bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden Admin Invites UN to Fix ‘Systemic Racism’ in U.S.
On Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced that the bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden administration had invited the United Nations to send in so-called experts to investigate “systemic racism” here. “The United States intends to issue a formal, standing invitation to all UN experts who report and advise on thematic human rights issues,” Blinken stated. “As a first step, we have reached out to offer an official visit by the UN Special Rapporteur on contemporary forms of racism and the UN Special Rapporteur on minority issues.”
It’s clear that the bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden administration’s intended target of investigation for these UN “experts” is American law enforcement, as Blinken’s announcement further states: “Last month, the UN’s High Commissioner for Human Rights released a report on racism and police brutality against Africans and people of African descent at the hands of law enforcement around the world, which includes examination of such cases in the United States… I also welcome the UN Human Rights Council’s adoption today in Geneva of a resolution to address systemic racism against Africans and people of African descent in the context of law enforcement. I look forward to engaging with the new mechanism to advance racial justice and equity.”
In fact, this is not about advancing justice; instead, it’s about the opposite. It’s about advancing the deceitful narrative of “systemic racism” supposedly plaguing America and, more specifically, American law enforcement.
Even Blinken’s justification for issuing this dubious invitation as a means for the U.S. to lead by example and setting “the standard for national responses to these challenges” has proven to do just the opposite. China, whose record of human rights abuses under communist rule is and continues to be one of the worst in human history, deftly used the UN report on racism and historical racial discrimination within the U.S. to promulgate a false equivalence argument in order to deflect from its ongoing genocide of its Muslim minority Uyghur population.
“The U.S. should not forget the innocent African American lives taken by the brutal Tulsa race massacre 100 years ago,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian stated. “The U.S. is in no position to criticize other countries’ human rights conditions. No matter how some in the U.S. go to great lengths along its misguided course to hype up lies on Xinjiang, their political conspiracy to disrupt Xinjiang and contain China will only end up in failure.”
Meanwhile, amidst Cubans marching and protesting for freedom as its communist government engages in a bloody crackdown, the bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden administration is turning a blind eye on genuine and systematic injustice. Moreover, not only does the Biden administration turn a blind eye, but it offers an invitation to all members of the UN Human Rights Council, which ironically includes some of the worst abusers of human rights — China, Cuba, Russia, and Venezuela.
Senator Marco Rubio hit the nail on the head in his response to Blinken’s utterly tone-deaf announcement: “[Secretary Blinken] instead of asking the UN to come here & tell us how ‘racist’ America is, why don’t you ask them to go to Cuba where an evil socialist regime storms into peoples homes, beats the crap out of them & then drags them away?”
If bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden and company want to truly lead by example, then they need to stop lying to and about the American people. They need to stop promulgating the demonstrably false claims of “systemic racism,” they need to stop lying about American law enforcement, and they need to start holding to account those tyrannical and totalitarian governments that genuinely engage in human rights abuses.
~The Patriot Post
BLM Blames Us, Praises Cuban Commies
When the race-baiting Marxist pressure group known as Black Lives Matter scrubbed the most offensive content from its website last year, we can’t say we were surprised. Marxists, after all, are liars. It’s how they come to power. They find an aggrieved and vulnerable group, and they tell them that their problems are the fault of others.
Nor were we surprised yesterday when BLM took to Instagram to issue a statement on Cuba that sounded like it’d been churned out by some mid-level Soviet apparatchik. Still, the intensity of the pro-commie, anti-American invective was impressive even for an organization whose money-grubbing leadership has boldly boasted, “We, uh, are trained Marxists. Um, we are, uh, super, uh, versed, um, on, sort of, ideological theories.”
“Black Lives Matter condemns the US federal government’s inhumane treatment of Cubans, and urges it to immediately lift the economic embargo,” the screed began. “This cruel and inhumane policy, instituted with the explicit intention of destabilizing the country and undermining Cubans’ right to choose their own government, is at the heart of Cuba’s current crisis.”
Here, BLM has it perfectly backward: Our nation’s economic embargo is meant to pressure Cuba’s communist government into allowing its people “to choose their own government.” After all, it’s hard to run a campaign from behind bars — which is where the regime’s political opponents and journalistic truth-tellers typically end up. Not even hard-left Amnesty International could cover for Cuba’s commies: “Freedom of expression, association, and movement,” it once wrote, “continue to be severely restricted.”
