by Bob Walsh
The head of the Iranian Quds Force, General Qassim Soleimani, was turned into red mist yesterday about midnight as his convoy prepared to leave the Baghdad airport. There is some question as to whether a drone or a U S helicopter fired the missile that fried the goat fucker.
Soleimani was a major supporter of terrorism in the Middle East and elsewhere and supports many of the "militias" active in Iraq. These militias were the primary shit stirrers at the U. S. Embassy in Baghdad two days ago.
I guess Trump was sending a message. Homie don't play. Allegedly a couple of the chief goat fuckers of the militia groups were also blown into little tiny bits in the process. You should be careful who you hang out with I guess.
Friday, January 03, 2020
VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR
by Bob Walsh
All three major stock indexes set new record highs yesterday. The Dow is flirting with 29,000. Yeah, I guess that Trump guy really turned out to be an idiot.
All three major stock indexes set new record highs yesterday. The Dow is flirting with 29,000. Yeah, I guess that Trump guy really turned out to be an idiot.
DHS MAY SQUISH UNDOCUMENTED DEMOCRAT'S DRIVER'S LICENSES
by Bob Walsh
Several states grant driver's licenses to undocumented democrats, formerly known as illegal aliens. The formerly great state of California has been doing so for years. New York just started. Various media outlets asserted yesterday that the Dept. of Homeland Security is "reviewing" the legality of this practice.
I admit having mixed feelings about this. Illegal aliens are going to drive. A LOT of them, because we encourage them to come here and stay here. If they have a driver's license they can get insurance, if they want to. Frequently they don't, but they can and sometimes do. Without a licenses it is pretty much impossible to get insurance.
So, how good is the trade-off. If I could wave my magic wand and make the decision myself without further review, I would say NO. That being said, I understand the opposite side and it is not totally unreasonable. I believe that any sort of official recognition to the presence of illegal aliens gives further psychological and legal "permission" for them to be here. But that's just my opinion, for what that may be worth to you.
Several states grant driver's licenses to undocumented democrats, formerly known as illegal aliens. The formerly great state of California has been doing so for years. New York just started. Various media outlets asserted yesterday that the Dept. of Homeland Security is "reviewing" the legality of this practice.
I admit having mixed feelings about this. Illegal aliens are going to drive. A LOT of them, because we encourage them to come here and stay here. If they have a driver's license they can get insurance, if they want to. Frequently they don't, but they can and sometimes do. Without a licenses it is pretty much impossible to get insurance.
So, how good is the trade-off. If I could wave my magic wand and make the decision myself without further review, I would say NO. That being said, I understand the opposite side and it is not totally unreasonable. I believe that any sort of official recognition to the presence of illegal aliens gives further psychological and legal "permission" for them to be here. But that's just my opinion, for what that may be worth to you.
ALL YOU NEED IS LOVE
But If You Are Running For President Some Money Helps Too
by Bob Walsh
Marianne Williamson, who announced that she would defeat Donald Trump with LOVE to counteract his hatefulness, announced yesterday that she was firing all of her campaign staff. The reason given by her now-unemployed staff was she can't get any money because she is such a fucking nut job.
She is a "celebrity spiritual adviser" and "peace activist" when she isn't tilting at windmills.
As far as I know she never registered above 0.0 in any polling. Life is hard and sometimes unfulfilling if you are a space cadet.
by Bob Walsh
Marianne Williamson, who announced that she would defeat Donald Trump with LOVE to counteract his hatefulness, announced yesterday that she was firing all of her campaign staff. The reason given by her now-unemployed staff was she can't get any money because she is such a fucking nut job.
She is a "celebrity spiritual adviser" and "peace activist" when she isn't tilting at windmills.
As far as I know she never registered above 0.0 in any polling. Life is hard and sometimes unfulfilling if you are a space cadet.
THE COUNTER IS RUNNING BACKWARDS
by Bob Walsh
For the first time in recorded history if looks like the formerly great state of California may LOOSE seats in the house, assuming the Census Bureau guesstimate has it right.
The data shows that 27 states plus D.C. had a net negative domestic migration in the last 2-3 years, to the point where it is likely to effect their seat count once the 2020 Census is completed.
Texas on the other hand is likely to GAIN three house seats. Arizona and Colorado may also gain.
Of course if the seats were apportioned for LEGAL RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS the seat count for California would drop by about 25%.
For the first time in recorded history if looks like the formerly great state of California may LOOSE seats in the house, assuming the Census Bureau guesstimate has it right.
The data shows that 27 states plus D.C. had a net negative domestic migration in the last 2-3 years, to the point where it is likely to effect their seat count once the 2020 Census is completed.
Texas on the other hand is likely to GAIN three house seats. Arizona and Colorado may also gain.
Of course if the seats were apportioned for LEGAL RESIDENTS AND CITIZENS the seat count for California would drop by about 25%.
RED BILL OBVIOUSLY DOES NOT UNDERSTAND HOW A FREE MARKET ECONOMY WORKS
De Blasio blasts Domino’s over $30 New Year’s Eve pizzas
By Ben Cohn and Bruce Golding
New York Post
January 1, 2019
Mayor Bill de Blasio got hot and crusty Wednesday over a Post report about a Domino’s pizzeria in Midtown that sold pies for $30 apiece to penned-in New Year’s Eve revelers in Times Square.
“Jacking up your prices on people trying to celebrate the holidays? Classy, @dominos,” de Blasio tweeted from his official city account.
“To the thousands who came to Times Square last night to ring in 2020, I’m sorry this corporate chain exploited you — stick it to them by patronizing one of our fantastic LOCAL pizzerias.”
But Hizzoner’s furious accusations of profiteering drew heaps of scorn from Twitter users who promptly delivered a menu of insults that included reminders of his infamous 2014 pizza peccadillo on Staten Island.
“Don’t worry @dominos this is coming from a guy who eats pizza with a knife and fork. New Yorkers have enough love for you and their local pizzeria,” tweeted Jeff Anzulewicz of the Brooklyn-based consulting company A Design Desk.
Multiple commenters also pointed the left-leaning pol to the basic laws of economics, with Matthew Baden tweeting: “How is this different to a million other things? Airlines, Uber, property. It’s called supply and demand.”
Others noted that many city pizzerias charge $4 a slice — which works out to $32 for a pie — and that restaurants regularly raise their rates on New Year’s Eve.
De Blasio — who tweeted a cropped screenshot of The Post’s article that obscured its origin and didn’t link back to the paper’s website — was also called out for seizing on the work of an outlet he’s claimed not to read.
“I thought you hated the Post,” tweeted Kevin Walsh, Webmaster of the site “Forgotten New York.”
The New Year’s Eve pizzas — which sold for more than twice the regular $14.49 price of a large cheese pie — were hawked by Domino’s delivery worker Ratan Banik, who did brisk business with hungry tourists waiting in holding pens for the ball drop.
“It’s absolutely worth it. It was hot. It seems like it just came out of the oven,” Amit Zanwar, 31, of New Jersey said Tuesday. “If he comes back, I will buy some more.”
The pizzas came from a franchise at 40th Street and Seventh Avenue, where a woman said the business had sold more than 50 pies by 6 p.m. and would continue offering them until the midnight ball drop.
The franchise has been selling New Year’s Eve pizzas in Times Square for more than 15 years, she added.
On Wednesday afternoon, the eatery was packed with patrons, including two NYPD cops on their lunch break.
Sarah Reyes, 19, of Queens, described herself as a loyal Domino’s customer and defended the New Year’s Eve price hike.
“What’s wrong with Domino’s cashing in? Everyone else was doing it last night,” Reyes said. “The mayor has more to worry about. How about he fixes the trains?”
A customer who gave his name as Robert said it was wrong for de Blasio to attack Domino’s because it “keeps people working.”
“Most people think it’s corporate but it’s important to the neighborhood,” he said. “I mean, they deliver cheap, fast food and they employ people.”
Store owner Robert Cookston declined to comment and referred The Post to a corporate spokesman who didn’t return a message.
Cookston, who delivered Domino’s pizzas in college during the 1980s and has at times owned more than two dozen franchises, has settled at least two suits that accused him of underpaying workers.
By Ben Cohn and Bruce Golding
New York Post
January 1, 2019
Mayor Bill de Blasio got hot and crusty Wednesday over a Post report about a Domino’s pizzeria in Midtown that sold pies for $30 apiece to penned-in New Year’s Eve revelers in Times Square.
“Jacking up your prices on people trying to celebrate the holidays? Classy, @dominos,” de Blasio tweeted from his official city account.
“To the thousands who came to Times Square last night to ring in 2020, I’m sorry this corporate chain exploited you — stick it to them by patronizing one of our fantastic LOCAL pizzerias.”
But Hizzoner’s furious accusations of profiteering drew heaps of scorn from Twitter users who promptly delivered a menu of insults that included reminders of his infamous 2014 pizza peccadillo on Staten Island.
“Don’t worry @dominos this is coming from a guy who eats pizza with a knife and fork. New Yorkers have enough love for you and their local pizzeria,” tweeted Jeff Anzulewicz of the Brooklyn-based consulting company A Design Desk.
Multiple commenters also pointed the left-leaning pol to the basic laws of economics, with Matthew Baden tweeting: “How is this different to a million other things? Airlines, Uber, property. It’s called supply and demand.”
Others noted that many city pizzerias charge $4 a slice — which works out to $32 for a pie — and that restaurants regularly raise their rates on New Year’s Eve.
De Blasio — who tweeted a cropped screenshot of The Post’s article that obscured its origin and didn’t link back to the paper’s website — was also called out for seizing on the work of an outlet he’s claimed not to read.
“I thought you hated the Post,” tweeted Kevin Walsh, Webmaster of the site “Forgotten New York.”
The New Year’s Eve pizzas — which sold for more than twice the regular $14.49 price of a large cheese pie — were hawked by Domino’s delivery worker Ratan Banik, who did brisk business with hungry tourists waiting in holding pens for the ball drop.
“It’s absolutely worth it. It was hot. It seems like it just came out of the oven,” Amit Zanwar, 31, of New Jersey said Tuesday. “If he comes back, I will buy some more.”
The pizzas came from a franchise at 40th Street and Seventh Avenue, where a woman said the business had sold more than 50 pies by 6 p.m. and would continue offering them until the midnight ball drop.
The franchise has been selling New Year’s Eve pizzas in Times Square for more than 15 years, she added.
On Wednesday afternoon, the eatery was packed with patrons, including two NYPD cops on their lunch break.
Sarah Reyes, 19, of Queens, described herself as a loyal Domino’s customer and defended the New Year’s Eve price hike.
“What’s wrong with Domino’s cashing in? Everyone else was doing it last night,” Reyes said. “The mayor has more to worry about. How about he fixes the trains?”
A customer who gave his name as Robert said it was wrong for de Blasio to attack Domino’s because it “keeps people working.”
“Most people think it’s corporate but it’s important to the neighborhood,” he said. “I mean, they deliver cheap, fast food and they employ people.”
Store owner Robert Cookston declined to comment and referred The Post to a corporate spokesman who didn’t return a message.
Cookston, who delivered Domino’s pizzas in college during the 1980s and has at times owned more than two dozen franchises, has settled at least two suits that accused him of underpaying workers.
40892-424 SAYS PELOSI WOULD HAVE IMPEACHED HONEST ABE
House Democrats Would Have Impeached Lincoln
By Rod Blagojevich
Newsmax
January 1, 2020
I, like most people from my home state of Illinois, am a great admirer of Abraham Lincoln.
Recently I've wondered what would have happened had Nancy Pelosi been the Speaker of the House when Abraham Lincoln was president.
Would Speaker Pelosi's House Democrats use the same flimsy impeachment standard they are currently using to impeach Honest Abe, one of the greatest presidents in the history of our country?
In 1998 I was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives during the Clinton impeachment, and in 2009, as the 40th governor of Illinois, I had the unhappy experience of being impeached and removed from office.
Nevertheless, I offer this interesting and unique perspective about impeachment as I sit here in prison.
Consider the possibilities.
First, today's Democrats would have impeached Lincoln for obstruction of Congress and abuse of power when he unilaterally issued his Emancipation Proclamation.
Lincoln didn't ask Congress for permission when he declared an end to nearly 250 years of slavery and offered freedom to millions of slaves in the American South. He neither consulted Congress nor sought its consent before he acted.
In fact, at the time Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, the Democrats of that day opposed it.
And then there's the matter of the job offer to Robert E. Lee. Shortly after the firing on Fort Sumter by secessionists in South Carolina, and one day after Virginia seceded from the Union, President Lincoln sent an emissary to Robert E. Lee to offer him command of the Northern armies.
General Lee declined the offer.
When his native state of Virginia left the Union, General Lee left with it, eventually going on to become the commanding general of the Army of Northern Virginia and the greatest military leader of the Civil War.
Can't you see how a Speaker Pelosi and many of today's House Democrats would call for the appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate Lincoln for "Confederate Collusion” and bring impeachment charges for abuse of power for offering the top military command to a guy who would go on to become the top military commander of the other side?
And surely, articles of impeachment would be brought against Lincoln by today's House Democrats for suspending the writ of habeas corpus across the Union as it related to traitors, spies, prisoners of war and Union soldiers.
And then there's the political side.
Would Lincoln face impeachment for some of the activities by his political aides who helped him secure the Republican Presidential nomination at their party's convention held in Chicago in 1860?
Today's Democrats would have argued that the routine horse trading employed by Lincoln's political operatives at the convention was bribery and that Lincoln should be impeached.
It is commonly known among historians that in order to gain the support of the delegate-rich Pennsylvania delegation, Lincoln's aides offered a cabinet position to Simon Cameron, the senator from that state.
After Pennsylvania voted to nominate Lincoln, Cameron was appointed Secretary of War.
Undoubtedly, today's House Democrats would bring impeachment charges against Lincoln labeling that routine political log rolling an illegal quid pro quo.
Would today's House Democrats seek the impeachment of Lincoln for his campaign's use of unconventional political tactics?
Taking a page from the playbook that would later be associated with the old-style Chicago Democrat machine, Lincoln's campaign aides made full use of their home-field advantage by printing 5,000 counterfeit tickets to the Republican convention to pack the halls with Lincoln supporters.
This tactic worked. With throngs of Lincoln supporters in the convention hall gallery cheering on their favorite son, a steamroller effect was created that led to the dark-horse Lincoln winning the nomination on the third ballot.
Would today's House Democrats impeach Lincoln for alleged fraudulent practices at the convention claiming he was an illegitimate president?
Two generations before Abraham Lincoln led the struggle to preserve our fractured nation through the crucible of civil war, the Framers of our Constitution established the criteria to impeach a president.
They rejected the weaponizing of impeachment as a political tool by expressly limiting it to "treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors."
They did this because they foresaw how tempting the use of impeachment could be to advance partisan ends.
Indeed, Alexander Hamilton warned of the great danger that the decision to impeach a president could be made for political reasons, "on the comparative strength of parties," rather than on the limited and expressed criteria written in the Constitution.
It is hard to imagine how history would have been changed had Lincoln been impeached. Thankfully, that never happened.
But to think that it could have happened is a reminder of how fragile our Republic is and how vulnerable our freedoms are.
No president is safe if a majority of hyperpartisan House members from the opposition party are willing to abuse the Constitution and vote to impeach.
And the worst part of it is, that should this happen, those politicians are taking from the people their right to choose their own leaders though free elections.
So much for "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" not perishing from this earth.
By Rod Blagojevich
Newsmax
January 1, 2020
I, like most people from my home state of Illinois, am a great admirer of Abraham Lincoln.
Recently I've wondered what would have happened had Nancy Pelosi been the Speaker of the House when Abraham Lincoln was president.
Would Speaker Pelosi's House Democrats use the same flimsy impeachment standard they are currently using to impeach Honest Abe, one of the greatest presidents in the history of our country?
In 1998 I was a member of the U.S. House of Representatives during the Clinton impeachment, and in 2009, as the 40th governor of Illinois, I had the unhappy experience of being impeached and removed from office.
Nevertheless, I offer this interesting and unique perspective about impeachment as I sit here in prison.
Consider the possibilities.
First, today's Democrats would have impeached Lincoln for obstruction of Congress and abuse of power when he unilaterally issued his Emancipation Proclamation.
Lincoln didn't ask Congress for permission when he declared an end to nearly 250 years of slavery and offered freedom to millions of slaves in the American South. He neither consulted Congress nor sought its consent before he acted.
In fact, at the time Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, the Democrats of that day opposed it.
And then there's the matter of the job offer to Robert E. Lee. Shortly after the firing on Fort Sumter by secessionists in South Carolina, and one day after Virginia seceded from the Union, President Lincoln sent an emissary to Robert E. Lee to offer him command of the Northern armies.
General Lee declined the offer.
When his native state of Virginia left the Union, General Lee left with it, eventually going on to become the commanding general of the Army of Northern Virginia and the greatest military leader of the Civil War.
Can't you see how a Speaker Pelosi and many of today's House Democrats would call for the appointment of a Special Counsel to investigate Lincoln for "Confederate Collusion” and bring impeachment charges for abuse of power for offering the top military command to a guy who would go on to become the top military commander of the other side?
And surely, articles of impeachment would be brought against Lincoln by today's House Democrats for suspending the writ of habeas corpus across the Union as it related to traitors, spies, prisoners of war and Union soldiers.
And then there's the political side.
Would Lincoln face impeachment for some of the activities by his political aides who helped him secure the Republican Presidential nomination at their party's convention held in Chicago in 1860?
Today's Democrats would have argued that the routine horse trading employed by Lincoln's political operatives at the convention was bribery and that Lincoln should be impeached.
It is commonly known among historians that in order to gain the support of the delegate-rich Pennsylvania delegation, Lincoln's aides offered a cabinet position to Simon Cameron, the senator from that state.
After Pennsylvania voted to nominate Lincoln, Cameron was appointed Secretary of War.
Undoubtedly, today's House Democrats would bring impeachment charges against Lincoln labeling that routine political log rolling an illegal quid pro quo.
Would today's House Democrats seek the impeachment of Lincoln for his campaign's use of unconventional political tactics?
Taking a page from the playbook that would later be associated with the old-style Chicago Democrat machine, Lincoln's campaign aides made full use of their home-field advantage by printing 5,000 counterfeit tickets to the Republican convention to pack the halls with Lincoln supporters.
This tactic worked. With throngs of Lincoln supporters in the convention hall gallery cheering on their favorite son, a steamroller effect was created that led to the dark-horse Lincoln winning the nomination on the third ballot.
Would today's House Democrats impeach Lincoln for alleged fraudulent practices at the convention claiming he was an illegitimate president?
Two generations before Abraham Lincoln led the struggle to preserve our fractured nation through the crucible of civil war, the Framers of our Constitution established the criteria to impeach a president.
They rejected the weaponizing of impeachment as a political tool by expressly limiting it to "treason, bribery, or other high crimes or misdemeanors."
They did this because they foresaw how tempting the use of impeachment could be to advance partisan ends.
