Friday, July 3, 2020

The Good News About COVID-19 the Corporate Media Keeps Hidden

As the pandemic panic porn continues because identified cases are rising, Dr. Fauci is back on television, and the media is once again demanding a national response. However, there is news they don’t share with you that could help reduce the already unwarranted levels of fear. Obviously, that doesn’t fit their partisan agenda.

Many commentators have noted that rising case numbers are not necessarily a reason to sound the alarm. The fear with COVID-19 was always of overwhelming the hospital system. The correct numbers to look at are COVID-19 hospitalizations, the percent of positive tests, and the age breakdown for severe disease.

COVID-19 Severity

A doctor from the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center said in a press conference Wednesday that people who are testing positive do not appear to be getting as sick as they did earlier in the pandemic. Dr. Donald Yealy also noted this trend was being seen in the wake of massive protests.

He suggested the country is focusing too much on rising COVID-19 case counts.

“We need to change our mindset and focus not exclusively on the number of cases, but on the severity of illness. We shouldn’t just be counting those who have a diagnosed infection,” Yealy said. “For the vast majority of people testing positive, their illness is mild, or they don’t even know they have any symptoms of COVID-19 infection.”

Dr. Yealy also noted that the positive case rate was about one in 400, which has remained steady for weeks. He also noted improved treatment protocols and some success with Remdisivir and other medications. Effective treatment is in addition to some success protecting the elderly and a much younger patient load testing positive.

“In summary, what our experience shows is that fewer people are being admitted, and when they are, they tend to be much less sick than at the beginning or at the peak phases of the pandemic.”

Hydroxychloroquine

Professor Harvey Risch, M.D., Ph.D., is a researcher at the Yale School of Public Health with a specialty in cancer etiology, prevention and early diagnosis, and epidemiologic methods. He recently surveyed research on the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc, concluding that they should be made widely available for use in the pandemic.

In explaining his findings, he noted that COVID-19 causes two different diseases. First is a nasty upper respiratory infection, and then it morphs into viral pneumonia. He only looked at studies where the treatment was given early in the onset and found it was effective. Specifically, he recommended it be given in the first five or six days of symptoms, especially to those over 60 or with a preexisting condition.

As many clinicians using the drug combination have been asserting, it is effective in preventing progression if given early and outpatient. Several have reported that even if a patient has mild shortness of breath, it reduces the severity of the illness.

From the abstract of Dr. Risch’s article in the American Journal of Epidemiology:

Early outpatient illness is very different than later hospitalized florid disease and the treatments differ. Evidence about use of hydroxychloroquine alone, or of hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin in inpatients, is irrelevant concerning efficacy of the pair in early high-risk outpatient disease. Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy.

This article was written on May 27, 2020. When asked why he thought the drug was so controversial, he said:

I think that there has been confusion about treating the cold versus treating the pneumonia. These medications don’t seem to work so well for treating the pneumonia. As early as possible is crucial, within the first five to six days of symptoms.

Seventy-two percent of doctors in Spain are using the drug combination. It would appear in the United States it was less about confusion and more about politics. Fish tank cleaner, anyone?

Asymptomatic Cases

Cases with mild or no symptoms are still the population health researchers are trying to get their arms around. However, recent congressional testimony regarding peer-reviewed research on antibody testing caused the CDC to increase the number of infections to 23 million Americans. It estimated that 8.7 million had likely been infected by March using data for flu-like illnesses. For every one person confirmed, serology for antibodies indicated ten had had it. Establishing this infection rate is a game-changing finding.

Previously Reported Good News

The U.K. reported excellent results with the generic, inexpensive drug dexamethasone. This finding confirms the work done by Dr. Thomas Yadegar at Providence Cedars-Sinai. An overactive immune system response that can be addressed with corticosteroids and other immune suppressants is what is making some patients severely ill. Clinical protocols to treat this syndrome, a cytokine storm, already exist and need to be widely communicated to clinicians.

End the Panic Porn

With a research review that indicates we have a treatment option that can prevent at-risk patients from becoming severely ill and widely available generic drugs that could have saved an estimated 5,000 lives in the U.K., the panic porn should be subsiding. But it is not. It is past time for President Trump to challenge his health experts and demand to know why these avenues are not being pursued.