Cuba would be in great shape, though, if only Uncle Sam would loosen his purse strings: “Since 1962,” BLM writes, “the United States has forced pain and suffering on the people of Cuba by cutting off food, medicine and supplies, costing the tiny island nation an estimated $130 billion. Without that money, it is harder for Cuba to acquire medical equipment needed to develop its own COVID-19 vaccines and equipment for food production. This comes in spite of the country’s strong medical care and history of lending doctors and nurses to disasters around the world.”
We’re glad it mentions Cuba’s medical “history,” because not even The New York Times will defend the country’s exploitative practice of sending its doctors overseas. According to one of those doctors, the policy is “a form of slave labor.”
To its credit, we suppose, BLM waited until the fourth paragraph to play the race card, but the group did: “The people of Cuba are being punished by the U.S. government because the country has maintained its commitment to sovereignty and self-determination. … Instead of international amity, respect, and goodwill, the U.S. government has only instigated suffering for the country’s 11 million people – of which 4 million are black and brown.”
Of course, none of this rhetoric is new. Much of it is old. Just ask that noted Castro apologist socialist/ commie-Bernie Sanders:
VIDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yutn6rS6FAE
Better yet, ask Senator Marco Rubio, who knows a thing or two about Cuban communism, and who recognizes a corrupt racket when he sees it. “The extortionist ring known as the Black Lives Matter organization,” he tweeted, “took a break today from shaking down corporations for millions and buying themselves mansions to share their support for the Communist regime in Cuba.” ~The Patriot Post
Cuban Solidarity Resolution Garners No Dem Support
On Tuesday, Florida Republican Representative Mario Diaz-Balart introduced a resolution to explicitly support the Cuban people and their demand for freedom from “the brutal oppression of the Communist dictatorship in Cuba.”
In introducing his resolution, Diaz-Balart notes that “for 62 years, the Cuban people have struggled for freedom and human rights under a brutal, repressive dictatorship.” The resolution:
Calls for the release of all political prisoners and for the end of acts of repression, arbitrary imprisonments, torture, and other human rights abuses against the Cuban people;
Honors the courageous Cuban people for daring to stand up to the Cuban regime and demanding respect for fundamental freedoms, such as freedom of expression and assembly;
Recognizes the brave pro-democracy and human rights activists, including independent journalists, artists, labor leaders, and religious leaders, who have been persecuted throughout decades of Communist tyranny;
Urges other democracies, regional and multilateral organizations to affirm that violence against the unarmed people of Cuba will not be tolerated and that human rights abusers will be held accountable for their crimes;
Expresses solidarity with the long-suffering Cuban people in their demands for a genuine democratic transition; and
Calls on the international community to stand with those struggling for freedom in Cuba by condemning repression and expressing unequivocal support for their rights to self-governance, human rights, and basic liberties.
Diaz-Balart, who is of Cuban descent, has several cosponsors of the resolution in the House, including Minority Whip Steve Scalise (R-LA), Elise Stefanik (R-NY), Dan Crenshaw (R-TX), Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL), Carlos Gimenez (R-FL), Nicole Malliotakis (R-NY), Greg Steube (R-FL), Byron Donalds (R-FL), Matt Gaetz (R-FL), and rino-Liz Cheney (R-WY). Tellingly, however, not a single Democrat has signed on to the resolution — a testament to just how far Democrats have drifted down the socialism hole. ~The Patriot Post
Cali and Florida: A Tale of Two States
In Florida, life is good. The tragic and horrific June 24 collapse of the surfside Champlain Towers notwithstanding, the purplish-red sunshine state is dynamic, diverse, welcoming, and well-governed.
In deep-blue California, however, they have tent cities and poop patrols.
Such is the difference between these two hugely important American states — one of them on a roll, and the other one seemingly circling the toilet bowl.
In a fine and comprehensive comparison of these two states, the New York Post’s Kyle Smith poses a few questions:
Should lots of new housing be built in the interest of affordability? California says no, Florida says yes. Should homeless people be allowed to turn public spaces into tent cities? California says yes, Florida says no. Should public elementary schools teach critical race theory? California says yes, Florida says no. Should gas be $4 a gallon? California says yes, Florida says no. Should biological males be allowed to dominate girls’ sports? Florida says no. California not only says yes, but it is trolling Florida by forbidding its employees to take state-funded trips to Florida, as well as 16 other states.
