Thursday, June 11, 2020

THE HOAX OF BLACK LIVES MATTER - AS BLACKS MURDER BLACKS BY THE WHOLESALE



The Complex Funding and Ideology of Black Lives Matter

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer
19:36

Political and corporate support for Black Lives Matter has become ubiquitous over the past week. Everyone’s email inbox is bulging with messages of support from corporate sponsors, every website is covered with Black Lives Matter logos, and the group has benefited from numerous fundraisers and charity sales. But, many people might not realize that Black Lives Matter is a distinct political organization, not just a slogan or social media hashtag, and it has both enormous funding and a wide-ranging political agenda.
Founded by Radicals
BLM describes its own founders as “three radical Black organizers” named Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, who “created a Black-centered political will and movement building project… in response to the acquittal of Trayvon Martin’s murderer, George Zimmerman.”
Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi — the founders of BLM (Photo source: BlackLivesMatter.com)
BLM’s history page proudly salutes the radical causes built into its DNA since its 2013 founding, including “liberation” politics and transgenderism.
In fact, BLM thinks other black civil rights movements aren’t nearly radical enough, especially when it comes to the gender politics of the hard Left: “Black liberation movements in this country have created room, space, and leadership mostly for Black heterosexual, cisgender men – leaving women, queer and transgender people, and others either out of the movement or in the background to move the work forward with little or no recognition.”
BLM incessantly refers to the deaths of Trayvon Martin, Mike Brown, and others as “murder,” ignoring all court decisions to the contrary, and describes police work as “state-sanctioned violence” against oppressed populations. In the course of explaining how it was formed, the group refers to cities like Ferguson, Missouri, as “occupied territory” – with law enforcement cast as a brutal invading force – and insists most other cities should be seen the same way: “We understood Ferguson was not an aberration, but in fact, a clear point of reference for what was happening to Black communities everywhere.”
Corporate and foundation sponsors appear unconcerned that BLM is unclear about who runs the movement today and commands its vast resources. The group itself claims it has no top-level leadership at all: “The project is now a member-led global network of more than 40 chapters. Our members organize and build local power to intervene in violence inflicted on Black communities by the state and vigilantes.”
The BLM founders are involved in a sprawling network of other left-wing groups and clearly remain influential with Black Lives Matter, although they are not held accountable as its executives. A New Yorker interview with Tometi on June 3, for example, treated her as a top BLM spokeswoman while noting that she has moved on to create and manage other organizations, most recently including an immigration activist group called the Black Alliance for Just Immigration, which is listed as a “partner” by Black Lives Matter. Another partner is the UndocuBlack Network, a “multigenerational network of currently and formerly undocumented black people.”
“We have been fighting and advocating to stop a war on black lives. And that is how we see it – this is a war on black life. And people understand that this system is filled with all sorts of inequality and injustice, and that implicit bias and just outright racism is embedded in the way that policing is done in this nation – and when you think about it historically, it was founded as a slave patrol. The evolution of policing was rooted in that,” Tometi said in her New Yorker interview.
Coronavirus Hypocrisy
In her interview with the New Yorker, Tometi said the coronavirus pandemic is yesterday’s news, and the disease – which is said to be far more dangerous to blacks than any other demographic in the United States – should be no obstacle to righteous activism.
“Concern about the pandemic is high, but people are also very clear that you can sit at home and also be affected by this illness, or you can go out and fight for a chance to live a life full of dignity, and they are willing to risk it. I think we have to sit with the profundity of this moment, and what it really means for people to say, ‘You know what, we are in this health crisis yet I cannot stay in my house. There is too much at stake. I am going to make an informed decision, and I am going out against all odds because it is worth it and the status quo is intolerable,'” she said.
