mantra is not true and their stated structure and ideals, plans, and intentions are anything BUT what they tell American citizens.

Today (Monday) and tomorrow (Tuesday) we will here give you a skeleton of the history and purpose of each group. The information we share with you will be historical, factual, and verifiable. We encourage you to digest what you see here at TruthNewsNetwork and then verify facts for yourselves. Let’s get started with “Antifa,” simply for alphabetical reasons!

Antifa Unmasked

The extremist anarchist-communist group Antifa has been in the headlines because of past violent clashes in Charlottesville, Virginia, then Portland, Oregon, and most recently, in numerous other cities across America. Yet while the organization has been applauded by some left-leaning news outlets for including white nationalists and neo-Nazis in its list of targets, the organization wasn’t always about targeting “fascism,” as it claims.

The organization was initially part of the Soviet Union’s front operations to bring about communist dictatorship in Germany, and it worked to label all rival parties as “fascist.”

The organization can be traced to the “united front” of the Soviet Union’s Communist International (Comintern) during the Third World Congress in Moscow in June and July 1921, according to the German booklet “80 Years of Anti-Fascist Action” by Bernd Langer, published by the Association for the Promotion of Anti-Fascist Culture. Langer is a former member of the Autonome Antifa, formerly one of Germany’s largest Antifa organizations, which disbanded in 2004.

The Soviet Union was among the world’s most violent dictatorships, killing an estimated 20 million people, according to “The Black Book of Communism,” published by Harvard University Press. The Soviet regime is second only to the Chinese Communist Party under Mao Zedong, which killed an estimated 65 million people.

The idea of the united front strategy was to bring together left-wing organizations in order to incite the communist revolution. The Soviets believed that following Russia’s revolution in 1917, communism would next spread to Germany since Germany had the second-largest communist party, the KPD (Communist Party of Germany).

It was at the Fourth World Congress of the Comintern in 1922 that the plan took shape. Moscow formed the slogan “To the Masses” for its united front strategy and sought to join together the various communist and workers’ parties of Germany under a single ideological banner that it controlled. “The ‘unified front’ thus did not mean equal cooperation between different organizations, but the dominance of the workers’ movement by the communists,” Langer writes.

Benito Mussolini, a Marxist and socialist who had been expelled from Italy’s Socialist Party in 1914 for his support for World War I, later founded the fascist movement as his own political party. He took power through his “March on Rome” in October 1922.

In Germany, Adolf Hitler became head of the National Socialist German Workers’ Party (Nazi Party) in 1921 and mounted a coup attempt in 1923.

The KPD decided to use the banner of anti-fascism to form a movement. Langer notes, though, that to the KPD, the ideas of “fascism” and “anti-fascism” were “undifferentiated,” and the term “fascism” served merely as rhetoric meant to support their aggressive opposition. Both the communist and fascist systems were based in collectivism and state-planned economies. Both also proposed systems wherein the individual was heavily controlled by a powerful state, and both were responsible for large-scale atrocities and genocide.

The 2016 annual report by Germany’s domestic intelligence service, the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (BfV), notes the same point: From the viewpoint of the “left-wing extremist,” the label of “fascism” as pushed by Antifa often does not refer to actual fascism, but is merely a label assigned to “capitalism.”

While leftist extremists claim to be fighting “fascism” while launching their attacks on other groups, the report states the term “fascism” has a double meaning under the extreme-left ideology, indicating the “fight against the capitalist system.” This held true from the beginning, according to Langer. For the communists in Germany, “anti-fascism” merely meant “anti-capitalism.” He notes the labels merely served as “battle concepts” under a “political vocabulary.” A description of Antifa on the BfV website notes that the organization still holds this same basic definition of capitalism as being “fascism.” “They argue that the capitalist state produces fascism, or at least tolerates it. Therefore, anti-fascism is directed not only against actual or supposed right-wing extremists but also always against the state and its representatives, in particular members of the security authorities,” it states.

Langer notes that historically, by labeling the anti-capitalist interests of the communist movement as “anti-fascism,” the KPD was able to use this rhetoric to label all other political parties as fascist. Langer states, “According to this, the other parties opposed to the KPD were fascist, especially the SPD [Social Democratic Party of Germany].” Thus, in what would today be considered ironic, the group that the communist “anti-fascists” most heavily targeted under their new label of “fascism” was the social democrats.

On Aug. 23, 1923, the Politburo of the Communist Party of Russia held a secret meeting, and according to Langer, “all the important officials spoke out for an armed insurrection in Germany.” The KPD was at the front of this call, launching a movement under the banner of United Front Action and branding its armed “anti-fascist” wing under the name Antifaschistische Aktion (“Antifascist Action”), which Antifa still carries in Germany, and from which the Antifa organizations in other countries are rooted.

The Unity Congress of Antifa, held at the Philharmonic Opera House in Berlin, on July 10, 1932. The congress was organized by the Communist Party of Germany as a rallying point to defeat the Social Democratic Party and the Nazi Party. Antifa labeled both parties as "fascist," which was a political label they used for all rival parties. (Public Domain)
The Unity Congress of Antifa, held at the Philharmonic Opera House in Berlin, on July 10, 1932. The congress was organized by the Communist Party of Germany as a rallying point to defeat the Social Democratic Party and the Nazi Party. Antifa labeled both parties as “fascist,” which was a political label they used for all rival parties.

At this time, Hitler and his Nazi Party had begun to emerge on the world stage, and the Nazi Party employed a similar group to Antifaschistische Aktion for political violence and intimidation, called the “brownshirts.”

Antifaschistische Aktion, meanwhile, began to attract some members who opposed the arrival of actual fascism in Germany and who did not subscribe to — or were potentially unaware of — the organization’s ties to the Soviet Union. However, the violence instigated by Antifaschistische Aktion largely had an opposite effect. The ongoing tactics of violence and intimidation of all rival systems under the Antifa movement, along with its violent ideology, drove many people toward fascism.

“The Communists’ violent revolutionary rhetoric, promising the destruction of capitalism and the creation of a Soviet Germany, terrified the country’s middle class, who knew only too well what had happened to their counterparts in Russia after 1918,” writes Richard J. Evans in “The Third Reich in Power.”

Anti-fascism is directed not only against actual or supposed right-wing extremists but also always against the state and its representatives, in particular members of the security authorities.
 
“Appalled at the failure of the government to solve the crisis, and frightened into desperation by the rise of the Communists,” he states, “they began to leave the squabbling little factions of the conventional political right and gravitate towards the Nazis instead.”

Langer notes that from the beginning, the KPD was a member of the Comintern, and “within a few years, it became a Stalinist party,” both ideologically and logistically. He states that it even became “financially dependent on the Moscow headquarters.”

Leaders of the KPD, with Antifa as their on-the-ground movement for violence and intimidation of rival political parties, fell under the command of the Soviet apparatus. Many KPD leaders would later become leaders in the communist German Democratic Republic, including its infamous Ministry for State Security, the Stasi.

As Langer states, “anti-fascism is a strategy rather than an ideology.” “It was brought into play in Germany in the 1920s by the KPD,” not as a legitimate movement against the fascism that would later arise in Germany, but instead “as an anti-capitalist concept of struggle,” he writes.

Summary

I know: this report is filled with names and name-abbreviations and includes much information. We Americans have lost any real sense of the necessity of the knowledge of our pasts. In almost every other country, the importance of history which shaped the present in every aspect of those nations is viewed by leaders as critical. Not so much in the U.S. In fact, World History is scarce in high school and college campuses. Civics which was once a staple of understanding of how our government works was removed from the History curriculum in our public schools. But, as you can see, knowing the historical foundations and basis for the existence of the various political and social groups who are today shaping the landscape of what our Nation is to become in their eyes is not just important, it is critical.

How do we do that without diving in to learn the facts of our origins, our past, and the past attempts to instigate totalitarian ideals here that other countries faced and defeated generations ago?

Antifa from its roots to its blooming today in America is evil. And if allowed to continue its unabated growth will undoubtedly usher in an oppressive government led by despots with their hunger for totalitarian control.

Before you dismiss the previous sentence, consider this: Italians, Germans, Polish People, Czech citizens, and other Europeans dismissed what they heard that was identical to this same warning, saying: “That can never happen here!”

Communism is estimated to have killed at least 100 million people, yet its crimes have not been fully compiled and its ideology still persists. The Epoch Times seeks to expose the history and beliefs of this movement, which has been a source of tyranny and destruction since it emerged. Read the whole series at ept.ms/TheDeadEndCom

Breonna Taylor

Once again, a grand jury has rendered a decision in a high-profile case involving police shooting a person of color, this time in Louisville, Kentucky. As if on cue, predestined violent protests and civil unrest erupted across the country. Fires were set, and angry demonstrators continued their monthslong path of destruction, this time fueled by their frustration over the decision in the Breonna Taylor case. In what has also become far too commonplace, two Louisville Metro Police Department officers were shot and wounded Wednesday evening.