Is it any wonder that California lost population for the first time ever last year, while Florida’s growth was second only to another dynamic and diverse red state, Texas?
It’s too easy to chalk this up to Democrat-versus-Republican governance, but we’re going to do it anyway. After all, California has for years had Democrat supermajorities in both houses of its state legislature, and three of its past four governors have been Democrats. Florida, on the other hand, has had four straight Republican governors: Jeb Bush, Charlie Crist, Rick Scott, and now Ron DeSantis, a rising star within the GOP and, at 42, the youngest governor in the nation.
“A native Floridian with blue-collar roots,” his biography reads, “Ron worked his way through Yale University, where he graduated with honors and was the captain of the varsity baseball team. He also graduated with honors from Harvard Law School. While at Harvard, he earned a commission in the U.S. Navy as a JAG officer. … His military decorations include the Bronze Star Medal for Meritorious Service and the Iraq Campaign Medal.”
Just how lucky are Floridians? DeSantis barely beat a human train wreck named Andrew Gillum in the 2018 gubernatorial election. (The margin was 49.59% to 49.19%, a mere 33,000 votes out of more than eight million cast.)
Then there’s California, where scumbag/liar-Gavin Newsom, the guy with the soap-opera good looks and the awful leftist instincts, now faces a recall election after having cruised to victory with 62% of the vote. Polling indicates that he’ll probably survive the recall and that de Maistre’s age-old observation is true: Every citizenry has the government it deserves. How so? Despite having just 12% of the nation’s population, California has 25% of its homeless.
Elections, then, have consequences, and there’s perhaps no better example of this than a comparison of California and Florida during the COVID-19 pandemic. As Kyle Smith continues:
California introduced some of the harshest lockdown measures in the country, crashing its economy, while Florida was among the first states to begin reopening, way back in May 2020, and has been almost entirely open since September. … One survey found that Florida had the second-fewest coronavirus restrictions; California ranked 45th by the same measure.
As for the psychological and emotional effects of locking children out of schools, we may never be able to measure the harm California did to its youngest citizens. The data firm Burbio, which has been tracking school reopenings, ranks California dead last on its index of in-person learning, [while] Florida scored 95 percent in-person learning, third-best in the nation.
The difference between the two states can be boiled down to a simple question — one that reveals the key to human flourishing: Are your people free, or aren’t they?
The answer shouldn’t surprise anyone. As Smith writes, “Florida is America’s freest state, according to a Cato Institute survey: No. 1 in fiscal freedom, No. 1 in educational freedom.” As for California, Cato calls it “the cronyism state in the union,” a reflection of the ongoing grift and graft that are wrecking the once-great Golden State, the state that Ronald Reagan governed half a century ago.
Elections. They do indeed have consequences. ~The Patriot Post
Taiwan Is Next, but Should We Care?
“Where is Taiwan anyway and why should we care?” It’s likely many Americans ask this question every time they hear or read about Taiwan being China’s next target, and what, if anything, the U.S. should do about it. So for a straight-up answer, let me be clear: If Taiwan falls to mainland China, it will mark the end of the United States as a world military power and as the prime force for freedom and democracy. The end, zilch, nada. And, of course, after the United States is no longer the central force for global freedom and democracy, all bets are off for the future of democracy versus socialism here at home.
Taiwan is a small island state (about 24 million inhabitants) in the western Pacific. There, Chinese nationalists, led by Chiang Kai-shek, took refuge following the fall of China to Mao and the Chinese communists in 1949. Since then, Taiwan has remained a contentious issue for Beijing’s communist government, which has vowed to “reunite” Taiwan with mainland China either peacefully or through force of arms.
But let there be no doubt: Taiwan is one of the brightest lights of freedom and prosperity in the world. Fully democratic, Taiwan routinely holds free and fair elections. Taiwan elected a female (Tsai Ing-wen) as the country’s (yes, I will refer to Taiwan as a country!) president in 2016 and remains staunchly anti-communist. President Tsai was reelected in 2020 with a historically strong majority. Taiwan boasts a significant free market economy, producing the 20th-largest GDP globally — incredible for such a small population. And Taiwan’s per capita income ranks with that of the United States.