Protesters stretch for blocks during demonstrations over the death of George Floyd near the White House on June 6, 2020 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Samuel Corum/Getty Images)
This has become a common sentiment on the Left: the infections and deaths that could result from mass protests are less important than the BLM cause.
BLM actually has a section about the coronavirus on its website, and it makes absolutely no mention of lockdowns, social distancing, or any of the other draconian measures that have been imposed on the American people since March. Instead, BLM quite accurately predicted that the pandemic could result in “result in massive social, economic, and political upheaval as systems reach crisis points and begin to fracture.”
This is BLM’s six-point strategy for dealing with the coronavirus:
  • Immediately pass a coronavirus relief package now that provides emergency funding assistance to cover expenses to massively test the population in the millions and provide emergency food and shelter to all homeless and poor.
  • Provide a protection and testing plan for incarcerated people while in custody and upon release.
  • Expand SNAP and unemployment for the duration of the pandemic.
  • Immediately legislate fully paid sick leave for all workers.
  • Implement an immediate moratorium on evictions and utility shut-offs.
  • Emergency funding for family and community-based childcare for families who cannot work from home.
SNAP is better known as the food stamp program. None of these measures has anything to do with disease prevention or restarting the economy after a lockdown, and would become vastly more expensive if the massive BLM protests produce another wave of coronavirus infections and deaths, followed by another lockdown order. The first positive COVID-19 tests for people who participated in the protests and riots are beginning to come in.
BLM Funding
As the Washington Times noted in 2016, Black Lives Matter (BLM) presents itself as a plucky street-level movement with shoestring resources, but in truth it receives millions of dollars from corporate and political sponsors. The movement’s funding gives a hint of how far its political agenda stretches beyond criticizing the excessive use of force by police officers.
Fortune also looked at BLM funding in 2016 and noticed its agenda and funding streams could “help dispel the myth that the movement itself is set on violence,” but could also “confirm the worst fears” of skeptics who saw BLM becoming another part of the vast and protean left-wing money machine.
The machinery of BLM funding has only grown more complex since 2016, exacerbating a problem skeptics have warned about from the start: it is very difficult to know what each dollar donated to the movement will actually be used for. 
BLM’s major financial supporters include:
  • Airbnb – $500,000 to BLM and the NAACP
  • Anastasia Beverly Hills fashions – $1 million pledged, $100,000 donated so far to groups including BLM
  • Bad Robot Productions – film studio involved in Star Trek, Star Wars, and Mission Impossible, $10 million pledged to “anti-racist” groups. BLM among the first recipients
  • BTS, a Korean pop group – $1 million, matching donations from fans
  • Cisco, electronics giant – $5 million to groups including BLM and its own Fighting Racism and Discrimination fund
  • DECIEM cosmetics – $100,000 to NAACP and BLM  
  • Democracy Alliance – another Soros-linked group, added BLM to its annual $500 million donor list
  • Door Dash – food delivery company, $500,000
  • Ford Foundation and Borealis Philanthropy – Left-wing groups that established a $100 million donor fund
  • George Soros’ Open Society Foundation – $33 million
  • Glossier cosmetics – $500,000
  • Pokemon Company – owners of the popular card game and its characters, $100,000
  • Scopely – mobile phone game developer, $1 million to BLM, NAACP, and Equal Justice Initiative
  • Spanx – undergarment manufacturer, $100,000 to groups including BLM
  • Square Enix computer games – $250,000 to BLM, also matching employee donations
  • Ubisoft computer games – $100,000 to NAACP and BLM
  • The Weeknd – Canadian R&B singer, $250,000
Sources include the above-mentioned Washington Times and Fortune pieces, PoliticoRolling StoneForbesNBC NewsThe Wrap, and Ellewhich has a long list of fashion and cosmetics firms making donations to BLM. ArtNet on Monday published a list of artists and galleries holding charity sales to support BLM.  