Taylor, 26, a black medical worker, was tragically killed this past March in an exchange of gunfire between police and her boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, who fired a 9 mm pistol at the entry team executing a search warrant. Walker struck police Sgt. Jonathan Mattingly in the leg. Mattingly and Detective Myles Cosgrove returned fire. During the exchange, Taylor was fatally struck six times by police bullets. She had been standing in the hallway, alongside Walker, who was in a shooting stance and remained unscathed during the shootout.

A Jefferson County Grand Jury ultimately charged Brett Hankinson, now a former Louisville Metro Police Department detective, with three counts of “wanton endangerment.” He fired a total of 10 rounds, with some entering an adjacent apartment that contained a male, a pregnant female, and a child. Hankinson has already been fired from the force. He now faces five years on each of the three charged counts. The other two officers were determined to have been justified in firing their weapons.

Kentucky Attorney General Daniel Cameron’s office led the investigation into the execution of the search warrant. His was a difficult position. There are concurrent federal, state, and local investigations ongoing. And he would serve as a special prosecutor, an appointment due to concerns that local district attorney offices work too closely with the police departments they may be charged to investigate. The reason for the “special” circumstances was well understood.

But Cameron is also a black man. And too often these days, everything related to our criminal justice system is defined along color lines. For example, on MSNBC, former Los Angeles Police Department Sgt. Cheryl Dorsey flippantly said of Cameron: “He’s skin folk, but he is not kinfolk.” Noted race-baiter Colin Kaepernick predictably weighed in with his take that the policing profession contains “white supremacists” and needs to be abolished.

And as usual, lies escalated in number and intensity in the supercharged case from the outset. Louisville’s Courier-Journal set about to fact-check some of the distortions, such as 1) police were at the wrong apartment, 2) police affected a no-knock warrant, 3) Breonna Taylor was shot and killed while asleep in her bed, and 4) Mattingly was wounded by friendly fire. More on all this later.

Defense attorneys and social justice activists often scream non-stop incendiary and inaccurate charges. Wildly inaccurate distortions of fact have recently led to violent riots in Washington, D.C., Chicago, and Minneapolis. The Taylor case has undoubtedly followed a similar false-claims playbook.

First, police secured a search warrant for Taylor’s apartment. A former “significant-other” had once lived there. And while he was arrested at a nearby drug den, Taylor’s apartment was considered a location where drugs were stashed. The court also authorized searches for three other persons if located at the apartment. And while Taylor’s current boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, was not listed on the warrant, her former boyfriend, Jamarcus Glover, was named. In addition, the grand jury determined that police did conduct a “knock and announce” warrant service and identified themselves. This also wasn’t an incident of targeting a disliked person, as was also falsely claimed. Walker, who fired first, was armed with a 9 mm pistol, while police were carrying weapons chambered in .40 caliber. The round that struck Mattingly was a 9 mm round.

Allow me to clear up several more misperceptions.

Beat cops do NOT complete paperwork and run the process necessary to secure warrants. Typically, case personnel works with prosecutors to secure warrants. Law enforcement tactical teams are then briefed on investigation details but draft the takedown plans, which they then execute. In the perfect realm, a senior agency official is then put in charge as the “on-scene commander” to make and give on-the-spot decisions.

Most of such warrants are of the standard “knock and announce” variety. A select few, due to the subject’s history of violence, are “no-knock.” But the distinction between the two doesn’t mean that police fail to identify themselves loudly before making entry. Instead, it is related to the amount of time you afford the inhabitants to open the door.

The Louisville case was NOT a no-knock warrant service, although that has been and still is being proclaimed as “fact” in Mainstream Media reports. Walker may very well have misidentified the entry team as intruders. But once he fired his weapon at them, wounding one of the officers in the process, they had every right to defend themselves.

Cameron defended the decision of the grand jury and decried the new era of “wokeness” that has flooded into our pursuit of justice:

The facts have been examined, and the grand jury, made up of Louisville peers and residents, has decided. Justice is not often easy. It does not fit the mold of public opinion. And it does not conform to shifting standards. It answers only to the facts and to the law.

The social justice awakening of 2020 has its roots in Ferguson, Missouri, and the 2014 justifiable fatal police shooting of Michael Brown. The federal grand jury’s decision not to indict the police officer at the center of that case helped birth the Black Lives Matter movement. And while BLM supporters claim to be fighting for justice, they demand predetermined outcomes, insistent that every police shooting of a minority MUST BE in every such case due specifically to systemic racism and the officers involved therefore are guilty and should be convicted of murder.

That’s not how our system works. That isn’t justice and certainly strips police officers of rights to due process and the presumption of innocence. But as Kentucky Attorney General Cameron cautioned, the standards are shifting. And that is not only unfair to the police, but it is dangerous. What eager, selfless, idealistic, young American attracted to law enforcement hasn’t taken notice? You are considered the enemy now. Assassination attempts are occurring with shocking regularity. This serves as an ominous warning. Foolhardy “abolish the police” initiatives may soon be rendered moot.

Good luck with attracting our best and brightest to the policing profession. After all, the demonization has its costs.

Today on “TNN Live”

We will launch further into the details of this story and what happened in the grand jury during our live show this morning (Friday) at 9:00 AM Central. We will verbatim share the transcript of AG Cameron’s detail of the grand jury facts that resulted in the determination of only one officer being charged in the case. Not a single Mainstream Media outlet has bothered to do that! That should not surprise Americans, but it does. Millions simply shake their heads to watch and listen to so-called Media “experts” still phrase reports as “factual” when they in almost every such case as Breonna’s are portrayed purely from the “Racial Perspective:” that is “white cops shooting a black citizen for no reason other than racial hatred.” Nothing could be further from the truth!

But what is more shocking than even the grand jury results and that Mainstream ignores reporting the truth is what our federal leaders have to say to the public about the grand jury findings. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi weighs-in with a statement that will blow your mind!

How do you join “TNN Live?” It’s simple: at the top of this article is a blue horizontal banner that says “LISTEN LIVE.” Click on that banner at 9:00 AM Central and join the show.

Feel free while listening to call the show to ask questions, share your thoughts, and even object if you so desire with what you hear on the show. It’s a toll-free call: 866-378-7884 — that is 866-37TRUTH. You can join and share your thoughts with people from your city and others from cities and countries around the World!

The Art of the Deal

After months of trying to frame the narrative of the nationwide unrest as “peaceful protesting,” as President Obama called it, or ignoring it entirely, Democrats have discovered a new way to label it: the riots are violent, and they’re Trump’s fault. After all, when Joe Biden decided to escape his basement, he was looking for some new “schtick” that he can use to let everyone know that HE’s the champion of anti-violence while Trump is the ringmaster of “pillage and burn!”

Joe Biden jumped on this new storyline during a campaign speech in Pittsburgh on Monday, telling voters that Trump is “stoking violence in our cities.”

“This president long ago forfeited any moral leadership in this country. He can’t stop the violence — because for years he has fomented it,” Biden claimed.

This is probably the most dishonest scheme the Democrats have ever created. Remember, the series of protests across the country — which often turned violent after nightfall — started in Minneapolis after the death of George Floyd at the hands of police. They were supposedly about police brutality and racist tendencies to attack African Americans. This all gave birth to the “Defund the Police” movement.

In Atlanta, rioters burned a Wendy’s after police shot Rayshard Brooks in the back in a parking lot. People burned businesses in Kenosha after the shooting of Jacob Blake. Protesters and rioters may have turned on President Trump because they view him as the leader of a broken system. But one thing is missing about this fairytale of anarchy: If Trump is the source of it all, what did he suddenly change that started the fires and devastation?

To listen to Democrats explain the riots, they were peaceful until white supremacist Trump supporters got involved. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler called ANTIFA violence in Portland a “myth” when he was confronted on a D.C. street about it. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser bragged in her Democratic National Convention speech about creating “Black Lives Matter Plaza” in Washington, D.C. for the protesters. But the Mayor conveniently forgot that some of those protesters set fire to the historic St John’s church outside of the White House.

Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan  described her city’s “autonomous zone,” which was snatched from Seattle authorities by armed protesters, as a place that would usher in a “Summer of Love.” That is where a black teenager would later be shot dead, in a “block party atmosphere.” Speaker Nancy Pelosi responded to the toppling of a statue of Christopher Columbus by giving a wave of her hand: “People will do what they do.”