With waning severity and more effective treatment, the idea of a ‘new normal’ is not required. And there is simply no excuse for this information not to be in the hands of the public.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/stacey-lennox/2020/06/27/the-good-news-about-covid-19-the-corporate-media-keeps-hidden-n583317

Thursday, July 2, 2020

President Trump Highlights Mail-In Ballot Fraud Using Recent New Jersey Example…

Posted on June 28, 2020 by sundance

Earlier this evening President Trump noted the ease of mail-in voting fraud by highlighting the recent New Jersey election where election fraud charges have been brought against against four people including: Paterson City Councilman Michael Jackson (D), Councilman-elect Alex Mendez (D), Shelim Khalique, and Abu Razyen. [Background Here]

New Jersey – Attorney General Gurbir S. Grewal today announced voting fraud charges against Paterson City Councilman Michael Jackson, Councilman-Elect Alex Mendez, and two other men in connection with the May 12, 2020 special election in the City of Paterson. All four men are charged with criminal conduct involving mail-in ballots during the election, Grewal said.

The investigation by the Attorney General’s Office of Public Integrity & Accountability (OPIA) began when the U.S. Postal Inspection Service alerted the Attorney General’s Office that hundreds of mail-in ballots were found in a mailbox in Paterson. Numerous additional ballots were found in a mailbox in nearby Haledon.

Dueto the COVID-19 pandemic, all voting in May 12 elections in New Jersey was done by mail-in ballots. (read more)

Nationally, Nancy Pelosi and top DNC Democrats have openly stated their intention is to force mail-in ballots in all states for the 2020 presidential election contest. The open intent is to use mail-in ballots as a purposeful way to win the election. To accomplish this goal panic around the COVID-19 virus is needed.

Mail-in ballots are notorious for voter fraud:

(1) Duplicate ballots can be sent to specific zip codes for specific parties allowing voters to cast several ballots.

(2) Fraudulent or counterfeit ballots can be created allowing unlimited fraudulent voting.

(3) The mail system can be used to control ballot delivery and/or return.

(4) Intercepted and selected ballot destruction is commonplace amid election precincts where wide-scale voter ballots have been used before.

(5) Political operatives working directly or bribing USPS employees for ballot control.

(6) Ballots sent to former addresses allowing multiple votes.

(7) Ballots sent to inactive or deceased voters allowing votes cast by ineligible persons.

(8) Millions of ballots sent to non-citizens as part of the motor-voter fraud; a common democrat initiative as used in California.

The list is long…. The entire process of mail-in ballots is built upon systemic and purposeful fraud intended to disfranchise eligible U.S. voters; and there is very little criminal accountability for the process.

Year-after-year, election after election, Broward County Florida has intentionally and purposefully used mail-in (absentee) ballots as the tool to manipulate their elections.

Nope, They Really Do Want to 'Burn It All Down!'

Nope, They Really Do Want to 'Burn It All Down!'
Kevin McCulloughKevin McCullough

Make No Mistake, 'Black Lives Matter' Wants To ‘Burn Down’ Western Civilization And Replace It With A Communist/Socialist Hellscape

He wasn’t being figurative. He wasn’t being symbolic. When Hawk Newsome—the leader of Black Lives Matter in New York—said for America to give him what he wanted or that he would “burn it down,” even though he pretended otherwise, he was being literal.

We know this because he cited the use of violence in the immediate follow up to the statement. He falsely claimed that “the riots of the 60s” brought about the greatest expansion of wealthy black Americans in their history. He bragged at the firing of eight police officers. He attempted to connect needed social change as being somehow in opposition to the ideals of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He also evidently believes due process is anti-progress.

All of it spoken like an absolute anarchist, propped up by Marxist thought, and likely bought and paid for by left-wing funding.

So how is it all working out? It’s a fair question since it appears to be “working” according to his “plan.”

Let’s peek in on Minneapolis. With hundreds of millions in damage to many black-owned businesses, the city council voted to disband and radically defund the police department. Now, let me remind you, that it was a police department of nearly even representation of people of color and white officers. It was led by an African American commissioner. Nevertheless, it had to go. Now, after three weeks of total chaos, the same city council has voted to spend tax-monies on private security firms for themselves, just not the taxpayers.

Baltimore, the fourth most dangerous city, voted this week to slash $22 million from its policing efforts. They did this despite all of the pain and controversy it has faced in repeated controversies over the last several years.

Chicago, which takes great delight in priding itself on being one of the most anti-gun cities in America, has averaged dozens of shootings (sometimes per day) each week in the month since “defund” has become the mantra.

In New York, 18 victims were shot in only nine hours early this past Saturday, compared to only 14 being shot for the entire calendar week in 2019.

In New York, the buffoonish mayor eliminated the anti-crime unit (largely credited with eliminating much of the gun violence) as well as a large percentage of plainclothes cops that work neighborhoods in problem areas.

No problem though. The mayor is also seeing a 49 percent increase in uniformed officers now opting for retirement.

Hawk Newsome—while boasting how right it is to “burn it down”—also oddly interjected the announcement that Black Lives Matter will practice their “Second Amendment rights” in the pursuit of their demands.

Armed thuggery, bragged about, on primetime news?

My hunch is the cowardly mayors will bow to the angry mob again and look the other way on the firearms. But God help you if, as a law-abiding American citizen, you get stopped while Constitutionally carrying.

Hawk Newsome and Black Lives Matter have ceased to be about justice, equality, or fairness. They believe they have the right to smash your storefront in and blame you for it—all because it will “work.”

They are not serious about what is good for the black experience.

Since the murder of George Floyd there have literally been hundreds more black Americans shot. Almost exclusively, they’ve been shot by other black Americans.

Their doctrine advocates for the destruction of the nuclear family. How is that healthy for any cultural group? Fatherlessness combined with welfare expansion brought us to where we are today. Kids need mom and dad. Black kids need mom and dad.

The idea that Newsome was waxing poetic about symbolism when he claimed he would “burn it down” is laughable.

He’s angry. We get that. America was angry at the murder of George Floyd.

But this threat to America isn’t about Floyd. It’s about a Marxist takeover using anarchy as its choice for force.

It’s already turning deadly in our nation’s biggest cities.

The capitulation must stop. The violence must be put down.

They want to end America.

Now it’s up to America to tell them, “No!”
https://townhall.com/columnists/kevinmccullough/2020/06/28/nope-they-really-do-want-to-burn-it-all-down-n2571479

The Movement to Destroy a Nation

Opinion: The Movement to Destroy a

Nation

A Protester attempts to pull down the statue of Andrew Jackson in Lafayette Square near the White House June 22, 2020 in Washington, DC. (Photo: by Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images)

Nation-wide protests weeks after George Floyd’s murder turned into a movement to destroy a nation. Parading as an attack on racial injustice, the movement has turned into an obliteration of history. This week that devastation set its eyes on faith.

Less than one week ago, protesters rekindled the call for removing confederate statues. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, in a show of solidarity with the protest mob, removed two portraits of former House speakers who were part of the Confederacy.

From there, the momentum quickly shifted to anyone whose statue is seen as offensive, who may have held racist or politically incorrect views of another era, or who may (or may not) have owned slaves or supported slavery at any time.

Never mind that the qualifiers of what constitutes “offensive” is blurred; the momentum of eradicating history is ruled by emotion, not reason.

Just in the last week, the long list of what’s offensive includes Ulysses S. Grant, Andrew Jackson, Winston Churchill, Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, George Washington, Francis Scott Key and more.

It was inevitable. When you go from a culture that is willing to cancel someone for what they said 10 years ago, why not go for what was said 100 years ago?

Everything is subject to a squinted-eye review based on the strict checklist of virtue extremists.

Now they have come for religion.

The is exactly the type of slippery slope conservatives warned about.

In addition to the antisemitism the American Jewish community has been increasingly enduring for the last number of years, protesters also toppled a memorial to Holocaust survivors in a cemetery in California.

COVID-19 measures issued by governors recently banned Christians from congregating in churches. Just weeks later, those same governors had no issue with city-wide protests that brought thousands together.

We’re now at the intersection of faith and history with the desire to eradicate the past.

Noticeably absent from the mob’s radar is Islam, as the intersectional allies of victimhood-claiming Islamists have chosen to ignore the problematic aspects of the religion.

But there’s a lot in Islam that needs to be discussed, as there is in many other faiths and sectors.

In answer to Shaun King, yes, we should talk about the impact of skin-lightening of religious figures. But should we cast the totality of historic aggressions perpetrated by missionaries on indigenous populations as white supremacy, as if there was an orchestrated white supremacist movement through the centuries?

Or do we — as a generation writing what has the potential to be the final chapter of injustice — elevate our own capacity to look beyond this simplistic narrative?

Resting the argument on just a blanket accusation of white supremacy does two devastating things:

Gives far more power to the idea of “white supremacy” than white supremacists actually have.
Further disempowers the authentic narratives of the “other” populations that have long been ignored or whose stories have long been told predominantly through the lens of the victor or conqueror.

There are other ways to talk about critical and overdue issues in human history, but none of the leading influencers or commentators are capable of leading this discussion, as they are proving.

If it feels like there is no stability in this movement and the monstrosity it has become, it’s because there isn’t any stability. If it feels like the goal posts keep shifting, it’s because they have. This is how extremists operate; they’re erratic, illogical, dangerously passionate, and any sincere cause or desire to do good by the few is lost to the movement of the mob.

Whether they come for statues today or people tomorrow, the goal of any extremist movement is to rewrite the narrative by obliterating any other narrative. The goal of this current movement is no different. It isn’t just to level racial injustice; it’s to level America.

https://clarionproject.org/the-movement-to-destroy-a-nation/?utm_source=Clarion+Project+Newsletter&utm_campaign=0fbb704d4b-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2020_06_25_12_43&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_60abb35148-0fbb704d4b-6484837&mc_cid=0fbb704d4b&mc_eid=c39e444d4e

Wednesday, July 1, 2020

Trump Lays Down the Law: BLM Vandals and Statue-Topplers Face 'Up to 10 Years in Prison'

BY TYLER O'NEIL

*Donald Trump resolute AP Photo/Alex Brandon*

As protests over the horrific police killing of George Floyd devolved into the looting, vandalism, and arson across America that destroyed black lives, black livelihoods, and black monuments, Cancel Culture iconoclasts have vandalized and toppled statues of Confederate generals and Union generals, Christopher Columbus, George Washington, and Thomas Jefferson. They even vandalized statues of Mahatma Gandhi and the first black Union volunteers.

President Donald Trump, who warned of this in 2017, issued a stern warning to the vandals and statue-topplers on Tuesday: federal law will be enforced, and they will face up to 10 years in prison.

“I have authorized the Federal Government to arrest anyone who vandalizes or destroys any monument, statue or other such Federal property in the U.S. with up to 10 years in prison, per the Veteran’s Memorial Preservation Act, or such other laws that may be pertinent,” the president tweeted. “This action is taken effective immediately, but may also be used retroactively for destruction or vandalism already caused. There will be no exceptions!”

…..This action is taken effective immediately, but may also be used retroactively for destruction or vandalism already caused. There will be no exceptions!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 23, 2020

On Monday, Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) condemned what he termed the “1619 riots,” arguing that the iconoclastic spirit evokes The New York Times‘s “1619 Project,” which attempted to redefine American history by centering America’s founding not in 1776 with the Declaration of Independence but in 1619, with the arrival of the first black slaves. The Times ultimately had to admit that one of its core claims — that America declared independence to save slavery — was false. Even so, the 1619 Project suggests the American experiment is fundamentally racist and must be scrapped, and the Cancel Culture iconoclasm that targets every statue under the sun echoes this anti-American screed.

In condemning the riots, Cotton noted two pieces of federal legislation that the executive branch should apply against the riots, the Anti-Riot Act and the Veterans Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act. “There must be consequences for mob violence,” he declared.

The Veterans Memorial Preservation and Recognition Act penalizes any American who “wilfully injures or destroys, or attempts to injure or destroy,” any monument on public property commemorating a veteran of the U.S. armed forces. The act applies to Americans who cross state lines to commit the vandalism or who vandalize property owned by the federal government.

Whoever, in a circumstance described in subsection (b), willfully injures or destroys, or attempts to injure or destroy, any structure, plaque, statue, or other monument on public property commemorating the service of any person or persons in the armed forces of the United States shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both.(b)A circumstance described in this subsection is that—

(1)in committing the offense described in subsection (a), the defendant travels or causes another to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or uses the mail or an instrumentality of interstate or foreign commerce; or

(2)the structure, plaque, statue, or other monument described in subsection (a) is located on property owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the Federal Government.

Rioters who cross state lines to vandalize statues or who target federal government statues violate federal law, whether law enforcement enforces that law or not. President Donald Trump sent a clear warning to the vandals, notifying them that the law will be enforced under his watch.

Law and order are critical to society. If the laws protecting property from destruction are not enforced, how can citizens expect their property and lives to be protected if the mob comes for them?

Vandals need to face real consequences for their destruction, in part because the destruction of statues and monuments heralding true American heroes like George Washington, Ulysses S. Grant, and the black Union volunteers of the 54th Regiment undermines America’s civic spirit at a time when the nation appears to be unraveling.

Critics often focus on Confederate monuments, rightly noting that these figures often fought against the United States of America in a rebellion premised on slavery. This is true, but the 1619 riots have come for far more than just Confederate monuments. It now appears the mob wishes to erase all heroes from the national consciousness in a great purge. This is dangerous for America’s civic heart, not to mention its understanding and appreciation of history.

If Americans truly want to build up America and replace Confederate monuments, they should erect monuments to black American heroes like Frederick Douglass and Harriet Tubman. New monuments would herald the true heroism of black Americans with the added bonus of not violating federal law.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/tyler-o-neil/2020/06/23/trump-lays-down-the-law-blm-vandals-and-statue-topplers-face-up-to-10-years-in-prison-n567431

The New Censors

BY JOHN STOSSEL

Do you say what you think? That’s risky! You may get fired!

You’ve probably heard about a New York Times editor resigning after approving an opinion piece by Senator Tom Cotton that suggested the military to step in to end riots.

Many Times reporters tweeted out the same alarmist wording, “Running this puts Black NY Times staffers in danger.”
Really? How?

In my new video, Robby Soave, a Reason Magazine editor who writes about young radicals, explains, “They only claim it because that’s their tactic for seizing power in the workplace.”

They learned this tactic from so-called woke professors and fellow activists at expensive colleges, says Soave.

Last year, Harvard students demanded that law professor Ron Sullivan resign as a resident dean. Why? He’d agreed to be part of Harvey Weinstein’s legal defense team.

A female student said, “I don’t feel safe!” although Sullivan had been a dean for many years. Sullivan resigned.

At UCLA, business school lecturer Gordon Klein rejected a request to give black students different treatment on their final exam because of George Floyd’s death. Klein pointed out that since the class was online, he had no way of knowing which students were black. He also told students: “remember that MLK famously said that people should not be evaluated based on the color of their skin.”

The activist group Color of Change (which once demanded that I be fired) launched a petition to have Klein “terminated for his extremely insensitive, dismissive, and woefully racist response.” UCLA quickly caved. Klein is on mandatory leave.

Now that many former college radicals have jobs at elite media companies, they demand that newspapers not say certain things.
When, in response to looting during George Floyd protests, the Philadelphia Inquirer ran the insensitive headline, “Buildings Matter, Too,” 44 staff members claimed that “puts our lives at risk.” Their letter didn’t give any evidence as to how it threatened their lives (in fact, today both blacks and whites are safer than ever), but they won. The editor resigned.

A week later, young activists at NBC news tried to silence The Federalist, a respected conservative site that NBC labeled as “far-right.” The Federalist had published a column that said, correctly, that the media falsely claimed that violent riots were peaceful. But the column did contain a mistake. It quoted a government official saying tear gas was not used, when it had been used.

NBC then ran an article bragging that Google blocked The Federalist’s ads after an “NBC news verification unit” brought The Federalist’s “racism” to Google’s attention. NBC’s reporter even thanked left-wing activist groups for their “collaboration.”

But NBC was wrong. Google didn’t cut off The Federalist. Google merely threatened that if the Federalist didn’t police its comments section.

It was one time when the activist mob’s smears failed. But they keep trying to kill all sorts of expression.

Some now even want the children’s TV show “Paw Patrol” canceled because it suggests law enforcement is noble.

When activists decide that certain words or arguments are “offensive,” no one must use those words.

“(But) we’re supposed to occasionally offend each other,” says Soave, “because you might be wrong. We have to have a conversation about it. We have to challenge dogma. What if we were still with the principle that you couldn’t speak out against the King?! That’s the history of the Middle Ages.”

That’s when authorities arrested Galileo for daring to say that the earth revolved around the sun.

“That’s the condition that all humans lived under until just the last 300 years, and it was a much less happy place,” says Soave. “Then we came to an idea that we improve society by having frank and sometimes difficult conversations about policy issues, philosophy, about how we’re going to get along and live together.”

Life has been much better since people acquired the right to speak freely.

Elite colleges spread the idea that speech can be a form of violence. “Words are like bullets!” they say.

But words are words; bullets are bullets. We must keep them apart.

When entitled leftists declare themselves the sole arbiters of truth, it’s crucial that we all speak up for free speech.

https://pjmedia.com/columns/john-stossel/2020/06/24/the-new-censors-n569088

When Black lives matter to Democrats, and when they don't

Democrats say Black lives matter but it's becoming clear they only matter sometimes, which explains why Democrats blocked Tim Scott's justice reform bill.

Glenn Harlan Reynolds

Opinion columnist

Do Black lives matter to Democrats? As Tim Alberta recently reported, a lot of Black voters think the answer is no. That may explain why the Democrats are blocking the GOP justice reform bill in the Senate: With Black voters already discouraged, Democrats don’t want them to get the idea that Republicans may have something to offer.

Alberta’s reporting, in Politico, is striking. At the invitation of a local African-American politico, he spent an afternoon with a bunch of middle-class Black voters outside Detroit. He found they were disappointed in the Democrats, thought nothing much had changed for them during the Obama presidency, and expected Trump to win even though they planned to vote for Biden themselves.

Democrats haven't actually helped Black communities

As a woman named Ursura Moore observed: “Some people thought just because we had a Black president, he was going to make things better for Black people — he was going to free Black prisoners, wipe out Black debt. That was just ignorance. But the disappointment some of us felt with Obama — more so with the Democratic Party —that was real. And it hasn’t gone away. So, people start to wonder whether the outcome even matters. They wonder whether they should bother voting at all.”

Eric Benjamin commented: “Biden’s a politician, same as the rest of them, same as Trump. But at least with Trump you know where he stands,” he said. “If we were sitting here, me and you, and you’re pretending we’re friends, but then behind my back, you act like you don’t even know me, that’s the worst. I’d much rather you just tell me to my face that we’re not friends. That’s Trump. I respect that. The Democrats always be acting like we’re friends.”

And, most damningly, Sherry Gay-Dagnogo said: “We’re always the f------ help! And I’m tired of being the help!” she cried. “Don’t wait until it’s an election year, until you’re in trouble, to come to us and ask for help saving your a--. They always say it will be different after the next election. But it never is. And we’re sick of it.”

U.S. Sen. Tim Scott on June 23, 2020, in Washington, DC.

Even activists like Shaun King are noticing that “systemic racism” seems to happen mostly in Democratic-controlled cities and states: “Democrats, from top to bottom, are running the cities with the worst police brutality in America right now. We voted for them.”

So now comes President Donald Trump — who’s already successfully pushed a criminal-justice reform package, the First Step Act, with Kim Kardashian and Kanye West, and already issued an executive order limiting police chokeholds and other abusive behavior that won praise even from Van Jones — and the Democrats are terrified that he might deliver a major reform bill in Congress before the election, and they can’t have that. Better that nothing should happen than that Black voters might see Trump as performing where the Democrats — even when they controlled the White House and had a supermajority in Congress — never did.

Lack of support for Tim Scott's bill

In the words of Black Republican Senator Tim Scott of South Carolina: "They cannot allow this party to be seen as a party that reaches out to all communities in this nation.”

So Scott’s bill can’t pass. The bill would make lynching a federal crime. It would also place stringent reporting requirements on so-called “no-knock” raids, and tie federal grants to the elimination of police chokeholds like the one that killed George Floyd. It would also use grants to encourage the use of police bodycams.

As Washington Post columnist Mark Thiessen put it, If Democrats cared about police reform, they would have advanced Tim Scott’s bill. He called the Democrats’ move “shameful,” and observed: “If Democrats cared about getting something done, they would have allowed the Senate to move forward and sought to amend Scott’s bill on the floor. There was plenty of basis for compromise. Scott’s legislation had already incorporated a number of Democratic proposals.” Yeah, it could do more — I’d favor an end to “qualified immunity” from lawsuits for police officers and other government officials, but I very much doubt that would command a majority, even among Democrats. And the Democrats’ motives are not pure. As Scott notes, they're ”pure race politics at its worst.”

And there’s more. Not only did the Democrats block debate on the bill, but Scott has been subjected to racial slurs — Sen. Dick Durbin used the word ”token” to describe Scott’s bill, a racial code word that Scott called out. And Democrat-supporting callers to Scott's office are subjecting him to racial slurs and threats and calling him a “sellout.” That for pushing a revolutionary piece of reform legislation.

So do Black lives matter to Democrats? Not if there are votes at stake, apparently. Bear that in mind between now and November.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2020/06/27/black-lives-matter-but-only-sometimes-column/3264946001/