The L.A. Times on Tuesday reported numerous companies are implementing donor-match programs that will match individual employee donations to Black Lives Matter with corporate funds.
As several of the above sources pointed out, it’s not always easy to tell when donations are going to BLM itself or its partners. The Financial Times reported that a flood of cash is pouring into civil rights groups, many of them allied with BLM or supportive of its projects. NBC News’ article about “corporate donations for BLM” only mentioned a few direct donations to the Black Lives Matter organization; the rest went to groups like the NAACP, ACLU, and Southern Poverty Law Center.
Groups like the Ford Foundation, Borealis Philanthropy, and Democracy Alliance tend to establish large funds that are disbursed to many smaller organizations, chapters, and individual activists. Not everyone who claims to be with “Black Lives Matter” is a certified member of the group founded by Garza, Cullors, and Tometi.
New York Magazine published an approving article on June 4 telling readers how to donate money to the Black Lives Matter movement. The article listed one hundred and fifteen “funds, organizations, and individual activists” linked to BLM, and those were just the financial intakes New York felt it had adequately “vetted” to ensure they weren’t outright scams. 
The article subdivided these 115 recommended donation recipients based on how they pledge to use the money they are given, “whether that’s to post bail/bonds for demonstrators arrested at protests, to purchase protective equipment to protesters on the front lines, to invest in rebuilding black communities where protests have occurred, or to invest in community enrichment programs for black and brown youth.” 
In the course of a very approving June 6 piece about the growth of bail funds, The Atlantic let slip a little hint about the difficulty of tracing these tens of millions of dollars in donations: “Whether celebrities – or anyone, for that matter – who donate to a bail fund believe that the system needs a total overhaul is almost irrelevant. Their money equips activists and organizers to do work that tangibly improves the lives of people whom the police often target.”
In other words, money is fluid and fungible, and donors often end up financing agendas they might not fully agree with when they give money to a slogan. The value of nearly-ubiquitous corporate promotion of the Black Lives Matter name over the past week is incalculable – there is nothing that kind of full-spectrum, all but inescapable advertising across television, print media, and the Internet could be compared to.
The Full BLM Agenda
From the earliest days of the BLM movement, as the 2016 pieces cited above indicate, critics have noticed it has a very wide-ranging agenda that reaches far beyond police issues – and, sometimes, working against black lives.
At the time of this writing, the top agenda item on the BLM web page is “Defund the Police” – a position only a very small minority of Americans supports, including a very small share of black Americans.
Black Lives Matter has a lengthy “What We Believe” statement on its website that begins with highly contentious and politicized assertions such as expressing rage at “the death of Trayvon Martin and the subsequent acquittal of his killer, George Zimmerman” and moving along to “justice for Mike Brown and all of those who have been torn apart by state-sanctioned violence and anti-Black racism.”
Further down the page, the official BLM agenda wanders into support for transgenderism, a vow to “dismantle cisgender privilege,” and some very heavy-duty plans for destroying and rebuilding American society:
We make our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We dismantle the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” so that they can mother in private even as they participate in public justice work.
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.
We foster a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking, or rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual (unless s/he or they disclose otherwise).(Emphasis added.)
In Boston, Massachusetts, a BLM chapter is asking that $15 million in American taxpayer money be spent on providing summer jobs to — not Black Americans — but illegal aliens. Study after study has revealed that every ten percent increase in the immigrant share of an occupation reduces the income of black American men by roughly five percent.
By doing business with companies that support BLM, you might be inadvertently funding its destructive and coercive left-wing policy agenda. Once upon a time, even Democrats understood how radical that agenda was, as a leaked memo from 2015 revealed Democrat Party leadership warning staffers and politicians to keep their distance from the movement.