Massachusetts Representative Ayanna Pressley took it further than did her fellow lawmakers. She urged more “unrest in the streets” during an MSNBC interview in August. No one blamed her for the Americans who were pulled out of their cars and beaten for daring to drive on streets blocked by protesters.

Then there is Senator Kamala Harris who is now Biden’s cohort — his Vice President running mate. Harris promoted a bail fund intended for protesters in Minnesota. Simply helping lawbreakers raise money from fellow Americans to bail them out of jail for committing crimes of all kinds is bad enough. It’s even worse when you look at the individuals who received those funds. One went on to assault a bar owner who was left with a traumatic brain injury after his release. Another was charged with stabbing a friend for refusing sex, a third was charged with sexual assault and kidnapping, and a fourth was charged with shooting at police. Great peaceful, law-abiding folks to help with bail money, right?

Biden was really powerful in attacking the violence in our streets in a speech in early June. But while lashing out at those who perpetrated the violence, he blamed Trump and the police for escalating tensions. His verbal assault on law officers AND the President was as crazy then as it is now.

Trump repeatedly offered federal assistance to governors and mayors as their cities were burned and looted. He continually and publicly made it clear to those mayors and governors, “All you have to do is call and we’ll send help immediately that will stop it all very quickly.” Many Americans are beginning to sense that Biden wanted to allow the unrest and violence to continue because he and other Democrats felt it gave them voter support.

The Democrats in charge of those cities must have thought the same thing! Almost all continually told President Trump to “mind your own business and stay in Washington.” They didn’t need his help. Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler wrote in a letter to Trump on August 28, “We don’t need your politics of division and demagoguery. When you sent the Feds to Portland last month, you made the situation far worse.” Ted apparently forgot that the looters were destroying the $200 million federal courthouse in Portland and Ted’s police force was not stopping the ANTIFA thugs from fire-bombing the building almost nightly.

The following night, weeks after federal troops left the area, a Trump supporter was shot by a member of ANTIFA. Protesters looted stores and set fires near the building in which Wheeler lives.

There’s a huge price to pay for letting all this rioting, looting, burning, and other types of destruction continue unabated. Homicide rates in 27 major American cities were up 21 percent from May to June.

After three months of all this chaos and mayhem — that showed little signs of slowing — locals began to take up arms to defend their families and their properties from destruction. Theirs’ was a response to violence they deemed necessary because their city government under Ted Wheeler — who is not just the Mayor but the Police Commissioner, too — refused to keep the city, its citizens, and its property safe.

Citizens who watched as police around the country were told to stand down or were chased and burned out of their own precincts cannot be blamed for taking matters into their own hands when the state failed them. Kyle Rittenhouse, the 17-year-old who was used as proof that Trump was aiding and abetting violent right-wingers, claims he was protecting a local business when he was chased and attacked by rioters who tried to take his weapon.

Don’t you find it curious that Joe Biden, who several months before became the certain Democrat Party presidential nominee — said NOTHING about the violence? And then, suddenly as if someone said, “Hey Joe: we’ve got to start blaming Trump for all this. The people are getting upset and are beginning to grumble against we Democrats,” Joe on cue began placing the blame squarely on Trump.

Here’s the Democrats’ conundrum:

  • The polls are no longer in the Democrats’ favor.
  • Support for Black Lives Matter has plummeted in swing states.
  • Biden is underperforming when compared to Hillary Clinton in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan.
  • Even Minnesota looks like it could be in play for Trump.
  • These are all states where high turnout in rural and suburban areas — whose residents likely fear riots coming to their streets — could hand the election to Trump.
  • The Biden campaign has obviously noticed all this and realized that allowing Trump to take control of the anti-violence message is a losing strategy.

So, here comes Uncle Joe! He began asking people if they feel safer under Trump and begins painting the picture of a death-spiral for America: “Does anyone believe there will be less violence in America if Donald Trump is reelected?”

Summary

When I was in the car business right out of college, I learned that in a negotiation — an interface between two people who are trying to induce the other to believe what they’re being told more than they believe what they’re trying to get the OTHER to believe — when an offer is made, the first party to even speak about the specifics will lose the negotiation! 

You know what? That happened almost every time I as a salesman began a price negotiation with a car buyer. Guess what: it happens in politics as well!

Joe Biden and the Democrat Party thought that sitting in the weeds while watching America burn with violence would give them a real advantage among voters. What they failed to understand was Donald Trump knew that Americans were not so stupid as to think that HE (or any other Republicans for that matter) could possibly have any control of the atmosphere of violence in any of these Democrat-controlled cities and states! So Mr. Trump just quietly stood by and made sure all knew that “all they have to do is call and ask me and we’ll end their violence and restore peace in their cities and states immediately.”

Of course they laughed and lashed-out at the President. “We don’t need your help! You’ll just make matters worse. Stay outta my town!”

Guess what? The Biden campaign and the DNC waited too long. They were hoping there would be some type of Armageddon blowup that would expose to the World that Donald Trump was an inept politician who simply let anarchists take over the United States!

Suddenly, the truth slapped them all in the faces at the same time: Trump has quietly let everyone know over and over, he can fix this. And because we haven’t even talked about it or even stated it exists, Americans are beginning to think that Joe, Kamala, and the other Democrats want this to result in the devastation of our major cities just to try and make Trump look bad!

You know what? I’m beginning to believe that’s just what they wanted.

But then, the Biden handlers made that sales fatal mistake: they sent Joe out to speak to the public about the violence. And, sure enough, he did exactly what Americans expected him to do: he blamed all the violence on the President.

This race is over, folks. The Democrats lost. Joe Biden lost. Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer lost.

They were beaten by a salesman who learned long ago that when a sales “final offer” is made in a negotiation, the first one to blink loses. And they blinked.

Obviously, none of them read the “Art of the Deal” written by that great salesman who lives in the White House.

Trump didn’t need to read it: he wrote it.

Do Black Lives Matter?

Let me make one thing clear: there is a vast gulf between the social and political organization “Black Lives Matter” and someone — ANYONE — saying, “black lives matter.” Both versions of the word are important. And we all need to stop weaponizing each.

Black Lives Matter (BLM) is a social justice organization that got its start in Ferguson, Missouri, in the wake of the outrage in the African American community following the police shooting death of Michael Brown. It turned into a national civil rights organization that has expanded across the nation. Because of Ferguson, Black Lives Matter’s focus has been on the killings of young African Americans at the hands of police from every level of law enforcement: federal, state, and local.

Additionally, BLM sponsored a number of demonstrations in several of the largest U.S. cities in protest to police shootings, some of which resulted in the death of blacks. In almost every one of the rallies or demonstrations, violence breaks out. In fact, many have begun to compare Black Lives Matters with ANTIFA, who seem to target rallies and meetings initiated as Free Speech rallies or conferences. Just take a look at what’s happened almost nightly in major cities across America like Portland, Seattle, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and New York City. It seems that in each city in each protest/demonstration/riot, the anger and furor escalates and turns into more and more aggressive actions in each.

ANTIFA is another story we’ve previously written about but are not the focus of this conversation. Please know, however, it seems to many BLM takes much of their demonstration and even violence planning from ANTIFA. (Or maybe it’s the other way around)

In our summary, we will address the fact that these and other far-left political groups seem to focus most of their attention on those from ethnic communities who are involved in incidents that are often racial and often end in the death of someone. They discovered that such violent acts are magnets for news coverage. Violent death makes for a good news story!

Instead of just throwing up our hands saying, “It doesn’t matter what we do or so, these people are going to harp on this claim: ‘police target blacks in almost all incidents that include some type of serious crime in which an African American is shot. They do so for purely racist and political purposes.'”

That’s been the police shooting story since half-way through Barack Obama’s first term as president. BLM supporters have built that into a narrative that accompanies every news story at every network, newspaper, and national television show when such killings are reported to Americans. Facts prove otherwise, which many minority Americans refuse to accept. This brings us today to ask not, “Is the storyline that police are responsible for most deaths in the African American community true?” What needs to be asked and answered instead is this:

Does the truth matter?

Evidently, not to groups like Black Lives Matter. That’s tragic for many reasons, not the least of which is that black lives are being lost as a result. When it comes to the subject of American police, blacks, and the deadly use of force, here is what we know:

A recent “deadly force” study by Washington State University researcher Lois James found that police officers were less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white or Hispanic ones in simulated threat scenarios. Harvard economics professor Roland Fryer analyzed more than 1,000 of officer-involved shootings across the country. He concluded that there is zero evidence of racial bias in police shootings. In Houston, he found that blacks were 24 percent less likely than whites to be shot by officers even though the suspects were armed or violent.