Indeed, Alexander Hamilton warned of the great danger that the decision to impeach a president could be made for political reasons, "on the comparative strength of parties," rather than on the limited and expressed criteria written in the Constitution.
It is hard to imagine how history would have been changed had Lincoln been impeached. Thankfully, that never happened.
But to think that it could have happened is a reminder of how fragile our Republic is and how vulnerable our freedoms are.
No president is safe if a majority of hyperpartisan House members from the opposition party are willing to abuse the Constitution and vote to impeach.
And the worst part of it is, that should this happen, those politicians are taking from the people their right to choose their own leaders though free elections.
So much for "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" not perishing from this earth.
OPEN SEASON ON NEW YORK JEWS
Jewish boy, 15, is attacked by thugs on a bus in New York while a Hasidic Jew, 21, is punched in the throat for trying to film two black women hurling anti-Semitic slurs at him in the latest spate of violent attacks
Daily Mail
January 2, 2020
A 15-year-old Jewish boy has been attacked at knife-point on a New York bus while a man was punched in the throat for trying to film two women hurling anti-Semitic slurs at him in just the latest spate of violent attacks.
The teenager was riding the bus in Sheepshead Bay in Brooklyn on Tuesday when he was approached by two assailants armed with a knife. Police said they stole his earbuds and yarmulke before taunting him with anti-Semitic slurs. The NYPD's Hate Crimes Task Force is currently investigating the incident.
Meanwhile, the task force is also investigating a separate incident in Brooklyn that saw a 21-year-old Hasidic Jew punched in the throat by two black women as he tried to film them yelling 'Fuck you Jew' and 'I will kill you Jews' at him. Police arrested the two women a short distance away.
EDITOR’S NOTE: These attacks are not going to stop since the perpetrators, if arrested, will be released from jail with no bail under Gov. Cuomo’s bail reform.
Daily Mail
January 2, 2020
A 15-year-old Jewish boy has been attacked at knife-point on a New York bus while a man was punched in the throat for trying to film two women hurling anti-Semitic slurs at him in just the latest spate of violent attacks.
The teenager was riding the bus in Sheepshead Bay in Brooklyn on Tuesday when he was approached by two assailants armed with a knife. Police said they stole his earbuds and yarmulke before taunting him with anti-Semitic slurs. The NYPD's Hate Crimes Task Force is currently investigating the incident.
Meanwhile, the task force is also investigating a separate incident in Brooklyn that saw a 21-year-old Hasidic Jew punched in the throat by two black women as he tried to film them yelling 'Fuck you Jew' and 'I will kill you Jews' at him. Police arrested the two women a short distance away.
EDITOR’S NOTE: These attacks are not going to stop since the perpetrators, if arrested, will be released from jail with no bail under Gov. Cuomo’s bail reform.
TIFFANY HARRIS WHO HAS DECLARED SHE WANTS TO FUCK JEWS - BUT NOT IN A SEXUAL WAY - GETS BUSTED AGAIN
Hate crime suspect Tiffany Harris arrested for third time in one week
By Rebecca Rosenberg, Paul Martinka, Reuven Fenton and Laura Italiano
New York Post
January 1, 2020
Tiffany Harris — arrested and released twice in three days after being charged in separate misdemeanor assaults in Brooklyn, including on a trio of Orthodox Jewish women — was arrested a third time on New Year’s Eve.
Harris was picked up by New York City Sheriff’s deputies at a Brownsville, Brooklyn, hotel on an arrest warrant issued earlier Tuesday after she allegedly failed to comply with court-ordered monitoring, officials said.
She had allegedly blown off an appointment with social workers at Brooklyn Justice Initiatives, which runs a supervised release program that helps defendants make their court dates and connect with such services as drug treatment and mental health counseling.
“They issued a bench warrant around 5 p.m. this evening,” New York City Sheriff Joseph Fucito told The Post.
“At 6:18, I was notified that she was a fugitive. We put together teams of deputy sheriffs that did basic background investigation, and started conducting interviews and canvassing known locations,” he added.
A lead materialized that she might be at the Hotel Omega, and investigators were able to confirm through surveillance video that Harris was there, the Sheriff said.
Harris was arrested at 10:15 p.m., and was being held pending an arraignment expected Wednesday morning.
Harris’s lawyer said the judge issued the warrant because of the negative publicity.
“She went to the office as instructed, gave the information she needed, clearly she wanted to leave,” Lisa Schreibersdorf said. “Anyone would want to leave in that circumstance, no one felt she did anything wrong.”
By Rebecca Rosenberg, Paul Martinka, Reuven Fenton and Laura Italiano
New York Post
January 1, 2020
Tiffany Harris — arrested and released twice in three days after being charged in separate misdemeanor assaults in Brooklyn, including on a trio of Orthodox Jewish women — was arrested a third time on New Year’s Eve.
Harris was picked up by New York City Sheriff’s deputies at a Brownsville, Brooklyn, hotel on an arrest warrant issued earlier Tuesday after she allegedly failed to comply with court-ordered monitoring, officials said.
She had allegedly blown off an appointment with social workers at Brooklyn Justice Initiatives, which runs a supervised release program that helps defendants make their court dates and connect with such services as drug treatment and mental health counseling.
“They issued a bench warrant around 5 p.m. this evening,” New York City Sheriff Joseph Fucito told The Post.
“At 6:18, I was notified that she was a fugitive. We put together teams of deputy sheriffs that did basic background investigation, and started conducting interviews and canvassing known locations,” he added.
A lead materialized that she might be at the Hotel Omega, and investigators were able to confirm through surveillance video that Harris was there, the Sheriff said.
Harris was arrested at 10:15 p.m., and was being held pending an arraignment expected Wednesday morning.
Harris’s lawyer said the judge issued the warrant because of the negative publicity.
“She went to the office as instructed, gave the information she needed, clearly she wanted to leave,” Lisa Schreibersdorf said. “Anyone would want to leave in that circumstance, no one felt she did anything wrong.”
THE CANDIDATE WHO SPOKE FOR THE VOIVELESS AND AGAINST THE POLICE DROPS OUT OF PRESIDENTIAL RACE
Julian Castro's Story Should Cause the Democratic Party to Reflect on How It Chooses Candidates
By Charles P. Pierce
Esquire
January 2, 2020
Julian Castro announced on Thursday that he was suspending his campaign for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States. This means that there is no longer a Latino presence in the field. This means that there is no longer a Latino presence in a field that still includes two no-hope white millionaires and a crackpot who thinks you can vibe away your cancer. This also means that there will be no candidate on stage at subsequent debates who reads out the names of the victims of police violence, who points out that police violence is gun violence, and who talks as much about poverty as he or she does about the embattled middle class. All of this should make the Democratic Party wonder about how it chooses its candidates, and it should make the country in general melancholy about the state of affairs as the election season begins.
Castro should have been viable all the way to the convention. (This is also true of Jay Inslee and Kamala Harris.) But the merciless criteria of polls and money worked against all three of them. Their ideas will now get atomized and spread out among the remaining candidates, but that process will be obscured by an implacable, faceless wall of spreadsheets. This is the way we do politics in this country now, thanks in large part to a Supreme Court that has managed to find room in the Constitution for both luxurious ratfcking and outright influence peddling.
But, in the words of Hyman Roth, this is the business they all have chosen. They knew the lay of the land when they launched their campaigns. Nobody fooled anyone. And the reason that Castro, Inslee, and Harris all have left the contest is not entirely down to numbers. All three still have valuable contributions to make to the politics of the country, and political futures, of one kind or another, to maintain. Marianne Williamson is running a marketing operation, so it doesn’t matter how much of her dough she wants to sink into her battle for victory on the Field of Love. And the politics of the country needs Julian Castro to be as involved as he wants to be.
His was a righteous voice in this campaign for people whose voices are truly silent. We hear a lot about how the middle class feels that politics is deaf to their concerns. But we know what the boys in the diner think. Castro campaigned in soup kitchens, and in homeless shelters, and in small urban gardens, where the truly voiceless try to get from sunrise to sunset holding desperation at bay with a charity toothbrush and growing their own vegetables. He campaigned for the minority citizen whose guts clench when they see the red flashing lights of the squad car behind them on a dark road late at night, and for the teenager who has to worry about how fast he takes his hands out of his pockets. He spoke their names on the national stage—Philando Castile, Michael Brown, Laquon McDonald, Sandra Bland, and the others—like a sad litany out of a cathedral history. He dared us to say the names, too.
In December, two cases arising from the existence of a “black site” run by the Chicago Police Department came to light. A man named Demond Watson was released from prison and a man named Armond Day sued the CPD. Both claimed they were tortured into confessing to crimes they did not commit. (Day allegedly was chained to a wall and repeatedly slammed against it.) This is what Julian Castro was talking about. Criminal justice reform, Julian Castro said, must also include justice for the victims of the criminals in uniform. This was a brave thing to say. It is still a brave thing to say, and somebody who’s still in the race should say it, plainly and without equivocation. Somebody who’s still in the race should say it as bravely as Julian Castro did.
In December, two cases arising from the existence of a “black site” run by the Chicago Police Department came to light. A man named Demond Watson was released from prison and a man named Armond Day sued the CPD. Both claimed they were tortured into confessing to crimes they did not commit. (Day allegedly was chained to a wall and repeatedly slammed against it.) This is what Julian Castro was talking about. Criminal justice reform, Julian Castro said, must also include justice for the victims of the criminals in uniform. This was a brave thing to say. It is still a brave thing to say, and somebody who’s still in the race should say it, plainly and without equivocation. Somebody who’s still in the race should say it as bravely as Julian Castro did.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Pierce’s tear jerker exposes his uber-liberalism and that of Esquire. I suggest that Castro go down to Mexico and run for president there because he can campaign against real police brutality down there.
__________
JULIAN CASTRO BITTEN ON THE ASS BY REALITY
by Bob Walsh
Julian Castro, the only actual Hispanic in the Democrat presidential race (as opposed to Robert Francis O'Rourke, who was a fake Hispanic) has recognized that he has been on a no-hope acid trip and pulled the pin. That leaves only about 1,129 people still running.
By Charles P. Pierce
Esquire
January 2, 2020
Julian Castro announced on Thursday that he was suspending his campaign for the Democratic nomination for president of the United States. This means that there is no longer a Latino presence in the field. This means that there is no longer a Latino presence in a field that still includes two no-hope white millionaires and a crackpot who thinks you can vibe away your cancer. This also means that there will be no candidate on stage at subsequent debates who reads out the names of the victims of police violence, who points out that police violence is gun violence, and who talks as much about poverty as he or she does about the embattled middle class. All of this should make the Democratic Party wonder about how it chooses its candidates, and it should make the country in general melancholy about the state of affairs as the election season begins.
Castro should have been viable all the way to the convention. (This is also true of Jay Inslee and Kamala Harris.) But the merciless criteria of polls and money worked against all three of them. Their ideas will now get atomized and spread out among the remaining candidates, but that process will be obscured by an implacable, faceless wall of spreadsheets. This is the way we do politics in this country now, thanks in large part to a Supreme Court that has managed to find room in the Constitution for both luxurious ratfcking and outright influence peddling.
But, in the words of Hyman Roth, this is the business they all have chosen. They knew the lay of the land when they launched their campaigns. Nobody fooled anyone. And the reason that Castro, Inslee, and Harris all have left the contest is not entirely down to numbers. All three still have valuable contributions to make to the politics of the country, and political futures, of one kind or another, to maintain. Marianne Williamson is running a marketing operation, so it doesn’t matter how much of her dough she wants to sink into her battle for victory on the Field of Love. And the politics of the country needs Julian Castro to be as involved as he wants to be.
His was a righteous voice in this campaign for people whose voices are truly silent. We hear a lot about how the middle class feels that politics is deaf to their concerns. But we know what the boys in the diner think. Castro campaigned in soup kitchens, and in homeless shelters, and in small urban gardens, where the truly voiceless try to get from sunrise to sunset holding desperation at bay with a charity toothbrush and growing their own vegetables. He campaigned for the minority citizen whose guts clench when they see the red flashing lights of the squad car behind them on a dark road late at night, and for the teenager who has to worry about how fast he takes his hands out of his pockets. He spoke their names on the national stage—Philando Castile, Michael Brown, Laquon McDonald, Sandra Bland, and the others—like a sad litany out of a cathedral history. He dared us to say the names, too.
In December, two cases arising from the existence of a “black site” run by the Chicago Police Department came to light. A man named Demond Watson was released from prison and a man named Armond Day sued the CPD. Both claimed they were tortured into confessing to crimes they did not commit. (Day allegedly was chained to a wall and repeatedly slammed against it.) This is what Julian Castro was talking about. Criminal justice reform, Julian Castro said, must also include justice for the victims of the criminals in uniform. This was a brave thing to say. It is still a brave thing to say, and somebody who’s still in the race should say it, plainly and without equivocation. Somebody who’s still in the race should say it as bravely as Julian Castro did.
In December, two cases arising from the existence of a “black site” run by the Chicago Police Department came to light. A man named Demond Watson was released from prison and a man named Armond Day sued the CPD. Both claimed they were tortured into confessing to crimes they did not commit. (Day allegedly was chained to a wall and repeatedly slammed against it.) This is what Julian Castro was talking about. Criminal justice reform, Julian Castro said, must also include justice for the victims of the criminals in uniform. This was a brave thing to say. It is still a brave thing to say, and somebody who’s still in the race should say it, plainly and without equivocation. Somebody who’s still in the race should say it as bravely as Julian Castro did.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Pierce’s tear jerker exposes his uber-liberalism and that of Esquire. I suggest that Castro go down to Mexico and run for president there because he can campaign against real police brutality down there.
__________
JULIAN CASTRO BITTEN ON THE ASS BY REALITY
by Bob Walsh
Julian Castro, the only actual Hispanic in the Democrat presidential race (as opposed to Robert Francis O'Rourke, who was a fake Hispanic) has recognized that he has been on a no-hope acid trip and pulled the pin. That leaves only about 1,129 people still running.
HORRIFYING NEWS FROM MY BIRTHPLACE
'They are so sorry': An 'ordinary middle-class' mother, 60, and her two grown-up daughters are facing up to five years in prison after admitting they illegally set off the Chinese lanterns that destroyed a German zoo's monkey enclosure - killing 30 animals
By Sophie Tanno, Chris Pleasance and Tim Stickings
Daily Mail
January 2, 2020
The suspects responsible for a fire at a German zoo which killed dozens of animals are a mother, 60, and her two adult daughters believed to be in their 30s, Krefeld police have confirmed.
The three women from Krefeld in western Germany lit five paper Chinese lanterns and launched them into the sky on New Year's Eve, despite a ban on the objects, which they had ordered online without a permit.
They handed themselves into police after learning of the disaster on the news, in which the entire ape house burned down and more than 30 animals, including five orangutans, a 48-year-old silverback gorilla called Massa, a chimpanzee and several monkeys, as well as fruit bats and birds, were killed just after midnight on New Year's Eve.
Criminal police chief Gerd Hoppmann described the women as 'completely normal people who seemed very sensible, very responsible'.
Hoppmann added that it was 'courageous' of them to hand themselves into police after learning of the fire, saving them a lengthy investigation. 'That is courageous. It stands for something that they handed themselves into the police like that. It is a decent thing to do and earns my respect,' he said.
He said that they fear reprisals. The suspects could either face up to five year's jail time or be hit with a fine.
According to Hoppmann, the internet companies selling the lanterns provide no warning about the countries they are banned in and there was nothing in the product description that could have informed the buyer.
Many Germans welcome in the new year legally with fireworks at midnight. Sky lanterns, however, are both mostly illegal and unusual in Germany. The mini hot-air balloons made of paper have been used in Asia for centuries.
Authorities are investigating on a single charge of 'negligently criminal fire', which carries a maximum sentence of up to five years in jail.
Police admitted that the incident was an 'exceptional' one.
Four of the five lanterns have been recovered by authorities.
Analysts studied the handwriting on one of the lanterns and inspected the burned-out animal enclosure at Krefeld Zoo, as well as analysing wind and weather patterns to determine those responsible and the exact details surrounding the case.
According to investigators, the fire was ignited in the north-eastern corner of the cage before strengthening and spreading, and the animals were either burnt to death or killed by inhaling toxic smoke. 'I've seen very many human corpses,' Hoppmann said. 'And I was struck by how like humans the bodies of the great apes looked when transformed by the fire.'
The ape house had been fitted with plexiglass - a transparent plastic material - a few years ago after a hailstorm. Foliage on the roof of the enclosure may have played a role in strengthening the fire, police said.
The zoo has been criticised for not installing sprinklers within the ape house which could have prevented the fire from spreading.
The city of Krefeld is considering a ban on fireworks, in the wake of the devastating incident. Department store chain Real said on Thursday that it would stop selling the lanterns, which are still permitted in the northern, coastal region of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
Five orangutans, a 48-year-old silverback gorilla and dozens of monkeys as well as fruit bats and birds were among the creatures killed in the fire which broke out within the first hour of January 1. Investigators are still working to identify all the animals that were killed in the blaze, authorities said on Thursday.
According to zoo spokeswoman Petra Schwinn, Krefeld Zoo will be reopened tomorrow but zoo officials will erect barriers around the enclosure to avoid 'catastrophe tourism' and macabre photos.
The two apes who were rescued from the burning enclosure are recovering well considering the circumstances, according to Schwinn. A funeral for the dead animals will be organised for employees of the zoo.
Photos taken on Wednesday show debris and twisted metal inside the ape house, where only two chimpanzees were rescued alive.
Yesterday tearful visitors lit candles and left flowers and soft toys at the entrance of the zoo on Wednesday. One of the tributes asked simply: 'Why?'
'Our worst fears have been realised,' Krefeld zoo, which specialises in primates, announced on its Facebook page.
The zoo near the Dutch border said that the entire ape house burned down and more than 30 animals, including five orangutans, a 48-year-old silverback gorilla called Massa, a chimpanzee and several monkeys, as well as fruit bats and birds, were killed.
Only two chimpanzees could be rescued from the flames by firefighters. They suffered burns but are in stable condition, zoo director Wolfgang Dressen said.
'It's close to a miracle that Bally, a 40-year-old female chimpanzee, and Limbo, a younger male, survived this inferno,' Dressen said.
Firefighters prevented the flames from spreading to other buildings at the zoo in North Rhine-Westphalia - meaning that gorilla Kidogo and six relatives who were in the Gorilla Garden survived the fire.
'We have to seriously work through the mourning process,' Dressen said. 'This is an unfathomable tragedy.'
The zoo director also said than many of the dead animals were close to extinction in the wild.
Krefeld zoo remained closed Wednesday and Thursday with employees 'in shock' owing to the 'terrible tragedy', management said.
Police have launched an investigation into 'arson through negligence' after the deadly blaze and a number of people who may have used the Chinese lanterns have spoken to investigators.
Several witnesses reported that they had seen the cylindrical paper lanterns with little fires inside flying in the night sky shortly after midnight.
Three lanterns bearing hand-written New Year's wishes were later discovered in the smouldering debris.
The German animal protection association quickly called for all kinds of fireworks to be banned near zoos, farms and kennels.
The deadly blaze was 'terrible proof of the dramatic consequences for animals' from 'uncontrolled' celebrations, the group said.
Chinese lanterns are a type of hot-air balloon made of paper, and have been used in Asia for celebratory events for centuries. The fire heats the air inside, making them fly and shine at night.
Hoppmann said investigators found some used lanterns on the ground that had not burned entirely. They were 13 inches, made out of white paper with an opening at the bottom where a small fire would have been suspended.
The Krefeld zoo was opened in 1975 and attracts some 400,000 visitors each year.
By Sophie Tanno, Chris Pleasance and Tim Stickings
Daily Mail
January 2, 2020
The suspects responsible for a fire at a German zoo which killed dozens of animals are a mother, 60, and her two adult daughters believed to be in their 30s, Krefeld police have confirmed.
The three women from Krefeld in western Germany lit five paper Chinese lanterns and launched them into the sky on New Year's Eve, despite a ban on the objects, which they had ordered online without a permit.
They handed themselves into police after learning of the disaster on the news, in which the entire ape house burned down and more than 30 animals, including five orangutans, a 48-year-old silverback gorilla called Massa, a chimpanzee and several monkeys, as well as fruit bats and birds, were killed just after midnight on New Year's Eve.
Criminal police chief Gerd Hoppmann described the women as 'completely normal people who seemed very sensible, very responsible'.
Hoppmann added that it was 'courageous' of them to hand themselves into police after learning of the fire, saving them a lengthy investigation. 'That is courageous. It stands for something that they handed themselves into the police like that. It is a decent thing to do and earns my respect,' he said.
He said that they fear reprisals. The suspects could either face up to five year's jail time or be hit with a fine.
According to Hoppmann, the internet companies selling the lanterns provide no warning about the countries they are banned in and there was nothing in the product description that could have informed the buyer.
Many Germans welcome in the new year legally with fireworks at midnight. Sky lanterns, however, are both mostly illegal and unusual in Germany. The mini hot-air balloons made of paper have been used in Asia for centuries.
Authorities are investigating on a single charge of 'negligently criminal fire', which carries a maximum sentence of up to five years in jail.
Police admitted that the incident was an 'exceptional' one.
Four of the five lanterns have been recovered by authorities.
Analysts studied the handwriting on one of the lanterns and inspected the burned-out animal enclosure at Krefeld Zoo, as well as analysing wind and weather patterns to determine those responsible and the exact details surrounding the case.
According to investigators, the fire was ignited in the north-eastern corner of the cage before strengthening and spreading, and the animals were either burnt to death or killed by inhaling toxic smoke. 'I've seen very many human corpses,' Hoppmann said. 'And I was struck by how like humans the bodies of the great apes looked when transformed by the fire.'
The ape house had been fitted with plexiglass - a transparent plastic material - a few years ago after a hailstorm. Foliage on the roof of the enclosure may have played a role in strengthening the fire, police said.
The zoo has been criticised for not installing sprinklers within the ape house which could have prevented the fire from spreading.
The city of Krefeld is considering a ban on fireworks, in the wake of the devastating incident. Department store chain Real said on Thursday that it would stop selling the lanterns, which are still permitted in the northern, coastal region of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
Five orangutans, a 48-year-old silverback gorilla and dozens of monkeys as well as fruit bats and birds were among the creatures killed in the fire which broke out within the first hour of January 1. Investigators are still working to identify all the animals that were killed in the blaze, authorities said on Thursday.
According to zoo spokeswoman Petra Schwinn, Krefeld Zoo will be reopened tomorrow but zoo officials will erect barriers around the enclosure to avoid 'catastrophe tourism' and macabre photos.
The two apes who were rescued from the burning enclosure are recovering well considering the circumstances, according to Schwinn. A funeral for the dead animals will be organised for employees of the zoo.
Photos taken on Wednesday show debris and twisted metal inside the ape house, where only two chimpanzees were rescued alive.
Yesterday tearful visitors lit candles and left flowers and soft toys at the entrance of the zoo on Wednesday. One of the tributes asked simply: 'Why?'
'Our worst fears have been realised,' Krefeld zoo, which specialises in primates, announced on its Facebook page.
The zoo near the Dutch border said that the entire ape house burned down and more than 30 animals, including five orangutans, a 48-year-old silverback gorilla called Massa, a chimpanzee and several monkeys, as well as fruit bats and birds, were killed.
Only two chimpanzees could be rescued from the flames by firefighters. They suffered burns but are in stable condition, zoo director Wolfgang Dressen said.
'It's close to a miracle that Bally, a 40-year-old female chimpanzee, and Limbo, a younger male, survived this inferno,' Dressen said.
Firefighters prevented the flames from spreading to other buildings at the zoo in North Rhine-Westphalia - meaning that gorilla Kidogo and six relatives who were in the Gorilla Garden survived the fire.
'We have to seriously work through the mourning process,' Dressen said. 'This is an unfathomable tragedy.'
The zoo director also said than many of the dead animals were close to extinction in the wild.
Krefeld zoo remained closed Wednesday and Thursday with employees 'in shock' owing to the 'terrible tragedy', management said.
Police have launched an investigation into 'arson through negligence' after the deadly blaze and a number of people who may have used the Chinese lanterns have spoken to investigators.
Several witnesses reported that they had seen the cylindrical paper lanterns with little fires inside flying in the night sky shortly after midnight.
Three lanterns bearing hand-written New Year's wishes were later discovered in the smouldering debris.
The German animal protection association quickly called for all kinds of fireworks to be banned near zoos, farms and kennels.
The deadly blaze was 'terrible proof of the dramatic consequences for animals' from 'uncontrolled' celebrations, the group said.
Chinese lanterns are a type of hot-air balloon made of paper, and have been used in Asia for celebratory events for centuries. The fire heats the air inside, making them fly and shine at night.
Hoppmann said investigators found some used lanterns on the ground that had not burned entirely. They were 13 inches, made out of white paper with an opening at the bottom where a small fire would have been suspended.
The Krefeld zoo was opened in 1975 and attracts some 400,000 visitors each year.
5 PREDICTIONS FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS OF GLOBAL POWER STRUGGLES
If these predictions come to pass, their fulfillment will have lasting effects upon America in the 2020s and beyond
By Edward Chang
The Federalist
December 31, 2019
In 2008, as the Obama administration prepared to take control in Washington, retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey offered a list of bold predictions for the coming five years. Some of them bore out: The economy performed well globally despite the Great Recession, relations with Russia became more hostile without devolving into outright dysfunction, and the United States withdrew from Iraq right at the 36-month mark, which McCaffrey specified. Other predictions, such as a North Korean collapse, improved prospects for success in Afghanistan following a massive commitment of resources, and a nuclear breakout for Iran, never occurred.
A year later, geopolitical analyst George Friedman published the widely read “The Next 100 Years.” Like McCaffrey, Friedman correctly predicted a new cold war between the United States and Russia, but he also foresaw the emergence of Turkey as a major regional power, the consequences of demographic change in Europe and North America, and tensions between the United States and Mexico as instability in Latin America threatens to generate a crisis on the southern border. Friedman got some things wrong, to be sure, but the number of things he got right is fascinating.
Making accurate predictions is no easy feat, leading some to take the “wait and see” approach. However, I offer six predictions, in no particular order, that will have serious implications for American national security and foreign policy in the 2020s.
1. Russia Will Lose Great Power Status
The American left, along with its compatriots in the media, have thrown everything toward fashioning Russia as a geopolitical menace that must be defeated at all costs, lest it conquer all of Europe and facilitate the electoral victory of the “wrong” presidential candidate once again. This is quite a departure from earlier this decade, when the prevailing wisdom was that the 1980s wanted its foreign policy back.
Russia no doubt possesses geopolitical clout, a large economy, and a strong military. But Russia is a dying country. Its aging population is wracked by poor health, combined with minuscule growth following decades of decline. Most, if not all, projections show considerable population loss for Russia by mid-century.
Russia’s dependence on oil and natural gas also belies the size of its economy. Extreme sensitivity to the price of oil equals prolonged periods of economic instability, leading to greater poverty and domestic discontent, forcing Russia to scale back its global role. Despite its instrumental role in saving the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, history may well look back on Russian foreign policy in the 2010s as an aberration, as realities on the home front mean the bear may soon go into hibernation indefinitely.
2. China Will Double Down on Authoritarianism
Inspiring as the Hong Kong protests have been to lovers of democracy and freedom all over, it’s a movement destined for failure. Without direct intervention from the outside, the protesters will never overcome the sheer might and violence the Communist Party of China can bring to bear. The protests will eventually fizzle out, or Beijing will decide, as it did in Tiananmen Square three decades ago, to end the uprising once and for all.
When Beijing doubles down, the world will be unable to do little differently than it does now: offer platitudes of support for the freedom-fighters, enact limited sanctions, and harshly condemn the socialist state. Beyond that, however, not a single country, the United States included, is willing to risk a confrontation with a nuclear-armed power that’s also the world’s second-largest economy over the fate of Hong Kong.
Meanwhile, the People’s Republic will continue its campaign of terror against its own citizens, most notably the Uyghurs of Xinjiang Province, to ensure total obedience of its population to the Communist Party and the rule of President Xi Jinping and, as some reports suggest, to ethnically cleanse the Uyghurs from China. With time, this same strategy will be applied to China’s other ethnic and religious minorities. When its economy eventually declines, expect to see a level of totalitarianism unseen since the days of Mao Zedong.
3. Japan Will Rise as Asia’s Powerhouse
“Japan was, is, and will be the major power in Asia, not China,” says retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor. “China is a large, lumbering brontosaurus with an insatiable appetite for food and energy. Japan is analogous to a pack of [velociraptors].”
To be sure, Japan faces substantial obstacles, not the least of which its aging population and economic stagnation. As Macgregor observes, however, Japan is blessed with features that set it aside from other countries facing similar challenges: “Japan and Germany were alike in that both states emerged as very homogenous populations with a strong, cohesive society supported by an effective culture. Germany now confronts serious internal weaknesses, while Japan has avoided that outcome and, as a result, is in a very strong position for the future.”
The inevitable Chinese decline will create a power vacuum, which Tokyo may ably fill. Murmurings of a shift in Japan’s foreign policy will become more real as Beijing continues to pose a regional security threat, combined with the ongoing nuclear crisis in Korea. The already firm U.S.-Japanese alliance will become even stronger and more important, reinforcing Japan’s emergence as Asia’s top power and guaranteeing America’s access to the economies and markets of the region.
Speaking of Germany:
4. Germany Will Flirt with the Idea of Leaving the EU
Brexit may be all the rage now, but all eyes will be on Germany in the 2020s. Arguably the leading continental power and the linchpin of the EU, Berlin will be forced to confront myriad challenges that will define its fate and that of Europe for decades to come. These include a demographic crisis, the migrant influx that refuses to abate, and the pressure that accompanies being the one country responsible for sustaining the EU experiment.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens after 2021, when Angela Merkel is expected to step down as chancellor. If the 2017 federal election was any signal, significant percentages of German voters are no longer buying what the more establishment, centrist parties are selling. Germany may well follow the United Kingdom and United States in a more nationalist, populist direction, especially with trouble lurking on the economic horizon.
By the end of the 2020s, all the crises and the pressure will add up to create enough enthusiasm for a departure from the EU, which will then experience an existential crisis. It’s difficult to say whether Germany would actually leave, given the difficulties Britain is enduring in its own attempt. But history makes this much certain: Where Germany goes, continental Europe follows.
5. Latin America Will Become America’s No.1 National Security Challenge
If the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border isn’t yet a crisis, it’ll become one in the 2020s. Mexico, which saw nearly 30,000 killed in 2019 due to the drug war, will continue to be consumed by the inferno. Nor is the problem limited to Mexico. Extraordinary levels of violence, corruption, and instability in Central America are the primary movers of northerly migration.
Even relatively stable South America isn’t quite so these days. Venezuela teeters on the brink following its disastrous two-decade experiment with socialism, creating a brand-new migrant crisis. Crime, an economic crisis, and corruption embroil Brazil, once considered an emerging great power. The long-term forecast for Latin America is gloomy.
In fact, by the mid-2020s, the United States will feel a noticeable political shift as the left reaches a breaking point over its support for illegal immigration, similar to its breaking point over homelessness. It’ll be impossible to ignore the glaring contradiction of promoting de facto open borders while decrying increasing levels of poverty, overcrowding, and declining quality of life, coupled with ever-increasing levels of violence. Likewise, the inability of any nation to sustain an influx of low-skill migrants who ultimately depend more on state and society than the reverse will become more apparent.
This is hardly a comprehensive list of predictions. Missing are those pertaining to the endless wars in the Greater Middle East, the enduring threat Islamist militants pose, the conflict with Iran that’ll soon enter its fourth decade, and the lingering question of North Korea disarmament. The futures I’ve offered here, however, if they come to pass, will have the most lasting effects upon America in the 2020s and beyond. May the 2020s prove more peaceful and prosperous than the decade we leave behind.
EDITOR’S NOTE: And I predict that Liechtenstein will become the most powerful nation in the world by 2025.
By Edward Chang
The Federalist
December 31, 2019
In 2008, as the Obama administration prepared to take control in Washington, retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey offered a list of bold predictions for the coming five years. Some of them bore out: The economy performed well globally despite the Great Recession, relations with Russia became more hostile without devolving into outright dysfunction, and the United States withdrew from Iraq right at the 36-month mark, which McCaffrey specified. Other predictions, such as a North Korean collapse, improved prospects for success in Afghanistan following a massive commitment of resources, and a nuclear breakout for Iran, never occurred.
A year later, geopolitical analyst George Friedman published the widely read “The Next 100 Years.” Like McCaffrey, Friedman correctly predicted a new cold war between the United States and Russia, but he also foresaw the emergence of Turkey as a major regional power, the consequences of demographic change in Europe and North America, and tensions between the United States and Mexico as instability in Latin America threatens to generate a crisis on the southern border. Friedman got some things wrong, to be sure, but the number of things he got right is fascinating.
Making accurate predictions is no easy feat, leading some to take the “wait and see” approach. However, I offer six predictions, in no particular order, that will have serious implications for American national security and foreign policy in the 2020s.
1. Russia Will Lose Great Power Status
The American left, along with its compatriots in the media, have thrown everything toward fashioning Russia as a geopolitical menace that must be defeated at all costs, lest it conquer all of Europe and facilitate the electoral victory of the “wrong” presidential candidate once again. This is quite a departure from earlier this decade, when the prevailing wisdom was that the 1980s wanted its foreign policy back.
Russia no doubt possesses geopolitical clout, a large economy, and a strong military. But Russia is a dying country. Its aging population is wracked by poor health, combined with minuscule growth following decades of decline. Most, if not all, projections show considerable population loss for Russia by mid-century.
Russia’s dependence on oil and natural gas also belies the size of its economy. Extreme sensitivity to the price of oil equals prolonged periods of economic instability, leading to greater poverty and domestic discontent, forcing Russia to scale back its global role. Despite its instrumental role in saving the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad, history may well look back on Russian foreign policy in the 2010s as an aberration, as realities on the home front mean the bear may soon go into hibernation indefinitely.
2. China Will Double Down on Authoritarianism
Inspiring as the Hong Kong protests have been to lovers of democracy and freedom all over, it’s a movement destined for failure. Without direct intervention from the outside, the protesters will never overcome the sheer might and violence the Communist Party of China can bring to bear. The protests will eventually fizzle out, or Beijing will decide, as it did in Tiananmen Square three decades ago, to end the uprising once and for all.
When Beijing doubles down, the world will be unable to do little differently than it does now: offer platitudes of support for the freedom-fighters, enact limited sanctions, and harshly condemn the socialist state. Beyond that, however, not a single country, the United States included, is willing to risk a confrontation with a nuclear-armed power that’s also the world’s second-largest economy over the fate of Hong Kong.
Meanwhile, the People’s Republic will continue its campaign of terror against its own citizens, most notably the Uyghurs of Xinjiang Province, to ensure total obedience of its population to the Communist Party and the rule of President Xi Jinping and, as some reports suggest, to ethnically cleanse the Uyghurs from China. With time, this same strategy will be applied to China’s other ethnic and religious minorities. When its economy eventually declines, expect to see a level of totalitarianism unseen since the days of Mao Zedong.
3. Japan Will Rise as Asia’s Powerhouse
“Japan was, is, and will be the major power in Asia, not China,” says retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor. “China is a large, lumbering brontosaurus with an insatiable appetite for food and energy. Japan is analogous to a pack of [velociraptors].”
To be sure, Japan faces substantial obstacles, not the least of which its aging population and economic stagnation. As Macgregor observes, however, Japan is blessed with features that set it aside from other countries facing similar challenges: “Japan and Germany were alike in that both states emerged as very homogenous populations with a strong, cohesive society supported by an effective culture. Germany now confronts serious internal weaknesses, while Japan has avoided that outcome and, as a result, is in a very strong position for the future.”
The inevitable Chinese decline will create a power vacuum, which Tokyo may ably fill. Murmurings of a shift in Japan’s foreign policy will become more real as Beijing continues to pose a regional security threat, combined with the ongoing nuclear crisis in Korea. The already firm U.S.-Japanese alliance will become even stronger and more important, reinforcing Japan’s emergence as Asia’s top power and guaranteeing America’s access to the economies and markets of the region.
Speaking of Germany:
4. Germany Will Flirt with the Idea of Leaving the EU
Brexit may be all the rage now, but all eyes will be on Germany in the 2020s. Arguably the leading continental power and the linchpin of the EU, Berlin will be forced to confront myriad challenges that will define its fate and that of Europe for decades to come. These include a demographic crisis, the migrant influx that refuses to abate, and the pressure that accompanies being the one country responsible for sustaining the EU experiment.
It’ll be interesting to see what happens after 2021, when Angela Merkel is expected to step down as chancellor. If the 2017 federal election was any signal, significant percentages of German voters are no longer buying what the more establishment, centrist parties are selling. Germany may well follow the United Kingdom and United States in a more nationalist, populist direction, especially with trouble lurking on the economic horizon.
By the end of the 2020s, all the crises and the pressure will add up to create enough enthusiasm for a departure from the EU, which will then experience an existential crisis. It’s difficult to say whether Germany would actually leave, given the difficulties Britain is enduring in its own attempt. But history makes this much certain: Where Germany goes, continental Europe follows.
5. Latin America Will Become America’s No.1 National Security Challenge
If the situation at the U.S.-Mexico border isn’t yet a crisis, it’ll become one in the 2020s. Mexico, which saw nearly 30,000 killed in 2019 due to the drug war, will continue to be consumed by the inferno. Nor is the problem limited to Mexico. Extraordinary levels of violence, corruption, and instability in Central America are the primary movers of northerly migration.
Even relatively stable South America isn’t quite so these days. Venezuela teeters on the brink following its disastrous two-decade experiment with socialism, creating a brand-new migrant crisis. Crime, an economic crisis, and corruption embroil Brazil, once considered an emerging great power. The long-term forecast for Latin America is gloomy.
In fact, by the mid-2020s, the United States will feel a noticeable political shift as the left reaches a breaking point over its support for illegal immigration, similar to its breaking point over homelessness. It’ll be impossible to ignore the glaring contradiction of promoting de facto open borders while decrying increasing levels of poverty, overcrowding, and declining quality of life, coupled with ever-increasing levels of violence. Likewise, the inability of any nation to sustain an influx of low-skill migrants who ultimately depend more on state and society than the reverse will become more apparent.
This is hardly a comprehensive list of predictions. Missing are those pertaining to the endless wars in the Greater Middle East, the enduring threat Islamist militants pose, the conflict with Iran that’ll soon enter its fourth decade, and the lingering question of North Korea disarmament. The futures I’ve offered here, however, if they come to pass, will have the most lasting effects upon America in the 2020s and beyond. May the 2020s prove more peaceful and prosperous than the decade we leave behind.
EDITOR’S NOTE: And I predict that Liechtenstein will become the most powerful nation in the world by 2025.
Thursday, January 02, 2020
ILLINOIS PRISON OFFICER ARRESTED FOR THREE MURDERS
by Bob Walsh
Clifford W. Brewer, 53, is being held pending a $5 million bond. It is alleged that he murdered his wife, his adult son, and a third person in a private home in the small town of Cullom, about 20 miles east of Pontiac.
The Livingston County S. O. responded to the scene early Wednesday and found Shirley Brewer, 48, Christian Brewer, 27, and Norman Walker, 51, all dead from gunshot wounds. The cops arrested Brewer. He had been a Correctional Officer at the Pontiac Correctional Center, a max security facility. He has been on the job since 2001.
Sounds like a domestic to me, but you never know. Could be they all got him underwear for Christmas and he flipped out.
Clifford W. Brewer, 53, is being held pending a $5 million bond. It is alleged that he murdered his wife, his adult son, and a third person in a private home in the small town of Cullom, about 20 miles east of Pontiac.
The Livingston County S. O. responded to the scene early Wednesday and found Shirley Brewer, 48, Christian Brewer, 27, and Norman Walker, 51, all dead from gunshot wounds. The cops arrested Brewer. He had been a Correctional Officer at the Pontiac Correctional Center, a max security facility. He has been on the job since 2001.
Sounds like a domestic to me, but you never know. Could be they all got him underwear for Christmas and he flipped out.
SOMETIMES ENOUGH SMOKE DOES INDICATE A REAL FIRE
Yes Dorothy, The New Python Is Real
by Bob Walsh
The New And Improved Colt Python is in fact real. It does look a lot like the old one, with a vent rib barrel. It will, for now, be available as a 4 1/4" and 6' stainless steel version. It is somewhat beefier and uses stronger steel. It still uses a v-leaf spring but the lock work is completely different and is allegedly very smooth right out of the box. It also uses a frame mounted firing pin rather than a hammer mounted one. The front sight is user interchangeable and the rear sight is "better." MSRP is $1500. They are cropping up on various web sites from $1400 to $1900. I assume it uses MIM internals but I don't know that for a fact.
It will no doubt be a long time before they make their way to California, at which time I will definitely check one out. Maybe they will be available in 3" blue steel by then.
by Bob Walsh
The New And Improved Colt Python is in fact real. It does look a lot like the old one, with a vent rib barrel. It will, for now, be available as a 4 1/4" and 6' stainless steel version. It is somewhat beefier and uses stronger steel. It still uses a v-leaf spring but the lock work is completely different and is allegedly very smooth right out of the box. It also uses a frame mounted firing pin rather than a hammer mounted one. The front sight is user interchangeable and the rear sight is "better." MSRP is $1500. They are cropping up on various web sites from $1400 to $1900. I assume it uses MIM internals but I don't know that for a fact.
It will no doubt be a long time before they make their way to California, at which time I will definitely check one out. Maybe they will be available in 3" blue steel by then.
ITS' NOW OFFICIAL. CALIFORNIA THINKS FOREST FIRES MIGHT BE BAD SOME TIMES
by Bob Walsh
On Tuesday the formerly great state of California decided that maybe they should streamline the permit process for three thinning and other forest land cleanup in order to prevent rapidly moving wild fires that caused so much death and destruction in recent years.
After more than ten years of "analysis" the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection approved a vegetation management program for a wide range of material from chaparral to alpine trees.
Under the old rules it took at least three years to get approval for an actual specified "forest management project." It can now be done in less than one year.
They are hoping to process as much as 500,000 acres per year. The state is responsible for about 20 million acres of wild land. The new plan does not cover commercial timber harvesting or new housing construction.
On Tuesday the formerly great state of California decided that maybe they should streamline the permit process for three thinning and other forest land cleanup in order to prevent rapidly moving wild fires that caused so much death and destruction in recent years.
After more than ten years of "analysis" the Board of Forestry and Fire Protection approved a vegetation management program for a wide range of material from chaparral to alpine trees.
Under the old rules it took at least three years to get approval for an actual specified "forest management project." It can now be done in less than one year.
They are hoping to process as much as 500,000 acres per year. The state is responsible for about 20 million acres of wild land. The new plan does not cover commercial timber harvesting or new housing construction.
MORONS FIRED FOR BEING MORONIC
We Don't Pay Cops To Be Stupid
by Bob Walsh
It seems that, during a class photo at the West Virginia Correctional Officer's Academy a number of the cadets thought it would be amusing to give a Nazi salute for the photograph.
Corrections and Rehabilitation Training Class #18, which ran during October and November, showed a number of the cadets giving the salute with the caption HAIL BYRD, in reference to instructor Karrie Byrd.
Several of the cadets asserted that they did not give the salute until ordered to by Byrd. Some did so with a clenched fist rather than an open hand. Some said they feared discharge or other retaliation if they refused to go along with the program.
Several of the cadets have been sacked. Several of the instructors are on leave pending likely discharge, including some of who knew knew about the incident but failed to report it. The photograph has been released to the public.
by Bob Walsh
It seems that, during a class photo at the West Virginia Correctional Officer's Academy a number of the cadets thought it would be amusing to give a Nazi salute for the photograph.
Corrections and Rehabilitation Training Class #18, which ran during October and November, showed a number of the cadets giving the salute with the caption HAIL BYRD, in reference to instructor Karrie Byrd.
Several of the cadets asserted that they did not give the salute until ordered to by Byrd. Some did so with a clenched fist rather than an open hand. Some said they feared discharge or other retaliation if they refused to go along with the program.
Several of the cadets have been sacked. Several of the instructors are on leave pending likely discharge, including some of who knew knew about the incident but failed to report it. The photograph has been released to the public.
SIX ARRESTED IN FRESNO SHOOTING
by Bob Walsh
Six members of the Mongolian Boys Society are under arrest for the shooting in Fresno on November 17 at a football game house party. At least one of the people at that party was a member of the Asian Crips. The shooting is thought to be a retaliation attack for a shooting earlier in the day that left a Mongolian Boys Society member toes up.
Each of the six is being held against a $11 million bail.
Authorities recovered 14 weapons, two of which were used in the Fresno attack.
Six members of the Mongolian Boys Society are under arrest for the shooting in Fresno on November 17 at a football game house party. At least one of the people at that party was a member of the Asian Crips. The shooting is thought to be a retaliation attack for a shooting earlier in the day that left a Mongolian Boys Society member toes up.
Each of the six is being held against a $11 million bail.
Authorities recovered 14 weapons, two of which were used in the Fresno attack.
INDEPENDENT TRUCKERS CATCH A BREAK IN CA
by Bob Walsh
Acting on Tuesday a federal judge temporarily blocked California's assault on the gig economy which would have screwed over about 70,000 independent truckers. U. S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez granted a TRO to the California Truckers Association while a permanent injunction is considered.
Freelance photographers and writers and drivers for Uber, Lyft, GrubHub and similar operations have similar lawsuits pending.
Acting on Tuesday a federal judge temporarily blocked California's assault on the gig economy which would have screwed over about 70,000 independent truckers. U. S. District Court Judge Roger Benitez granted a TRO to the California Truckers Association while a permanent injunction is considered.
Freelance photographers and writers and drivers for Uber, Lyft, GrubHub and similar operations have similar lawsuits pending.
CHARGED WITH ASSAULT ON A POLICE OFFICER, RESISTING ARREST AND 3 ADDITIONAL CHARGES, MAN WITH 24 PRIOR ARRESTS WAS RELEASED WITH NO BAIL UNDER GOV. CUOMO’S BAIL REFORM
Man who sucker-punched cop in Brooklyn is back on his old turf
By Ruth Weissmann and Jorge Fitz-Gibbon
New York Post
December 29, 2019
The man who was arrested for sucker-punching an NYPD cop in Brooklyn was back at his old stomping ground Sunday — just two days after being released without bail despite a slew of charges.
Steven Haynes, 40, returned to Livingston and Court streets in Downtown Brooklyn — where police say he slugged and brawled with one of New York’s Finest on Thursday — after being cut loose, irritating local merchants who say he’s been a troublesome presence on the block for months.
“No bail. Three hours, he was back in the same spot,” Michael Vitiello, general manager of an Italian restaurant two doors down, told The Post. “They had a cop sitting there, just watching him. He got his own security ‘cuz he’s a celebrity now.”
“They could have locked him up in Bellevue last night, but they didn’t do it,” he continued. “Now he’s back in the street causing problems.”
Haynes on Sunday was in an out of a Popeye’s fast-food restaurant on the block that’s next door to the Bank of America branch where he allegedly punched the cop on Thursday.
He was photographed by The Post sipping a single-serving shot of Georgi vodka on the corner Sunday.
His quick return to the neighborhood stunned even the local panhandler, whose usual spot is next to Haynes on the sidewalk.
“I’m dumbfounded,” said Jesus, 28. “If it was me I would still be in jail. I’m coherent. I don’t have any mental problems — but that should not be justification for hitting a cop.”
He said Haynes “started getting the pints” and “now he’s a little aggressive with the mouth.”
“Now he’s starting to spit at people, started to curse people out,” Jesus said. “The other day he went at the delivery guy like, ‘why you always around me?'”
Cops asked Haynes to move at least twice Sunday, but he returned after officers left.
His scuffle with the cop Thursday, which was caught on video, came after police got complaints he was sitting on the sidewalk drinking and blocking pedestrians.
He allegedly punched the officer and wrestled him to the ground, sending a nearby trashcan flying into the street.
The cop’s partner and other officers eventually subdued Haynes and took him into custody.
Haynes, who has at least 24 prior arrests, was charged with assault on a police officer, resisting arrest, obstructing governmental administration, disorderly conduct and an alcohol violation.
He was cut loose on supervised release Friday, records show.
City judges have begun to release many defendants who are charged with lower-level crimes — in anticipation of a state bail reform measure due to take effect Jan. 1.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Back in the law and order days, for punching a cop, this dirtbag would have had to be hospitalized before he could be taken to jail.
By Ruth Weissmann and Jorge Fitz-Gibbon
New York Post
December 29, 2019
The man who was arrested for sucker-punching an NYPD cop in Brooklyn was back at his old stomping ground Sunday — just two days after being released without bail despite a slew of charges.
Steven Haynes, 40, returned to Livingston and Court streets in Downtown Brooklyn — where police say he slugged and brawled with one of New York’s Finest on Thursday — after being cut loose, irritating local merchants who say he’s been a troublesome presence on the block for months.
“No bail. Three hours, he was back in the same spot,” Michael Vitiello, general manager of an Italian restaurant two doors down, told The Post. “They had a cop sitting there, just watching him. He got his own security ‘cuz he’s a celebrity now.”
“They could have locked him up in Bellevue last night, but they didn’t do it,” he continued. “Now he’s back in the street causing problems.”
Haynes on Sunday was in an out of a Popeye’s fast-food restaurant on the block that’s next door to the Bank of America branch where he allegedly punched the cop on Thursday.
He was photographed by The Post sipping a single-serving shot of Georgi vodka on the corner Sunday.
His quick return to the neighborhood stunned even the local panhandler, whose usual spot is next to Haynes on the sidewalk.
“I’m dumbfounded,” said Jesus, 28. “If it was me I would still be in jail. I’m coherent. I don’t have any mental problems — but that should not be justification for hitting a cop.”
He said Haynes “started getting the pints” and “now he’s a little aggressive with the mouth.”
“Now he’s starting to spit at people, started to curse people out,” Jesus said. “The other day he went at the delivery guy like, ‘why you always around me?'”
Cops asked Haynes to move at least twice Sunday, but he returned after officers left.
His scuffle with the cop Thursday, which was caught on video, came after police got complaints he was sitting on the sidewalk drinking and blocking pedestrians.
He allegedly punched the officer and wrestled him to the ground, sending a nearby trashcan flying into the street.
The cop’s partner and other officers eventually subdued Haynes and took him into custody.
Haynes, who has at least 24 prior arrests, was charged with assault on a police officer, resisting arrest, obstructing governmental administration, disorderly conduct and an alcohol violation.
He was cut loose on supervised release Friday, records show.
City judges have begun to release many defendants who are charged with lower-level crimes — in anticipation of a state bail reform measure due to take effect Jan. 1.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Back in the law and order days, for punching a cop, this dirtbag would have had to be hospitalized before he could be taken to jail.
IF THE SUPREME LEADER IS WRONG, IRAN COULD BE TURNED INTO A GLOWING DUST BOWL
Iran's Khamenei strongly condemns U.S. attacks in Iraq, tells Trump ‘You cannot do a damn thing’
by Parisa Hafezi
Reuters
January 1, 2020
DUBAI -- Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei strongly condemned U.S. attacks on Iran-allied militia group in Iraq, Iranian state TV reported on Wednesday, blaming the United States for the violence in the neighbouring country.
“The Iranian government, nation and I strongly condemn the attacks,” state TV quoted Khamenei as saying.
The U.S. military carried out air strikes on Sunday against the Kataib Hezbollah militia in response to the killing of a U.S. civilian contractor in a Friday rocket attack on an Iraqi military base.
U.S. President Donald Trump accused Iran of orchestrating violent protests at the U.S. embassy in Iraq on Tuesday and said Tehran would be held responsible. Iran has rejected the accusation.
“Again that guy (Trump) has accused Iran for the attacks. You cannot do a damn thing. If you were logical, which you are not, you would see that your crimes in Iraq and other countries have made nations hate you,” Khamenei tweeted.
“If Iran decides to confront a country, we will do that openly ... If anyone threatens our nation’s interests we will fight back ... without any hesitation.”
__________
'You can't do a damn thing!' Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei hits back at Donald Trump after the president threatened to make him pay a 'big price' for US embassy attack
Daily Mail
January 1, 2020
Iran's supreme leader today hit back at the US for deadly strikes on Iraq and warned his country would not hesitate to strike after Donald Trump said Tehran would pay a 'big price' for the assault on the American consulate in Baghdad.
Thousands mobbed the US embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday, breaching the heavily fortified Green Zone and torching the entrance, in protest to the deaths.
President Trump, who deployed 100 Marines to protect the site last night, has accused Tehran of 'orchestrating' the assault.
And on Wednesday the Iran-backing militia attacked the embassy for the second day in a row and the US Marines fired tear gas at the fighters who set part of the embassy on fire again.
It comes after Trump last night tweeted: "Iran will be held fully responsible for lives lost, or damage incurred, at any of our facilities. They will pay a very BIG PRICE! This is not a Warning, it is a Threat."
In response, Khamenei retweeted the post and said: "That guy has tweeted that we (the United States) see Iran responsible for the events in Baghdad and we will respond to Iran. "First of all, you can't do a damn thing! This has nothing to do with Iran," the supreme leader in his televised address.
by Parisa Hafezi
Reuters
January 1, 2020
DUBAI -- Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei strongly condemned U.S. attacks on Iran-allied militia group in Iraq, Iranian state TV reported on Wednesday, blaming the United States for the violence in the neighbouring country.
“The Iranian government, nation and I strongly condemn the attacks,” state TV quoted Khamenei as saying.
The U.S. military carried out air strikes on Sunday against the Kataib Hezbollah militia in response to the killing of a U.S. civilian contractor in a Friday rocket attack on an Iraqi military base.
U.S. President Donald Trump accused Iran of orchestrating violent protests at the U.S. embassy in Iraq on Tuesday and said Tehran would be held responsible. Iran has rejected the accusation.
“Again that guy (Trump) has accused Iran for the attacks. You cannot do a damn thing. If you were logical, which you are not, you would see that your crimes in Iraq and other countries have made nations hate you,” Khamenei tweeted.
“If Iran decides to confront a country, we will do that openly ... If anyone threatens our nation’s interests we will fight back ... without any hesitation.”
__________
'You can't do a damn thing!' Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei hits back at Donald Trump after the president threatened to make him pay a 'big price' for US embassy attack
Daily Mail
January 1, 2020
Iran's supreme leader today hit back at the US for deadly strikes on Iraq and warned his country would not hesitate to strike after Donald Trump said Tehran would pay a 'big price' for the assault on the American consulate in Baghdad.
Thousands mobbed the US embassy in Baghdad on Tuesday, breaching the heavily fortified Green Zone and torching the entrance, in protest to the deaths.
President Trump, who deployed 100 Marines to protect the site last night, has accused Tehran of 'orchestrating' the assault.
And on Wednesday the Iran-backing militia attacked the embassy for the second day in a row and the US Marines fired tear gas at the fighters who set part of the embassy on fire again.
It comes after Trump last night tweeted: "Iran will be held fully responsible for lives lost, or damage incurred, at any of our facilities. They will pay a very BIG PRICE! This is not a Warning, it is a Threat."
In response, Khamenei retweeted the post and said: "That guy has tweeted that we (the United States) see Iran responsible for the events in Baghdad and we will respond to Iran. "First of all, you can't do a damn thing! This has nothing to do with Iran," the supreme leader in his televised address.
IRAN PLAYS ITS TRUMP CARD IN IRAQ
Tehran clearly intends to exploit the "embassy incident" to rally public support in Iraq for expelling American forces from the country, presenting the US president with an incendiary dilemma in an election year
By Oded Granot
JNS
January 1, 2020
Twice in a span of 40 years, the Islamic Republic of Iran has managed to humiliate the world's preeminent superpower by striking at one of its main symbols, and in the same exact way.
In 1979, supporters of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini stormed the American Embassy in Tehran, taking its staff hostage. On Tuesday, on the last day of 2019, members of pro-Iranian militias in Iraq stormed the US Embassy compound in Baghdad – almost taking American hostages again.
In many ways, Tuesday's humiliation was even more stinging. The "Green Zone" in Baghdad, which houses the US embassy along with other embassies and government buildings, is a fortified area, perhaps one of the most guarded compounds on the planet, surrounded by outer and inner security rings of Iraqi soldiers and security personnel. Dozens of roadblocks and checkpoints are positioned on the roads leading to the Green Zone.
In hindsight, it appears the compound's guards stood idly by, didn't try preventing the thousands of protesters from entering through the main gate and allowed them to advance unimpeded toward the US Embassy, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build.
Images broadcast from inside the embassy, where several rooms were torched by the militiamen, showed American soldiers crowded together, besieged and likely frightened over their fate.
President Trump tweeted on Tuesday that Iran was behind the embassy attack, and he wasn't wrong. Over the past half-year, Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, has watched as the Americans have completely failed to respond to a series of provocations he has ordered in retaliation for the economic sanctions imposed on his country – from the lack of response to the targeting of oil tankers in the Persian Gulf and downing of an American drone, to ignoring the bombing of Saudi oil facilities.
Soleimani recently concluded that it was safe to raise the stakes. The rocket attack last week by the pro-Iranian Hezbollah Brigades militia, under direct orders from Tehran, on the American-Iraqi base near Kirkuk – which killed an American defense contractor and wounded two others – was a planned ambush. The American counterstrike, which claimed the lives of 30 militiamen, allowed Soleimani to order the participants of Tuesday's funerals to storm the US Embassy.
In general, Iraq is Soleimani's preferred area of operations in the war he is waging against the US in the Middle East, for several reasons. One is that it allows the Iranians to run their war against the Americans via their proxies, while keeping their hands clean. "It wasn't us who fired the rockets at the military base." Secondly, the thousands of American soldiers in Iraq are a convenient target, because many of them are stationed at bases located within easy range of the pro-Iranian militias.
Thirdly, a conflict with the US on Iraqi soil via the militias beholden to Tehran helps the Iranians strike a wedge between Washington and the Iraqi government. Thus, for instance, because many of the militia fighters who were harmed in the American airstrikes were Iraqi citizens, the outgoing Iraqi prime minister was forced to condemn the American action and the "violation of his country's sovereignty" – without even mentioning the attack on the American base in Kirkuk.
Furthermore, it became clear on Tuesday that Iran intends to exploit the "embassy incident" to rally public support in Iraq for expelling American forces from the country.
To this end, the protesters were instructed to erect tents around the embassy compound and prepare for an extended stay there – which is why Washington quickly demanded their immediate removal by the Iraqi government.
The clash with Iran on Iraqi soil, which escalated on Tuesday, presents the Trump administration with a difficult dilemma. On one hand, maintaining its policy of restraint in the face of Iranian provocations will only encourage the Iranians to carry out even more brazen attacks via their proxies; and if, heaven forbid, Trump ultimately decides to withdraw his forces from Iraq – Iran will celebrate its greatest victory.
On the other hand, any decision by Washington to continue hitting Iran and its proxies militarily, while certainly appropriate, could ensnare the US in a war that Trump, in an election year, really doesn't want.
By Oded Granot
JNS
January 1, 2020
Twice in a span of 40 years, the Islamic Republic of Iran has managed to humiliate the world's preeminent superpower by striking at one of its main symbols, and in the same exact way.
In 1979, supporters of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini stormed the American Embassy in Tehran, taking its staff hostage. On Tuesday, on the last day of 2019, members of pro-Iranian militias in Iraq stormed the US Embassy compound in Baghdad – almost taking American hostages again.
In many ways, Tuesday's humiliation was even more stinging. The "Green Zone" in Baghdad, which houses the US embassy along with other embassies and government buildings, is a fortified area, perhaps one of the most guarded compounds on the planet, surrounded by outer and inner security rings of Iraqi soldiers and security personnel. Dozens of roadblocks and checkpoints are positioned on the roads leading to the Green Zone.
In hindsight, it appears the compound's guards stood idly by, didn't try preventing the thousands of protesters from entering through the main gate and allowed them to advance unimpeded toward the US Embassy, which cost hundreds of millions of dollars to build.
Images broadcast from inside the embassy, where several rooms were torched by the militiamen, showed American soldiers crowded together, besieged and likely frightened over their fate.
President Trump tweeted on Tuesday that Iran was behind the embassy attack, and he wasn't wrong. Over the past half-year, Qassem Soleimani, commander of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, has watched as the Americans have completely failed to respond to a series of provocations he has ordered in retaliation for the economic sanctions imposed on his country – from the lack of response to the targeting of oil tankers in the Persian Gulf and downing of an American drone, to ignoring the bombing of Saudi oil facilities.
Soleimani recently concluded that it was safe to raise the stakes. The rocket attack last week by the pro-Iranian Hezbollah Brigades militia, under direct orders from Tehran, on the American-Iraqi base near Kirkuk – which killed an American defense contractor and wounded two others – was a planned ambush. The American counterstrike, which claimed the lives of 30 militiamen, allowed Soleimani to order the participants of Tuesday's funerals to storm the US Embassy.
In general, Iraq is Soleimani's preferred area of operations in the war he is waging against the US in the Middle East, for several reasons. One is that it allows the Iranians to run their war against the Americans via their proxies, while keeping their hands clean. "It wasn't us who fired the rockets at the military base." Secondly, the thousands of American soldiers in Iraq are a convenient target, because many of them are stationed at bases located within easy range of the pro-Iranian militias.
Thirdly, a conflict with the US on Iraqi soil via the militias beholden to Tehran helps the Iranians strike a wedge between Washington and the Iraqi government. Thus, for instance, because many of the militia fighters who were harmed in the American airstrikes were Iraqi citizens, the outgoing Iraqi prime minister was forced to condemn the American action and the "violation of his country's sovereignty" – without even mentioning the attack on the American base in Kirkuk.
Furthermore, it became clear on Tuesday that Iran intends to exploit the "embassy incident" to rally public support in Iraq for expelling American forces from the country.
To this end, the protesters were instructed to erect tents around the embassy compound and prepare for an extended stay there – which is why Washington quickly demanded their immediate removal by the Iraqi government.
The clash with Iran on Iraqi soil, which escalated on Tuesday, presents the Trump administration with a difficult dilemma. On one hand, maintaining its policy of restraint in the face of Iranian provocations will only encourage the Iranians to carry out even more brazen attacks via their proxies; and if, heaven forbid, Trump ultimately decides to withdraw his forces from Iraq – Iran will celebrate its greatest victory.
On the other hand, any decision by Washington to continue hitting Iran and its proxies militarily, while certainly appropriate, could ensnare the US in a war that Trump, in an election year, really doesn't want.
16 DEAD IN FRIENDLY ZETAS VS. GULF MEXICAN PRISON SOCCER GANE
‘Friendly’ Zetas vs Gulf cartel prison soccer match ends in a bloodbath with 16 dead after fight over a dirty tackle escalated into a gun battle
By Ross Ibbetson
Daily Mail
January 1, 2020
Sixteen inmates have died after a prison riot was sparked by a dirty tackle during a New Year’s Eve soccer clash between two rival cartels in Mexico.
The 'friendly' was taking place at the Cieneguillas jail in the northern state of Zacatecas between the fearsome Gulf and Zetas Cartels.
Firearms were drawn, including long-barreled weapons, when a dispute erupted over a challenge in the penalty box.
The federal forces and the National Guard were mobilized to the prison but it took them more than three hours to stop the bloodbath.
Twenty ambulances arrived and many terrified family members paying a festive visit to their relatives were evacuated.
Fifteen were reported dead at the scene and one further casualty died in hospital.
According to La Jornada the chaos may have been a deliberate scheme by the convicts to create an escape opportunity.
A total of four firearms were confiscated in the aftermath, s ecretary of Public Security Ismael Camberos Hernández said.
The medium security prison houses around 1,000 inmates and had recently undergone a search for contraband and weapons, the authorities said.
Hernández said Monday's search uncovered: 'Seventy-seven bags of marijuana, 18 packages of rice paper, 17 knives, a saw, a 9mm cartridge, three pairs of scissors, nine phones, phone chargers, a phone battery, a memory disk, two hammers, a bottle of liquor and a can of beer jug.'
The Gulf and Zetas Cartels are two of the most powerful crime syndicates in Mexico and are locked in a bitter feud.
The Zetas in fact split from the Gulf Cartel in 2002 resulting in a bloody gang war and the end of the Gulf's dominance.
By Ross Ibbetson
Daily Mail
January 1, 2020
Sixteen inmates have died after a prison riot was sparked by a dirty tackle during a New Year’s Eve soccer clash between two rival cartels in Mexico.
The 'friendly' was taking place at the Cieneguillas jail in the northern state of Zacatecas between the fearsome Gulf and Zetas Cartels.
Firearms were drawn, including long-barreled weapons, when a dispute erupted over a challenge in the penalty box.
The federal forces and the National Guard were mobilized to the prison but it took them more than three hours to stop the bloodbath.
Twenty ambulances arrived and many terrified family members paying a festive visit to their relatives were evacuated.
Fifteen were reported dead at the scene and one further casualty died in hospital.
According to La Jornada the chaos may have been a deliberate scheme by the convicts to create an escape opportunity.
A total of four firearms were confiscated in the aftermath, s ecretary of Public Security Ismael Camberos Hernández said.
The medium security prison houses around 1,000 inmates and had recently undergone a search for contraband and weapons, the authorities said.
Hernández said Monday's search uncovered: 'Seventy-seven bags of marijuana, 18 packages of rice paper, 17 knives, a saw, a 9mm cartridge, three pairs of scissors, nine phones, phone chargers, a phone battery, a memory disk, two hammers, a bottle of liquor and a can of beer jug.'
The Gulf and Zetas Cartels are two of the most powerful crime syndicates in Mexico and are locked in a bitter feud.
The Zetas in fact split from the Gulf Cartel in 2002 resulting in a bloody gang war and the end of the Gulf's dominance.
WHY ABOLISHING BAIL FOR SOME CRIMES HAS LAW ENFORCEMENT ON EDGE
Democrats are hailing the new law, saying New York’s old bail system punished the poor. Critics say it will put criminals back on the streets
By Jesse McKinley, Alan Feuer and Luis Ferré-SadurnÃ
The New York Times
December 31, 2019
ALBANY, N.Y. — When Democrats pushed through a law last spring that sharply curtailed cash bail for nonviolent defendants, they hailed it as a landmark measure to stop the poor from being jailed before trial simply because they had few resources.
Now, as the rules take effect on Jan. 1, a backlash has arisen among numerous district attorneys, judges, county legislators and law enforcement officials, who are sounding alarms and raising the specter of dangerous criminals on the loose. Some Republicans are using the issue to paint Democrats as soft on crime.
“Estimates of what’s going to happen have ranged from ‘Much Ado About Nothing’ to something like the panic in the opening scene in ‘Escape From New York,’” said Greg Berman, the director of the Center of Court Innovation, a nonprofit group. “There are still a lot of unknowns.”
While New Jersey, California, Illinois and other states have limited the use of bail, New York is one of the few states to abolish bail for many crimes without also giving state judges the discretion to consider whether a person poses a threat to public safety in deciding whether to hold them.
That decision has many prosecutors and police officials worried the changes will have unintended consequences.
“When you have individuals that are standing before a judge and immediately being released, and essentially everyone in the room knows that this person is a danger to the community, I think we need to look at the system and make sure that judges can make common-sense decisions,” the New York City police commissioner, Dermot F. Shea, said in a radio interview on 1010 WINS in early December.
Under the new law, judges will no longer be able to set bail for a long list of misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies, including stalking, assault without serious injury, burglary, many drug offenses, and even some kinds of arson and robbery.
Thousands of people currently in jail awaiting trial across the state will be automatically released, and about 90 percent of new defendants each year in New York will remain free as their cases move through the courts. Most cities and counties will rely on supervised release programs — in which officials stay in touch with defendants through phone calls or meetings — to ensure people show up to court.
In New York City alone, 20,000 more people would have been released in 2018 under the law, according to a report from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
Bail is a method to ensure people return to court that requires defendants to post cash or a bond, which they forfeit if they fail to show up for proceedings. Since the 1970s, New York judges have been able to consider only the risk of flight in setting bail, not public safety. The amount can range from a few hundred dollars to millions.
Opponents of cash bail have long argued that it criminalizes poverty, tilting the justice system in favor of wealthy defendants. In New York, the inequities of the system were crystallized when a Bronx teenager named Kalief Browder spent three years on Rikers Island because his family could not raise $3,000, only to have charges dropped in 2013 for lack of evidence. He later took his own life.
After his death, the movement to abolish cash bail grew stronger, and last year the governor and the Democratic-led State Legislature passed the new law, which bans imposing bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies.
The rules require judges to impose the “least restrictive conditions” that will assure people return to court. Those include supervised release, travel restrictions and, for some serious offenses, electronic monitoring.
In recent weeks, courts around the state have begun releasing batches of defendants from jails under the new rules to avoid a rush as the new year starts, and the law’s opponents have pounced on recent cases in which people out on bail committed crimes as harbingers of the future.
Supporters of the bail law say critics are being alarmist: Judges will still be able to set bail for almost all violent felonies, they point out, and the old law unfairly discriminated against the poor. Neither Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo nor Democratic legislative leaders have given any sign that they might delay or significantly alter the law, despite the intensifying opposition.
“I know change is scary, change is hard,” said Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins, the Westchester County Democrat who leads Albany’s upper chamber. “But, again, we are talking about justice.”
Backers say the new bail system will pay dividends by allowing people awaiting trial to remain in their homes with their families and jobs — all elements of maintaining stability in low-income communities. Moreover, they argue that law enforcement in New York — a liberal stronghold — should be embracing the changes, rather than fighting them.
Prosecutors and law enforcement officials say the law takes a critical decision away from judges. Even though under the old law judges were supposed to consider only the risk of flight in setting bail, as a practical matter judges still had the discretion to set a higher bail for people with long arrest records or who showed other signs they might commit another crime.
Some states, like New Jersey, that have abolished or curtailed the use of cash bail have established a system for assessing the risk that a defendant might commit another crime, and allow judges to hold people to protect public safety. But New York simply eliminated bail for most nonviolent crimes.
“District attorneys do not believe in general that people should be held in jail just because they can’t afford to get out,” said David Hoovler, the district attorney in Orange County and president of the District Attorneys Association of New York. “But people who have done bad things and are repeat offenders will be getting out.”
Republicans facing elections next year have begun to wield the issue as a cudgel against Democrats. “I’m already campaigning on it,” Senator John J. Flanagan, the Republican minority leader, said at a news conference in mid-December in the State Capitol. “And I think we have an obligation to do so.”
On Tuesday, Mr. Flanagan and other Republicans on Long Island — where the G.O.P. lost four seats in 2018 and, with them, control of the State Senate — intensified their criticism. They decried recent cases in which defendants were set free under the new rules, including Tiffany Harris, who was arrested a day after being charged with a bias attack on several Orthodox Jewish women in Brooklyn.
“This is not what justice looks like,” Mr. Flanagan said.
Senator Michael Gianaris, a Queens Democrat who is the deputy majority leader, said Republicans’ critiques of the new system were “intentionally misleading or ignorant.”
“We are taught that we have a system of innocent till proven guilty, but it was functioning as guilty till proven rich,” he said. “We fixed that.”
Incumbent Democrats in some suburban districts are also being hammered over the issue by law enforcement groups on social media. Some, like Senator Todd Kaminsky of Nassau County, have responded by proposing bills to amend the law, making it possible to set bail for more offenses. For some types of sex offenders, Mr. Kaminsky, a former federal prosecutor, is seeking to add public lewdness and exposure to the list.
Mr. Kaminsky said while he understands “the unfairness of a cash bail system that favors wealthier offenders,” some the offenses now eligible for release “are as serious, if not more serious, as felonies under cash bail reform that remain part of the criminal justice system.”
Democratic lawmakers privately worry the pushback will hinder their pursuit of a raft of additional criminal justice bills when they return to the State Capitol in January, including a measure to allow people with felony convictions to vote and serve on a jury.
Mr. Hoovler and other county prosecutors argue that the legislature rushed passage and implementation of the law.
Others, including the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., have faulted New York State for not providing more money to create or expand programs that will track defendants who are free awaiting trail.
A few liberal prosecutors, including the Brooklyn district attorney, Eric Gonzalez, have embraced the changes, pointing to states that saw lower crime rates after they eliminated cash bail.
But many prosecutors and police officials worry that some defendants released under the new rules will continue to commit crimes, and a few may try to intimidate potential witnesses. They point out that the crimes for which people will not have to post bail includes drug sales.
“Someone who deals in drugs is not someone who, once arrested, will just decide to give it up and find legal employment,” said Patrick Swanson, the district attorney in Chautauqua County, on the state’s western border. “They will continue to sell drugs.”
Advocates for the law have moved to fend off the criticism. In early December, New Yorkers United for Justice, a group that has spent more than $2 million to champion the law, hosted dozens of Democratic lawmakers for a two-day retreat in Westchester County to discuss how to defend the changes. The group also created a television and mail campaign featuring Mr. Gonzalez.
“These reforms passed in late March,” said Khalil A. Cumberbatch, the group’s chief strategist. “The district attorneys across the state who are in opposition could have begun preparing, as opposed to last-minute fear-stoking.”
By Jesse McKinley, Alan Feuer and Luis Ferré-SadurnÃ
The New York Times
December 31, 2019
ALBANY, N.Y. — When Democrats pushed through a law last spring that sharply curtailed cash bail for nonviolent defendants, they hailed it as a landmark measure to stop the poor from being jailed before trial simply because they had few resources.
Now, as the rules take effect on Jan. 1, a backlash has arisen among numerous district attorneys, judges, county legislators and law enforcement officials, who are sounding alarms and raising the specter of dangerous criminals on the loose. Some Republicans are using the issue to paint Democrats as soft on crime.
“Estimates of what’s going to happen have ranged from ‘Much Ado About Nothing’ to something like the panic in the opening scene in ‘Escape From New York,’” said Greg Berman, the director of the Center of Court Innovation, a nonprofit group. “There are still a lot of unknowns.”
While New Jersey, California, Illinois and other states have limited the use of bail, New York is one of the few states to abolish bail for many crimes without also giving state judges the discretion to consider whether a person poses a threat to public safety in deciding whether to hold them.
That decision has many prosecutors and police officials worried the changes will have unintended consequences.
“When you have individuals that are standing before a judge and immediately being released, and essentially everyone in the room knows that this person is a danger to the community, I think we need to look at the system and make sure that judges can make common-sense decisions,” the New York City police commissioner, Dermot F. Shea, said in a radio interview on 1010 WINS in early December.
Under the new law, judges will no longer be able to set bail for a long list of misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies, including stalking, assault without serious injury, burglary, many drug offenses, and even some kinds of arson and robbery.
Thousands of people currently in jail awaiting trial across the state will be automatically released, and about 90 percent of new defendants each year in New York will remain free as their cases move through the courts. Most cities and counties will rely on supervised release programs — in which officials stay in touch with defendants through phone calls or meetings — to ensure people show up to court.
In New York City alone, 20,000 more people would have been released in 2018 under the law, according to a report from the John Jay College of Criminal Justice.
Bail is a method to ensure people return to court that requires defendants to post cash or a bond, which they forfeit if they fail to show up for proceedings. Since the 1970s, New York judges have been able to consider only the risk of flight in setting bail, not public safety. The amount can range from a few hundred dollars to millions.
Opponents of cash bail have long argued that it criminalizes poverty, tilting the justice system in favor of wealthy defendants. In New York, the inequities of the system were crystallized when a Bronx teenager named Kalief Browder spent three years on Rikers Island because his family could not raise $3,000, only to have charges dropped in 2013 for lack of evidence. He later took his own life.
After his death, the movement to abolish cash bail grew stronger, and last year the governor and the Democratic-led State Legislature passed the new law, which bans imposing bail for most misdemeanors and nonviolent felonies.
The rules require judges to impose the “least restrictive conditions” that will assure people return to court. Those include supervised release, travel restrictions and, for some serious offenses, electronic monitoring.
In recent weeks, courts around the state have begun releasing batches of defendants from jails under the new rules to avoid a rush as the new year starts, and the law’s opponents have pounced on recent cases in which people out on bail committed crimes as harbingers of the future.
Supporters of the bail law say critics are being alarmist: Judges will still be able to set bail for almost all violent felonies, they point out, and the old law unfairly discriminated against the poor. Neither Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo nor Democratic legislative leaders have given any sign that they might delay or significantly alter the law, despite the intensifying opposition.
“I know change is scary, change is hard,” said Senator Andrea Stewart-Cousins, the Westchester County Democrat who leads Albany’s upper chamber. “But, again, we are talking about justice.”
Backers say the new bail system will pay dividends by allowing people awaiting trial to remain in their homes with their families and jobs — all elements of maintaining stability in low-income communities. Moreover, they argue that law enforcement in New York — a liberal stronghold — should be embracing the changes, rather than fighting them.
Prosecutors and law enforcement officials say the law takes a critical decision away from judges. Even though under the old law judges were supposed to consider only the risk of flight in setting bail, as a practical matter judges still had the discretion to set a higher bail for people with long arrest records or who showed other signs they might commit another crime.
Some states, like New Jersey, that have abolished or curtailed the use of cash bail have established a system for assessing the risk that a defendant might commit another crime, and allow judges to hold people to protect public safety. But New York simply eliminated bail for most nonviolent crimes.
“District attorneys do not believe in general that people should be held in jail just because they can’t afford to get out,” said David Hoovler, the district attorney in Orange County and president of the District Attorneys Association of New York. “But people who have done bad things and are repeat offenders will be getting out.”
Republicans facing elections next year have begun to wield the issue as a cudgel against Democrats. “I’m already campaigning on it,” Senator John J. Flanagan, the Republican minority leader, said at a news conference in mid-December in the State Capitol. “And I think we have an obligation to do so.”
On Tuesday, Mr. Flanagan and other Republicans on Long Island — where the G.O.P. lost four seats in 2018 and, with them, control of the State Senate — intensified their criticism. They decried recent cases in which defendants were set free under the new rules, including Tiffany Harris, who was arrested a day after being charged with a bias attack on several Orthodox Jewish women in Brooklyn.
“This is not what justice looks like,” Mr. Flanagan said.
Senator Michael Gianaris, a Queens Democrat who is the deputy majority leader, said Republicans’ critiques of the new system were “intentionally misleading or ignorant.”
“We are taught that we have a system of innocent till proven guilty, but it was functioning as guilty till proven rich,” he said. “We fixed that.”
Incumbent Democrats in some suburban districts are also being hammered over the issue by law enforcement groups on social media. Some, like Senator Todd Kaminsky of Nassau County, have responded by proposing bills to amend the law, making it possible to set bail for more offenses. For some types of sex offenders, Mr. Kaminsky, a former federal prosecutor, is seeking to add public lewdness and exposure to the list.
Mr. Kaminsky said while he understands “the unfairness of a cash bail system that favors wealthier offenders,” some the offenses now eligible for release “are as serious, if not more serious, as felonies under cash bail reform that remain part of the criminal justice system.”
Democratic lawmakers privately worry the pushback will hinder their pursuit of a raft of additional criminal justice bills when they return to the State Capitol in January, including a measure to allow people with felony convictions to vote and serve on a jury.
Mr. Hoovler and other county prosecutors argue that the legislature rushed passage and implementation of the law.
Others, including the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus R. Vance Jr., have faulted New York State for not providing more money to create or expand programs that will track defendants who are free awaiting trail.
A few liberal prosecutors, including the Brooklyn district attorney, Eric Gonzalez, have embraced the changes, pointing to states that saw lower crime rates after they eliminated cash bail.
But many prosecutors and police officials worry that some defendants released under the new rules will continue to commit crimes, and a few may try to intimidate potential witnesses. They point out that the crimes for which people will not have to post bail includes drug sales.
“Someone who deals in drugs is not someone who, once arrested, will just decide to give it up and find legal employment,” said Patrick Swanson, the district attorney in Chautauqua County, on the state’s western border. “They will continue to sell drugs.”
Advocates for the law have moved to fend off the criticism. In early December, New Yorkers United for Justice, a group that has spent more than $2 million to champion the law, hosted dozens of Democratic lawmakers for a two-day retreat in Westchester County to discuss how to defend the changes. The group also created a television and mail campaign featuring Mr. Gonzalez.
“These reforms passed in late March,” said Khalil A. Cumberbatch, the group’s chief strategist. “The district attorneys across the state who are in opposition could have begun preparing, as opposed to last-minute fear-stoking.”
ABOLISH THE POLICE?
A dangerous new idea is inspiring some criminal-justice activists
By Christopher F. Rufo
City Journal
December 26, 2019
The latest call to action from some criminal-justice activists: “Abolish the police.” From the streets of Chicago to the city council of Seattle, and in the pages of academic journals ranging from the Cardozo Law Review to the Harvard Law Review and of mainstream publications from the Boston Review to Rolling Stone, advocates and activists are building a case not just to reform policing—viewed as an oppressive, violent, and racist institution—but to do away with it altogether. When I first heard this slogan, I assumed that it was a figure of speech, used to legitimize more expansive criminal-justice reform. But after reading the academic and activist literature, I realized that “abolish the police” is a concrete policy goal. The abolitionists want to dismantle municipal police departments and see “police officers disappearing from the streets.”
One might dismiss such proclamations as part of a fringe movement, but advocates of these radical views are gaining political momentum in numerous cities. In Seattle, socialist city council candidate Shaun Scott, who ran on a “police abolition” platform, came within 1,386 votes of winning elected office. During his campaign, he argued that the city must “[disinvest] from the police state” and “build towards a world where nobody is criminalized for being poor.” At a debate hosted by the Seattle Police Officers Guild, Scott blasted “so-called officers” for their “deep and entrenched institutional ties to racism” that produced an “apparatus of overaggressive and racist policing that has emerged to steer many black and brown bodies back into, in essence, a form of slavery.” Another Seattle police abolitionist, Kirsten Harris-Talley, served briefly as an appointed city councilwoman. Both Scott and Harris-Talley enjoy broad support from the city’s progressive establishment.
What would abolishing police mean as a practical policy matter? Nothing very practical. In The Nation, Mychal Denzel Smith argues that police should be replaced by “full social, economic, and political equality.” Harris-Talley, meantime, has traced policing’s origins back to slavery. “How do you reform an institution that from its inception was made to control, maim, condemn, and kill people?” she asks. “Reform it back to what?” If cities can eliminate poverty through affordable housing and “investing in community,” she believes, the police will become unnecessary. Others argue that cities must simply “help people resolve conflicts through peace circles and restorative justice programs.”
Police abolitionists believe that they stand at the vanguard of a new idea, but this strain of thought dates to the eighteenth-century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who believed that stripping away the corruptions of civilization would liberate the goodness of man. What police abolitionists fail to acknowledge is the problem of evil. No matter how many “restorative” programs it administers, even a benevolent centralized state cannot extinguish the risks of illness, violence, and disorder. Contrary to the utopian vision of Rousseau and his intellectual descendants, chaos is not freedom; order is not slavery. In the modern world, civilization cannot be rolled back without dire consequences.
If anything like police abolition ever occurred, it’s easy to predict what would happen next. In the subsequent vacuum of physical power, wealthy neighborhoods would deploy private police forces, and poor neighborhoods would organize around criminal gangs—deepening structural inequalities and harming the very people that the police abolitionists say they want to help. Even Scott, when pressed by a local journalist about how he would respond to a shooting in his district, conceded that “we live in a world where it’s not possible to turn anywhere for help on big questions like this but to the police force.”
Reform the police? Sure. Abolish them? Never.
By Christopher F. Rufo
City Journal
December 26, 2019
The latest call to action from some criminal-justice activists: “Abolish the police.” From the streets of Chicago to the city council of Seattle, and in the pages of academic journals ranging from the Cardozo Law Review to the Harvard Law Review and of mainstream publications from the Boston Review to Rolling Stone, advocates and activists are building a case not just to reform policing—viewed as an oppressive, violent, and racist institution—but to do away with it altogether. When I first heard this slogan, I assumed that it was a figure of speech, used to legitimize more expansive criminal-justice reform. But after reading the academic and activist literature, I realized that “abolish the police” is a concrete policy goal. The abolitionists want to dismantle municipal police departments and see “police officers disappearing from the streets.”
One might dismiss such proclamations as part of a fringe movement, but advocates of these radical views are gaining political momentum in numerous cities. In Seattle, socialist city council candidate Shaun Scott, who ran on a “police abolition” platform, came within 1,386 votes of winning elected office. During his campaign, he argued that the city must “[disinvest] from the police state” and “build towards a world where nobody is criminalized for being poor.” At a debate hosted by the Seattle Police Officers Guild, Scott blasted “so-called officers” for their “deep and entrenched institutional ties to racism” that produced an “apparatus of overaggressive and racist policing that has emerged to steer many black and brown bodies back into, in essence, a form of slavery.” Another Seattle police abolitionist, Kirsten Harris-Talley, served briefly as an appointed city councilwoman. Both Scott and Harris-Talley enjoy broad support from the city’s progressive establishment.
What would abolishing police mean as a practical policy matter? Nothing very practical. In The Nation, Mychal Denzel Smith argues that police should be replaced by “full social, economic, and political equality.” Harris-Talley, meantime, has traced policing’s origins back to slavery. “How do you reform an institution that from its inception was made to control, maim, condemn, and kill people?” she asks. “Reform it back to what?” If cities can eliminate poverty through affordable housing and “investing in community,” she believes, the police will become unnecessary. Others argue that cities must simply “help people resolve conflicts through peace circles and restorative justice programs.”
Police abolitionists believe that they stand at the vanguard of a new idea, but this strain of thought dates to the eighteenth-century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who believed that stripping away the corruptions of civilization would liberate the goodness of man. What police abolitionists fail to acknowledge is the problem of evil. No matter how many “restorative” programs it administers, even a benevolent centralized state cannot extinguish the risks of illness, violence, and disorder. Contrary to the utopian vision of Rousseau and his intellectual descendants, chaos is not freedom; order is not slavery. In the modern world, civilization cannot be rolled back without dire consequences.
If anything like police abolition ever occurred, it’s easy to predict what would happen next. In the subsequent vacuum of physical power, wealthy neighborhoods would deploy private police forces, and poor neighborhoods would organize around criminal gangs—deepening structural inequalities and harming the very people that the police abolitionists say they want to help. Even Scott, when pressed by a local journalist about how he would respond to a shooting in his district, conceded that “we live in a world where it’s not possible to turn anywhere for help on big questions like this but to the police force.”
Reform the police? Sure. Abolish them? Never.
NEW YORK’S THICKENING CLOUD OF VIOLENT CRIME
A surge in horrific incidents is unsettling the city—but elected officials keep making it easier for criminals to operate
By Seth Barron
City Journal
December 30, 2019
As we approach 2020, disaster looms over public safety in New York. A surge in violent crimes has shocked the public, from the midnight slaughter of four street sleepers by a mentally ill homeless drug addict; to the late-afternoon murder of a Barnard student, apparently by three young teenagers; to a spate of anti-Semitic attacks, climaxing in the Harlem arrest of a man who chopped his way with a machete into the upstate home of a Monsey rabbi celebrating the penultimate night of Hanukkah.
Grafton Thomas, perpetrator of the Monsey attack, fled to New York City and was almost immediately apprehended. His car’s license plate number had been reported and, after he crossed the George Washington Bridge, the NYPD’s automated “license-plate reader” system registered his presence. He was arrested within 15 minutes of entering the city.
But if New York’s city council has its way, surveillance tools like the LPR will be rendered less effective, if not useless. The Public Oversight of Surveillance Technology Act enjoys the support of Speaker Corey Johnson and the co-sponsorship of most of the city council, which held a long-awaited hearing on the bill only two weeks ago. In the name of “transparency,” the POST Act would require the NYPD to disclose and publish the details of how such technology works. A council report complains that “if a license plate of a passing car matches a ‘plate of interest,’ the system sends an alert. Advocates believe that these license plate readers raise privacy concerns because every license plate is scanned.” The NYPD has warned that the POST Act would create “a one-stop shopping guide” for criminals to evade scrutiny.
But judging by the state’s evolving criminal-justice landscape, empowering criminals seems like the goal. New York State is preparing to roll out sweeping criminal-justice reforms that will prevent police and the courts from detaining people arrested and charged with serious offenses. The new rules on bail remove judicial discretion from a remarkably wide array of charges. No one charged with a misdemeanor, for example, can be held on bail, regardless of his criminal history, gang affiliation, or evident disposition for committing more crimes. Misdemeanors in New York include assault in the third degree, causing “physical injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument,” and reckless endangerment in the first degree, when, “evincing a depraved indifference to human life,” someone “recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person.”
In advance of January 1, when the new reforms officially come into effect, judges and prosecutors statewide have begun easing into the new regime by proactively letting remanded prisoners out of jail and by releasing newly arrested serious criminals on their own recognizance. For instance, on Friday, Tiffany Harris of Brooklyn slapped three Jewish women in the face, yelling anti-Semitic imprecations. She was arraigned on Saturday and released without bail; she was arrested for assaulting someone else on Sunday. On Saturday, Steven Haynes, a Brooklyn man lying on the sidewalk, attacked and pummeled a police officer who asked him to get up. Charged with a series of crimes, Haynes was released by a judge and was back on the street within a few hours. In Rockland County—where the Hanukkah machete attack occurred—Jorge Flores-Villalba, an unlicensed driver, killed a pedestrian on Christmas Eve and fled the scene. He was released without bail on Christmas Day.
Police and other critics of the hastily enacted and sloppy criminal-justice reforms have been warning New Yorkers for months that the scene is being set for mayhem. But neither Governor Andrew Cuomo—who now promises to enact “domestic terrorism” legislation in response to the Monsey attacks—nor the legislature have moved to fix the new bail laws. Mayor Bill de Blasio has introduced a plan to offer incentives like gift cards or baseball tickets to induce offenders to return to court. “In a world where we want speedier trials and we want the justice system to work, if small incentives are part of what actually makes it work, then that’s a smart policy,” said the mayor. The day after the Monsey attack—perpetrated, like almost all the recent anti-Semitic violence in New York, by an African-American—de Blasio blamed President Trump. This echoed his June comments that “the right-wing movement” represents “the violent threat” of contemporary anti-Semitism.
Mayor de Blasio expresses the defeatism and denial that has infected the state’s entire political class regarding public safety. Having accepted the bogus argument that minority communities are disproportionately policed and “criminalized,” our leaders have seemingly surrendered the will to protect the communities—largely these same minority neighborhoods—most ravaged by crime. The only option left is to pursue the debunked logic that policing is driven by implicit racial bias, and that crime is caused by inadequate funding of social programs.
Governor Cuomo’s recent proposal to hire 500 new cops to patrol the subway system—where farebeating has become endemic, following local prosecutors’ announcement that they would no longer pursue fare-evasion cases—was met by fierce resistance from advocates and elected officials who decried it as racist. The New York Times called Cuomo’s plan “a blow to the fragile public trust that officials had finally earned in their promising efforts to turn around New York’s subway system,” but said nothing about anti-police demonstrations, resounding with explicit calls for violence against cops, focused around police activity in the subway system.
Mayor de Blasio and his supporters keep repeating that “New York is the safest big city in the nation.” It certainly was when he took over in 2014. But as we head into the last two years of his mayoralty, more and more of the people who ride its subways and walk its streets no longer feel safe. And Orthodox Jews, whose distinctive attire and cohesive communities make them eminently visible, presently find themselves at the front lines of the disintegration of public order.
By Seth Barron
City Journal
December 30, 2019
As we approach 2020, disaster looms over public safety in New York. A surge in violent crimes has shocked the public, from the midnight slaughter of four street sleepers by a mentally ill homeless drug addict; to the late-afternoon murder of a Barnard student, apparently by three young teenagers; to a spate of anti-Semitic attacks, climaxing in the Harlem arrest of a man who chopped his way with a machete into the upstate home of a Monsey rabbi celebrating the penultimate night of Hanukkah.
Grafton Thomas, perpetrator of the Monsey attack, fled to New York City and was almost immediately apprehended. His car’s license plate number had been reported and, after he crossed the George Washington Bridge, the NYPD’s automated “license-plate reader” system registered his presence. He was arrested within 15 minutes of entering the city.
But if New York’s city council has its way, surveillance tools like the LPR will be rendered less effective, if not useless. The Public Oversight of Surveillance Technology Act enjoys the support of Speaker Corey Johnson and the co-sponsorship of most of the city council, which held a long-awaited hearing on the bill only two weeks ago. In the name of “transparency,” the POST Act would require the NYPD to disclose and publish the details of how such technology works. A council report complains that “if a license plate of a passing car matches a ‘plate of interest,’ the system sends an alert. Advocates believe that these license plate readers raise privacy concerns because every license plate is scanned.” The NYPD has warned that the POST Act would create “a one-stop shopping guide” for criminals to evade scrutiny.
But judging by the state’s evolving criminal-justice landscape, empowering criminals seems like the goal. New York State is preparing to roll out sweeping criminal-justice reforms that will prevent police and the courts from detaining people arrested and charged with serious offenses. The new rules on bail remove judicial discretion from a remarkably wide array of charges. No one charged with a misdemeanor, for example, can be held on bail, regardless of his criminal history, gang affiliation, or evident disposition for committing more crimes. Misdemeanors in New York include assault in the third degree, causing “physical injury to another person by means of a deadly weapon or a dangerous instrument,” and reckless endangerment in the first degree, when, “evincing a depraved indifference to human life,” someone “recklessly engages in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person.”
In advance of January 1, when the new reforms officially come into effect, judges and prosecutors statewide have begun easing into the new regime by proactively letting remanded prisoners out of jail and by releasing newly arrested serious criminals on their own recognizance. For instance, on Friday, Tiffany Harris of Brooklyn slapped three Jewish women in the face, yelling anti-Semitic imprecations. She was arraigned on Saturday and released without bail; she was arrested for assaulting someone else on Sunday. On Saturday, Steven Haynes, a Brooklyn man lying on the sidewalk, attacked and pummeled a police officer who asked him to get up. Charged with a series of crimes, Haynes was released by a judge and was back on the street within a few hours. In Rockland County—where the Hanukkah machete attack occurred—Jorge Flores-Villalba, an unlicensed driver, killed a pedestrian on Christmas Eve and fled the scene. He was released without bail on Christmas Day.
Police and other critics of the hastily enacted and sloppy criminal-justice reforms have been warning New Yorkers for months that the scene is being set for mayhem. But neither Governor Andrew Cuomo—who now promises to enact “domestic terrorism” legislation in response to the Monsey attacks—nor the legislature have moved to fix the new bail laws. Mayor Bill de Blasio has introduced a plan to offer incentives like gift cards or baseball tickets to induce offenders to return to court. “In a world where we want speedier trials and we want the justice system to work, if small incentives are part of what actually makes it work, then that’s a smart policy,” said the mayor. The day after the Monsey attack—perpetrated, like almost all the recent anti-Semitic violence in New York, by an African-American—de Blasio blamed President Trump. This echoed his June comments that “the right-wing movement” represents “the violent threat” of contemporary anti-Semitism.
Mayor de Blasio expresses the defeatism and denial that has infected the state’s entire political class regarding public safety. Having accepted the bogus argument that minority communities are disproportionately policed and “criminalized,” our leaders have seemingly surrendered the will to protect the communities—largely these same minority neighborhoods—most ravaged by crime. The only option left is to pursue the debunked logic that policing is driven by implicit racial bias, and that crime is caused by inadequate funding of social programs.
Governor Cuomo’s recent proposal to hire 500 new cops to patrol the subway system—where farebeating has become endemic, following local prosecutors’ announcement that they would no longer pursue fare-evasion cases—was met by fierce resistance from advocates and elected officials who decried it as racist. The New York Times called Cuomo’s plan “a blow to the fragile public trust that officials had finally earned in their promising efforts to turn around New York’s subway system,” but said nothing about anti-police demonstrations, resounding with explicit calls for violence against cops, focused around police activity in the subway system.
Mayor de Blasio and his supporters keep repeating that “New York is the safest big city in the nation.” It certainly was when he took over in 2014. But as we head into the last two years of his mayoralty, more and more of the people who ride its subways and walk its streets no longer feel safe. And Orthodox Jews, whose distinctive attire and cohesive communities make them eminently visible, presently find themselves at the front lines of the disintegration of public order.
Wednesday, January 01, 2020
UNHAPPY HANUKKAH
Josef Neumann was among the five Orthodox Jews injured in the Hanukkah machete attack
The weapon used in the attack penetrated Neumann's skull and impacted his brain. He also suffered three cuts to the head, a cut to his neck and his right arm was shattered. Doctors say it is unlikely that he will regain consciousness.
The weapon used in the attack penetrated Neumann's skull and impacted his brain. He also suffered three cuts to the head, a cut to his neck and his right arm was shattered. Doctors say it is unlikely that he will regain consciousness.
NOTABLE 100TH ANNIVERSARY
by Bob Walsh
Tomorrow marks the 100th anniversary of the birth of Isaac Asimov. Many readers in my generation (prehistoric) cut their SciFi teeth on I-Robot and the Foundation series.
Asimov was born in Russia, but corrected that error at the age of three. He taught himself to read before entering kindergarten and entered college at 15. He was a successful professional writer at age 18. He wrote an average of ten books a year and edited books as well. Asimov authored books that occupy nine of the ten basic subclassifications of the Dewey Decimal System. He shuffled off to whatever comes next about 18 years ago and left a rich legacy behind.
There are worse things you could say about a guy.
Tomorrow marks the 100th anniversary of the birth of Isaac Asimov. Many readers in my generation (prehistoric) cut their SciFi teeth on I-Robot and the Foundation series.
Asimov was born in Russia, but corrected that error at the age of three. He taught himself to read before entering kindergarten and entered college at 15. He was a successful professional writer at age 18. He wrote an average of ten books a year and edited books as well. Asimov authored books that occupy nine of the ten basic subclassifications of the Dewey Decimal System. He shuffled off to whatever comes next about 18 years ago and left a rich legacy behind.
There are worse things you could say about a guy.
A SANDERS PRESIDENCY WOULD BE AN UNPRECEDENTED NIGHTMARE FOR ISRAEL AND AMERICAN JEWRY
Will Bernie Sanders become the first Jewish president?
By Jonathan S. Tobin
JNS
December 31, 2019
We’re still more than a month away from the first actual votes being cast in the Democratic presidential race. But an analysis piece published on the influential Politico website last week reminded observers of a possibility that many are ignoring: Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders could win and ultimately become the nation’s first Jewish president.
While generations of American Jews have dreamed of a day when one of their own won the White House, a Sanders’ presidency would actually be an unprecedented nightmare for Israel and Jewish interests.
The Politico article reported that Sanders’s resiliency has impressed Democratic insiders. Despite suffering a heart attack in October – something that not only sidelined him for a time, but also reminded voters that he is 78 years old – Sanders has remained in the top tier of contenders.
While acknowledging that he has won both the affection and loyalty of much of the party’s left-wing base, not least for his strong showing while opposing Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2016, a lot of pundits disparage his chances. They say that despite the party’s clear tilt to the left since the victory of President Donald Trump, Sanders is too radical and would easily be beaten in November.
Yet Sanders has not faded the way some other candidates who were once highly touted have done in the past year. He is currently in second place in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, trailing only former Vice President Joe Biden. He is a threat to win three out of the first four early-voting states, with the average of polls showing him leading in New Hampshire, a close second in Iowa and in contention in Nevada. That means that although Biden remains the frontrunner and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s stock is rising (while that of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is falling), it would be foolish to assume that Sanders can’t be the Democratic nominee.
Though his extreme positions horrify moderates, Sanders is utterly authentic and, despite his long tenure in Congress, can’t be accused of being part of the establishment, as can be said of Biden. Indeed, being a Socialist outlier makes him seem more genuine to voters who are tired of conventional politicians, the same factor that helped elect Trump.
Moreover, his radicalism has won him both affection and loyalty from those in the Democratic base who think that choosing the candidate conventional wisdom deems more electable will be just as much of a disaster for their party in 2020 with Biden as it was when Hillary Clinton was the nominee.
Sanders’s irascible demeanor also endears him to primary voters, much as it did when unelected superdelegates and party rules that favored Clinton were needed to beat him in 2016. On top of that, the Democrats’ proportional voting rules that eliminate winner-take-all outcomes will ensure that Bernie remains a factor even if he loses the early states.
His capturing the Democratic Party in 2020 might still be less likely than the scenarios predicting a win for Biden, or a turn of events that would allow Buttigieg or even a second-tier contender to catch fire and win the nomination. But the Politico analysis does require an evaluation of what a Sanders’s nomination or presidency (despite the GOP’s open rooting for Sanders to be their opponent, matchup polls with Trump predict such a race would be a tossup) would mean for Jewish interests and Israel.
Though he is Jewish and has repeatedly said that he supports Israel’s existence, there is also no doubt that Sanders is the Democratic contender who is the most critical of Israeli policy and the most sympathetic to the Palestinians. Though other Democrats may agree with his scorn for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, most of them would hesitate to hurl epithets like "racist" at him, as Sanders has done.
Every one of the other Democratic candidates would reinstate the dangerous 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and likely revert to President Barack Obama’s policy of seeking more "daylight" between America and Israel. But Sanders goes further by seeking to also create a "pro-Palestinian" foreign policy. In the past, that has led him to call for the end of the blockade of Hamas-run Gaza, as well as issuing scathing and fallacious critiques of Israel’s efforts to defend its border and people against attacks from a coastal enclave governed by terrorists.
While this wouldn’t advance a two-state solution that both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have no interest in, it would bring US-Israel relations to a historic low point, while emboldening the Jewish state’s foes to a point where they might consider war a reasonable option.
On the domestic front, Sanders would not merely end Trump’s policy seeking to enforce laws against anti-Semitic activity on college campuses. His active opposition to anti-BDS laws and his close ties with advocates of this variant of Jew-hatred could potentially unleash a wave of anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic activity throughout the country.
That reminds us that Sanders has the support of most of the nation’s most notorious left-wing anti-Semites, such as Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), as well as fellow BDS advocate Linda Sarsour. His refusal to repudiate these figures sets an ominous precedent that would come into play when it comes to staffing an administration, which can be expected to be populated by fellow radicals hostile to Israel and indifferent at best to anti-Semitism.
More to the point, the person who would be responsible for this catastrophe would be insulated from criticism simply by the fact that Sanders and his apologists would claim that as a Jew, he could not be termed hostile to his own people. Seen from that perspective, such a Jewish president might be the worst thing yet to befall American Jewry.
By Jonathan S. Tobin
JNS
December 31, 2019
We’re still more than a month away from the first actual votes being cast in the Democratic presidential race. But an analysis piece published on the influential Politico website last week reminded observers of a possibility that many are ignoring: Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders could win and ultimately become the nation’s first Jewish president.
While generations of American Jews have dreamed of a day when one of their own won the White House, a Sanders’ presidency would actually be an unprecedented nightmare for Israel and Jewish interests.
The Politico article reported that Sanders’s resiliency has impressed Democratic insiders. Despite suffering a heart attack in October – something that not only sidelined him for a time, but also reminded voters that he is 78 years old – Sanders has remained in the top tier of contenders.
While acknowledging that he has won both the affection and loyalty of much of the party’s left-wing base, not least for his strong showing while opposing Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination in 2016, a lot of pundits disparage his chances. They say that despite the party’s clear tilt to the left since the victory of President Donald Trump, Sanders is too radical and would easily be beaten in November.
Yet Sanders has not faded the way some other candidates who were once highly touted have done in the past year. He is currently in second place in the RealClearPolitics average of national polls, trailing only former Vice President Joe Biden. He is a threat to win three out of the first four early-voting states, with the average of polls showing him leading in New Hampshire, a close second in Iowa and in contention in Nevada. That means that although Biden remains the frontrunner and South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg’s stock is rising (while that of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren is falling), it would be foolish to assume that Sanders can’t be the Democratic nominee.
Though his extreme positions horrify moderates, Sanders is utterly authentic and, despite his long tenure in Congress, can’t be accused of being part of the establishment, as can be said of Biden. Indeed, being a Socialist outlier makes him seem more genuine to voters who are tired of conventional politicians, the same factor that helped elect Trump.
Moreover, his radicalism has won him both affection and loyalty from those in the Democratic base who think that choosing the candidate conventional wisdom deems more electable will be just as much of a disaster for their party in 2020 with Biden as it was when Hillary Clinton was the nominee.
Sanders’s irascible demeanor also endears him to primary voters, much as it did when unelected superdelegates and party rules that favored Clinton were needed to beat him in 2016. On top of that, the Democrats’ proportional voting rules that eliminate winner-take-all outcomes will ensure that Bernie remains a factor even if he loses the early states.
His capturing the Democratic Party in 2020 might still be less likely than the scenarios predicting a win for Biden, or a turn of events that would allow Buttigieg or even a second-tier contender to catch fire and win the nomination. But the Politico analysis does require an evaluation of what a Sanders’s nomination or presidency (despite the GOP’s open rooting for Sanders to be their opponent, matchup polls with Trump predict such a race would be a tossup) would mean for Jewish interests and Israel.
Though he is Jewish and has repeatedly said that he supports Israel’s existence, there is also no doubt that Sanders is the Democratic contender who is the most critical of Israeli policy and the most sympathetic to the Palestinians. Though other Democrats may agree with his scorn for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, most of them would hesitate to hurl epithets like "racist" at him, as Sanders has done.
Every one of the other Democratic candidates would reinstate the dangerous 2015 nuclear deal with Iran and likely revert to President Barack Obama’s policy of seeking more "daylight" between America and Israel. But Sanders goes further by seeking to also create a "pro-Palestinian" foreign policy. In the past, that has led him to call for the end of the blockade of Hamas-run Gaza, as well as issuing scathing and fallacious critiques of Israel’s efforts to defend its border and people against attacks from a coastal enclave governed by terrorists.
While this wouldn’t advance a two-state solution that both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have no interest in, it would bring US-Israel relations to a historic low point, while emboldening the Jewish state’s foes to a point where they might consider war a reasonable option.
On the domestic front, Sanders would not merely end Trump’s policy seeking to enforce laws against anti-Semitic activity on college campuses. His active opposition to anti-BDS laws and his close ties with advocates of this variant of Jew-hatred could potentially unleash a wave of anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic activity throughout the country.
That reminds us that Sanders has the support of most of the nation’s most notorious left-wing anti-Semites, such as Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.), as well as fellow BDS advocate Linda Sarsour. His refusal to repudiate these figures sets an ominous precedent that would come into play when it comes to staffing an administration, which can be expected to be populated by fellow radicals hostile to Israel and indifferent at best to anti-Semitism.
More to the point, the person who would be responsible for this catastrophe would be insulated from criticism simply by the fact that Sanders and his apologists would claim that as a Jew, he could not be termed hostile to his own people. Seen from that perspective, such a Jewish president might be the worst thing yet to befall American Jewry.
ASSAULTS ON NEW YORK JEWS CONTINUE UNABATED
Jewish Man Assaulted by 7 Black Teens, Hit in Head With a Chair in Crown Heights
COLive
December 30, 2019
The assault of a Chassidic Jewish man by a group of 7 black teens was recorded on surveillance footage which was recently released.
Community activist Yaakov Behrman posted the disturbing video to Twitter, but wrote that the victim does not want to come forward due to his fear of the discovery reform, which may lead to the attacker finding out his identity.
In the video, the group of teens is seen running after the Jewish man, hitting him in the head with a chair. They are then seen chasing him down the block, and one can be seen punching the man in the head.
The incident occurred last Tuesday evening on Lincoln Place near Albany Avenue, the same day another incident occurred in Crown Heights a short while later.
In the second incident, a Jewish man was assaulted by a group of teens on Union Street between Albany and Kingston Avenues at approximately 6:00 pm.
The group of black teenaged males approached him from behind. One of the males punched the Jewish man in the head, while the other took a video of the attack, police said.
The investigation was referred to the Hate Crimes unit and is being treated as a bias attack, NYPD said.
Behrman says he believes it is the same group of teens who have perpetrated both attacks.
Police are searching for the attackers, no arrests have been made.
COLive
December 30, 2019
The assault of a Chassidic Jewish man by a group of 7 black teens was recorded on surveillance footage which was recently released.
Community activist Yaakov Behrman posted the disturbing video to Twitter, but wrote that the victim does not want to come forward due to his fear of the discovery reform, which may lead to the attacker finding out his identity.
In the video, the group of teens is seen running after the Jewish man, hitting him in the head with a chair. They are then seen chasing him down the block, and one can be seen punching the man in the head.
The incident occurred last Tuesday evening on Lincoln Place near Albany Avenue, the same day another incident occurred in Crown Heights a short while later.
In the second incident, a Jewish man was assaulted by a group of teens on Union Street between Albany and Kingston Avenues at approximately 6:00 pm.
The group of black teenaged males approached him from behind. One of the males punched the Jewish man in the head, while the other took a video of the attack, police said.
The investigation was referred to the Hate Crimes unit and is being treated as a bias attack, NYPD said.
Behrman says he believes it is the same group of teens who have perpetrated both attacks.
Police are searching for the attackers, no arrests have been made.
REVOLVING-DOOR BAIL REFORM COURTESY OF GOV. CUOMO
Tiffany Harris let loose again after second alleged assault
By Tina Moore, Andrew Denney and Aaron Feis
New York Post
December 30, 2019
A Brooklyn trouble magnet who dodged bail in an anti-Semitic assault over the weekend — only to be busted a day later in another alleged attack — walked free again on Monday courtesy of new bail-reform laws.
Tiffany Harris’ dizzying tour of the criminal-justice system saw her back in Brooklyn Criminal Court for the second time in three days, after she allegedly slugged a woman in the face in front of the victim’s two young children in Prospect Heights on Sunday.
But the encore appearance had a similar outcome to her arraignment just a day earlier for allegedly slapping three Orthodox Jewish women in Crown Heights on Friday while yelling, “Fuck you, Jews.”
Handcuffed by the state’s soft-on-crime bail-reform laws — which technically don’t take effect until Jan. 1 — prosecutors noted Harris’ déjà vu appearance, but could ask for no more than supervised release.
“We’re here two days after the defendant was here on another charge,” said prosecutor Evan Hannay to Judge Archana Rao.
“We believe the highest level of supervised release is appropriate.”
Rao granted that request, which requires Harris to check in periodically with a social worker — but allowed her to walk back onto city streets without putting up a dime of bail.
Harris pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor charges including assault in the third degree, menacing and endangering the welfare of a child.
Despite her alleged bashing spree, her low-level raps are not eligible for bail under the incoming laws, which prosecutors and courts across the city have been implementing ahead of time.
The laws also prohibit holding without bail those accused only of misdemeanors, even if the suspect appears to pose a future danger to the community.
The outcome incensed relatives of the 35-year-old victim in Sunday’s run-in, who was walking with her 3-year-old son and months-old daughter when she was allegedly ambushed by Harris.
“I reached out to the victim’s parents and the young woman [who] was punched in the face is very traumatized,” said a cousin of the victim, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“Police had assured them that because this was a hate crime … that she was going to be held this time,” the cousin said.
Sunday’s victim is Jewish, relatives said, but Harris was not charged with a hate crime because there was no obvious indication that the attack was motivated by bias.
Things were apparently much clearer in Friday’s assault.
“Yes, I slapped them. I cursed them out,” the Flatbush woman admitted to cops shortly after she allegedly slapped three Orthodox women on Eastern Parkway near Kingston Avenue, according to a criminal complaint.
“I said, ‘Fuck you, Jews.’ ”
Harris similarly pleaded not guilty during her Saturday arraignment for that attack, one of at least eight alleged anti-Semitic incidents to rock the city’s Jewish community amid the eight nights of Hanukkah.
The “revolving-door” justice afforded Harris — who has 13 total arrests in the city, most for assault — at a time when officials are vowing crackdowns on hate crimes also troubled some in law-enforcement.
“I feel terrible for the people in the Jewish community who continue to be victimized by not only criminals, but now … this revolving-door legislation,” said Ed Mullins, president of the NYPD’s sergeants’ union.
By Tina Moore, Andrew Denney and Aaron Feis
New York Post
December 30, 2019
A Brooklyn trouble magnet who dodged bail in an anti-Semitic assault over the weekend — only to be busted a day later in another alleged attack — walked free again on Monday courtesy of new bail-reform laws.
Tiffany Harris’ dizzying tour of the criminal-justice system saw her back in Brooklyn Criminal Court for the second time in three days, after she allegedly slugged a woman in the face in front of the victim’s two young children in Prospect Heights on Sunday.
But the encore appearance had a similar outcome to her arraignment just a day earlier for allegedly slapping three Orthodox Jewish women in Crown Heights on Friday while yelling, “Fuck you, Jews.”
Handcuffed by the state’s soft-on-crime bail-reform laws — which technically don’t take effect until Jan. 1 — prosecutors noted Harris’ déjà vu appearance, but could ask for no more than supervised release.
“We’re here two days after the defendant was here on another charge,” said prosecutor Evan Hannay to Judge Archana Rao.
“We believe the highest level of supervised release is appropriate.”
Rao granted that request, which requires Harris to check in periodically with a social worker — but allowed her to walk back onto city streets without putting up a dime of bail.
Harris pleaded not guilty to misdemeanor charges including assault in the third degree, menacing and endangering the welfare of a child.
Despite her alleged bashing spree, her low-level raps are not eligible for bail under the incoming laws, which prosecutors and courts across the city have been implementing ahead of time.
The laws also prohibit holding without bail those accused only of misdemeanors, even if the suspect appears to pose a future danger to the community.
The outcome incensed relatives of the 35-year-old victim in Sunday’s run-in, who was walking with her 3-year-old son and months-old daughter when she was allegedly ambushed by Harris.
“I reached out to the victim’s parents and the young woman [who] was punched in the face is very traumatized,” said a cousin of the victim, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
“Police had assured them that because this was a hate crime … that she was going to be held this time,” the cousin said.
Sunday’s victim is Jewish, relatives said, but Harris was not charged with a hate crime because there was no obvious indication that the attack was motivated by bias.
Things were apparently much clearer in Friday’s assault.
“Yes, I slapped them. I cursed them out,” the Flatbush woman admitted to cops shortly after she allegedly slapped three Orthodox women on Eastern Parkway near Kingston Avenue, according to a criminal complaint.
“I said, ‘Fuck you, Jews.’ ”
Harris similarly pleaded not guilty during her Saturday arraignment for that attack, one of at least eight alleged anti-Semitic incidents to rock the city’s Jewish community amid the eight nights of Hanukkah.
The “revolving-door” justice afforded Harris — who has 13 total arrests in the city, most for assault — at a time when officials are vowing crackdowns on hate crimes also troubled some in law-enforcement.
“I feel terrible for the people in the Jewish community who continue to be victimized by not only criminals, but now … this revolving-door legislation,” said Ed Mullins, president of the NYPD’s sergeants’ union.
JOE BIDEN WOULD SAY ‘THIS IS ABOUT TRUMP, NOT ME’
Judge recuses himself as Hunter Biden's Burisma dealings are pulled into Arkansas child support suit and ex-Ukraine prosecutor's sworn claim he was fired because he was investigating VP's son is entered in court case
Daily Mail
December 31, 2019
The judge in Hunter Biden's paternity case with baby mama Lunden Roberts has recused himself from the case on Tuesday, DailyMail.com can disclose.
Judge Don McSpadden announced he was recusing himself at 10.20am. It came hours after Joel Caplan filed a motion in Independence County, seeking to become a party in the case and filed a witness statement from Viktor Shokin.
Shokin, an ex Ukrainian prosecutor, claimed he was fired because he led a probe into Burisma and refused to shut it down, despite pressure from VP Joe Biden. Shokin claims Joe lobbied for his dismissal in an alleged attempt to help out Hunter from any possible prosecution.
Caplan wants Hunter Biden's bank records to prove VP's son received $1.5bn from Chinese companies that 'hustled Americans out of life savings.'
Private eye Dominic Casey also wants to be added to the case and claimed on Friday he had obtained Biden's bank account records.
Daily Mail
December 31, 2019
The judge in Hunter Biden's paternity case with baby mama Lunden Roberts has recused himself from the case on Tuesday, DailyMail.com can disclose.
Judge Don McSpadden announced he was recusing himself at 10.20am. It came hours after Joel Caplan filed a motion in Independence County, seeking to become a party in the case and filed a witness statement from Viktor Shokin.
Shokin, an ex Ukrainian prosecutor, claimed he was fired because he led a probe into Burisma and refused to shut it down, despite pressure from VP Joe Biden. Shokin claims Joe lobbied for his dismissal in an alleged attempt to help out Hunter from any possible prosecution.
Caplan wants Hunter Biden's bank records to prove VP's son received $1.5bn from Chinese companies that 'hustled Americans out of life savings.'
Private eye Dominic Casey also wants to be added to the case and claimed on Friday he had obtained Biden's bank account records.
TEXAS SHERIFF CALLS 12-YEAR-OLD BOY A ‘REAL HERO’
12-year-old wrestled knife away from brother during stabbing of great-grandparents
KTRK
December 31, 2019
KATY, Texas -- A 12-year-old boy is being hailed a hero after saving his great-grandparents from being stabbed to death by his half-brother during an argument.
Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez said the couple, the boy and 20-year-old Lucian Adrian Johnston were in a car, when Johnston got into a verbal argument with his great-grandparents.
According to the sheriff's office, the argument began after the great-grandparents, who are 76 and 92, told Johnston he could no longer live with them due to concerns about his recent behavior.
Deputies said Johnston, from the backseat, began stabbing them in the head and neck with a pocket knife.
ABC13 talked to the 12-year-old boy Sacha about how he intervened. Sacha was also in the backseat.
"What I did was I grabbed him from behind. I pulled him backwards trying to get him away from grandma," Sacha, who did not want to show his face during the interview, said.
"But I did grab the knife. I held that to his neck also. He bent back my finger, which is still sore right now," Sacha continued. "He head-butted me, which I have a loose tooth from that, but I do not really care."
Deputies said Johnston later fled the scene after the car came to a stop.
"So I'm still looking at the knife in my hand, throw it, shut and lock the door. I yell at her to shut and lock her door," Sacha recalled.
Deputies say his great-grandparents drove themselves to the hospital, where they were treated for their wounds. That's where the family was met by deputies, who gave Sacha a special coin.
"He said, 'You're a hero, so you deserve this.' He pulled it out of his pocket and gave it to me," Sacha said.
As for Johnston, he was arrested and is now facing two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, according to Gonzalez.
He was set to appear in court overnight, but did not because he's undergoing mental health evaluations at the jail. Jonhston's bond is set at $80,000.
Johnston was also charged with assaulting a family member in 2017. The judge ordered he not be allowed to go anywhere near the great-grandparents.
"The real hero in this ordeal is a 12-year-old that was also in the backseat at the time of the brutal attack," said Gonzalez in a tweet thread. "He managed to wrestle the knife away from Johnston & threw it out the window, which successfully stopped the attack."
The great-grandparents were released Monday night and are expected to make a full recovery.
"I've talked lately about my worry for the trauma impacting so many in our modern era," said Gonzalez in a tweet, who sounded distraught about the incident. "Surely, this entire family, including the 12-year-old, has new trauma to process."
The boy was not injured during the incident and told investigators he was excited to help. Gonzalez said the boy "truly prevented a double-murder."
"His grandfather praised him immensely for saving their lives," said Sgt. John Klafka. "(The great-grandfather) said if it wasn't for his grandson, the older grandson would've killed him. He felt positive of that."
KTRK
December 31, 2019
KATY, Texas -- A 12-year-old boy is being hailed a hero after saving his great-grandparents from being stabbed to death by his half-brother during an argument.
Harris County Sheriff Ed Gonzalez said the couple, the boy and 20-year-old Lucian Adrian Johnston were in a car, when Johnston got into a verbal argument with his great-grandparents.
According to the sheriff's office, the argument began after the great-grandparents, who are 76 and 92, told Johnston he could no longer live with them due to concerns about his recent behavior.
Deputies said Johnston, from the backseat, began stabbing them in the head and neck with a pocket knife.
ABC13 talked to the 12-year-old boy Sacha about how he intervened. Sacha was also in the backseat.
"What I did was I grabbed him from behind. I pulled him backwards trying to get him away from grandma," Sacha, who did not want to show his face during the interview, said.
"But I did grab the knife. I held that to his neck also. He bent back my finger, which is still sore right now," Sacha continued. "He head-butted me, which I have a loose tooth from that, but I do not really care."
Deputies said Johnston later fled the scene after the car came to a stop.
"So I'm still looking at the knife in my hand, throw it, shut and lock the door. I yell at her to shut and lock her door," Sacha recalled.
Deputies say his great-grandparents drove themselves to the hospital, where they were treated for their wounds. That's where the family was met by deputies, who gave Sacha a special coin.
"He said, 'You're a hero, so you deserve this.' He pulled it out of his pocket and gave it to me," Sacha said.
As for Johnston, he was arrested and is now facing two counts of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, according to Gonzalez.
He was set to appear in court overnight, but did not because he's undergoing mental health evaluations at the jail. Jonhston's bond is set at $80,000.
Johnston was also charged with assaulting a family member in 2017. The judge ordered he not be allowed to go anywhere near the great-grandparents.
"The real hero in this ordeal is a 12-year-old that was also in the backseat at the time of the brutal attack," said Gonzalez in a tweet thread. "He managed to wrestle the knife away from Johnston & threw it out the window, which successfully stopped the attack."
The great-grandparents were released Monday night and are expected to make a full recovery.
"I've talked lately about my worry for the trauma impacting so many in our modern era," said Gonzalez in a tweet, who sounded distraught about the incident. "Surely, this entire family, including the 12-year-old, has new trauma to process."
The boy was not injured during the incident and told investigators he was excited to help. Gonzalez said the boy "truly prevented a double-murder."
"His grandfather praised him immensely for saving their lives," said Sgt. John Klafka. "(The great-grandfather) said if it wasn't for his grandson, the older grandson would've killed him. He felt positive of that."
GOD CARRIES OUT SENTENCE 25 YEARS LATER
Serial killer Phillip Jablonski dies on California death row
By Don Thompson
Associated Press
December 30, 2019
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- A serial killer whose five victims included two wives has died on California's death row, authorities said Monday.
Phillip Carl Jablonski, 73, was found unresponsive in his San Quentin State Prison cell on Friday and pronounced dead within minutes. His cause of death is awaiting an autopsy, but he had been assigned a single cell, said corrections department spokeswoman Terri Hardy.
A San Mateo County jury sentenced him to death in 1994 for the first-degree murders of his wife, Carol Spadoni, 46, and her mother, Eva Petersen, 72.
Spadoni had married him while he was in prison for murdering a previous wife in 1978.
It was the latest in what court records say was a long history of violence against multiple women, dating to his trying to kill his first wife in the 1960s. At the time he was an Army sergeant who had served two tours of duty in the Vietnam War before he was discharged in 1969 for a “schizophrenic illness.”
He pleaded guilty to the second-degree murder, assault and attempted rape of his second wife, Melinda Kimball, in 1978.
He was paroled for good behavior in 1990, despite having tried to strangle his mother with a shoelace during a prison visit in 1985.
Authorities said they recovered a cassette tape in which he then described fatally shooting, stabbing and mutilating Spadoni and her mother, and raping her mother after she was dead.
He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but a jury found he was sane at the time.
Jablonski was also implicated in the deaths of two other women that same year, Fathyma Vann of Indio, California, and Margie Rogers of Thompson Springs, Utah.
Vann was attending the same community college as Jablonski at the time. Rogers and her husband co-owned a store along Interstate 70 where she was found dead.
By Don Thompson
Associated Press
December 30, 2019
SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- A serial killer whose five victims included two wives has died on California's death row, authorities said Monday.
Phillip Carl Jablonski, 73, was found unresponsive in his San Quentin State Prison cell on Friday and pronounced dead within minutes. His cause of death is awaiting an autopsy, but he had been assigned a single cell, said corrections department spokeswoman Terri Hardy.
A San Mateo County jury sentenced him to death in 1994 for the first-degree murders of his wife, Carol Spadoni, 46, and her mother, Eva Petersen, 72.
Spadoni had married him while he was in prison for murdering a previous wife in 1978.
It was the latest in what court records say was a long history of violence against multiple women, dating to his trying to kill his first wife in the 1960s. At the time he was an Army sergeant who had served two tours of duty in the Vietnam War before he was discharged in 1969 for a “schizophrenic illness.”
He pleaded guilty to the second-degree murder, assault and attempted rape of his second wife, Melinda Kimball, in 1978.
He was paroled for good behavior in 1990, despite having tried to strangle his mother with a shoelace during a prison visit in 1985.
Authorities said they recovered a cassette tape in which he then described fatally shooting, stabbing and mutilating Spadoni and her mother, and raping her mother after she was dead.
He pleaded not guilty by reason of insanity, but a jury found he was sane at the time.
Jablonski was also implicated in the deaths of two other women that same year, Fathyma Vann of Indio, California, and Margie Rogers of Thompson Springs, Utah.
Vann was attending the same community college as Jablonski at the time. Rogers and her husband co-owned a store along Interstate 70 where she was found dead.
NOT A GOOD DAY IN TEXAS COURT FOR LEADING CONSPIRACY THEORIST
Alex Jones of InfoWars ordered to pay $100,000 in Sandy Hook court fines
By Audrey McNamara
CBS News
December 31, 2019
A judge in Texas has ordered InfoWars host Alex Jones to pay over $100,000 in court fines in a Sandy Hook defamation lawsuit against him. Jones and InfoWars are being sued by Neil Heslin, whose 6-year-old son Jesse was one of the 26 people killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting. Heslin's case is one of several taking aim at Jones and InfoWars for promoting the bogus claim that the massacre was a hoax.
Judge Scott Jenkins, of Travis County, Texas, ordered Jones and his media outlet to pay $65,825 for ignoring a court order to provide documents and witnesses in the case, and ordered them to pay an additional $34,323.80 in legal fees, The Daily Beast first reported. Jenkins also denied an InfoWars motion to dismiss the case.
Attorneys for Heslin alleged that Jones and InfoWars obstructed court proceedings.
According to the plaintiff, Jones and InfoWars agreed to provide a representative to discuss their handling of Sandy Hook, but that representative, a producer at the outlet, did not provide an explanation as to why InfoWars had called the parents "crisis actors" during deposition, The Daily Beast reports. They also alleged that Jones and InfoWars failed to preserve social media posts and internal messaging.
Judge Jenkins said the failure by Jones and InfoWars to cooperate "should be treated as contempt of court." Jones faces similar accusations in cases being litigated in Connecticut.
Jones claimed on his show, with an audience estimated to be in the millions, that the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, never actually happened, and that the grieving parents are paid "actors." Heslin told CBS News' Tony Dokoupil last year that the conspiracy theory spread by Jones turned a mob of people against him after he lost his son.
"I've had many death threats," Heslin said. "People say, 'You should be the ones with a bullet hole in your head.'"
Heslin is one of several Sandy Hook victims' family members who decided to sue Jones, and other conspiracy theorists, for profiting off of spreading lies.
In October, a jury in Wisconsin awarded $450,000 to the father of another boy killed at Sandy Hook after he filed a defamation lawsuit against conspiracy theorist authors who claimed the massacre never happened. James Fetzer, a retired University of Minnesota Duluth professor, was ordered to pay Leonard Pozner, whose 6-year-old son Noah was among the victims.
"If Mr. Jones had simply accepted responsibility for his reckless lies and years of illegal harassment, this all could have been avoided," Mark Bankston, one of Heslin's attorneys, wrote in an email to The Daily Beast. "Instead, Mr. Jones seems to prefer exiting into the dustbin of history in the most expensive and embarrassing way possible."
The trial for Heslin's defamation case is expected to begin before the end of next year, according to Bankston.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Alex Jones also claims that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the World Bank to control the world economy though a carbon tax.
Trump is an ardent follower of InfoWars. Obama shed tears over the Sandy Hook shootings, but could those tears have been because Alex Jones claimed the shootings never happened?
These fines are only a start. Wait until all the lawsuits against Jones and his ridiculous conspiracy theories are over. He may have to borrow money from the hated World Bank to keep InfoWars afloat.
By Audrey McNamara
CBS News
December 31, 2019
A judge in Texas has ordered InfoWars host Alex Jones to pay over $100,000 in court fines in a Sandy Hook defamation lawsuit against him. Jones and InfoWars are being sued by Neil Heslin, whose 6-year-old son Jesse was one of the 26 people killed in the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting. Heslin's case is one of several taking aim at Jones and InfoWars for promoting the bogus claim that the massacre was a hoax.
Judge Scott Jenkins, of Travis County, Texas, ordered Jones and his media outlet to pay $65,825 for ignoring a court order to provide documents and witnesses in the case, and ordered them to pay an additional $34,323.80 in legal fees, The Daily Beast first reported. Jenkins also denied an InfoWars motion to dismiss the case.
Attorneys for Heslin alleged that Jones and InfoWars obstructed court proceedings.
According to the plaintiff, Jones and InfoWars agreed to provide a representative to discuss their handling of Sandy Hook, but that representative, a producer at the outlet, did not provide an explanation as to why InfoWars had called the parents "crisis actors" during deposition, The Daily Beast reports. They also alleged that Jones and InfoWars failed to preserve social media posts and internal messaging.
Judge Jenkins said the failure by Jones and InfoWars to cooperate "should be treated as contempt of court." Jones faces similar accusations in cases being litigated in Connecticut.
Jones claimed on his show, with an audience estimated to be in the millions, that the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, never actually happened, and that the grieving parents are paid "actors." Heslin told CBS News' Tony Dokoupil last year that the conspiracy theory spread by Jones turned a mob of people against him after he lost his son.
"I've had many death threats," Heslin said. "People say, 'You should be the ones with a bullet hole in your head.'"
Heslin is one of several Sandy Hook victims' family members who decided to sue Jones, and other conspiracy theorists, for profiting off of spreading lies.
In October, a jury in Wisconsin awarded $450,000 to the father of another boy killed at Sandy Hook after he filed a defamation lawsuit against conspiracy theorist authors who claimed the massacre never happened. James Fetzer, a retired University of Minnesota Duluth professor, was ordered to pay Leonard Pozner, whose 6-year-old son Noah was among the victims.
"If Mr. Jones had simply accepted responsibility for his reckless lies and years of illegal harassment, this all could have been avoided," Mark Bankston, one of Heslin's attorneys, wrote in an email to The Daily Beast. "Instead, Mr. Jones seems to prefer exiting into the dustbin of history in the most expensive and embarrassing way possible."
The trial for Heslin's defamation case is expected to begin before the end of next year, according to Bankston.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Alex Jones also claims that global warming is a hoax perpetrated by the World Bank to control the world economy though a carbon tax.
Trump is an ardent follower of InfoWars. Obama shed tears over the Sandy Hook shootings, but could those tears have been because Alex Jones claimed the shootings never happened?
These fines are only a start. Wait until all the lawsuits against Jones and his ridiculous conspiracy theories are over. He may have to borrow money from the hated World Bank to keep InfoWars afloat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)