Hashtag Confusion
As mentioned above, many people think “Black Lives Matter” is a slogan, an ideal, or a grassroots movement, not a political organization with eight figures of funding and a hardcore left-wing policy agenda. 
This is a very old game practiced by both amateurs and political professionals. Every bill that passes through Congress is given a name that suggests only the most heartless villain could possibly oppose it. Many organizations on both the Left and Right claim to speak for sympathetic constituencies, or carefully cultivate an image of being much less wealthy and powerful than they actually are. 
In the case of Black Lives Matter, the movement’s slogan is effectively becoming the definition of “anti-racism,” which means all disagreement and doubt are racist by definition. This can be seen in the white-hot rage directed at anyone who dares to say “All Lives Matter,” for example – a phrase as inherently benevolent and obviously true as “Black Lives Matter,” but the “All” formulation has been redefined as a vile curse, an unforgivable assault on the purity of Black Lives Matter.
That’s a very large ideological umbrella, and plenty of other left-wing groups are jockeying for space beneath it, some of them highly toxic. The Jerusalem Post on Sunday worried about anti-Semitic and anti-Israel forces climbing aboard the BLM train, making an effort to “hijack the civil rights discourse and portray Israel as a ‘settler’ state linked to ‘white supremacy.’”
“That hostility is clear when voices such as Marc Lamonte Hill retweet a Ben and Jerry’s tweet supporting the protests with the comment ‘we dealing with justice in illegal settlements too or nah?’” the Jerusalem Post noted, neatly bringing together the issues of unreflective corporate support for BLM and the effort to hook other ideologies to its runaway populist locomotive.
More humorously, Yahoo News on Sunday found all sorts of Internet “influencers” trying to hitch their wagons to BLM, only to be rebuffed by activists furious at them for trivializing the movement or hijacking its themes for selfish purposes. The line between welcome support and unacceptable exploitation of the movement is blurry. Vegan restaurants are praised for donating money to BLM, for example, while a vegan influencer who endorsed BLM because it’s fighting “the same fight” as crusaders against cruelty to animals was forcefully told to keep her deep thoughts to herself. White social media celebrities are taking some heat for trying to insert themselves into the Black Lives Matter movement, often in ways that trivialize the issues and make the protests seem like giant block parties.
A viral tweet of a young woman allegedly getting her companion to take a photo of her in front of a vandalized T-mobile store, presumably for the purposes of posting on social media. 
BLM itself feels that some of this performative activism dilutes its message and detracts from its policy agenda. For example, the group expressed annoyance with D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser allowing “Black Lives Matter” to be printed in giant letters on the street in front of the White House because it was a “distraction” from “our demands to decrease the police budget and invest in the community.”
“Bowser has consistently been on the wrong side of BLMDC history. This is to appease white liberals while ignoring our demands. Black Lives Matter means defund the police,” BLM said.
What does “Black Lives Matter” really mean? What agenda are people supporting with their black boxes, tweets, Facebook posts, and financial donations? In this turbulent moment, the movement is having trouble even defining what “Defund the Police” really means, perhaps sensing that the position is so unpopular that it must be hastily redefined as “reform the police, details to come later.” Some BLM leaders insist they are primarily interested in sensible community policing reforms, while others think New York Governor Andrew Cuomo doesn’t swing far enough to the Left.
A popular internet meme poking fun at the premise of last week’s “Blackout Tuesday”
It seems remarkable that a group with so little discipline, so much confusion over its agenda, and so much money at its disposal would be allowed to effectively demand compulsory support from the entire American public and corporate and political class, without any deep media investigation of its finances, leadership, or agenda. Many of BLM’s donors are signing on to a new social contract with a great deal of fine print they should read more carefully.




