It’s Friday, August 28th, 2020…but before we begin, writing at his Morning Jolt, Jim Geraghty offers some insightful observations regarding the continuing Marxist-inspired violence consuming America’s cities:
“…I don’t think the core problem of the riots is presidential rhetoric. I don’t even think the problem is that Democratic lawmakers are too mealy mouthed in their denunciations or criticism.I think the core of the problem is that a lot of opportunistic malcontents are smashing store windows, stealing merchandise, assaulting people, and setting firesbecause they think they can escape any serious consequences.
There are simply not enough cops on the streets to catch every looter, protect every person and building, and ensure that no one starts a fire. Every looter and rioter out there is making a calculated gamble that they won’t be one of the perpetrators that the cops catch, prosecute, and incarcerate. For a lot of them, it turns out to be a winning bet.
Stopping the riots will, at least in the short term, require more policing, not less. That’s an uncomfortable message for a lot of elected officials, because it places additional trust in the police, at a time when the protesters are declaring they no longer trust the police.
But the alternative is to offer ineffective calls for calm and to simply hope for the best while American cities burn.“
“…Those who attended protests relating to George Floyd, police misconduct, and Black Lives Matter over the past three months will argue, justifiably, that they should not be conflated with the actions of a malevolent and violent minority. But that argument is exactly how many cops feel about Derek Chauvin. It is also how gun owners feel about mass shooters, how pro-lifers feel about Eric Rudolph, how those who work in the financial industry feel about Bernie Madoff(Whoa: Let’s not get carried away!), and how Evangelicals feel about televangelists. We all hate the thought of being tarred with a broad brush and being judged by the worst person in our group; we would often contend that the worst people, by virtue of their actions and malevolent desires, no longer qualify as a member of “our” group.
The George Floyd protesters were driven by the noble and indisputably American value of being treated equally in the eyes of the law. They can justifiably argue that anybody who’s running around setting fires in Kenosha this week isn’t all that focused on reforming police behavior.
Fine. But if the people perpetuating mayhem on the streets of Kenosha and just about every major American city for the past few months are indeed morally and politically separate from those who came out to protest…why has anybody(everybody?)been reluctant to denounce them? Why do we keep seeing television correspondents standing in front of a burning building and insisting that what happened was“not generally speaking unruly”or“fiery but mostly peaceful protests”?Ifthe protests and riots are completely separate entities, why would anyone feel the need to downplay or avert their eyes from the violence?…”
Why indeed?!?
Here’s a graphic for anyone a little slow on the uptake:
“…Yesterday, Wisconsin’s Department of Justice identified the officer who fired his weapon as Rusten Sheskey and reported that “during the investigation following the initial incident, Mr. Blake admitted that he had a knife in his possession. [Division of Criminal Investigation] agents recovered a knife from the driver’s side floorboard of Mr. Blake’s vehicle. A search of the vehicle located no additional weapons.” It remains unclear whether Blake was carrying the knife during the altercation, or if he went to the vehicle to get it, or what.
These details leave a lot we don’t know — frankly, too much. In a case as fraught as this one, officials have a duty to be transparent about what happened as quickly as possible. At minimum, it would be good to hear the officers’ side of the story. Ideally we’d also have body-camera footage, but we never will, because Kenosha doesn’t plan to buy body cameras until 2022.
Nonetheless, there are some important things to keep in mind as the rest of the information comes out.
One is that when someone deliberately disobeys the instructions of a police officer with his gun drawn, and instead reaches into a vehicle or toward his waistband, the officer usually can’t wait to find out what the suspect is pulling. By that time, it’s too late.
…The full analysis will involve ascertaining where the knife was and when, what the cops knew about it and when, whether they thought Blake was getting a different weapon from the SUV, and — most important — whether Officer Sheskey reasonably feared that Blake posed an imminent threat when he opened fire.
Going by what is currently known, however, I’m doubtful that Sheskey will be successfully prosecuted. Blake went into the SUV in open defiance of the officers, and a lethal weapon was found in that part of the vehicle. At the key moment, a noncompliant suspect was in close proximity to both a knife and the cops he was fighting with. A knife can kill someone quickly up close. Few juries would think it unreasonable for an officer to fear for his life in that situation…”
Based on what we’ve read and viewed to date, neither do we.
Here’s the juice: Jacob Blake was in complete control of every phase of this incident, and is solely responsible for how it unfolded. He could have prevented or deescalated events at any time simply by: 1. Not violating his existing restraining order; 2. Giving up the keys; 3. Surrendering to the cops when they showed up ‘cuz he had an outstanding warrant; 4. Ceasing resistance when they attempted to subdue him physically; 5. Ceasing resistance when they attempted to tase him; 6. Stopping in front of the vehicle or at the driver’s door and putting his hands on the hood or roof; 7 (and most important) NOT opening the door and reaching inside where the police couldn’t see what he was doing.
To recap, Blake, a known felon with an outstanding warrant for spousal abuse who is at his fiancé’s home in in violation of a restraining order, having resisted arrest, repeatedly refused to comply with the arresting officers’ lawful orders and armed with a knife, opens the door to a vehicle occupied by three of his children and is shot by police. So…what’s the problem?!?
We’ll leave the last word on the Blake shooting to the great Michael Ramirez:
In a related item, as the regards the two fatal shootings in Kenosha, this article at Red State helps in…
Meet Kyle Rittenhouse, who for good or ill, rightly or wrongly, with malice aforethought or the best of intentions (not that anyone other than “mostly peaceful” protestors are accorded the latter!), crossed into Wisconsin from his home in Illinois to help defend the good people of Kenosha from the forces of evil and anarchy.
To parrot the subject of Robert Verbruggen’s commentary above, here’s what we know about the Kyle Rittenhouse shootings.
We begin with an intriguing bit of information supplied by Townhall.com‘s Julio Rosas, who reports, prior to the incident, one Joseph Rosenbaum, the first rioter Rittenhouse shot, was caught on camera taunting a group of armed civilians.
Goes to the victim’s state of mind, your honor.
The 36-year-old Rosenbaum is next seen on video chasing the 17-year-old, pudgy, but armed Rittenhouse into the confines of a shuttered gas station and hurling something at the teen before they disappear behind a vehicle immediately prior to shots ringing out.
Rosenbaum is killed, likely by a shot to the head. Rittenhouse calls 911 before running in the opposite direction to once again escape a group of “mostly peaceful” protestors, this time intent on (A) sitting down with Rittenhouse to ascertain what’s on his mind, or (B) kicking in his skull…
…beating his brains out with a skateboard…
…and putting a bullet in his brain:
Based on the photographic evidence, we’re going with (B).
FYI, of one thing you can be certain: if someone chases us when we’re openly carrying a weapon…
Sure, young Kyle may have watched too many movies, played too many video games or read too much Cervantes. But the fact remains, as of now, we’ve seen or read nothing to justify charges of 1st-degree homicide, let alone “intentional”, and everything which indicates, whatever his reasons for being in Kenosha, each time he pulled the trigger he was acting in self-defense.
“Donald Trump Jr. described Joe Biden as the Loch Ness Monster, a lifelong swamp creature. That was patty-cake compared with what Democrats think of and won’t stop saying about Donald J. Trump. Wash away the neurotic personal animus, and the Democratic case for Joe Biden is that by ending the nonstop Trump disruption, or “chaos,” Mr. Biden will restore the country to normalcy. He won’t.
Only the most sound-asleep voters can believe that with one day’s voting in November they can melt the Wicked Witch of Trumpland and dance down the yellow-brick road to more temperate times. Returning to pre-2020 normality anytime soon, no matter which candidate wins, is impossible.
…In normal circumstances, Mr. Biden and his convention might have been able to get away with conjuring “10 million well-paying jobs” after his party has banned fossil fuels in 15 years. But in the three-month George Floyd aftermath, the party has moved way past even this platform.
At the same moment the country is struggling through a pandemic of personal and economic uncertainty, the Democratic agenda has stretched to include their intention to overturn a pervasive, irredeemably racist American social structure. And without Joe Biden having to say it, that party to-do list includes truly novel ideas such as defunding big-city police departments.
Add in the Pelosi multi-trillion virus-spending blowout. Surely some sense is growing among suburban swing voters that this Wizard-of-Oz spending can’t go on.
This is the party running on making the U.S. normal again?
For many voters, this election is a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea. But the Democrats’ blue sea has risen past embracing transformation to defending tumult. That may be more disruption than pandemic-and protest-fatigued Americans want right now.“
In a related Between a Rock and a Hard Place segment, aka, the Dimocrats’ crazed Uncle in the Attic versus Biden in the Basement, as The Hill informs us…
“When former President Obama delivered his convention speech from Philadelphia last week, it raised some questions for Democrats about Joe Biden’s lack of a travel schedule. Biden has been effectively sidelined because of the coronavirus pandemic, keeping his public appearances largely confined to his hometown of Wilmington, Del., where he also ended up accepting his party’s nomination last week.
“I think a lot of people thought, ‘If Obama can get on a plane and travel, why can’t Biden?’ said one Democratic strategist, who pointed to the former president’s trip from Massachusetts to Philadelphia for his primetime address. “I know we all believe in science and building a contrast with Republicans on COVID, I get that. But no one I know is stuck at home. Folks are moving around. They’re traveling. Some schools are reopening.
“I don’t know how sustainable this is for Biden,” the strategist said…”
Biden’s sidelined himself: NOT because of the Wuhan virus, but because of his rapidly-degrading mental faculties. COVID-19 has nothing to do with it!
“The Republican Party that presented itself to the nation this week had a wide and welcoming look. Some in the GOP think that look could make the difference in November.
Following the 2014 election of Mia Love, the first black Republican woman to win a seat in Congress, the Washington Post said: “For at least half a century, the party of Lincoln has battled charges that it is racist, sexist and anti-immigrant.” (The WaPo should know, as it’s sourced a large percentage of them!)These “charges” weren’t true, of course; they were the pronouncements of media bean counters who measure morality in terms of racial percentages. Yet the “racist” chorus has only grown, and the election of Donald Trump sent the left to new levels of hysteria.
This week, Americans got to choose between that version of the GOP and their own lying eyes. The party on display was an array of African-American officials, sports icons and civil rights leaders, Latina businesswomen, Native Americans, Cuban refugees, powerhouse female politicians, dairy farmers and loggers, newly-sworn-in immigrants, union workers, and an openly gay former acting director of national intelligence. It was an optimistic presentation, too—a celebration of the party’s width and depth…”
Moving on, courtesy of Mark K., The Federalist‘s Glenn Stanton reports…
“What do we know about the effects of hormone and surgical treatments for gender-dysphoric patients? Many people might assume they are highly effective because they are widely presented as the obvious proper medical and compassionate course for such patients. The prevailing narrative is that parents and patient advocates who disapprove of surgeries or hormone treatments are both evil and dangerous. The best research, however, indicates just the opposite.
The latest major study on the topic, published in the American Journal of Psychiatry, answers the question this way: “Despite professional recommendations to consider gender-affirming medical interventions for transgender individuals who experience gender incongruence, the effect of such interventions on long-term health is largely unknown.”
In other words, doctors have been blindly prescribing hormone treatments and surgeries for their gender-dysphoric patients, including children, without any clinically documented verification that they even work…”
What,…was the original analysis completed by Dr. Faux-Chi?!?
And from AEI, one Sam Abrams can’t see the blizzard for the snowflakes, as he explains…
…sorta think your suggested approach is one of the primary reason these tender snowflakes think they’re something special to begin with. As Ronaldus Maximus noted in our Video of the Day, as always accessible through link #2 immediately below our Quote of the Day at the top of the page…
“…What I don’t understand is why Clinesmith’s guilty plea is satisfactory to the Justice Department — to the Durham team, which negotiated the plea and is poised to drop any other potential charges against Clinesmith in exchange for the admission of guilt as he has farcically articulated it…”
Which brings us, inappropriately enough, to The Lighter Side:
Mark Foster…
…the Penguin…
…Speed Mach…
…and last, but certainly not least, Balls Cotton:
By the way, we couldn’t confirm the veracity of this last one, but we did find a photo featuring a Delta VP which indicates it’s likely so:
Either way, we urge you to consider flying other carriers, and see how Delta fares transporting a tiny minority of the population.
Finally, we’ll call it a week with The Sports Section, and our parting thoughts on the latest idiocies to emanate from the undeniably over-indulged world of professional athletics.
Submitted for your approval, consider: Exhibit “A“, as in “A*sholes”; Exhibit “B“, as in “Braindeads”; Exhibit “C“, as in “Clueless and Craven Capitulators”; and, Exhibit “D“, as in, “If They Weren’t Dumb, They Wouldn’t Have Been Playing Hockey in the First Place”. After all, for a sport which has almost as few Competitors of Color as Olympic swimming, not to mention a solidly pale fan base, the NHL’s move defies explanation.
It didn’t used to be this way, but as of late, Rollerball has it right:
Consequently, when it comes, at least for now, to watching almost any professional sport other than the PGA, we’re with Deckard:
Loading ...
You must be logged in to post a comment.