Thursday, December 19, 2019


Police: NYC Man Randomly Sucker-Punches Woman in the Face


The New York Police Department (NYPD) is searching for a man who randomly sucker-punched a woman in the face while she was looking at her cellphone on Monday.
The suspect was captured on surveillance video walking on Park Avenue near East 85th Street on Manhattan’s Upper East Side when he allegedly struck the woman at random without notice.
The 21-year-old victim suffered bruising and swelling to her face but refused medical attention at the scene, the New York Post reported.
The suspect allegedly walked away from the area.
Police said the man had been causing mayhem nearby minutes earlier when he approached a man sitting in his car and brandished a knife.
“I know you are talking about me!” the suspect reportedly said before he brandished his knife and chased the man down.
After the assault was captured on video, the suspect ran into his next victims on Third Avenue and East 87th Street during broad daylight. He then took out his knife and threatened the man and woman after deliberately walking into them, police said.
Police describe the individual as 25 years old and 5 feet 6 inches tall.

Heather Mac Donald

Public safety
The Social Order
As for interracial violence generally, blacks disproportionately commit it. Between 2012 and 2015, there were 631,830 violent interracial victimizations, excluding homicide, between blacks
and whites, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Blacks, who make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, committed 85.5 percent of those victimizations, or 540,360 felonious assaults on 
whites, while whites, 61 percent of the population, committed 14.4 percent, or 91,470 felonious assaults on blacks. Regarding threats to blacks from the police, a police officer is 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.

Why No 'White Lives Matter'?

Tessa Majors, a young woman ''not of color," was unable to complete her first semester at Barnard University in New York City. She was fatally stabbed in Morningside Park adjacent to the university, collapsing as she left the park -- a place referred to over the years as "Muggingside Park.” At least one "person of color," all of thirteen years old, has been arrested. Although it is unclear whether he participated in the murder, he has implicated others who, like him, have barely reached their teen years.
Three days earlier, a black man and a black woman, members of a virulently anti-Semitic sect, the black Hebrew Israelites, went on a killing spree in a kosher market in Jersey City. Six people died, including a police officer.
Last week’s incidents have one obvious thing in common -- both involved blacks murdering whites. They also have at least one other thing in common -- nobody marched, nobody protested, nobody circulated ‘White Lives Matter” shirts, nobody organized boycotts of black-run businesses, nobody took to the streets screaming racial epithets, nobody threw bricks at black-owned property, and nobody attacked black citizens.
Contrast that non-reaction not only to what occurred in Baltimore four years ago when Freddie Gray died, or five years ago in Ferguson when Michael Brown died, but with what happened for three days in 1991 when a seven-year-old black boy was tragically but unintentionally killed by a vehicle driven by Yosef Lifsh, an Orthodox Jew who was escorting the Grand Rebbe of the Lubavitch Hasidic community to the cemetery where he visited his deceased wife every Sunday. Lifsh’s car collided with another vehicle; the collision sent Lifsh's car flying onto the sidewalk where it pinned a black youth, Gavin Cato, against a building, causing his death.
Approximately 600 blacks in Crown Heights rioted for three days, injuring just under two hundred people; two residents were shot, a sniper wounded eight police officers, a firehouse was attacked and buildings burned. All of that pales by comparison to the fate of Yankel Rosenbaum, a Hasidic scholar from Australia. He was surrounded by a large group of black youths and repeatedly stabbed by Lemrick Nelson, until he collapsed and died.
Why are the reactions to those tragedies so different? Why no rioting and no reprisals when whites are intentionally and brutally murdered by blacks but prolonged rioting and reprisals reflexively occur when a black is tragically but unintentionally killed, another black is shot to death as he was attacking a white police officer and a third black died from injuries sustained in a police van after being arrested for possession of an illegal weapon? (It is important to remember that none of the police officers were convicted of anything and the Justice Department decided against filing federal civil rights charges against any of the officers involved in the Freddie Gray incident and the police officer who shot and killed Michael Brown was never charged).
If pressed to answer what they perceive as a racist inquiry, liberals will point to the sordid history of slavery in this country. Doesn’t that beg the question? By 1991, no black who lived through slavery was still alive. In fact, it is unlikely that even a child of a slave was still alive then. Moreover, the Crown Heights riot occurred in a place where slavery was outlawed in 1827 and which was a center of abolitionist activism thereafter. While Jews did comprise roughly one percent of Southern slaveowners, the Jewish commitment to the Civil Rights movement one hundred years later -- which actually happened during the lifetimes of many involved in the Crown Heights rioting -- is far more telling evidence of their present-day racial mindset. If we want to talk prejudice and discrimination, no group has had more personal experience to draw upon than the Jews. While slavery was horrific, it still wasn’t genocide. So why the rioting, why no real consequences for the rioting, and why no Jewish rioting in Jersey City or Columbia University?
There is no better example of the Jewish reaction to their horrendous mistreatment than the recent Hungarian film 1945. After surviving years in a concentration camp, an elderly Orthodox Jew and his son return to their Hungarian village. Local officials had alerted the Germans to their presence in the village during the war in order to steal the Jews’ property once they were deported to the camps. Returning to the village, the father and son, throughout almost the entirety of the film, walk slowly but deliberately back toward their home carrying a very large crate. Their quiet (they never speak) dignity is in sharp contrast to the bedlam their arrival engenders. Everyone fears they have returned to claim the property officials stole from them years earlier. In fact, the guilt, greed and stupidity of the townsfolk results in their burning down their own village, not before, however, they realize that the "large crate” contains  playthings and remnants, all that was left of the lives of their family who perished in the camp. They return home not to fight for their property but to bury those remnants of lost lives in the family cemetery. 
This is how Jews for the most part react to the tragic and inhumane treatment to which they are too often subjected. It is this grace and grandeur depicted in 1945 that enrages other minorities more than anything else. Jews are not loathed just for failing to “man up.” Rather, it is their failure to react that way, whether in response to the Jersey City murders or the Crown Heights riots, which both demonstrates and symbolizes a moral pinnacle which others despise. They despise it because it brings into sharp contrast their own animalistic response. Simply put, it is the old story of Jacob and Esau with one twist -- if anyone stole the symbolic birthright of the blacks, it certainly wasn’t the Jews.