Does the truth matter?

An analysis of the Washington Post’s Police Shooting Database and of Federal Crime Statistics reveals that fully 12 percent of all whites and Hispanics who die of homicide are killed by cops. By contrast, only four percent of black homicide victims are killed by cops. But isn’t it a sign of bias that blacks make up 26 percent of police-shooting victims, but only 13 percent of the national population?

It is not, and common sense suggests why. Police shootings occur more frequently where officers confront armed or violently resisting suspects. Those suspects are disproportionately black.

According to the most recent study by the Department of Justice, although blacks were only about 15 percent of the population in the 75 largest counties in the U.S., they were charged with 62 percent of all robberies, 57 percent of murders and 45 percent of assaults. In New York City, blacks commit over three-quarters of all shootings, though they are only 23 percent of the city’s population. Whites, by contrast, commit under two percent of all shootings in the city, though they are 34 percent of the population. New York’s crime disparities are repeated in virtually every racially diverse city in America. The real problem facing inner-city black communities today is not the police but criminals. In 2014, over 6,000 blacks were murdered, more than all white and Hispanic homicide victims combined. Who is killing them? Not the police, and not white civilians, but other blacks. In fact, a police officer is eighteen and a half times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer. If the police ended all use of lethal force tomorrow, it would have a negligible impact on the black death-by-homicide rate. In Chicago, through just the first six-and-a-half months of 2016, over 2,300 people were shot. That’s a shooting an hour during some weekends. The vast majority of the victims were black. During this same period, the Chicago police shot 12 people, all armed and dangerous. That’s one half of one percent of all shootings.

Does the truth matter?

If it does, here’s a truth worth pondering: There is no government agency more dedicated to the proposition that black lives matter than the police. The proactive policing revolution that began in the mid-1990s has dramatically brought down the inner-city murder rate and saved tens of thousands of black lives. Unfortunately, that crime decline is now in jeopardy.

Police officers are backing off of proactive policing in black neighborhoods, thanks to the false narrative that police officers are infected with homicidal bias. As a result, violent crime is going up. In cities with large black populations, homicides in the last two years rose anywhere from 54 percent in Washington D.C. to 90 percent in Cleveland. Overall, in the nation’s 56 largest cities, homicides rose 17 percent, a nearly unprecedented spike. Many law-abiding residents of high-crime areas beg the police to maintain order — precisely the type of policing that the ACLU, progressive politicians, BLM, and some in Congress denounce as racist. This is tragic because when the police refrain from proactive policing, black lives are lost—lost because of a myth.

The rancor escalated to never-before-seen heights with the death of Michael Floyd in Minneapolis. Since that day, the fires of anger and bitterness have stoked fires of division across the nation. Almost without fail, peaceful protests become peaceful demonstrations and marches. But almost without fail, those morph into violence, rioting, and looting.

It is uncontroverted that there are instances of white cops killing blacks — far more than we would hope would ever happen. Thankfully they are not in the numbers most in the public feel are certain. But the problem here is even though the best research and data conclude that there is no evidence that police are killing blacks just because they are black. Exclusively such incidents occur as a result of severe law-breaking acts and acts of violence.

What Matters?

OK, we’ve examined the statistics. They originate from very authentic and credible sources. And they’re quite conclusive in the finding that disproves the almost universal perception that police “in general” are killing blacks because they are blacks. But those statistics beg for answers to a question not part of the first segment of this conversation: What is the REAL reason for this conversation that is so necessary yet so damaging?

There’s a simple answer: No one yet has, on a national scale, offered a plausible solution. Find a peaceful way to resolve these differences is — and always has been — a monumental task which no one has completed. Many have tried, several have gotten started, but none so far have seen success.

Here’s the fearful part of where we find us today: those actively involved in these conversations have become so polarized, so far apart, it often seems a solution will NEVER be found. And even if a solution is identified, it is doubtful all sides in this crisis will agree. I think there is a group of people who are the loudest and most demanding in this that don’t even want resolution. They feed on the anger and hatred, the fear and the violence, the infliction of pain for which they know there’s no real price they will be forced to pay.

What we need is a “new” Martin Luther King, Jr. who could draw people of all races and backgrounds to him for a conversation. He taught that communication is the necessary element to begin resolution. When people speak “to” each other and not yell “at” each other, it’s much easier to finish a conversation and have substance to show for the labor.

It would help, too, if we didn’t have an industry that relies on conflict, confusion, and violence to self-perpetuate a need for their existence: the Media.

As we find ourselves inside of 90-days until an election, it would be wise for every American to pause just a moment and consider where they WANT to go in the near future. Then choose the best way under the best circumstances to get there. Open those conversations with others that live within your circle of influence. Challenge everyone to THINK instead of just ACTING.

We MUST find a way through this. And we can…I’m certain of that.

 

Armageddon Came to Congress: The American People Lost

Tuesday, July 28th, was the most reprehensible day in history for the United States House of Representatives. House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) gaveled-in his committee to hear the testimony of Attorney General William Barr regarding a host of topics about the attorney general’s recent actions.  They pertain to legal cases from the past several years, the Department of Justice responses to the recent protest-turned-riots in Portland and elsewhere, and for the AG to answer questions about many other things that have stuck in the craws of every Democrat on that committee.

Just to put this hearing in context for you, House Democrats have filed articles of impeachment against Attorney General Barr. So you can only imagine the atmosphere in that hearing room.

Rep. Jarrold Nadler (D-NY)

Chairman Nadler was an hour late because of a car wreck in which he was involved on the way. He wasted no time to share his angst for the negative start to his day by taking it out on any Republican within earshot — including the Attorney General. Here’s a brief synopsis of how this hearing evolved into the nastiest House Judiciary Committee hearing in my memory:

  • Democrats sought to paint Barr, making his first appearance before the House Judiciary Committee, as a Trump loyalist who has tried to shield the president and his allies from scrutiny, all while seeking to help Trump project the image of a law-and-order president ahead of the 2020 presidential election.
  • “The job of the attorney general is to defend the best interests of the people and serve as the people’s lawyer, but during your time as attorney general you have consistently undermined democracy, undermined the Constitution and undermined the health, safety, and well-being of the American people,” said Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.). “All to personally benefit Donald Trump.”
  • “You are supposed to represent the people of the United States of America, not violate people’s First Amendment rights, you are supposed to uphold democracy and secure equal justice under the law, not violently dismantle certain protesters based on the president’s agenda,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) said in one of the more fiery moments of the hearing.
  • The hearing frequently devolved into shouting matches between Democratic lawmakers and Barr as well as between committee members. Democrats also said they were worried about what Barr might do before the presidential election.
  • A focus for Democrats throughout the hearing was the administration’s decision to send federal police to Portland.

The back-and-forth exchanges also showed how much pent up frustration there was among Democrats ahead of the hearing. Tuesday’s appearance was Barr’s first before the panel, and Democrats have long said they have wanted to hear from Barr, stemming back to his handling of the release of former special counsel Robert Mueller’s report.

During one tense exchange, Rep. Madeleine Dean (D-Pa.) repeatedly admonished Barr for interrupting her questioning. “We’ve waited a long time for you to come here. The time is mine,” Dean said. “You waited to talk to me like this? You didn’t need to wait so long,” Barr responded.

That is just a small sample of the insults hurled incessantly at the attorney general by Democrats throughout the nearly five-hour “get-together.” I call it that because it was far from a hearing. To explain what I mean in saying that is just to give you one sentence uttered in a brief pause by Attorney General Barr: “I thought this was to be a hearing. If it’s a hearing, shouldn’t the witness who’s appearing be allowed to respond?”

For approximately five hours, Mr. Barr was accused, berated, insulted, demeaned, interrupted, and called a liar. The only time he was allowed to complete any thoughts put into spoken words was during his opening statement!

“There Have Been ONLY Peaceful Protestors in Portland”

Attorney General Barr

Almost to a person Democrats in that hearing demanded that there were NO Antifa or other anarchists present in Portland, NO violence at all perpetrated by any during the protests other than that alleged by Democrats during the hearing perpetrated by federal officers against those “peaceful” protestors. Chairman Nadler himself on Monday was caught on camera, responding to a reporter who asked the congressman about the Antifa-inspired riots in Oregon. Nadler responded to the question saying, “There have been no riots in Portland. That’s a myth circulating only in Washington.”

In his opening remarks, Barr stated some of the Portland demonstrators have been overly violent, and protests have damaged federal property. “What unfolds nightly around the courthouse cannot reasonably be called a protest; it is, by any objective measure, an assault on the government of the United States,” he said.