A significant majority of Taiwan’s population asserts it will resist and fight any effort by mainland China to militarily force “reintegration” into the communist People's Republic of China (PRC). Taiwan seeks strong and stable relations with the United States and, indeed, President Donald Trump talked with President Tsai by telephone following his election as president. Trump was the first commander-in-chief to talk to a Taiwanese president since 1979.
With Hong Kong now securely in its communist pocket, China sees Taiwan as the final roadblock on its way to a fully secure maritime periphery with uninhibited access to the Pacific Ocean and South China Sea. China also views the integration of Taiwan into its communist web as the last step to ending its “Century of Humiliation” between 1839 and 1949. Ending the Century of Humiliation is a central driving force to the Chinese communist regime; the taking of Taiwan must and will happen according to Chinese strategic thinking and policy. So let there be no doubt — China is and will be relentless in its pursuit to subdue Taiwan and make it its 24th province — through peace or war.
Much as the vibrant West Berlin was the symbol of the USSR’s unsuccessful efforts to subdue Western democracies in Europe following World War II, Taiwan is today’s symbol of China’s still unsuccessful effort to fully dominate its vast Pacific maritime regions. Taiwan is the one remaining full-throated rebuke to Chinese hegemony over its eastern littoral, and it stands in the way of China’s unfettered access to the Pacific, and thus the world.
If through “peaceful” reintegration — or the more likely requirement for an invasion — China is permitted to grab Taiwan, the U.S. is finished as the democratic global leader for liberty. If we allow this bastion of freedom and democracy to be crushed, our international purpose, cemented by our victory in World War II, as the global “Shining City on a Hill” will end. And many believe, as do I, with the end of our God-given purpose to lead humanity in the quest for freedom and liberty, our nation’s efforts to provide these same inalienable rights to our citizens will end also. America will fade into history as we tumble into so-called democratic socialism (read: Marxism) with an irreversible era of government domination over individual rights and freedom.
The path to our demise is clear, and the international linchpin is a small band of brave Taiwanese patriots over 7,000 miles from our homeland, all of whom face a communist China behemoth just 100 miles to their west. Parroting General Patton as he responded to cries for help from Bastogne, Taiwan is surely a country worth saving! But it is more, much more, than that. To save Taiwan, and thus ourselves, here’s what we must do.
First and foremost, we must — must — make China fear our military presence in the Pacific. Today it does not. That fear begins with the rebuilding and expansion of our Navy. The threat to Taiwan (and to our allies and friends in the Pacific and South China Sea region) is a maritime threat. Thus, to counter it, we must have a dominant maritime force. Period. Full stop. Make our Navy once again the strongest naval force on the planet. This must be the unambiguous national policy of the bumble/ socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden administration. President Ronald Reagan once envisioned a 600-ship Navy (we currently have less than 300 battle force ships), and today it must again be our fully resourced national requirement and objective, with innovative combatant ship design and capability.
In this, our Marine Corps must be elevated to our first and foremost over-the-shore land combat force. It needs four (not three) active duty, properly resourced, modernized, fully deployable, and ready Marine Expeditionary Forces (MEFs), not the under-resourced and over-committed Marine Corps of today.
Second, our Space Force must be brought up to full capability quickly and decisively. Its mission must be to defeat the PRC’s land and orbital space offensive and defensive capacity, including cyber. There can be no compromise here. We must dominate the space domain.
Third, our Air Force must be fully modernized to overwhelm the PRC’s air capacity tactically, operationally, and strategically. This includes our manned and unmanned Air Force aircraft as well as our offensive strategic and deterrent missile capability. To support our potential naval and ground force operations against the PRC, more aggressive forward basing of our Air Force to locations of greatest impact in the Pacific and South China Sea region must be accomplished.
Fourth, the Army cannot be used as a “bill payer” for these requirements. Indeed, the Army is America’s guarantor of freedom, and it is the force of choice for heavy, sustained land combat operations and ultimate land victory. Modernize the Army, fully resource it, and ensure it is ready for deployment. Ensure the Army’s air defense capability can stop the PRC’s medium- and long-range missiles. Reinstitute the pre-Iraq and Afghanistan Army division structures and reassign Brigade Combat Team force multipliers back to division command and control.
Many will say that this is all too expensive. Hogwash. We are piling trillions and trillions of dollars into non-productive social welfare dependency programs at the expense of free market enterprise, self-dignity, and jobs. Build up our Armed Forces with all that money and give people jobs to do it. Another full stop.