Walter Williams tackles the elephant in the room on crime

Dr. Williams is a well known conservative economist and longtime John Olin Chair faculty at George Mason University in eastern Virginia, author of 12 books and syndicated columnist.  In the past, he has been substitute host on the Rush Limbaugh radio program.  He is almost like family to me, and I have benefited from his essays and books over the years.  This past week, I saw and read his essay on disparities in crime rates among races that was picked up by Military in its October 2019 issue.  What got Dr. Williams going was the article by  Matthew DeLisi of Iowa State U and John Paul Wright of the U of Cincinnati titled "What Criminologists Don't Say and Why."
Dr. Williams confirms that the writers are right about the liberal tilt of criminologists — "If criminologists have the guts to even talk about a race-crime connection, it's behind closed doors and in guarded language.  Any discussion about race and crime ... can mean the end of one's professional career."  
Dr. Williams points out teen black-on-white predatory behavior — chronicled in detail by many, particularly Colin Flaherty, whose investigative reports appear frequently (more than 100) at American Thinker — cannot be reported, mentioned, or considered by the media, politicians,  criminologists, commentators, politicians, even law enforcement people without risking being called racist, the easy epithet used to enforce a ban on talking about the realities of racial disparities in crime and the increasingly violent nature of black violence against whites — the knockout game, polar bear hunting, flash mob violence against people and property.
Referencing the Wright and DeLisi report, Dr. Williams comments on another reality: that the rate of black homicide and armed robbery as well as other violent crimes are as is as much as 15–30 times more than whites, for example, and he points out the silliness of criminologists' claims that mass incarceration rather than criminality has decimated the black community.  He favorably quotes Wright and DeLisi when they say, "What they [criminals] did, in reality was to prey on their neighbors."
Dr. Williams returns to a theme he has explored many times before in this essay and commentary when he points out that the black family of the past was two parents and stable, even back to days of slavery, and that the black community was moral and law-abiding.  "The strong character of black people is responsible for the great progress made from emancipation to today. ... [T]oday's conduct among black youth wouldn't have been tolerated yesteryear."
My regret is there aren't enough Walter Williams and Thomas Sowell types to engage the nutty attitudes of liberal chatterbox experts.

John Dale Dunn, M.D., J.D. is an emergency physician, sheriff's medical officer and inactive attorney, policy and science adviser to the American Council on Science and Health of NYC and the Heartland Institute of Chicago.

Black Nationalist Hate Group Praised by Media Shot Up Kosher Market


Rep. Ilhan Omar and the New York Times’ favorite hate group targets Jews.

December 12, 2019 

Daniel Greenfield

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

The New York Times called them "sidewalk ministers" who practice "tough love." The paper quoted Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center who described them as victims of racism and claimed that they were non-violent.
The Washington Post, in its own puff piece on the Black Hebrew Israelites, also falsely described them as non-violent, and concluded that, "Israelite street preaching in parts of D.C., Philadelphia and New York is commonplace, a familiar if odd accent to city life."
The odd accent to city life in Jersey City came amid a hail of bullets as two members of the racist black nationalist hate group opened fire in the JC Supermarket. Despite initial 

claims by the media and the authorities 

that the Jewish market had not been 

targeted, David Anderson and Francine 

Graham ignored passerby on Martin Luther 

King Dr, to get to the store and kill as many

Jewish people as they could.

