polecat news and views

Tuesday, June 2, 2020

Trump Takes Decisive Action Against Antifa Thugs as Riots Spread Across America

On Sunday, after days of rioting, looting, and arson in cities across America following protests over the horrific death of George Floyd at the hands of police officers, President Donald Trump announced that his administration would formally declare the loosely-organized radical leftist agitator group known as “antifa” a terrorist organization.

“The United States of America will be designating ANTIFA as a Terrorist Organization,” Trump tweeted.

As PJ Media contributor Victoria Taft noted two years back, the Department of Homeland Security already considers antifa a form of domestic terrorism. In 2017, Politico reported that “the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as ‘domestic terrorist violence,’ according to interviews and confidential law enforcement documents obtained by POLITICO.”

Even so, a formal declaration is arguably warranted following the devastation in recent days. Lamenting the riots, looting, and arson should not be a partisan or racial issue, as black citizens and business owners have broken into tears after witnessing the devastation in their communities and the destruction of their livelihoods.

As of Sunday morning, police had arrested nearly 1,400 people in 17 U.S. cities since Thursday. Governors in at least nine states have activated their states’ National Guards to respond to riots: Minnesota, Ohio, Georgia, Colorado, Wisconsin, Kentucky, Texas, Utah, and Washington State. In another five more, governors have said they planned to activate the National Guard.

As the United States was leaving lockdowns imposed to fight the coronavirus, cities across the country have enforced a new limited kind of lockdown to prevent the destruction. Cities across the country set curfews to stem the violence, including: Minneapolis, Chicago, Los Angeles, Atlanta, Denver, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Seattle, Cleveland, Columbus, Portland, Miami, Milwaukee, Salt Lake City, and Rochester.

Previous push to designate antifa a terrorist group

Last year, following a horrendous attack in Portland that left Quillette editor Andy Ngo hospitalized, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) introduced a resolution condemning the violent acts carried out by antifa and calling for the U.S. to designate the group a domestic terrorist organization.

“Antifa is a group of hateful, intolerant radicals who pursue their unhinged agenda through aggressive violence,” Cruz said in a statement. “Time and time again their actions have demonstrated that their only purpose is to inflict harm on those who oppose their views. The hate and violence they spread must be stopped, and I am proud to introduce this resolution with Senator Cassidy to properly identify what Antifa are: domestic terrorists.”

“Antifa are terrorists, violent masked bullies who ‘fight fascism’ with actual fascism, protected by Liberal privilege,” Cassidy added. “With bullies, they get their way until someone says no. There must be courage, not cowardice, from the elected officials who allow violence against the innocent.”

The Cruz-Cassidy resolution also notes that the ICE office in southwest Portland, Ore., was shut down for days due to threats and occupation. Cruz and Cassidy omitted the most recent case of such violence, in which self-described antifa member Willem Van Spronsen threw incendiary devices at an ICE detention center in Tacoma, Wash. He was killed in a shootout with police. The local antifa group hailed him as a “comrade” and a “martyr,” and said his death should inspire more “protest and direct action.”

Van Spronsen also condemned ICE centers as “concentration camps,” echoing the inciting language of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.). Ocasio-Cortez has yet to denounce this act of violence arguably inspired by her rhetoric.

Responding to Trump’s tweet, Ngo called on federal investigative authorities to “dismantle the networks & hundreds of antifa cells across the US who radicalize, train & carry out organized extremist violence. They also have international links to affinity cells in Western Europe. It is domestic & international terrorism.”

Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump

· 1h

The United States of America will be designating ANTIFA as a Terrorist Organization.

Andy Ngô

✔@MrAndyNgo

Federal investigative authorities must dismantle the networks & hundreds of antifa cells across the US who radicalize, train & carry out organized extremist violence. They also have international links to affinity cells in Western Europe. It is domestic & international terrorism.

7,683

9:36 AM - May 31, 2020

Twitter Ads info and privacy

2,747 people are talking about this

Trump’s move to declare antifa a terrorist organization is a welcome response to increasing violence.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/05/31/as-america-burns-trump-declares-antifa-a-terrorist-group-n472221

Monday, June 1, 2020

Don's Tuesday Column

THE WAY I SEE IT by Don Polson Red Bluff Daily News 6/01/2020

Demo-pocalypse now in cities

The killing of George Floyd doesn’t produce emotional angst over race here because I don’t see anyone solely through the lens of their skin color. Never have, never will. That doesn’t remove race from this or other unjust situations—an obviously poorly trained white officer, clearly indifferent fellow officers and an African-American suspect, doesn’t prove racism.

It’s sickening that a fellow American was treated that way, even assuming he broke some counterfeiting law as reported. Every fair-minded citizen can use common sense to know that subduing a suspect on the street requires the most effective and efficient transfer into the squad car with no more physical violence than necessary. Is that reasonable? Those officers failed lethally.