“Rioters have barricaded the front door of the courthouse, pried plywood off the windows with crowbars, and thrown commercial-grade fireworks into the building in an apparent attempt to burn it down with federal personnel inside. The rioters have started fires outside the building, and then systematically attacked federal law enforcement officers who attempt to put them out — for example, by pelting the officers with rocks, frozen water bottles, cans of food, and balloons filled with fecal matter.

“Remarkably, the response from many in the media and local elected offices to this organized assault has been to blame the federal government. To state what should be obvious … such acts are, in fact federal crimes under statutes enacted by this Congress.”

Barr said an attorney general has a “unique obligation” to ensure that the standard of justice is applied to everyone equally and that he’s sought to uphold this obligation without interference from Trump.

“The president has not attempted to interfere in these decisions,” he said. “On the contrary, he has told me from the start that he expects me to exercise my independent judgment to make whatever call I think is right. That is precisely what I have done.”

Other “Matters”

Barr also did not commit to withholding the results of U.S. Attorney John Durham’s investigation into the origin of the FBI’s Russia investigation until after the 2020 presidential election. He stated that any report released ahead of the election “will be in my judgment, not the one that is covered” by a Justice Department policy against investigations that may disrupt an election.

“We’re not going to interfere,” he said. “In fact, I’ve made it very clear that I’m not going to tolerate it.”

Further discussing November’s elections, Barr said there was no reason to believe the election would be “rigged” but did back Trump’s skepticism of mail-in voting, saying “there’s a high risk” for voter fraud if the practice is widely adopted.

Barr dismissed the allegations lobbed at him throughout the roughly five-hour hearing, arguing that he has worked to “restore the rule of law” after the DOJ “strayed” from its mission before his tenure.

Republicans also leaned into a fierce defense of Barr, joining him in blasting Democrats for failing to denounce rioters who have violently clashed with federal agents in recent weeks.

“What makes me concerned for the country is, for the first time in my memory, that the leaders of one of our great two political parties, the Democratic Party, are not coming out and condemning mob violence and the attacks on federal courts,” Barr said.

“Why can’t we just come out and say violence against federal courts has to stop? Could we hear something like that?” the attorney general added.

Jim Jordan (R-OH) set the tone for Republicans at the beginning of the hearing by showing a selectively edited 10-minute video highlighting moments of violence at protests around the country. It was preceded by images of Democrats, including former President Obama and presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, describing protests as peaceful.

The GOP members repeatedly argued that an aggressive law enforcement response was necessary to quell violent protests.

“We’re seeming just to contort ourselves to get to some way to show that you have nefarious motives,” said Rep. Doug Collins (R-Ga.).

Summary

I have never heard such nastiness from any group of adults: insults, badgering, interruptions, allegations, defamation. Democrats showed in this hearing just how vile members of Congress can be when they want to destroy a former attorney general who is attorney general for the second time. William Barr, throughout his entire career, has been revered by Republicans and Democrats alike as one of the greatest strict adherents to the Constitution and the Rule of Law that has ever born the attorney general title.

What could make this group so venomous to Barr today?

You know the answer to that: he serves for President Donald Trump. That’s his only sin.

“That shouldn’t cause them to attack so viciously this or any attorney general!” Your saying that would be a truthful conclusion IF this Democrat Party wasn’t focused entirely on one objective: Destroy Donald Trump and destroy all that work with and for him. No price is too high to pay to run them all out of Washington, D.C.!

The fact that their objective as it has played out is so obviously one fueled by more than just anger should make every American ask, “What’s going on in all this? What is their purpose?”

The answer is simple: Attorney General William Barr, the Department of Justice, Federal Attorney John Durham, and revealed in the hearing today by A.G. Barr an added federal attorney, Stephen Cox of Texas, are together about to wrap up several massive criminal cases of illegal activities on the part of members of the Obama Administration.

Democrats are scared to death. They desperately want all of this to remain unresolved until after the swearing of Joe Biden as President to replace President Trump. If they can keep the findings of these investigations quiet and Biden wins and be sworn in as President, the massive wrongdoing much of which has already been revealed can simply be swept under the Obama “corruption rug,” which will be handed down to Biden.

In closing, let me say the hearing today was so vile and unprecedented, I wanted to save just a few audio tidbits. If you join us at 9:00 Central this morning at TNN Live, in our first segment, I will play snippets of testimony from just a few of the participants to show you how nasty these House Democrats are today. How do you listen? Just click on the blue horizontal banner at the top of this story at 9:00 AM Central, and it will take you right to the broadcast. The segment only lasts a few minutes so you can hear those and then move on to your day unless you want to stay with us.

If we don’t see you at 9:00, we’ll look forward to getting back together tomorrow at Truth News Network.

“white” Folks Ain’t Woke — Until Now

Just when we get to the point where we in America think we have things all together and we understand everything, we don’t. Just when we think we’ve reached a point where everyone knows how to address people of every race, ethnicity, religion, economic status, we don’t. But God knows we certainly know what it is to be Woke! You are not going to believe this, but the “real” journalists in our media have just turned the corner on exactly how to prove one is Woke: it’s how you spell two critical words in the English language.

What you are about to read will probably turn your face red — if not red then white, and your temperature will skyrocket. But here’s a critical promise you MUST make before continuing to read: don’t stop reading until you get all the way to the end! If you will not commit to that, simply click off this story and go to CNN or MSDNC online! It’s a story written by a reporter named Jarvis Dupont. We’ll tell you about Mr. Dupont at the completion of his offering to us all today. (Don’t forget: you MUST read all the way through)

Jarvis Dupont

The Associated Press — without question the oldest and formerly most reputable national newsprint disseminator — recently posted an announcement on their website detailing their decision to capitalize the “B” in Black when used in the context of race and culture.”These changes align with the long-standing capitalization of other racial and ethnic identifiers such as Latino, Asian American, and Native American,” writes AP’s Vice President for Standards, John Daniszewski in a blog post on the AP website.

The following day a further announcement was made explaining why they had taken the decision to continue to use a lowercase “w” in “white” when used in the same context.

Predictably, this has upset a lot of white people (or as I like to call them “racists”) who obviously cannot understand that when it comes to race, they really need to stay in their lane and get used to not “capitalizing” (haha!) from the labor of Black and Minority Ethnic people.

“There was clear desire and reason to capitalize Black,” explains Daniszewski in a second blog post. “Most notably, people who are Black have strong historical and cultural commonalities, even if they are from different parts of the world and even if they now live in different parts of the world. There is, at this time, less support for capitalizing white. White people generally do not share the same history and culture, or the experience of being discriminated against because of skin color.”

What John Daniszewski is saying here is that white people come from a wide range of cultures and social backgrounds, whereas Black people are one homogenous group with the same outlook and experiences and only one distinct identity: Black. Every Black person I know enjoys rap music and supports Black Lives Matter. I am fairly sure of this. When it comes to white people, their likes and dislikes are all over the place. You just can’t pin them down to anything specific. It’s like trying to nail ants to a wall. Horrible mess.

“We agree that white people’s skin color plays into systemic inequalities and injustices, and we want our journalism to robustly explore those problems,” Daniszewski continues.

From this, we can deduce that although white people come from many different cultures and backgrounds and experience no meaningful shared experience regarding their skin color…they DO share a propensity towards slave-ownership, white privilege and racism due to their, well, skin color. This makes perfect sense. white people benefit universally from Black slavery, they each have a duty to accept and dismantle their white privilege, they need to recognize the injustices that their lack of melanin have brought against Black people and strive to make amends. Only last week I made my grandfather go to his nearest KFC and apologize to any Black people he came across (apparently they can’t get enough of fried chicken which is another shared experience of theirs) for the death of George Floyd. He’s 83 and suffers from dementia, so he ended up telling a black Labrador that he killed George Foreman. The Labrador didn’t seem to pay him much heed but I still feel this was a valuable step towards making reparations.

So with all this in mind, I fully support the non-capitalization of the word ‘white’ when used in conversations surrounding race issues. white people need bringing down a fair few pegs, and this would be a damn good start. In fact, I think it would benefit us greatly if we took this a bit further and have outlined a few suggestions for a less white-oriented society:

  • Petition paint companies to not capitalize the word “white” on any of their products;
  • Create a typeface that automatically makes the “w” smaller when used before the letters “h”, “i,” “t,” and “e;”
  • Get rid of the “w” altogether so that the term “hite people” contains fewer letters than “Black people;”
  • Force editors to print the word “Black” in gold lettering on all magazine and newspaper articles, and have the word “white” handwritten in cheap crayon;
  • Completely remove the word “white” as a descriptive term, so that when we are discussing matters of race, the conversation becomes centered on “people,” and “Black people.”
  • Capitalize every letter in “Black” on everything everywhere to address the inequality and oppression BLACK people deal with every day.

I feel confident that we will begin to make huge strides towards true racial equality once we learn to treat people differently according to our preconceived notions regarding their skin color, and I would like to thank the Associated Press for taking that first brave step.

Summary

No doubt at some point during the Jarvis Dupont story you felt some disgust, probably some anger, and certainly screamed at your computer screen. You probably thought something like this: “How can this guy — and how can the Associated Press relent to the ‘Woke-Mongers’ and bow to the Black Lives Matter and do something so trivial which is nothing more than symbolic at best with NO substance?”

Jarvis Dupont

I’ll answer your question and give you some context this way: Jarvis Dupont is a fictional character who is either “a” person or “some” people who via Twitter have in large part headed this Social Justice Culture that pretty much totally controls the United States! Supposedly, Jarvis, fake-pictured to the left, is a transgender woman who exclusively uses Twitter to spread the LGTBQI, Woke, BLM, message using racial, ethnic, and bigotted language.

The Associated Press decision to, in all reports, keep the word “white” lower-case while capitalizing “Black” is true. USA Today and its network of 260 media outlets announced the plan to do the same last week. NBC News, Los Angeles Times, Chicago Sun-Times are expected to follow suit quickly.

I could rant and rave about every part of this: the use of a fake transgender Twitter character, lighting ANOTHER fire of racial anger spelling “Black” and “white” in all reporting to disparage all white people, certainly pours gasoline on an already raging inferno.

Isn’t this what the U.S. needed in the shadows of the vilest racial violence and political upheaval of the last 50 years? It’s as if some political terrorist leader sitting at a table with henchman having a beer and laughing said, “What else can we do to create news to perpetuate the already existing hatred, anger, and divisiveness so this chaos will continue and even get worse? Hey, let’s think of something we can get Jarvis to dump on Twitter that will take this to an even higher level!”

Maybe that terrorist leader is Jarvis Dupont! Maybe, it’s George Soros or Barack Obama or Joe Biden or Vladimir Putin. Heck, it might even be Hillary. But whoever it is and whatever their plan is it has certainly succeeded so far. The fires of hatred and anger burn brightly in many of our major cities. Sadly, it appears that REAL violence might break out quickly in deadly fashion.

Play

Do All Black Lives Matter?

‘I understand black lives matter. But that’s not my movement, right now. My movement is to let them know that was my son. Horace Lorenzo Anderson was my son.’ And his son is dead.

In a gripping, gut-wrenching, heartrending, half-hour interview with Sean Hannity of Fox News, Horace Lorenzo Anderson, Sr. tearfully plead with social justice warriors and anyone watching that his son’s black life mattered, too.

Horace Jr. was just 19 years old when he was shot and killed at Seattle’s Capitol Hill Ongoing Protest (CHOP), the police-free, six-block city encampment created with the blessing of Democratic officials. Seattle mayor Jenny Durkan cheerfully dubbed the anarchist takeover a ‘summer of love,’ apparently unaware that the first Summer of Love, in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury district in 1967, ended in rampant criminality, drug addiction, sex abuse and the other varieties of misery which have marred the City by the Bay ever since.

I know, I’m an old white guy and therefore anything I would say on this subject certainly means my skin color means I’m ineligible to do so, plus it means I’m racist. Hey, give me a break. I’m WOKE! I understand what “Black Lives Matter” means and stands for according to conventional and current social demands. While I know what I have to say puts me squarely in the bullseye of the Cancel Culture police, if I get “canceled,” it will have nothing to do with the applicability or correctness of the content of what I say. Just because someone alleges something I say – something ANYBODY says – is wrong, doesn’t mean it’s wrong. And before anyone jumps to “cancel” me, my life of 67 years speaks anything other than racism. So, I suggest you listen for a moment or two or just cancel out of what I have to say right now. Because if you’re going to stick to the WOKE rule that “no white person can possibly understand racism,” you will not receive anything I have to say anyway. That, of course, has nothing to do with the merits of what I say. It speaks rather to your unwillingness to consider something that may force you to rethink an absolute or two you’ve embraced. And maybe you’ve embraced something incorrectly or for the wrong reasons.

At least, give me a shot. There’s no harm in listening, is there?

The Black Lives Matter movement has apparently abandoned the substance of its purposeful founding and should quickly rethink the operational process that is today underway nationwide. If that doesn’t happen soon, what credibility the movement had will be flushed down the toilet as little more than hypocritical radicalism that has for generations seen so many initially worthy causes fade away because their actions decry their claims of purpose for existence. Why? Instead of stepping up and responding in the face of REAL horrors that many in the African American community face daily, BLM has allowed itself to morph into little more than another radical social cause that looks and acts nothing like its claimed purpose and nothing that its name alleges it is.

Few question that African Americans have suffered unfair treatment in the criminal justice system. There is far too much in-your-face evidence to discount it. And because of the generations of politicians simply looking-away, far too many Americans reject its pervasiveness. And that’s sad. Black Lives Matter (at least formerly) had the perfect opportunity to be the voice for black Americans who socially suffer at the hands of not just a few racist law officers, but at the hands of racism that many who are perpetrators don’t even know they’re the culprits! Last year, 9 African Americans were shot and killed by white cops – that in a nation of 330 million people. Say what you will, but that number doesn’t justify the $130 million “seed” given to BLM by George Soros. Think of what even a small chunk of that $130 million could change in the lives of a large number of African American children.

What might have been for Horace Jr. had he never crossed the perimeter of CHOP? What if he had managed to escape his revolutionary captors who blocked paramedics from coming to his rescue as he bled to death in their new urban utopia?

What might have been for eight-year-old Secoriea Turner had she survived Atlanta’s Fourth of July? During a press conference, her heartbroken father, his voice hoarse, pleaded, “They say, ‘black lives matter.’ You killed your own. You killed your own this time just because of a barrier. They killed my baby.”

Atlanta’s Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, flanked by Turner, grim-faced police officers, and families grieving the weekend orgy of violence, was to the point: “The reality is this: These aren’t police officers shooting people on the streets of Atlanta. These are members of the community shooting each other – and, in this case, it is the worst possible outcome.”

In Chicago, another father bore painful witness to the worst possible outcome: his baby being killed over the Fourth of July over some probable trivial dispute. Seven-year-old Natalia Wallace was shot at a weekend party in her grandmother’s backyard. Nathan Wallace told reporters, “To see my daughter on the table with a gunshot wound to the forehead, that will change somebody’s life.”

Tyrone Muhammad, a Chicago activist and founder of the fledgling group “Ex-Cons for Community and Social Change,” works to change lives before the bullets fly. Muhammad knows both sides of the violence equation. He spent over two decades in prison for murder. He went in a hard-eyed gangster and came out determined to keep other young men from making the same disastrous trek from the South Side to steel bars. Here’s is what he said about all of the uproar with no action when it comes to senseless killings of Chicago babies:

Muhammad is unsteady about the politics and goals of Black Lives Matter as an organization. “Black Lives Matter is a political group that has so many political leanings that it clearly uses black death as a hustle. Black death is a hustle for a lot of these outside groups.”

A hustle, Tyrone Muhammad believes, that ignores the root of the problem driving what he calls a “swarm of civil war” engulfing America’s inner cities: fatherless homes, broken families, official corruption and complacent communities:

“It’s black men’s fault to allow black boys and black men to victimize their own communities and murder their children. We have to take personal responsibility.” He adds. “It should be commended whenever black men say, ‘It’s our responsibility to reduce violence.'”

Chicago’s mayor, Lori Lightfoot was swept into office last year by a citizenry desperate for change. The new big-city mayor is clearly rattled by the extreme violence wracking her city. After another weekend of bloodshed, Lightfoot declared, “Thoughts and prayers are simply not enough at this point. Sorrow itself is not enough.”

But for Mr. Anderson, Mr. Turner, and Mr. Wallace, and for the countless parents and families like them, prayers and sorrow are all they have for their black children whose lives dearly mattered.

“I’m kissing a picture,” Horace Sr. says through tears.

If the leaders of BLM truly want to impact the lives of black Americans, it should revise and broaden its mission. Americans have watched this year as BLM has flexed its muscles showing the world its potential to truly impact the preservation of the lives of young African Americans in the U.S., not just from a handful of racist policemen, but from senseless deaths at the hands of anyone, but primarily other blacks.

How callous are the leaders of BLM to ignore the cries of Horace Lorenzo Anderson, Sr. as he wept profoundly on Sean Hannity’s show? Did the life of Horace, Jr. not matter? What about eight-year-old Secoriea Turner who just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time in Atlanta and caught a bullet in her forehead that instantly snuffed-out her life? Where was BLM in either of those cases? Painting its name on a street somewhere?

America’s social justice elites are quick to throw anyone under the bus for even questioning BLM’s motives in ignoring such African American killings at the hands of other blacks. Let’s be adults here: when it comes to the senseless slaughter of African Americans at the hands of ANYONE, enough is enough. $130 million for an organization that names itself Black Lives Matter should probably find a way to tackle the problem its “Name” says it tackles: deaths of blacks…PERIOD because black lives DIDN’T matter! Anything short of that is little more than another ethnic not-for-profit that exists to make noise, create havoc, which is content to light fires with no desire or efforts to put out the fires for the cause of meaningful change.

If Black Lives really matter, do something – whatever you can with whatever resources you can muster – to show a nation your group name is more than a call-sign used to spark fear among millions of Americans who simply don’t understand the BLM movement. Presently, Black Lives Matter looks exactly like dozens of other social groups from U.S. history that do little more than scorch the ground with little or no change.

I hope BLM does not hope that its acceptance will be based upon fear. Fear seldom accomplishes positive changes. America doesn’t need another one of those. There are far too many already in place to count. We need some group of people to activate whatever is necessary to assure every black American that truly, “Black Lives really DO Matter.”

Play

Actor Terry Crews Feels to BLM Only ”Some” Black Lives Matter

This Cancel Culture and Elitism we’ve talked about for several years at TruthNewsNetwork is consuming our world. Every day we see example after example of how frustrating it is to be caught up in a conundrum that puts you in the bullseye of those who have taken command of the determination of everything and everybody regarding saying and doing the “right” thing. It’s bad enough that anyone has to even think about such silliness. But your having to do so just to survive in your chosen career or to maintain friendships or keep your job is nasty. And it’s not based on what you DO, but based solely on what someone who controls the rules of Social Elitism can with a snap of the fingers put you in a good place or send you to “Hell on Earth” with no regard at all for the truth of any matter. The substance has been deleted and replaced by Social Elitism. And those in charge control far more of this nation today than they did just two weeks ago. And if things don’t change, in 90 days, they will be telling everyone what cereal to eat for breakfast and what color bowl from which to eat it!

That may seem to be a joke, but it’s no joke. Today more than ever, the jobs, friendships, family relationships as well as friends, business associates and fellow employees are more than ever before being forced to embrace a set of fundaments, standards, rules, how to’s and how not to’s that regulate every process of being “acceptable” within all these overlapping circles. Additionally, the social elitists that control the circle in which you find yourself have the power to at any time, for whatever reason, and without any justification, put the word out. You’ll not only find yourself thrown to the curb, but without any knowledge of your doing anything wrong! You’ll never know in advance what you are supposed to and not supposed to do.

Today’s craziness has evolved into schizophrenic paranoia: everyone is afraid of saying anything for fear of saying the wrong thing. And few even know what the right and wrong thing to say are!

Social Elitism Now Dominates Hollywood

Actor and comedian Terry Crews is taking heat for criticizing the Black Lives Matter (BLM) organization over its tendency to hone in on police brutality and ignore far more significant issues in the black community. He recently tweeted that he wants to make sure “black lives matter” doesn’t turn into “black lives matter more.” Predictably, he was met by reactionary shrieks of “Uncle Tom” and “coon.”

Crews appeared on CNN on Monday night to explain his objections to BLM, and instead received a lecture from Don Lemon about the grievous errors in his line of thinking. After informing the movie star that he (Lemon) has “skin as tough as an armadillo” thanks to his soapbox at CNN, Lemon told Crews that “if you want an All Black Lives Matter movement that talks about gun violence,” then he should “start that movement with that name.”

“The Black Lives Matter movement is about police brutality and injustice in that manner, not about what’s happening in black neighborhoods,” Lemon said smugly.

Crews tried to explain that the Black Lives Matter movement is no longer solely about police brutality, as the organization’s website admits, but was repeatedly interrupted. Lemon, of course, had to keep his viewers from hearing the truth: that an organization purportedly dedicated to making black lives matter only actually cares about some black lives.

According to a database compiled by the Washington Post, only nine unarmed black people were killed by police in 2019. At least half of those incidents occurred after the unarmed individual attacked the police officer on the scene. This figure hardly compares to the thousands of African Americans affected by violent crime, largely perpetrated by other African Americans.

As a matter of fact, between recent crime waves in major cities and innocent black folks like David Dorn losing their lives in the wake of riots and looting, BLM and the related #DefundThePolice movement may be responsible for many more than nine deaths by the end of the summer. An eight-year-old girl was shot to death over the weekend in Atlanta near Wendy’s where Rashard Brooks was killed.

Cockburn suggests that Black Lives Matter should change its name to “0.00001 percent of Black Lives Matter” — “0.00001BLM,” for short.

Not Smart To Mess With Terry

BLM’s hypocrisy doesn’t end with claiming to want to lift black people while ignoring interracial crime. The organization is also against one of the most proven ways to reduce poverty and violence: fatherhood. BLM explicitly opposes traditional two-parent families: “We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable.”

Even the progressive left’s radical gender ideology seems to be more critical to BLM than reducing violence and providing stable homes for black children. “We affirm the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, undocumented folks, folks with records, women, and all Black lives along the gender spectrum,” the organization also says on its website.

Like the leaders of Black Lives Matter, prominent politicians are failing to take responsibility for the uptick in crime over the past several weeks. Just as Don Lemon attacked Terry Crews for mentioning negative trends outside of police brutality, Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago shifted the blame to firearms: ‘Tonight, a 7-year-old girl in Austin joined a list of teenagers and children whose hopes and dreams were ended by the barrel of a gun.”

Crews perfectly captured this phenomenon in another one of his recent tweets, writing, “There are ‘gatekeepers of Blackness’ within our own community who decide who’s Black and who’s not. I have often been called out for not being ‘black enough.’ How can that be?” (Crews is happily married to a mixed-racial wife)

Welcome to 2020, Mr. Crews. Anyone who questions the far-left agenda of groups like BLM will be shut down, black or not.

Rather than give you more of Don Lemon’s whipping of Terry Crews from his CNN show Monday night, we decided to call on Rob Smith of The First to break it down with an actual segment of that confrontation for yourself. Rob is an African-American journalist and is conservative. This piece includes a portion of the Crews interview which shows you just how black elites in media treat those of their own race who dare to make sense of the obvious that none of the BLM supporters from the black community want to accept: that Black Lives Matter only cares about Black Lives when those lives fit their peculiar narrative that details any opportunities to diminish any white person or group of white people, or, in Terry’s case, any black person who doesn’t toe the BLM line:

Summary

I cannot go without saying this: Terry Crews is not only an outstanding actor, but he’s also an African American man who made it out of some nasty spots in Flint, Michigan growing up. He chose to put aside all the petty racial partisanship in favor of working hard, working smart, honing his skills, and pursuing his dreams of becoming a successful actor. He made his own breaks. He did that by consciously refusing to allow the black environment in the U.S. to flood him with thoughts of victimhood. He took responsibility to make his life what it is today by not letting the elitist perspective dominate his thinking.

These babies were shot last week and died. Where is BLM on saving These lives?

Terry certainly is NOT a sellout or an Uncle Tom. He’s a smart, sensitive, and thoughtful American. He believes strongly in personal accountability and responsibility for one’s own life.

That’s too much for Don Lemon. After all, CNN has mastered the art of putting people in front of their cameras, who are mediocre at best at their craft. But they are all masters of denigration: the denigration of anyone and any group that refuses to accept being a mirror image of what someone else — ANYONE else — thinks they should be.

Lemon’s insistence that BLM is ONLY protesting against police violence is grossly false. His doing so repeatedly in Terry Crews’ face is an insult to every black person in America.

Sadly, Lemon has a big microphone. Fortunately, however, very few people watch him make a fool of himself every weeknight. And Terry Crews did it masterfully by just allowing Don to speak. Lemon’s little more than an empty suit. And his ratings confirm that again and again.

I bet all three of his fans got a kick watching Lemon insult Terry Crews.

Play

It’s Not a Revolution — It’s the Exact Opposite

America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary “putsch” — or a coordinated attempt to overthrow a government. It started four years ago immediately upon a group of people understanding that their long quiet and deadly push to the left politically had been railroaded by a conservative billionaire from Queens. What people are they? The sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalization who suddenly found themselves out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit in the UK, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist candidates in the U.S.