When the shooting had ended, Moshe Hersh Deutsch, a yeshiva student who was known for helping distribute food packages to the needy, Mrs Leah Mindel Ferencz, a mother of 3 who helped her husband run the grocery store, and Miguel Jason Rodriguez, the father of an 11-year-old daughter and a parishioner at an Assemblies of God church, were all dead.
Anderson, who left behind anti-Semitic and anti-police writings, had also killed Detective Joseph Seals, a father of 5, and wounded Officer Ray Sanchez and Officer Ferenella Fernandez.
The black nationalist terrorist had hated cops and Jews. He managed to kill both.
The media whitewash of the racist Black Israelites had come during the Covington Catholic case when the Washington Post, among other papers, had falsely blamed the pro-life students for a confrontation that actually began when members of the nationalist hate group had begun calling them, “crackers,” “faggots,” and “pedophiles.” An African-American pro-life student was called the ‘n-word’.
Rep. Ilhan Omar, who has her own history of racism and anti-Semitism, falsely claimed that the Covington Catholic students were “taunting 5 black men.”
The New York Times equivocated that members of the hate group “use blunt and sometimes offensive language, and gamely engage in arguments”. The typical “offensive language” and argumentative style of the Times’ second favorite racist hate group involves shouting racist and anti-Semitic slurs at people.
David Anderson, the Kosher supermarket shooter, had a whole YouTube playlist of such ugly incidents. In one video, a Black Israelite preacher shouts, “Satan is in you” at a Jewish man. “You stole our history. You are pretending to be us. The messiah, who is a black man, is going to kill you.”
Gamely indeed.
In another video, a Black Israelite preacher calls a Jewish teen a member of the “Synagogue of Satan”. “We want our book back and we want our land back,” the preacher demands. “Go back to Russia.”
You can see why Rep. Ilhan Omar might have felt called to defend the racist hate group.
“They move you all over the earth, but we know who you are. You are part of the Zionist deception. You go among the earth to spread Zionism, which is really Catholicism,” he rants. “Witchcraft and sorcery.”
Such statements may seem deranged, but they’re typical of the supremacist theology of the hate group.
Previous incidents involving the hate group have been even uglier with a video that doesn’t appear on Anderson’s playlist showcasing a Black Israelite preacher shouting, "The Holocaust is a damn joke! Heil Hitler!" A documentary shows another preacher standing on a prone white man and declaiming, "We're coming for you, white boys. Negroes are the real Jews. Get ready for war.”
It’s no wonder that Tom Metzger a KKK leader and the founder of the White Aryan Resistance, had described them, as "the black counterparts of us".
And yet, the New York Times concluded its whitewash of the hate group with a closing quote by Todd Boyd, a professor of race and culture at UCLA, which claimed that, "To many black people, Hebrew Israelites are a harmless part of their communities."
No doubt to many white people the KKK are a harmless part of their communities. Racist hate groups are the bigger problem for people who aren’t a member of their race.
"More alarming to many African Americans," the UCLA professor of race had argued, is "seeing a white guy in a ‘Make America Great Again’ hat."
The dead at the JC Supermarket would have liked to have seen a MAGA had instead of black coats.
The whitewash of the Black Israelite hate group was the work of John Eligon, a reporter hired by the New York Times to report on race, who had previously defended Rep. Ilhan Omar’s anti-Semitism, and had injected black nationalist sympathies into his writing. The Washington Post’s whitewash of the hate group was the work of Sam Kestenbaum, a contributing editor at the radical leftist The Forward. The anti-Jewish paper has a long history of whitewashing and defending anti-Semitism by its political allies.
But the problem is much bigger than just the media’s whitewash of the Black Israelites.
The FBI’s warning about the threat of “black identity extremism” was met with a wave of attacks by the media.  A New York Times op-ed warned of "The F.B.I.’s Dangerous Crackdown on ‘Black Identity Extremists’" The Intercept, a notorious radical hate site funded by Franco-Persian eBay billionaire Pierre Omidyar, joined in. "Why the FBI's "Black Identity Extremist" Classification Is Dangerous," Teen Vogue had argued. The Nation had warned of a "Coming War on 'Black Nationalists'".
Rep. Karen Bass, a militant anti-Israel Democrat, despite representing a partially Jewish district, attacked former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, the FBI, and other officials over the BIE category.  This was after the murder of 4 Dallas police officers by Micah X. Johnson and Kori Ali Muhammad's targeted killing of three white men in Fresno.
“I don’t believe black identity extremists exist, and I believe the FBI should retract the document and send out a document throughout law enforcement saying that black identity extremists do not exist,” Bass had ranted.
This year, under pressure, the FBI jettisoned the BIE term. Just in time for the Kosher market shooting.
The FBI report helps police officers prepare for coming threats. By undermining the warnings about black nationalist violence, Rep. Bass, the New York Times, the Washington Post, and every media activist and politician who went to bat for black nationalist racists sabotaged police preparedness.
And they have blood on their hands.
The media is already embracing the familiar narrative about lone wolves and individual instability. That’s the same story we hear after acts of violence by members of a movement that it is politically allied with.
Hate groups, whether it’s the KKK or the Black Israelites, or campus hate groups like the Groypers or SJP, should be exposed with clear and honest facts about who they are and what they believe.
When political activists and media whitewashes cover up the truth for partisan reasons, people can die.
A father of five with a badge, a mother of three running a grocery store, a man working to support his daughter, another man delivering food packages, did not have to die. If the truth had been told about the Black Israelites, they might still be alive today. Instead the media lied and they are gone.
Truly standing up against racism and anti-Semitism means jettisoning partisan agendas for the truth.
Rep. Karen Bass, the New York TimesThe Intercept, the ACLU, and others colluded to tie the hands of the FBI and local police because they see black nationalists like Anderson as allies in their cause.
After the attack, a representative from Americans Against Anti-Semitism, an organization which, unlike the ADL, actually opposes hate wherever it comes from, took a camera to record local reactions.
"I blame the Jews. We never had a shooting like this until they came," one resident bellows. “My children are stuck at school because of Jew shenanigans.”
"Four of y'all are dead right? That's great. If they was there, they got shot dead, that's great," a man says.
"Get the Jews out of Jersey City," someone else shouts.
There’s nothing extraordinary about this. It’s the everyday hate that we can’t talk about. The hate that the media is quick to cover up. If you want to understand why children are beaten on Brooklyn streets and why a Kosher supermarket was shot up, it’s because we aren’t allowed to talk about it.
Evil needs silence and complicity. The media and Democrat politicians are guilty of both.
The Ferencz family, Moishe and Leah, opened a small market on Martin Luther King Dr. They filled the narrow aisles with bread, juice, candy, milk, and the household staples you need when time is short.
They worked late hours.
And then, while Moishe was praying next door, the black nationalist bigots whom the New York Times, the Washington Post, Rep. Ilhan Omar, and Rep. Karen Bass had defended, killed her husband.
That is the story that the media won’t tell. But it must be told.

Jersey City Kosher Market Shooter Was Anti-Semitic Black Nationalist

December 11, 2019 
Daniel Greenfield
When a mass shooting fits a political narrative, the information on it is released quickly. When it doesn't, the authorities stall and the media spins. There's extensive coverage of what witnesses saw, but no tangible facts or meaningful information.
In the Jersey City shooting at the JC Kosher supermarket, the media and authorities initially claimed that the location was random, then admitted that it had been targeted, but slow-walked the release of information about the shooters. That told us it was either Islamic terrorists or black nationalists. A white nationalist mass shooter isn't that likely in Jersey City and the information would have been quickly put out there.
Then reports mentioned that the male shooter had posted anti-Semitic and anti-police rants. That narrowed it down to black nationalists.
The two people who stormed a kosher grocery store in Jersey City with rifles, killing three people inside and also murdering a veteran detective, have been identified as David Anderson and Francine Graham, four law enforcement sources familiar with the case tell News 4.
The footage shows the shooters deliberately bypass other people on the busy street, aiming directly for people inside the kosher deli. Information continues to develop, and while authorities said Tuesday that it appeared the standoff began with the deadly shooting of a police officer at a separate site, Fulop and Shea said Wednesday that the bloodshed began at the market.
"We now know this did not begin with gunfire between police officers and perpetrators and then move to the store," Shea, the brother of NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea, said. "It began with an attack on the civilians inside the store."
According to three sources, Anderson was a one-time follower of the Black Hebrew Israelite movement, whose members believe they are descendants of the ancient Israelites and may adhere to both Christian and Judaic beliefs, and his social media pages include anti-police and anti-Jewish writings. Investigators are looking to see if it was Anderson himself who posted that material.
It's nice to belatedly hear the truth.
There are a number of black hebrew groups. Some claim to be Jews. Some claim that Jews aren't really Jews. The Black Hebrew Israelites are notorious not only for claiming that Jews aren't real Jews, but for being extremely racist and engaging in confrontational street preaching.
And by "confrontational", we're talking shouting slurs and obscenities at people passing by.
This was the hate group at the center of the Covington Catholic incident. And was defended by the media at the time. 
After the white nationalist shootings in Pennsylvania and California, there was a conversation about the rising violence of Neo-Nazis and its roots in the hatred of Jews. Are we going to have that conversation about black nationalism and anti-Semitism? Don't count on it.


Heather Mac Donald

Public safety
The Social Order
As for interracial violence generally, blacks disproportionately commit it. Between 2012 and 2015, there were 631,830 violent interracial victimizations, excluding homicide, between blacks
and whites, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Blacks, who make up 13 percent of the U.S. population, committed 85.5 percent of those victimizations, or 540,360 felonious assaults on 
whites, while whites, 61 percent of the population, committed 14.4 percent, or 91,470 felonious assaults on blacks. Regarding threats to blacks from the police, a police officer is 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male is to be killed by a police officer.

Anti-cop activist Shaun King says that his involvement in the campaign around the Jazmine Barnes murder was not driven by reports that a white man had killed the seven-year-old girl, who was gunned down in Houston on December 30. According to Barnes’s mother and 15-year-old sister, the white driver of a pickup truck had pulled up next to the family’s car before opening fire. The accusation set off a frenzy of hate-crime allegations and blanket coverage by the New York Times. King offered a $100,000 reward to anyone who located the suspect. 
As it turned out, Jazmine Barnes was killed by two black men, who opened fire on her mother’s car because they thought that they were targeting enemies of their gang. King passed along a tip about the real killers to the Houston police, and now says that he merely “internalized the pain of the family and tried to search as if it were my own child who was killed.” Race, in other words, had nothing to do with his activism. 
It’s worth remembering, though, the many other black children who have been victims of drive-by shootings without leading King to launch a national crusade.
A sampling: in March 2015, a six-year-old boy was killed in a drive-by shooting on West Florissant Avenue in St. Louis, as Black Lives Matter protesters were converging on the Ferguson, Missouri, Police Department to demand the resignation of the entire department. In August 2015, a nine-year-old girl was killed by a bullet from a drive-by shooting in Ferguson while doing her homework in her bedroom, blocks from the Black Lives Matter rioting thoroughfare. Five children were shot in Cleveland over the 2015 Fourth of July weekend. A seven-year-old boy was killed in Chicago that same weekend by a bullet intended for his father. In Cincinnati, in July 2015, a four-year-old girl was shot in the head and a six-year-old girl was left paralyzed and partially blind from two separate drive-by shootings. In Cleveland, three children five and younger were killed in September 2015, leading the black police chief to break down in tears and ask why the community only protests shootings of blacks when the perpetrator is a cop. In November 2015, a nine-year-old in Chicago was lured into an alley and killed by his father’s gang enemies; the father refused to cooperate with the police. All told, ten children under the age of ten were killed in Baltimore in 2015; twelve victims were between the age of ten and seventeen. 
In 2016, a three-year-old girl in Baltimore was partially paralyzed by a drive-by shooting. In Chicago in 2016, two dozen children under the age of 12 were shot in drive-bys, including a three-year-old boy mowed down on Father’s Day 2016 who is now paralyzed for life and a ten-year-old boy shot in August; his pancreas, intestines, kidney, and spleen were torn apart. A Jacksonville 22-month-old was shot to death by a passing car last June. In September, three men killed three-year-old Azalya Anderson in a drive-by in Sacramento, and a week before Christmas in Bridgeport, a 12-year-old boy was shot and killed on his way home from the candy store in a drive-by shooting.
Why did King let these shootings of black children go by without responding as he did to Jazmine Barnes’s murder? Could it be because the perpetrators were black? You could end all white shootings of black children tomorrow and it would have zero effect on the death rate of black children by homicide, because such white-on-black shootings are extremely rare. Moral abominations, like the 2015 Charleston church massacre by white supremacist Dylann Roof, are aberrations that belong to the outermost lunatic fringe of American society. The country’s revulsion at the Charleston carnage was immediate and universal, resulting in a movement to banish the Confederate flag, embraced by Roof as a white supremacist symbol, from official sites. 
If Shaun King and other Black Lives Matter activists really want to save black children from the trauma of urban violence, they should put their efforts into rebuilding inner-city culture—above all, by revalorizing a married father as the best gift a mother can give her child. Fantasies about white violence against “black bodies” are a distraction from what is actually happening on American streets. 
Heather Mac Donald is the Thomas W. Smith Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a contributing editor of City Journal, and the author of The War on Cops: How the New Attack on Law and Order Makes Everyone Less Safe and The Diversity Delusion: How Race and Gender Pandering Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture.


of crime and policing than this weekend’s demonstrations suggest.

The FBI released its official crime tally for 2016 today, and the data flies in the face of the rhetoric that professional athletes rehearsed in revived Black Lives Matter protests over the weekend.  Nearly 900 additional blacks were killed in 2016 compared with 2015, bringing the black homicide-victim total to 7,881. Those 7,881 “black bodies,” in the parlance of Ta-Nehisi Coates, are 1,305 more than the number of white victims (which in this case includes most Hispanics) for the same period, though blacks are only 13 percent of the nation’s population. The increase in black homicide deaths last year comes on top of a previous 900-victim increase between 2014 and 2015.
Who is killing these black victims? Not whites, and not the police, but other blacks. In 2016, the police fatally shot 233 blacks, the vast majority armed and dangerous, according to the Washington Post. The Post categorized only 16 black male victims of police shootings as “unarmed.” That classification masks assaults against officers and violent resistance to arrest. Contrary to the Black Lives Matter narrative, the police have much more to fear from black males than black males have to fear from the police. In 2015, a police officer was 18.5 times more likely to be killed by a black male than an unarmed black male was to be killed by a police officer. Black males have made up 42 percent of all cop-killers over the last decade, though they are only 6 percent of the population. That 18.5 ratio undoubtedly worsened in 2016, in light of the 53 percent increase in gun murders of officers—committed vastly and disproportionately by black males. Among all homicide suspects whose race was known, white killers of blacks numbered only 243. 
Violent crime has now risen by a significant amount for two consecutive years. The total number of violent crimes rose 4.1 percent in 2016, and estimated homicides rose 8.6 percent. In 2015, violent crime rose by nearly 4 percent and estimated homicides by nearly 11 percent. The last time violence rose two years in a row was 2005–06.  The reason for the current increase is what I have called the Ferguson Effect. Cops are backing off of proactive policing in high-crime minority neighborhoods, and criminals are becoming emboldened. Having been told incessantly by politicians, the media, and Black Lives Matter activists that they are bigoted for getting out of their cars and questioning someone loitering on a known drug corner at 2 AM, many officers are instead just driving by. Such stops are discretionary; cops don’t have to make them. And when political elites demonize the police for just such proactive policing, we shouldn’t be surprised when cops get the message and do less of it. Seventy-two percent of the nation’s officers say that they and their colleagues are now less willing to stop and question suspicious persons, according to a Pew Research poll released in January 2016. The reason is the persistent anti-cop climate. 
Four studies came out in 2016 alone rebutting the charge that police shootings are racially biased. If there is a bias in police shootings, it works in favor of blacks and against whites. That truth has not stopped the ongoing demonization of the police—including, now, by many of the country’s ignorant professional athletes. The toll will be felt, as always, in the inner city, by the thousands of law-abiding people there who desperately want more police protection. 

Operation Mockingbird's Racial Destructive Lies

In a recent article, I explained that Operation Mockingbird is a program founded by the CIA in the 1950s to use journalists and front groups to spread propaganda. 
Today’s version of Operation Mockingbird uses intelligence agencies, academia, Hollywood, and the Democratic party to spread hatred for Christians, traditional values, law-abiding gun owners, straight white men, pro-lifers, police and the 63 million who voted for Trump.
I am encouraged that a growing number of young Americans realize they are being propagandized 24/7. Young people are fed up with SJWs (social justice warriors) demonizing whites, anyone who is happy, successful, thin, and enjoying life. Youths are angry for being branded an “ist” or “phobe” for everything they say or do.
These three Operation Mockingbird lies continue to wreak havoc, igniting racial hatred, division and violence.
The Tea Party is racist.
In 2008, I was about to sing my “American Tea Party Anthem” at a rally in Orlando, Florida. The audience of 6000 was 95% white. At center stage, I spontaneously proclaimed, “Hello my fellow patriots. I am NOT an African American. I am Lloyd Marcus, AMERICAN!” Surprisinglythe audience leaped to their feet, erupting in thunderous cheers and applause. After the rally, I was rushed by people, some with tears, thanking me. They believe hyphenating divides us. I love John Wayne's hyphen speech. That day in Orlando, I became “The Unhyphenated American.”
My unhyphenated American proclamation received the same joyous response at over 500 Tea Party rallies nationwide. A Holocaust survivor gave me a tearful bear hug.
At a rally in Texas, a white cowboy approached me pushing a stroller with two black babies he and his wife adopted from Africa. He and his wife asked God for babies who needed their love. The proud pop was excited about his kids becoming U.S. citizens.
At a rally in Traverse City Michigan, a white woman in a wheelchair yelled, “Oh my gosh, there's Lloyd Marcus! Can I get a picture with you?” The woman's adult daughter told a staffer that her mom was dying and meeting me was atop her mom's bucket list. Wow!
At a rally in Montana, a rancher with working man's hands invited my wife and I to visit his huge ranch. “We can shoot guns, drink whiskey on my porch and watch the beautiful big sky sunset.”
Do these Tea Party people behave like racist white supremacists? No. As a matter of fact, 40% of the Tea Party voted for Obama,. They simply opposed him driving us down the road to socialism.
Cops Murder Blacks
Democratic presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris said Michael Brown was “murdered” by a racist white cop. That irresponsible statement should disqualify these two power-obsessed despicable people from becoming president. Brown was not murdered. Evidence confirmed that Brown was shot while attacking the officer inside his cruiser, trying to take the officer's gun.  Operation Mockingbird continues to promote the Brown-was-murdered lie, resulting in cops being assaulted, ambushed, and assassinated.
Outrageously, Black Lives Matter declared “open season” on killing cops and white people. BLM marched down a New York street chanting, “What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want it? Now!” 
Operation Mockingbird and the deep state are one in the same, gifting propaganda hate groups over $130 million to wreak havoc in our streets. Obama, outrageously honored BLM at the White House. 
The truth is that police are blacks' greatest defenders. 
Whites Routinely Murder Blacks
To sell their irresponsible evil lie that whites routinely murder blacks, fake news media reported that Trayvon Martin was gunned down by George Zimmerman, a “white Hispanic.” The truth is, Martin jumped on top of Zimmerman and began beating his head into the ground. Incredibly, NBC news went as far as to edit Zimmerman's 9/11 call to make him sound like a racist. 
Fake news media mislead the public about Martin's age, promoting a photo of him as a cute little boy. Martin was a 17-year-old thug. 
George Zimmerman was acquitted in the 2012 shooting. And yet, the Martin shooting continues to be used to sell the lie that innocent black children live in constant danger of being murdered by racist white men. Zimmerman is fighting back with a $100 million lawsuit against Martin's family and the prosecutors. 
Patriot brother JJ Flash is with the Trump Train and The True Channel. He has done an outstanding job exposing how Operation Mockingbird is behind corruption in our government. 
Americans have about had it with elitists who are behind the scenes propagandizing us while demanding control of our lives and behavior. President Trump is our new sheriff in town in Washington D.C. Thanks to him, We the People are fighting and winning back our culture and freedoms.
Lloyd Marcus, The Unhyphenated American


Sessions on Impeachment: ‘Dramatic Abuse’ by House — Pelosi Refusal to Send to Senate Shows Lack of Confidence

(Jeff Poor/Breitbart News)
(Jeff Poor/Breitbart News)

HUNTSVILLE, Alabama — On Thursday, former U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions, a candidate for U.S. Senate in Alabama, was on the campaign trail in his state’s Tennessee Valley, catching up with voters and local officials about the issues of the day.
Of notable importance was the House of Representatives’ passage of two articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump a day earlier.
In comments given to Breitbart News, the former U.S. Senator and Attorney General criticized the House of Representatives’ effort on the grounds of substance and called it a “dramatic abuse” by the body.
“I think it has just been shocking to most Americans to see how little substance this is,” he said. “It’s like, is this all there is? After all these vicious charges against the president, it comes down to these vague charges of abuse and obstruction? What does that mean? I think it’s a dramatic abuse by the House of Representatives of the impeachment clause in the Constitution. And it’s not anything the House says it is. Some have tried to say that. But in truth, the Constitution says treason, bribery, high crimes, and misdemeanors. Those mean something. It means something other than we had a disagreement with you, and now we’re going to impeach you. This was a horrible, improper act, in my opinion.”
The former U.S. Attorney General also weighed in on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) refusal at the moment to transfer the articles of impeachment to the U.S. Senate, where a trial would take place. He said that gesture from Pelosi showed a lack of confidence in the two articles.
“I think there’s no doubt they don’t have confidence in them,” Sessions explained. “They’re not able to defend the charges. You had Professor [Jonathan] Turley, who I have gotten to know, Ken Starr, who is a great lawyer, being a law school dean and was a Clinton special prosecutor, but he says it is nowhere close to impeachable offenses. And Professor Turley does, too. He says it would be the least supported impeachment charge ever in our nation’s history. I’m totally in accord with that. Not sending it over is to me a clear indication that they’re not proud of their work. I said some weeks ago it looked like they were going to force this thing through and slink away, and hope it goes away. They know it doesn’t have legs in the Senate.”
Sessions did not have a recommendation as to whether or not witnesses should be called in the Senate trial. But he added that he did not think witnesses were necessary and pointed out that witnesses were not called in the impeachment trial of Bill Clinton in 1999.
“In my opinion, there’s so little substance in this impeachment charge that calling witnesses is not required to fulfill the responsibility of the Senate,” he said. “But I know Sen. McConnell and the White House are talking about that question. I won’t make a recommendation as to what they should do. I think they should think it through, and I think they probably should reach a good decision. I don’t think it’s required. We didn’t do witnesses on Clinton. With Clinton, there was proof beyond a reasonable doubt — all the elements of three different crimes. There’s no crime really charged here. The charges are vague, and they support impeachment for almost anything Congress wanted to do in the future if this is sustained.”
Sessions is the apparent front-runner in a crowded field for the seat he held for 20 years before accepting President Donald Trump’s appointment to serve as U.S. Attorney General. Sessions faces former Auburn head football coach Tommy Tuberville, U.S. Rep. Bradley Byrne (R-AL), former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore and State Rep. Arnold Mooney (R) for the opportunity to run against incumbent Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL) next November.
Follow Jeff Poor on Twitter @jeff_poor

Donald Trump Questions Nancy Pelosi’s Corruption

AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

President Donald Trump questioned House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s dubious participation in stock market initial public offering shares, enriching her family.

The president shared a clip Monday highlighting a CBS 60 Minutes report featuring author and Breitbart senior contributor Peter Schweizer’s investigation into Pelosi and her husband participating in at least eight different stock IPOs while in Congress.

"The House gone rogue! I want to remind you a little bit about the ring leader in this whole rogue operation against the President of the United States..." @MarkLevinShow

60 Minutes reporter Steve Kroft confronted Pelosi on the topic in 2011, but she denied any impropriety.
The report noted that Pelosi and her husband participated in an initial public offering of Visa in 2008, while credit card regulation was underway in the House of Representatives. The Pelosis bought 5,000 shares at the initial price of $44 and shares were trading at $64 just two days later, according to the report. 
“Congress has never done more for consumers nor has the Congress passed more critical reforms of the credit card industry than under the Speakership of Nancy Pelosi,” Pelosi spokesman, Drew Hammill, said in a statement, according to CNN after the 60 Minutes report aired.
The clip was featured on Mark Levin’s Fox News show Life, Liberty and Levin on Sunday.

Turns out Biden's family not the only one to benefit from Ukrainian fossil fuels


On Sept. 24, 2019, Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the official impeachment inquiry that would be led by the Intelligence Committee and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.).  At first, this was a curious decision to objective persons, since the Judiciary Committee has the authority over this type of procedure.  At the time, Pelosi indicated a threat by President Donald Trump to our national security during the July 25 conversation between him and President Zelensky of Ukraine.  She did this without the benefit of the transcript, but she doubtless already knew much of the CIA "whistleblower's" complaint.  Further, the Ukrainian president disputes her version.
But this is not the rationale for her haste to convene the investigation.  It appears that the D.C. swamp benefits another powerful family.  The Biden family has gotten special treatment from Ukrainian oil interests, and the Pelosi family has a similar advantage.  Paul Pelosi, Jr. was a board member of Viscoil and an executive at its related company NRGLab, which was involved in energy business in Ukraine.  Perhaps the use of the Intelligence Committee has given the Democrats the opportunity to limit Republican questioning and maintain secrecy over the responses from subpoenaed witnesses.  This would prevent any official record implicating Pelosi's son.  This also explains her reluctance to take a vote authorizing the investigation, since the minority party would gain some rights.
This is interesting also since much of the Democratic Party rejects carbon-based energy sources.  Biden has made this a part of his campaign.  The Green New Deal proposals will eventually end dependency on oil and gas as an energy source.  But this does not stop these politicos from benefiting financially from this sector of the economy.  This reminds one of the financial benefits that Al Gore's father had from Occidental Petroleum, which was one of the great polluters (remember Love Canal?).  He chose to make money selling carbon offsets to atone and make his own name. 
The Ukrainian oil company Burisma used many well connected members of the D.C. establishment connected to the Obama administration.  This interlocking swamp is a threat to the USA.  But the media have managed to convince a vast number of Americans that Trump is the threat.  When Trump railed against Pelosi in Louisiana on Friday, he was accusing her of not just splitting the nation politically, but also ignoring the financial benefits to powerful families at the detriment of our national security.  This also helps explain the constant discussion in public about Biden's son Hunter, in addition to the political advantage he might gain.
No wonder the establishment (including many Republicans) wants to impeach Trump.  Family security always "trumps" national security in the D.C. swamp.

NANCY PELOSI GOT RICH OFF ELECTED OFFICE AND SERVICING THE “CHEAP” LABOR LOBBIES - Jim Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?”


CALL NANCY PELOSI Washington , DC - (202) 225-4965 San Francisco , CA - (415) 556-4862 


Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this 
than I previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits.

Pelosi's Stake in Illegal Immigration

The Minuteman Project, founded by Jim Gilchrist (who is also the co-author of the book Minutemen: The Battle to Secure America’s Borders), is made up of citizen volunteers who watch our border with Mexico and report illegal entry to the border patrol. For performing that thankless task in full compliance with the law, Gilchrist and his colleagues have been falsely maligned as fascists, racists, and even murderers. They have been driven off the speaker’s platform at Columbia University and vilified by Leftist politicians and their handmaidens in the liberal press.

So it was no surprise that the mainstream media chose to ignore a recent press release, issued by his publisher, in which Gilchrist asked the question about Nancy Pelosi’s ethics that should be on the minds of every law-abiding American – including those immigrants who are following the law to become citizens here the proper way: “Do we really need a House Speaker whose every action is calculated to enhance her own financial interests, instead of focusing on how porous borders will affect the security of everyday American citizens?”

Gilchrist did not stop there. He demanded an investigation into Pelosi’s “economic stake in just the kind of illegal alien exploitation that we deplore in Minutemen.” But you would never know it from the liberal media, who - while ignoring this demand - have had no compunctions in calling for Speaker Hastert’s head in the wake of the Foley page controversy.

Gilchrist was reacting to my report several weeks ago in FrontPage Magazine that Pelosi – who owns non-union vineyards in Napa Valley where grape-picking depends chiefly on the availability of cheap foreign labor – is doing everything she can to help open the floodgates to more illegal immigration. And she wants the American taxpayers to pay their way. As even more proof of this than I previously reported, Pelosi does not want employers like her to be required to pay the cost of illegal aliens’ hospital care. She voted against a bill that would make employers liable for the reimbursements if an undocumented employee seeks medical attention. And she voted in favor of rewarding illegal aliens from Mexico with Social Security benefits.

At the same time, Pelosi has led the Democratic opposition to any effective border controls or documentation requirements. She opposed the Secure Fence Act of 2006, signed into law by President Bush, and voted against final passage of a border security and enforcement bill in 2005 which required that all businesses must use an electronic system to check if all new hires have the legal right to work in this country. She voted against a bill to bar drivers' licenses for illegal aliens in 2005. This year she opposed legislation requiring presentation of a legitimate government-issued photo ID to prove eligibility to vote, claiming that “there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem with non-citizen voters.” She is dead wrong. For example, an accused terrorist by the name of Nuradin Abdi was just recently reported to have illegally registered to vote at the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Nuradin Abdi was indicted earlier this year as part of a conspiracy to blow up the Columbus Mall.

How many other terrorist suspects may have slipped through the system because Leftists like Pelosi oppose any meaningful screens? Instead she continues to advocate our recognition of the flimsy, non-validated ID card that the Mexican consulates provide to illegal aliens before they cross over our border, called the “matricula consular”, which gives them phony documentation to set up bank accounts, apply for jobs, obtain social benefits, board airplanes, identify themselves to police, enter buildings that require IDs, obtain drivers’ licenses and then perhaps use those drivers’ licenses to try to illegally register to vote in our elections.

Pelosi also believes in giving sanctuary to illegal aliens. She opposed legislation to deny federal homeland security funding to state and local governments who refuse to share information they learn about an individual's immigration status with Federal immigration authorities. Pelosi’s hometown of San Francisco is one of the sanctuary cities she voted to protect for the benefit of illegal aliens. Pelosi even voted against strengthening our immigration law with regard to the deportability of alien terrorists.

Jim Gilchrist cut to the chase with this devastating observation that the mainstream media does not want you to read:

"As we’ve shown again and again in ‘Minutemen,’ the Democrats aren’t just hypocrites, but are working actively to subvert our legislative system to their own ends. Their only goal is votes, votes and more votes, no matter where they come from, no matter if they’re cast legally, no matter whether the person casting them is dead, alive, a citizen or an illegal alien."

Pelosi sees Jim Gilchrist’s Minutemen Project as a threat to her pro-illegal alien agenda. More illegal aliens mean more votes for the Democrats and more grape-pickers for Napa Valley vineyards like hers. So she even voted against a measure that would have cut off the use of U.S. taxpayers’ funds to tip off illegal aliens as to where the Minutemen citizen patrols may be located! She obviously wants to see the Minutemen put out of business – permanently. She can count on the liberal press to distort the work of the Minutemen and to keep out of the public eye Gilchrist’s pointed questions about her motivations for helping illegal aliens during the run-up to the mid-term elections that may make her the next Speaker of the House.

Gilchrist, of course, is accustomed to being vilified and prevented by the Left from getting his message out. In early October, he was prevented from finishing his speech at the "Minutemen Forum" sponsored by the Columbia College Republicans. Gilchrist had spoken for just a few minutes and managed to utter the words “I love the First Amendment” when a group of radical protestors took the stage and interrupted him, displaying a big banner saying "There are no illegals." More protestors then stormed the stage. Chaos erupted and the audience members who had come to hear Gilchrist speak never got the chance, which was precisely the protestors’ objective. As reported online by the staff of Columbia’s undergraduate newspaper, “a mosh pit of triumphal students and community members danced and chanted outside, "Asian, Black, Brown and White, we smashed the Minutemen tonight!" They also put out a statement declaring:

“The Minutemen are not a legitimate voice in the debate on immigration. They are a racist, armed militia who have declared open hunting season on immigrants, causing countless hate crimes and over 3000 deaths on the border. Why should exploitative corporations have free passes between nations, but individual people not? No human being is illegal.” (Emphasis added)

We have come to the point in this country where a bunch of radical protestors get to decide who is and who is not a legitimate voice in the debate on as critical a public policy issue as immigration. Such Leftists think that migration in a borderless world is a basic human right. They want no barriers, no guards, and no proof of lawful residency. They certainly do not want the Minutemen watching the border and reporting illegal entry to the authorities.

Leftist slogans like “no human being is illegal” are red herrings. It is not the human being who is illegal; it is what the human being does that may be illegal. One’s conduct is the test, not simply who one is. Immigrants who follow our rules are welcome here. Those who do not abide by our laws have no right to be here. A person who breaks into your house without your permission does not deserve room, board and a job as a reward, even if the intruder may be much poorer than you. He has broken the law and deserves to be punished for what he has done. Our country’s boundaries and rules for entry and residency similarly define who is permitted to be here and how we choose to protect ourselves. We are a land of immigrants, but we are also a land of laws with certain core values. Those seeking to enter our country and remain here must learn to accommodate to our laws and values, not the other way around. That is the way prior generations of immigrants did it, including those who passed through Ellis Island. Why should the law be thrown aside now?

What we are witnessing is a frontal challenge to our nation’s sovereignty. Mexico’s Foreign Secretary wants to drag us before the United Nations for intending to build a fence on our side of the border with our money to keep out aliens who seek to enter our country illegally. They will probably get a sympathetic ear as some UN bureaucrats believe there should be no such thing as “illegal” immigrants in the first place. For the first time in our history, Americans are being asked to cede the right to decide how we define ourselves as a nation and protect our own borders to a globalist governance body. Will Pelosi lead her liberal loyalists as House Speaker to support the UN against America’s right to control its own borders? Do we really want to risk finding out?

It is high time, as Jim Gilchrist demanded in the press release ignored by the mainstream media, that Pelosi come clean under oath as to her personal stake in the illegal immigration issue before she can do even more damage as House Speaker.

Pelosi - Illegals - Sunkist - Her investments!
Pelosi's corrupt insider passing of bills that make her rich.
Check for yourself
Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's home House District includes San Francisco.
Star-Kist Tuna's headquarters are in San Francisco, Pelosi's home district.
Star-Kist is owned by Del Monte Foods and is a major contributor to Pelosi.
Star-Kist is the major employer in American Samoa employing 75% of the Samoan workforce.
Paul Pelosi, Nancy's husband, owns $17 million dollars of Star-Kist stock.
In January, 2007 when the minimum wage was increased from $5.15 to $7.25, Pelosi had American Samoa exempted from the increase so Del Monte would not have to pay the higher wage. This would make Del Monte products less expensive than their competition's.
Last week when the huge bailout bill was passed, Pelosi added an earmark to the final bill adding $33 million dollars for an "economic development credit in American Samoa".
Pelosi has called the Bush Administration "corrupt".
Check some more for yourself

Conservative Activist Jumps Pelosi's Fence With Illegal Aliens to Prove a Vital Point

Conservative activist Laura Loomer, who is known for going undercover with James O'Keefe, took alleged illegal aliens from Mexico and Guatemala to Speaker Nancy Pelosi's home in California. There, the group jumped the fence and Loomer demanded the group be let into the home. The group set up a pop up tent with the word "morality" on it and hung the pictures of those who were killed by illegal aliens, The Daily Caller reported. 

City Journal
How Unskilled Immigrants Hurt Our Economy
Immigration’s bottom line has shifted so sharply that in a high-immigration state like California, native-born residents are paying up to ten times more in state and local taxes than immigrants generate in economic benefits.
The annual expenditure of state and local tax dollars on services for that population is $25.3 billion (DATED – NOW $35 BILLION AND ONLY GOING UP). That total amounts to a yearly burden of about $2,370 for a household headed by a U.S. citizen.
According to the Centers for Immigration Studies, April '11, at least 70% of Mexican illegal alien families receive some type of welfare in the US!!!


More than 7-in-10 households headed by immigrants in the state of California are on taxpayer-funded welfare, a new study reveals.

The latest Census Bureau data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California — the number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S. JOHN BINDER

This week, lawmakers unveiled a $1 billion health care plan that would include spending $250 million to extend health care coverage to all illegal alien adults. JENNIFER G. HICKEY

Two groups of Central American migrants made separate marches on the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana Tuesday, demanding that they be processed through the asylum system more quickly and in greater numbers, that deportations be halted and that President Trump either let them into the country or pay them $50,000 each to go home. MONICA SHOWALTER
This annual income for an impoverished American family is $10,000 less than the more than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on each unaccompanied minor border crosser.
study by Tom Wong of the University of California at San Diego discovered that more than 25 percent of DACA-enrolled illegal aliens in the program have anchor babies. That totals about 200,000 anchor babies who are the children of DACA-enrolled illegal aliens. This does not include the anchor babies of DACA-qualified illegal aliens. JOHN BINDER