It doesn’t mean he was killed because he was black. Let’s allow the autopsy to tell us the particular cause of death; the cop was fired with obvious cause, and charges of murder or manslaughter will be filed.

I had to wonder, given Officer Chauvin’s previous complaints, if the process of union representation and rules had the same effect as those involved in the education field. We all know the stories of incompetent, even malignant, teachers that are given empty rooms for a classroom due to the expense and time required to fight the teachers’ union for termination.

When “hiring/firing at will” becomes a dance or chess match with public employee unions and burdensome rules, it must be agreed that getting rid of incompetent, bad cops or teachers becomes difficult. We may never know what role that played, just like we may never know why Democrat Hennepin County Attorney (now Senator) Amy Klobuchar never prosecuted Officer Derek Chauvin for prior offences.

There’s an obvious lesson in this—previously raised over the violent arrest of a large, black man selling single cigarettes on a New York sidewalk, who died in the process. Likewise, in the recent physical arrests and citations of law-abiding people for violating “stay-at-home,” business lockdown and “zero tolerance” outdoor recreation policies.

When laws and emergency rules have the backing of elected officials—with the authority of the people—those laws and rules are enforced ultimately with physical force, tasers, pepper spray, handcuffs and/or “the barrel of a gun.” We on the conservative side favor the lightest reasonable burden of laws and rules for just that reason; those on the left seem to favor lots of laws and rules but then resent and protest when the police “force” compliance, often against the violent objection of the offender.

The underlying philosophies are irreconcilable: We believe in the constitutional principle that we are free to do whatever we want as long as no law says we can’t. The left seems to prefer that everyone only do or say that which is approved and permitted; otherwise, it’s not allowed. You do see the difference, right?

Protests that are the “peaceable assembly to petition for redress of grievances” are a right; subject to a permitting process, the space needed is assured and protected. Signs, however outrageous, and angry, even hysterical speech, is cherished participatory democracy, used by all sides.

That stopped after the first days and after sundown. The riots, looting, violence and property destruction disgustingly played out from coast to coast in many American cities—that is what I call the Democrat Apocalypse, or “Demo-pocalypse.” Why so partisan, you ask? First, there haven’t been Republican mayors in these cities for decades; next, the violent rioters, looters, and occasional killers are the literal demographic that Democrats woo and curry favor with spending programs and entitlement payments.

Finally, Democrats high and low have not a discouraging word beyond the routine disapproval of immediate city officials. While hardly approved by the rank and file, it’s true that Democrat inner circles, operatives and their connected financial sources accept the legitimate role of anarchists, thugs, race-hustlers, hate-mongers and their well-organized violence, looting and burning of cities. From Saul Alinsky, perhaps?

This applies to the so-called “Anti-fa” and the violent side of the Black Lives Matter movement. They differ little beyond their uniforms from the Ku Klux Klan, who were, in fact and deed, the terrorist arm of the Democrat Party in the post-Civil War South, subjugating the otherwise Republican-leaning African-American population.

“Like the guaranteed ritual of swallows returning to Capistrano, you can always count on certain Democrats to defend thugs, arsonists, and criminals even when those scum are burning down the cities those Democrats operate. You see, some Democrats hate this nation so much that any wanton violence against person or property is fine with them as long as it damages the country in any way.

“What they don’t get, but President Trump does understand, is that a vast majority of the American people, regardless of color, are decent individuals who are disgusted by the antics of the thieves and looters afoot in many major cities in the U.S.

“President Trump, by calling these animals ‘thugs,’ put himself on the side of that American majority (much like Richard Nixon did in 1968 in regards to violent New Left and hippie protests against American troops fighting in Vietnam) who recoil from rioting and looting no matter the supposed reason.

“By his accurate use of ‘thugs,’ Trump brilliantly baited the Democrats into coming to the visceral defense of said thugs. Well played, sir.” (“Trump Baits Democrats Into Defending Arsonists and Looters,” by David Kamioner, Thepoliticalinsider.com)

Also, look up: “Our leaders have sided with the agents of chaos – we're told crimes of the mob are our fault,” by Tucker Carlson. More cops are killed by black criminals than the other way; of the 2,925 blacks murdered in 2018, 2,600 (89%) were killed by black criminals (FBI). I missed the protests, I guess.

Joe Biden’s Bogus Claim of a ‘Scandal-Free’ Obama-Biden Administration Gets Nuked in New RNC Ad

by Sister Toldjah

AP featured image — *President Barack Obama laughs with Vice President Joe Biden during a ceremony in the State Dining Room of the White House in Washington, Thursday, Jan. 12, 2017. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)*

——

Joe Biden is very fond of comparing the Obama/Biden administration to the Trump/Pence administration, and often boasts about how there was supposedly never a hint of scandal during the Obama/Biden years.