In all this, our alliances will be crucial, both formal and coalition. It is so very sad that across the Pacific region, we have but a few truly functioning security alliances (Australia, Japan, South Korea), but no vision for a decisive NATO-like alliance to contain the expansive hegemonic pursuits of the PRC. China has far surpassed the capability and threat we saw from the Soviet Union when we led the establishment of NATO in 1949, so why are we not actively pursuing the establishment of something like a Pacific Alliance Treaty Organization (PATO), which could stand as the military bastion against China? In addition to Taiwan, countries such as Japan, South Korea, Australia, Vietnam, New Zealand, Thailand, India, the Philippines, Indonesia, and Malaysia are all clearly threatened by China. There are more, including potentially someday Russia. And as a price for our continuing participation in NATO, we should ensure our European allies are members of PATO and make them bring their guns with them.
Finally, once our military is on an irreversible path to Pacific region military dominance, we must put forth a policy that is unambiguous to China. Any military effort to overthrow or dominate Taiwan will be met with a strong and decisive U.S. response, and the same is true for our allies (PATO?) in the region as well.
All these things can and must be done if we are to continue to reinvigorate and lead the global pursuit for liberty. And they must be done now and with great energy and purpose. Time is short. Our issue today is that we lack the leadership and the will to achieve them. Our security and our future as a free and democratic beacon are the responsibility of our government. Who is our future national leader who will bring all this to the fore, help us develop the national will and purpose to save ourselves, and save freedom and democracy for our future generations? We must — must — elect him or her as our next president, along with a supportive Congress, or our future will most surely be determined by the communist leaders in Beijing. Again, time is short. ~The Patriot Post
The USCP Officer Who Killed Ashli Babbitt
I was dumbstruck this week after reading an article claiming, “Reporters Who Survived the Capitol Riot Are Still Struggling.” Typical of the strugglers was PBS NewsHour correspondent Lisa Desjardins, who lamented, “I’m still not sleeping like I used to, even to this day.” Bloomberg News reporter Erik Wasson felt, “It was traumatizing.” Veteran Capitol Hill reporter John Bresnahan says: “I can’t tell you how many conversations I’ve had with reporters [claiming] ‘I don’t know if I want to do this anymore.’ Anyone who doesn’t want to come up here again, I don’t blame them at all, even a little bit, one iota.”
Would these emotionally incontinent snowflakes have you believe their experience was tantamount to that of combat veterans who have endured relentless war-zone firefights, and brothers bleeding out in their arms? Would these “survivors” have you believe they had been caught in the crossfire of the endless violent and deadly urban riots Democrats seeded nationwide in 2020?
Apparently, many of these scribes experienced something that was well outside of their comfort zones and, consequently, are in need of therapy for manifestations of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. Given that scumbag/ liar-Nancy Pelosi’s Capitol barricade political props are finally being dismantled, they may never feel the Capitol is a safe space again.
To be clear, the Capitol riot was a disgraceful event, and there were some violent people involved who in no way represent Donald Trump’s tens of millions of supporters across the nation.
But for the record, there was only one shot fired that day — a shot that killed an unarmed 110-pound Air Force veteran, a woman named Ashli Babbitt. I have written at length about the circumstances of her death and about the fact that investigators closed the shooting review without releasing any details to the public.
Unlike every other officer-involved shooting anywhere, there has been no public information released about the investigation of Babbitt’s shooter or the circumstances justifying that shooting — not the name of the officer involved, and not a shred of information about the motive or competence of the officer involved. For that reason, there is no reason to trust the decision to exonerate that officer, especially given the political influence of the bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden//scumbag/liar-Harris regime in that investigation.
Until this week, the only public knowledge about Ashli’s death was in the graphic videos of the shooting here, here, and here — which clearly show the circumstances from her side of the door before and after her death.
What’s clear from the videos is that there were four uniformed officers within feet of Babbitt, at least four additional heavily armed riot police, and one or more plain-clothed officers — none of whom made an effort to prevent her attempt to climb through the broken window of the door where she was shot. There is no apparent justification for the officer’s actions, and it was fortunate that none of the other officers behind Babbitt were injured by that gunshot.
In the weeks following the “exoneration” of that officer, Pelosi and Chuck scumbag/liar-Schumer desecrated the death of U.S. Capitol Police (USCP) officer Brian Sicknick, using his funeral as a political fodder to promote Pelosi’s call for a “9/11-type commission,” ostensibly to keep their Capitol riot narrative going strong. The fact that scumbag/liar-Pelosi dared compare the Capitol riot with the 9/11 Islamist attack on our country was indicative of the drama she planned.
Wisely, Republicans blocked that charade in May, but a month later scumbag/liar-Pelosi established a House committee to investigate the “insurrection,” noting, “The timeline will be as long as it takes for them … to do the investigation of the causes of this … the white supremacy, the anti-Semitism, the Islamophobia, all of the rest of it.” That will be a feeder for bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Joe Biden’s assertion that the nation is being besieged by “white supremacists.”
Here is what we now know about the officer who shot and killed Ashli Babbitt.
In late January, based on information then, our staff discussed the possibility that her shooter was a Capitol Police officer named Lt. Michael Byrd. At that time, given the pending investigation, it would have been irresponsible to publish such speculation. We determined we should wait on the outcome of that investigation, despite the video evidence calling into question justification for the shooting.
On 25 February, the then-acting House Sergeant of Arms, in video testimony, referred to the man who shot Babbitt as “Officer Byrd.” But we still were determined to wait on the investigation findings, because the USCP declared, “The Department will share additional information once the investigation is complete.”
Of course, in April, we then learned that those findings would be sealed from any public inquiry or scrutiny, other than the conclusion that there was “no evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the officer willfully committed a violation.” However, it became clear that if Byrd, a Black USCP officer, killed Babbitt, an unarmed White woman, that would have broader implications regarding the bumble/socialist/scumbag/liar-Biden administration’s unprecedented concealment of the investigation.
In May there was speculation that the plain-clothed officer might have been a Secret Service agent, but the original statement by USCP on 07 January confirmed that “a sworn USCP employee discharged their service weapon, striking an adult female.” Further, the Department of Justice news release about the incident unequivocally stated that it was a “U.S. Capitol Police officer involved in the fatal shooting of 35-year-old Ashli Babbitt.”
In June, when Babbitt’s family filed suit to determine the identity of the officer who killed her, as well as the circumstances leading to that lethal use of force, their lawyer noted in an interview that they knew the officer involved was the same officer who had left a loaded handgun in a Capitol restroom. That was also an incident linked to Lt. Byrd, who was investigated for that incident in February of 2019.
The USCP has been exempted by Congress from Freedom of Information Act requests, thus the Babbitt family is suing the DC Police, which conducted the investigation, “for documents that identify the officer who shot Babbitt … as well as notes and summaries of what the officer said regarding the shooting and the reasons he discharged his weapon.” Notably, the DC Police would be required by law to reveal the officer’s identity if he were one of its own.
At the time, Byrd suggested to other officers that he would “be treated differently” and questioned later about the incident. USCP Communications Director Eva Malecki insisted, “Appropriate actions will be taken,” but it’s not clear what if any actions were taken because the USCP is not required to disclose the results of misconduct investigations. (This despite the fact that more than 700 complaints have been filed against USCP officers in recent years.)
In congressional testimony on 15 June, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) asked FBI Director Christopher Wray, “Do you know who executed Ashlie Babbitt?” Shockingly, Wray responded, “No, I do not know the name of the person involved in the Ashli Babbitt shooting.” Are we to believe that when the DoJ investigates a high-profile shooting in the nation’s Capitol building, the FBI director has not reviewed those findings?
Gosar: “Why hasn’t that officer who executed Ashli Babbitt been named when police officers around the country are routinely identified after a shooting?” Wray: “I won’t comment on that case. It’s not something we’ve been directly involved in so I can’t agree or disagree with your characterization.”
Gosar: “Do you approve of lethal force against unarmed citizens, especially 110-pound women with no warning, no prior use of nonlethal force?” Wray: “Not going to try to answer a hypothetical, especially one based on a case…”
Gosar: “That actually wasn’t a hypothetical. That’s actually what happened.”
Enter investigative reporter Paul Sperry, who posts in his report, “Naming the Capitol Cop Who Killed Unarmed Jan. 6 Rioter Ashli Babbitt,” details and photographic evidence linking Lt. Byrd with the shooting death of Babbitt.