What Do They Really Want?



Imani Bashir, writing for the New York Times, says, "Living abroad is my way of prolonging my black son's life."  It's actually the title of the article.  She says she's been living abroad for years now, in places like Cairo and Poland and Malaysia and Wuhan (yes, that Wuhan), and that the bills are piling up and they're eating at her soul.  Still, she won't move back to America.  She sees her son's face in every black person the police kill.  She's stuck in Florida for the moment, waiting for the borders to ease up so she can go anywhere else.
Her husband, from Buffalo, New York, is traveling with her, coaching American football where he can.  She says before he turned 25, 30 of his friends had been killed.  They never talked about white picket fences when they got married.  They said if they were going to make it, if their son was going to make it, they had to go anywhere but here.  
But notice they didn't go anywhere.  They went to Poland, noted for its strict (and some say "bigoted") stances on immigration and gay rights; Cairo, a place that just blew up a few years ago, is looking to blow up again, and is known for its horrible treatment of women; and China, a communist country known for locking up Christians and Muslims and honest reporters, for not having habeas corpus, for selling the organs of political prisoners, and for grinding its workers into the dust.  It's a firm supporter of the most oppressive, volatile states in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa.  It has a domestic surveillance system seen only in our most harrowing classics of science fiction.  Nineteen eighty-four came almost to life, and Imani Bashir moved there instead of Schenectady.
I mention these things because of where she didn't go.  For instance, if she can scratch out a living on the fly, why not anywhere in black Africa?  Why not the sub-Saharan region, where, as Howard French reports in China's Second Continent, 10 of the 20 fastest growing economies exist?  Why not somewhere where the cost of living is cheaper and where, since she says racism exists everywhere, there could be little to no racism against her son? 
These questions deserve a solid answer — especially if it's anything other than "I don't want to live around black people."  It should also be asked of all the other famous black people who don't want to live around black people.  Beyond this, I think it's questionable that 30 of her husband's friends died at the hands of the police.  She never said it was the police, by the way (she casually refused, in an article about police killings, to place the blame anywhere), and we know it wasn't, because the police killed about 19 unarmed black males in 2017, and black people killed about 2,627 — a difference of over a hundred times.  In fact, in 2018, black people killed about 2,600 black people, and whites in general — all of us, despite being 60% of the populace — killed only 234, more than ten times fewer.  The greatest danger to black people in America today is always other black people.  Black lives matter to Black Lives Matter only when it gives them an excuse to attack white people.
My theory is that she doesn't go to black Africa because she doesn't feel safe around black people, and she doesn't want to be confused for them.  He doesn't, either.  It's what they call a hidden bias.  People with the sort of mindset I suspect here know that a fraction of their 13% of Americans is responsible for 50% of the crime, and they're profiling.  The fact is, they can't say it.  Once they admit it, the whole anti-racism scam is up.  It means white parents, whose children, according to the FBI, are killed twice as often by black people than the other way around, have more of an excuse to move their kids to Poland.  It means they have a reason to stop busing black kids to white schools, and going soft on crime, and beating their chests, and being hard on police.  But Bashir says she's scared of us — and because she's afraid, people are rioting.  I remind you that racism means being afraid of people for things they don't do.
The question is, what does she want?  The New York Times reports that Minneapolis, like all the other places on fire, is one of the most liberal cities in the nation.  Surpassing even Seattle, Minneapolis has black people on the City Council.  Two of these black council members are transgender.  None of them is a Republican.  Juneteenth gets a yearly parade, and the police chief, until this week, was a black man.  They're so devoted to fighting racism that you can't zone for single-family housing anymore — ostensibly to make the housing cheaper for blacks and to keep richer whites from having better neighborhoods to move to.  
This means that Minneapolis and all the other left-wing cities on fire already do everything they can to police the police — and if they go any farther, they'll have to get rid of them altogether.  The main job of the police officer, after all, is not to stop crimes in progress (since there are too few of them to see everything), but to show up after the fact and then sniff out a suspect.  This means everyone who fits a criminal's description in the area will be tracked down, picked up, tied up, and locked up — and if he refuses, probably beaten up.  If he refuses too manfully, possibly killed.  In a country of 330 million people, there are going to be a few dozen murders by cop.  But you get rid of this right to track, and you've gotten rid of the police.  You get rid of profiling, and you get rid of the concept of policing.  You get rid of the police, and you get rid of society.  And Minneapolis, where the violent crime rate was already horrible — this year, before the riots, twice the national average, and last year three — is already too dangerous.  Thanks to Black Lives Matter blowing up the police stations, it is about to get worse.
I ask you again — what does Imani Bashir want?   What they all want and can't say: to live somewhere her son can't theoretically be mistaken for or hurt by a black criminal.  It's a legitimate want.  We want it for all good black people, too.  But Black Lives Matter isn't finding ways to stop the criminals.  It's instead finding ways, mostly, to punish the innocent.  Bashir profiles and runs and barricades herself, and she's a victim of racism.  I just wish that she, and the Black Lives Matter movement, and The New York Times, would respect us when we do it, too.  They won't.
Jeremy Egerer is the author of the troublesome essays on Letters to Hannah, and he welcomes followers on Twitter and Facebook.