Those four sentences explain the storm of unrest battering American cities from coast to coast and making waves in Europe as well. The storm’s ferocity — the looting, the mobs, the mass lawlessness, the deranged slogans like #DefundPolice — terrifies ordinary Americans. Many conservatives believe they are facing a revolution targeting the very foundations of American order.

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Marxist revolt, even if some within this uproar scream hard-left rhetoric. What’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the entrenched elitist class — academia, media, large corporations, ‘experts,’ Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016 when Donald Trump shot their balloon out of the sky. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.

They’re not seeking some new arrangement, but a return to the pre-Trump status quo which was working out very well for them. It was working out less-well for the working class of all races, who bore the brunt of their preferred policy mix: open borders, free trade without limits, aggressive cultural liberalism that destroyed tradition and community, and a ‘global governance’ that purposely handicapped democracy and politics.

Conservatives generally don’t tend to pay much attention to class analysis. But in this case, it does help to explain what’s going on. And it helps to shine a light of the truth of social movements that disguise themselves and can get mistaken for revolutionary leftism. We at TruthNewsNetwork have called it that way. Why? Because we could find no other purpose for all that is happening than that.

Does anyone seriously believe the American establishment — Walmart, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, the trustees of Ivy League universities, the major sports leagues, even Brooks Brothers, for God’s sake — would sign on to a movement that genuinely threatened its material interests? And yet these and many other firms and institutions are falling over themselves to express solidarity with the ‘uprising,’ some going so far as to donate millions of dollars to Black Lives Matter, an outfit that lists among its objectives the abolition of the nuclear family.

Before my conservative friends go postal, think through this with me:

Over the past four years, every trick in the book has been used to end the ‘nightmare’ of national conservatism and populism. The methods deployed by the elite reflect its tendencies and preferences as a class. None of the methods they have exercised to bring down this president were unexpected. Remember: I even predicted all this craziness in politics — including impeachment — was going to happen as far back as 2017! Just think of recent happenings. Though few of us in the U.S. think about what’s happening similarly at the same time as in the U.S., it happened at the same time as Brexit in the U.K.

A majority of Britts voted to leave the EU and then had to spend three years fighting a political establishment that pulled all its vast resources to Brexit from happening. It failed. Does that parallel what’s happening here right now?

In America, the liberal establishment tried harder, failed harder, but learned more. From the minute Trump won the presidential election, Democrats, a significant group in our Intelligence Community, and their media allies set out to undo the result of the 2016 “send-home” of Hillary Clinton. The “Big” bullets in their gun were the ‘collusion’ probe and an impeachment push that was perhaps the single biggest insult ever to the intelligence of the American people. There were also countless smaller attempts to unseat Trump and destroy his followers. Remember: as he has so famously stated to American conservatives from the beginnings of the Mueller investigation: “They’re NOT coming after me. They’re coming after YOU.”

Trump survived it all. Now comes the new wave of rioters and mad anarchists, which many corporates and Democratic governors and mayors have actively encouraged, even as they continue to bar children from public parks and families from holding outdoor funerals, going to church and work, citing COVID-19 risks.

But wait: riots and statue-toppling — such things aren’t pleasant to establishment figures, are they? The logic becomes obvious when you see it as a form of class struggle. For all its fury, the storm of the riots ends. Their demands for ongoing racial fairness, equality, and attacks on law enforcement ends. There’s little in their cries about labor injustice, wages, and job security. Just demands for ‘representation’ or diversity (on corporate boards, in university curricula, etc). And, of course, the firing of those who say the wrong or awkward thing in the digital public square, in workplaces or in classrooms: you know, “Cancel Culture.”

The goal isn’t to repair economic injustices. You remember those protests and demands from the past: massive inequalities in wealth, health and job security. The goal today is 180 degrees opposite: to compromise, to defer, to smooth over, to hide these substantive disagreements, and instead have battles on methods of operations and social rule and racial changes.

Which social class most excels at politically correct treatment of others? That would be the professional-managerial class, the laptop class. Its children learn the communication and speech lingo for discussing ‘issues of race, gender, and sexuality’ from an early age. They’re expected to have mastered it by the time they take their entry-level jobs. It’s a skill that private schools are positively teaching already.

Working-class people, meanwhile, are most likely to struggle with this language. Even when they mean well they don’t always get it right, not because the rules constantly shift with the multiple and dramatic changes in race theory and LGBTQ desires and demands. By protecting the requirements to speak and think correctly — and raising the stakes for failures — the “new” liberal class has now created a new mechanism for staying at the top and keeping the peasants — American’s working-class — down: especially those who voted the wrong way in 2016.

So whatever you do, don’t call it a leftist revolution. With the flags, the protests, the kneeling, and the new language, it’s the OPPOSITE of war or revolution. The outcome is certainly unknown, but the class war is thriving and gaining strength every day.

Best Example of this “Counter-Revolution”

Former NFL star and activist Colin Kaepernick marked July Fourth by sharing a video of actor James Earl Jones reciting Frederick Douglass’s historic speech, “What to the Slave is the Fourth of July” with Kaepernick calling the holiday a “celebration of white supremacy.”

The video shows images of the Declaration of Independence, slaves, Klu Klux Klan members, lynchings and police brutality as Jones’s voice narrates in the background: “Fellow-citizens, pardon me, allow me to ask, why am I called upon to speak here today? What have I, or those I represent, to do with your national independence? Are the great principles of political freedom and of natural justice, embodied in that Declaration of Independence, extended to us?”

Kaepernick captioned the video with strong condemnation of racism and a call for “liberation for all” in the future.

“Black people have been dehumanized, brutalized, criminalized, and terrorized by America for centuries, and are expected to join your commemoration of ‘independence’, while you enslaved our ancestors,” he wrote. “We reject your celebration of white supremacy and look forward to liberation for all.”

His demonization of tens of millions of Americans happens while many citizens contemplate today’s Independence Day in the context of nationwide protests against police brutality and racism. Lawmakers have faced growing pressure in recent weeks to pass comprehensive police reform as well as other policies to protect Black Americans in the wake of the deaths of George Floyd and others who have been killed in police custody.

Many minority members of the nation look at Kaepernick as a “soldier for the cause” of fixing the nation: a Counter-revolution.

Summary

Here’s the hard part: being patient. How many times have you had to tell yourself the last few months “I wish I knew exactly what is going on!” If you’ve said or thought that, you’re one in about 200 million here and probably half that in Europe. To grasp an understanding of sorts that will probably answer your questions, consider this:

  • The political class in this nation evolved into the beast we find ourselves feeding so that we can survive in the 60s. No one stepped out and declared “Here’s what we’re going to do.” It was found to be simpler to quietly takeover Washington with policies and regulations to grab as much power as possible without making it obvious it was happening.
  • Serving in the U.S. government for two centuries had been an honorable vocation that paid less than did similar jobs in the private sector. But that was OK: you know, “the greater good.” But then with a booming economy that saw cost-of-living increases in the Potomac Valley skyrocket, D.C. political elitists began the process to even the scales for politicians personally. A process of increasing Congressional income and also the compensation for political bureaucrats began a slow increase that has peaked today. In doing so, we suddenly see an economic environment that not only has those in office paid equivalent to their private-sector counterparts, but are paid significantly more than their private counterparts. And why not? Congress determines not only their base pay but personal business and office expenses and has created a profitable retirement opportunity for all members of Congress. POWER!
  • They make the rules for everything in government. Wouldn’t you if in the same scenario could legally increase your total compensation do so? The U.S. Congress makes all the rules, all the laws, all the regulations that control every sector of living in the U.S. They under almost permanent liberal leadership have done just that year after year.
  • Campaign finance has not only increased the cost of getting elected, it created political action committees (PACS) that though strapped with regulations can legally raise tens of millions of dollars for candidates.  Super political action committees have less restraint on contributions and therefore take campaign donations to new heights.

None of the above has even been mentioned by the liberal leaders of this “counter-revolution.” They certainly do NOT want to upset the behemoth of the U.S. Government that has so successfully granted the elect in that group of elitists virtually unfettered power and legally unlimited collection of money.

Why would they support the destruction of that multi-billion-dollar piggy bank? The answer: THEY DON’T!

This entire travesty that dominates every newscast, every news story that centers on any part of this process is ancillary to their objective: destroy the populism and nationalism of Trump here, Brexit in the U.K., and dramatic civil unrest in Hong Kong to protect the power of the liberal left elitist that remains while doing all that’s necessary to re-implement what of it was torn away by Donald Trump.

Does that mean to not be concerned or to not be vocal about the evil we’re staring at? No. It simply states they don’t want to lose the gravy-train that has fed them so long just because Donald Trump messed it up!

They want it just the way it was before it was taken from them.

Play