One of the more notable moments where he made this claim was a few days after he announced his presidential candidacy in April 2019. Biden told “The View” co-hosts and viewers that there was “not one single whisper of scandal”, which he credited President Obama for. “That’s because of Barack Obama,” he stated to applause from “The View”‘s liberal audience.

Watch:

He’s made it often since.

This is done, of course, to appeal to middle of the road types and independent voters who have grown weary of the mostly media/Democrat-driven “scandals” of the past 3+ years.

It’s also done because Biden is well aware of the fact that most in the mainstream media won’t fact check him on his wildly false claim of the Obama/Biden administration being “scandal-free.”

The Republican National Committee, on the other hand, isn’t at all interested in giving the 2020 presumptive Democratic presidential nominee a pass on the issue.

They released a hard-hitting ad on Tuesday that reminded voters of Obama/Biden-era scandals like Benghazi, Fast and Furious, the IRS’s targeting of conservative groups, Obama’s and Biden’s “lie of the year” about Obamacare, the $400 million in cash given to the Iranian terrorist regime in exchange for four American hostages, the half a billion dollar loan to Solyndra, and the VA wait times scandal.

Watch:

There were many more scandals not mentioned in the ad, including Obama’s firing of numerous inspectors general during the first year of his first term – including one who was doing an investigation into an Obama donor, and Obamagate, which is inarguably the biggest one of them all.

https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/05/27/joe-bidens-bogus-claim-of-a-scandal-free-obama-biden-administration-gets-nuked-in-new-rnc-ad/

Based in North Carolina, Sister Toldjah is a former liberal and a 16+ year writer with an emphasis on media bias, social issues, and the culture wars.

TRUMP VS. SOCIAL MEDIA [UPDATED]

BY JOHN HINDERAKER IN FACEBOOK, MEDIA, TWITTER

Today President Trump signed an executive order intended to address the problem of liberal bias in the major social media platforms. Reporting on the order has generally been poor. This is some of what it actually says, after a long preamble:

Sec. 2. Protections Against Online Censorship. (a) It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet. Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act (section 230(c)). 47 U.S.C. 230(c). It is the policy of the United States that the scope of that immunity should be clarified: the immunity should not extend beyond its text and purpose to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech, but in reality use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.
***
Sec. 4. Federal Review of Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices. (a) It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook, as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today, should not restrict protected speech. The Supreme Court has noted that social media sites, as the modern public square, “can provide perhaps the most powerful mechanisms available to a private citizen to make his or her voice heard.” Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S. Ct. 1730, 1737 (2017). Communication through these channels has become important for meaningful participation in American democracy, including to petition elected leaders. These sites are providing an important forum to the public for others to engage in free expression and debate. Cf. PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robins, 447 U.S. 74, 85-89 (1980).
***
c) The FTC shall consider taking action, as appropriate and consistent with applicable law, to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, pursuant to section 45 of title 15, United States Code. Such unfair or deceptive acts or practice may include practices by entities covered by section 230 that restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities’ public representations about those practices.

The genesis of today’s order is, as I understand it, the tech platforms’ desire to have their cake and eat it too. They want to be classified with internet service providers under federal law, so that they are immune from liability for anything that might be posted on their platforms. ISPs, of course, have no idea what publishers of web sites (like us) are putting up on the internet, and don’t purport to take any responsibility for it. As a result, under federal law they are immune from liability for, e.g., defamation.

The social media platforms want that immunity, and so far they have, I believe, enjoyed it. But at the same time, they, unlike ISPs, constantly monitor and often censor material that is posted by their members. They represent that they suppress certain kinds of undesirable information in the public interest, and to provide a better user experience. Fine: but in that case, they can’t claim the legal immunity that the federal government has conferred on ISPs.

No doubt this is a oversimplification, and more knowledgeable readers can weigh in via comments, but that is my understanding of the legal significance of today’s order. What it will mean, as a practical matter, remains to be seen. The FTC is a bureaucracy like any other, and the likelihood of its taking any significant action before the next presidential election seems slim. So today’s order is perhaps best viewed as a shot across the bow.

A final observation: note this definition.

Sec. 7. Definition. For purposes of this order, the term “online platform” means any website or application that allows users to create and share content or engage in social networking, or any general search engine.

So the order applies, in some fashion, to Google too.

UPDATE: I should add that no one denies that the social media platforms are all run by liberals, and manifest a more or less grotesque left-wing bias. This could be illustrated in a million ways, but let’s just go with this tweet by Nicholas Sandmann, the 16-year-old boy against whom Twitter hosted countless death threats:

Twitter has no answer, of course, except that it is a left-wing organization, as exemplified by its first attempt to “fact check” a tweet by President Trump. The “fact check,” done by a far-out leftist, was wrong. To return to the main point: if Twitter wants to be a far-left platform, it has that right. But if that is the path it has chosen, it can’t expect to be granted the same legal immunity that federal law extends to ISPs that have nothing to do with the content of the web sites that they host.

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/05/trump-vs-social-media.php

Biden Reelected Trump Last Friday

Biden Reelected Trump

Last

Friday

The former VP’s patronizing remark was no jest and it was fatal to his campaign.

by DAVID CATRON

🔊 Listen to this article

Usually, it’s necessary to wait until after a presidential election is over before it becomes possible to identify the point at which the dynamics of the contest began to favor the eventual winner. Occasionally, however, the turning point is blindingly obvious. President Reagan’s 1984 reelection, for example, was all but assured when Walter Mondale included a promise to raise taxes in his speech accepting the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination. Likewise, former Vice President Joe Biden almost certainly handed the 2020 election to President Trump last Friday when he told an African-American interviewer, “If you have a problem figuring out whether you’re for me or Trump, then you ain’t black.”

That blunder not only unmasked Biden’s condescending attitude toward a bloc of voters without whose support he cannot hope to win, it also revealed that his campaign is worried about poll numbers they’re seeing for those very voters. A new Quinnipiac poll shows that 81 percent of African-Americans support Biden. If that seems high, remember that Clinton won 88 percent of the black vote in 2016 and lost the election. African-American turnout was also down in 2016. In other words, Biden must turn out more black voters than did Hillary and win a larger percentage of their votes. Biden can’t win with 81 percent of a tepid African-American turnout, and his campaign knows it.

This is why the candidate condescended to be interviewed by Charlamagne tha God on “The Breakfast Club.” Biden’s campaign recently rebooted his outreach to the black community, and the interview was part of that effort. Charlamagne has real influence in the African-American community. “The Breakfast Club” is among the most-listened-to morning radio shows in America, reaching millions of listeners every week, and Charlamagne boasts 2.1 million Twitter followers. Biden’s remark, for a lot of his listeners, reinforced the view that the Democratic Party takes the black vote for granted. Sunday morning, Charlamagne was asked on MSNBC if he believed that this was the Democratic attitude:

I know that’s the attitude. That’s why I don’t even care about the words and the lip service.… It has to come to the point where we stop putting the burden on black voters to show up for Democrats and start putting the burden on Democrats to show up for black voters.… They have to worry about voter depression, people staying home on Election Day because they just aren’t enthused by the candidate.… You can’t act like this is the most important election ever but run a campaign from your basement, not make some real policy commitments to the black community, and not listen to some of the demands that the black community is making.

Friday, Biden’s campaign first attempted to clean up the mess by claiming that the remark was a joke. This was the line taken by Symone Sanders, a senior adviser to the Biden campaign who tweeted, “The comments made at the end of the Breakfast Club interview were in jest, but let’s be clear about what the VP was saying: he was making the distinction that he would put his record with the African American community up against Trump’s any day.” This balderdash quite literally fails the laugh test. President Trump’s pre-pandemic job creation initiatives and criminal justice reform have done more for blacks in three years than Joe Biden accomplished in half a century backstroking around the swamp.

After it became clear that the “just kidding” strategy wasn’t selling, Sanders simply refused to answer further questions. When NBC’s Chuck Todd, not exactly a purveyor of GOP talking points, tried to ask her a question about the issue she interrupted him thus: “Chuck, I’m not going to do this. Chuck, I’m not going to do this.” Sen. Tim Scott (R-S.C.) was less reticent: “Joe Biden’s comments are the most arrogant and condescending thing I’ve heard in a very long time. I am offended but not surprised.” Nor was Michigan GOP Senate candidate John James who, like Sen. Scott, is black. Indeed, the latter was moved to explain what really motivates the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee:

The Democratic Party has taken the black vote for granted for decades, but on Friday former Vice President Joe Biden took this view to a new and very hurtful level.… Biden has shown clearly that he thinks he knows better than black people what is best for us, and that if we don’t support him we are denying our own racial identity and heritage. Worse, I don’t see Biden’s Democratic colleagues holding him accountable for his comments. Instead, I hear silence.… Biden’s views have been exposed and stand in stark contrast to President Trump, who visited Michigan Thursday and actually listened to the needs of black people from black people.

Oddly enough, there is a certain symmetry to this. Biden wants to lead the party of slavery, Jim Crow, and segregation. President Trump leads the party that ended the “peculiar institution,” granted citizenship to former slaves, and recognized their right to vote. The Republicans did these things, as well as passing the 19th Amendment, despite the frequently violent objections of the Democrats. The best-kept secret in American politics is that, for these reasons, 95 percent of African-Americans voted Republican from the end of the Civil War until the 1930s. By that time, however, the GOP had come to take the black vote for granted. Sound familiar? If not, go back and read that quote from Charlamagne tha God.

https://spectator.org/biden-reelected-trump-last-friday/