According to Sperry: “Byrd appears to match the description of the shooter, who video footage shows is an African American dressed that day in a business suit. Jewelry, including a beaded bracelet and lapel pin, also match up with photos of Byrd. In addition, Byrd’s resume lines up with what is known about the experience and position of the officer involved in the shooting — a veteran USCP officer who holds the rank of lieutenant and is the commander of the House Chamber Section of the Capitol Police. Following the shooting, Byrd’s Internet footprint was scrubbed, including his social media and personal photos.”
Currently, 53-year-old Byrd is on leave and under 24-hour protective details. Sperry notes: “USCP General Counsel Tad DiBiase [said] ‘one of our officers has received death threats, threats to his family, and numerous vile, racist sentiments directed at the officer.’ Without elaborating, he said ‘these threats are currently under active investigation by the USCP and the FBI.’”
In light of those threats, there was and is nothing preventing the USCP from releasing the full investigative report with the name of Ashli Babbitt’s shooter redacted.
Meanwhile, more than 500 protesters have been arrested. Notably, despite the constant Demo and Leftmedia drumming about “insurrectionists,” not one protestor has been charged with treason or sedition — most being charged with trespassing.
However, the most dangerous person in DC on the day of the Capitol riot, an actual terrorist, has not been arrested. The FBI and BATFE are offering a $100,000 reward for information to convict the person who left pipe bombs outside both the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters the night before the protest. ~The Patriot Post
KAY C. JAMES
It’s Not Racist to Support Election Integrity Laws
Earlier this month, when I heard that the Supreme Court had struck down a lawsuit claiming that Arizona’s election laws were a form of racist voter suppression, I happened to be standing where civil rights leaders long ago gathered to talk about the very issue of fighting for the right to cast their vote without fear or intimidation.
These were the black leaders who envisioned an America where people of all colors could live together as equals, in peace, and with mutual respect. They weren’t politicians who tried to foment racial discord to advance a political agenda, something we see all too often today.
In 2005, I worked with Democrats and Republicans on the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, also known as the Carter-Baker Commission, which examined all the ways we could strengthen the integrity of American elections. Reforms such as requiring voter ID, verifying that only citizens voted, and sharing voter lists among the states to prevent people from voting twice were agreed to by both sides as good policy.
Yet today, the left is reneging on that agreement. Somehow, those were common sense reforms in 2005. Now, the left calls many of them racist.
The left has tried to portray any legitimate attempt to pass election integrity reforms as the disenfranchisement of African Americans. They talk about black folks as if we are incapable of obtaining a state ID, getting to the polls on our own, or following simple election rules.
Now, as states try to pass laws to prevent fraud, increase the transparency of our elections, and ensure that every legitimate vote gets counted, the left once again is opposing many of these measures. It’s literally trying to stop states from removing dead people from the voter rolls, from preventing noncitizens from registering to vote, and from requiring people to prove they are who they say they are to vote (i.e., showing an ID) — which polling shows most Americans, including black Americans, agree with.
In the end, the left is attempting to make it easier for people to cheat, increasing the likelihood that more and more fraudulent votes will cancel out legitimate ones.
The left claims that it’s opposing these reforms because it wants to help African Americans. But in reality, it’s creating a situation that dilutes their — and everyone else’s — legitimate vote.
The fact is, the left’s real agenda isn’t about helping minority voters; it’s about helping themselves: They believe voter fraud favors their candidates, plain and simple.
Ultimately, the left wants to federalize elections, turning over the rulemaking from accountable state legislators to unelected federal bureaucrats. They are trying to pass bills such as HR 1 and S1 (the so-called For the People Act) and HR 4 (the John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act) and put the federal government in charge of state elections so that many reforms become impossible.
It’s a recipe for corruption.
Certainly, there was a time in America when some states had laws that deliberately discriminated against minorities (and I know firsthand because I lived in one of those states during segregation). There was a need for the federal government to intervene. But that’s not what’s happening today. The left would have us believe that we are still living in the segregated South of the 1960s.
Many politicians and many in the media continue to spread the lie that racism keeps people from voting, even though election results and census numbers clearly show that blacks and other minorities are showing up to vote in increasingly record numbers.
It would be a great irony and a great tragedy if the promise of the civil rights movement and the sacrifice of all those who fought and even died to protect our right to vote were undone because the left successfully cloaked its efforts in the name of civil rights.
Our sacred right to vote and the very future of our free republic depend on us making sure they fail. ~The Patriot Post
Replies