 

 

The American left does not recognize 

America's government

Thanks to the useful death of St. George Floyd of the Church of Black Lives Matter, the execrable Ben Crump has found the best way ever to leverage his profile and his bank account.  Crump attaches himself like a leech to high-profile black deaths and will use any means necessary to push a narrative.  His latest push is to use Floyd's family as a means to attack American sovereignty by appealing to the U.N. to police America's police.
Crump's made a career out of representing the families of black men who died during interactions with the police or who otherwise had politically useful deaths.  Considering how few unarmed blacks die at police hands (especially since Trump became president), Crump probably has to leverage cases to make a profit.  (There's profit to be had with the Floyd family, who are now the beneficiaries of a $13.8-million GoFundMe campaign.)  That lust for fame and money may explain why Crump held his tongue when the prosecution against George Zimmerman for Trayvon Martin's death used a fake witness to push the narrative that Martin was a good kid, not a wannabe thug.
With Floyd's death, Crump is going beyond America and speaking to the world.  He has written an open letter to the U.N. to demand that it step in to govern America's police departments:
The group sent a letter on June 3 to one of the international body's working groups asking for support for the end of the provision of military equipment and military-type training for police, the teaching of deescalation techniques, independent prosecutions and autopsies for "extrajudicial" police killings, and more.
"When a group of people of any nation have been systemically deprived of their universal human right to life by its government for decades, it must appeal to the international community for its support and to the United Nations for its intervention," Floyd's family attorney Ben Crump said in a press release.
A few things need to be said: first, this is an attack on American sovereignty, something that bothers Americans but not Democrats.  (I'm not even pretending anymore that Democrats consider themselves Americans.  They see themselves as world citizens fighting the evil that is America.)
Second, this is the same U.N. that has nothing to say about police abuses in China, among the Palestinians, in Venezuela, or anywhere else in the world that's not America.
Third, this is the same U.N. that allowed its "peacekeepers" (i.e., its police) to commit sexual abuse against thousands of black children in Africa and Haiti.
Fourth, this is the same U.N. that allows Palestinian terrorists to use its ambulances in the terrorists' perpetual wars against Israeli citizens.
Fifth, the U.N.'s high commissioner for human rights, Michelle Bachelet, insisted that Floyd's death was the "latest in a long line of killings of unarmed African Americans by U.S. police officers and members of the public" and urged "serious action."  The U.N. is champing at the bit to demean America.
Crump knows that the U.N. cannot affect policing in America.  This is theater, but it's disgusting theater to see a race-hustler appeal to an anti-American organization that has no trouble with totalitarian organizations around the world abusing people under their control, and that turned a blind eye for decades to its own organization's abuse of blacks.  Thinking about Crump's conduct, perhaps it's time to drag out the Logan Act...

Chutzpah Cities: Bailouts, beggings, and food deserts, starting with Minneapolis

Exhibit A is Minneapolis, whose far-left mayor failed to protect his city from a multi-night orgy of looting and rioting and now wants a $55-million taxpayer bailout to sweep the entire mess under the rug.
There are a lot of blue cities out there with an unusual sense of entitlement.  We got the first whiff of it during the coronavirus stimulus debate, as mismanaged blue metropolises demanded pension and other unrelated bailouts from Congress from what were supposed to be emergency response funds. 
But now in the wake of riots, they're really getting bad.  They're demanding taxpayer bailouts for riot damage after failing to protect their cities, all so they could claim they were woke.  They're begging big box retailers not to pull up stakes and leave after allowing them to be trashed and looted.  They're complaining about sudden food deserts appearing as inner-city shopkeepers are thrown out of business after being robbed, burned, and destroyed and wondering why these stores don't re-open.  It all underlines an amazing failure to recognize any consequences for bad decisions taken, coupled with a howling sense of entitlement.  Call these solid blue failures "Chutzpah Cities."
Exhibit A is Minneapolis, whose far-left mayor failed to protect his city from a multi-night orgy of looting and rioting and now wants a $55-million taxpayer bailout to sweep the entire mess under the rug.
According to Big League Politics:
Minneapolis Democratic Mayor Jacob Frey is ordering city officials to begin a wide-ranging query of the damage done to the city's infrastructure from the race riots that began last week after the death of George Floyd, planning on requesting a federal bailout for the city to repair the damages done by "protestors."
Early preliminary estimates gauge the price tag of property damage from the riots at more than $55 million dollars. Frey is already working with U.S. Senator Amy Klobuchar and representatives Ilhan Omar and Betty McCollum on a potential bailout package for the city.
Any apology for bad decisions?  Any promise to return to rule of law so taxpayers don't have to keep doing this to eternity?  Normally, bailouts come with tough conditions for reform to ensure future sustainability.  But Frey has no intention of reform; he just wants you to bankroll his latest social experiment.
Reform in Minneapolis comes not raising the price for rioting and looting and promising to enforce law in order, but by getting rid of the police.  Frey's lashed to the mast with a rabid far-left city council, which has enacted a veto-proof majority to de-fund the entire police force.  That'll ensure that riots and looting don't happen again, right?  Apparently, the next spray-shooter can rest easy and fire away, as the police will be gone.  It's an idea so bad that it sounds as if an enemy dreamed it up.  It can only be called a plan for permanent bailouts, because the results will be a disaster.  The plan seems to be to make Minneapolis a second Cuba, always looking for the next Uncle Sugar to sustain its communist failures.  And the productive members of society are supposed to go along with this, gladly emptying their pocketbooks.
Frey, the mayor of Minneapolis, was last seen doing some kind of chicken dance, which gives you an idea as to how busy he's been:


Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey is an embarrassment and he will go down as the worst mayor in the history of the United States of America.

And what is he wearing!

He's not the only one running a blue Chutzpah City.
How about the mayor of Chicago, who, after failing to protect her city's big box retailers from an orgy of looting, called upon these establishments not to leave her city?


This has to be satire.
She pleaded with retailers to stay after she allowed their stores to be looted?
https://www.wnd.com/2020/06/mayor-pleads-walmart-retailers-not-abandon-chicago/ 

Mayor pleads with Walmart, other retailers to not abandon Chicago - WND



No promises of no looting again ever.  Just calls to stay and get looted again.  No sane business would take her up on her offer.  There are plenty of other places to go, where law and order still mean something and where making money doesn't have to be discounted by losses from looters.  The citizens of these blue cities are likely to go where they go as well.  All of the major blue cities are losing people, something that makes the big boxers even less likely to be able to turn a profit.  Fewer people, fewer buyers, all the result of blue-city policies, which include high taxes and low job creation rates.  Chicago for sure is among them.
Then there's this plaintive whine:


Looters Clear Out Groceries In Chicago’s South Side, Leaving Residents With Little Food http://ow.ly/d01730qNwFR 

Looters Clear Out Groceries In Chicago’s South Side, Leaving Residents With Little Food – True...



Brought on by this:


Shop owners reveal financial and emotional struggles of being looted



What the heck did they think would happen if they allowed rich, white Antifa trust-fund bunnies to go out and loot struggling small inner-city businesses with little cushion for recovery?  Thomas Lifson predicted that in these pages very early.  People who work 16-hour days and operate on razor-thin margins don't recover from mob assaults easily.  Did they really think these businesses could shake the losses from mass looting and destruction like water off a duck's back?  The hard reality is, trash your small, struggling businesses, and there won't be small, struggling businesses.  Good luck getting the tax revenue to pay for the bloated bureaucracies.
The whole thing underlines the ugly reality about leftists: that they lack introspection and firmly believe they have nothing to answer for.  Kevin Williamson has an excellent piece on that here. For the left, there's no sense of making things better with this bunch, there's just an adherence to the socialist template, failure after failure, letting someone else pay the bill. All we see in this wretched picture is entitlement and greed, even when they are sitting there in the mud, the victims of their own abhorrent decisions. This is chutzpah in the extreme, the classic phony plea of man who killed his parents, and then told the judge to have mercy on him for he was an orphan.
It calls to mind that they really do need to bear the consequences of their own bad decisions, hard as it may be. This may be the only way to halt the extreme leftward slide of the Democratic Party. That may well be the real meaning of President Trump's presidency, for surely he will put a stop to this, as long as he remains in office.

Imagine how bad it would be if Joe Biden were in the presidential saddle instead. These blue cities, it is reported, are already supposedly waiting or their 'Biden bailouts, refusing to cut spending, refusing to reform, waiting for Biden to come onboard to bail them out, knowing that Trump will see right through them and their toddler-like entitlement and tell them no. It underlines why Biden must never be elected president. Just say no to these spoiled brats who fail to learn from their mistakes, and like socialists, just keep making the same mistakes over and over and over.

No comments: