Month: May 2020

A race free analysis of the George Floyd killing

Law enforcement officers have a very difficult job, but sometimes some of them just become completely intoxicated on power. What was that policeman thinking when Floyd was telling him that he couldn’t breathe, and the bystanders were telling the policeman that Floyd was bleeding from his mouth and that he was going to kill him. Did he think Floyd and the bystanders were lying? It was obvious from his stance that he was putting a great deal of weight on Floyd’s neck. How could he not know that he would kill him kneeling on his neck like that? Floyd was handcuffed and a threat to nobody. This is just so disgusting

Floyd’s arrest wasn’t motivated by race, because he was caught committing a crime, and it wasn’t just loose cigarettes.  And there is no evidence that the force used during his detention was motivated by race. What it was motivated by, I do not know. The only way I know how to characterize it, is that it was a complete disregard for the safety and wellbeing by the police of a person in their charge. It was little different than leaving him lying on the railroad tracks of an oncoming train. The moment he was placed under arrest, it was their job to protect him.

Then came the typical aftermath. Hoodlums looting, ransacking and destroying the private property of those who had absolutely nothing to do with Floyd’s killing. As one comment I saw noted, it apparently is a lot easier to mourn the loss of George Floyd watching a freshly stolen 65 inch flat screen TV, and Xbox. The American people are on the side of George Floyd, but they aren’t on the side of the vandals and thieves. And their criminal behavior influences nobody, except to reinforce negative stereotypes for blacks. The policemen involved should be punished to the greatest extent possible, because theirs was a flagrant abuse of power and of the public trust.

A race free analysis of the Ahmaud Arbery killing

When I first saw this story on my feed I didn’t spend any time looking into it. I didn’t watch the video, but I did read the headline and was aware of the race of the players which isn’t important to me. My understanding was that a couple of guys wanted to make a citizen’s arrest on a man they saw running through their neighborhood because of recent property thefts, and ended up shooting him. I posted a comment on that article that the two men essentially shot Arbery over personal property because they thought he may be a thief, and that they should be prosecuted, because nobody should be killed in order to defend personal property.

Then I saw a comment about the incident on a subsequent post that stated that Arbery made an attempt to wrestle the gun from the younger McMichael. This raised a red flag for me so I dug into it a little more. I have since viewed the longest video I could find, and read some more reporting which also mildly explained the law governing citizen’s arrests. Until more facts come out, this is my analysis currently.

There were two pivotal mistakes made, one by the McMichaels, and the other by Arbery. The first pivotal mistake was made by the McMichaels for trying to make an illegal citizen’s arrest because they had no probable cause to arrest Arbery. Apparently they saw him doing nothing but running through their neighborhood. It wasn’t like they just saw him murder someone or commit some other type of violent crime. However, the video evidence does show that they didn’t chase him down just to kill him because he was black. They could have done that without getting out of the truck. They were indeed trying to effect a citizen’s arrest as misguided and illegal as it was, and there is no evidence that the encounter was motivated by racism.

I don’t think they were wrong in taking a gun because they had no way of knowing if Arbery was armed and capable of being violent. However they should not have approached Arbery in such a reckless manner with their guns brandished. Brandishing guns the way they did only added great a deal of tension to the situation. They should have left their guns stowed, but accessible if needed for self-defense purposes. They should have only tried talking to or monitoring him without trying to detain him. That is the job of the police.

The second and most consequential mistake was made by Arbery when he attacked the younger McMichael and made an attempt to take the gun away from him. This is undeniable, the video shows this. In the video you can see Arbery running down the middle of the road with the McMichaels truck stopped in front of him with the younger McMichael standing outside the truck trying to stop Arbery. Arbery then diverts around the truck and then swerves toward McMichael and initiates a physical confrontation with McMichael and begins to try to wrestle the gun from him.

All of the reporting I saw stated that Arbery was unarmed. This is true up to a point, but the moment Arbery grabbed the gun he became just as armed as McMichael. The moment Abery charged at and tried to wrestle the gun from McMichael is the moment the entire dynamic changed. It does not matter that what the McMichaels were doing was illegal or unwarranted. This encounter was reduced to two men, one holding a gun and the other trying to take it from him.

I think the McMichaels should be charged with something, what, I do not know. They were wrong when they chased after Arbery in such a reckless manner, but Arbery was wrong when he attacked the younger McMichael and tried to take control of the gun. Again, it does not matter that what the McMichaels were doing was illegal, it was happening. Arbery could have swerved away from McMichael or stopped and allowed the arrest or detention to occur. He could then file charges against the McMichaels for false arrest or illegal detention, and then maybe they would be sitting in jail while he was out running in the streets again.

The moment he created the scuffle for the gun, he changed the dynamic and put himself in deep jeopardy and even made it possible for the Younger McMichael to claim self-defense. Arbery should have conducted himself the way most businesses want their employees to act when confronted with an illegal actor such as an armed robber…give him what he wants and don’t try to be a hero….comply and survive.

A Tale of Two Political Parties while re-opening the economy

It shouldn’t be, but there are two distinct ways to handle re-opening the economy, and it overwhelmingly depends on which political party is in charge. Republican controlled States are more likely to treat their citizens as adults and allow them to put their lives back on the path to normalcy while doing those things necessary to protect those who can’t protect themselves, and instructing those who can protect themselves to do so. They understand not just the economic damage, but the damage to the lives of their citizens in all areas caused by this lockdown, and that a safe and reasonable balance can be achieved to end the lockdown. They are willing to allow the freedom that most Americans expect after having sacrificed so much.


Democrat controlled States are more likely to treat their citizens as children, and hover over them like helicopter parents. They don’t view their citizens as being capable of taking care of themselves, therefore they require constant supervision and meddling. The extent that these States want to continue their lockdowns shows absolutely no faith in their citizenry, and no regard for their personal lives after they have willingly sacrificed so much. The decision by these States to continue the lockdown have nothing to do with the science or data. There is in my opinion two overriding reasons to continue the lockdown. First, is a genuine fear by omnipotent moral busybodies for the safety of their citizens. The second, is a purely political move to damage the economy and President Trump’s re-election chances. I leave you with a quote by C.S. Lewis, and then a question.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.

Can the citizens of those States so negatively affected by the continued lockdowns, survive the consciences of their omnipotent moral busybody government officials?

Trump shouldn’t pardon Flynn….yet

As you probably know, Judge Emmet Sullivan has refused to drop the case against General Michael Flynn, but has instead opted to appoint a former federal judge to present arguments against the DOJ’s decision to drop the case against Flynn, and to see if Flynn should be held in contempt of court for perjury which I guess is for lying about being guilty. I guess Judge Sullivan has never had defendants in his court plead guilty to a crime which they did not commit. This is said to be a very inappropriate and unprecedented move by Sullivan.

I don’t know Sullivan’s motivations, but I have heard him spoken of very favorable. Even Flynn’s attorney Sydney Powell has thought a great deal of him in the past because of his actions in the Ted Stevens case. Stevens, was at one time a senator from Alaska who was victimized by federal prosecutorial misconduct.

Judge Sullivan may be a left wing loon using his position as an accomplice to the deep state, or he may be highly peeved and embarrassed that his court was used by the deep state to further a travesty of justice. He certainly is fully aware that prosecutors and investigators are capable of lying, and is fully aware that these same individuals can bring such pressure to bear on the target, Flynn in this case, that the target will acquiesce and plead guilty to a crime not committed. That’s why it’s called a plea agreement. I’m sure more will come out that will help to determine his true motivations, so I will leave it at that.

The reason I think President Trump should not pardon Flynn at this time is because I think it will be better to use the same system to vindicate him that was used to railroad him. I want to see the system and the players eat crow publicly and as embarrassingly as possible. I think the prospects will be greatly enhanced of him becoming a very wealthy man after he sues the federal government for its prosecutorial misconduct, investigative misconduct, his financial ruin defending himself against this travesty, and the hit upon his personal integrity. This should be played out all the way to the Supreme Court if necessary. What do you think would carry a more powerful message of public disgrace for the DOJ and in particular the FBI and those involved, a dismissal by the Supreme Court or a pardon by President Trump?

President Trump can pardon Flynn at any time, even going out the door if Biden wins the presidency. The Left is not going to go down without a fight, so the rancor that has followed the DOJ’s decision to drop the case should not have been a surprise. As the days pass, we will learn Judge Sullivan’s motives. If he is an accomplice to the deep state it will be easily detected, because his court will fill with kangaroos, and as more of the illegal activities of the deep staters are uncovered, it will become impossible to deny the obvious.

It is time for Anthony Fauci’s fifteen minutes of fame to end.

Anthony Fauci clearly has no understanding of the economic impact of the policies he is proposing we continue. I have no problem with the actions taken in the beginning because we were dealing with an unknown virus. It appeared extremely lethal and the transmissibility of the virus wasn’t well known. The death rates worldwide ranged from one percent to ten percent. In fact, nothing was well known in the beginning. The science and data were nearly complete unknowns. However, that situation no longer exists.

Now we hear leftists say we need to follow the science and data and keep the Country closed. Well, actually the science and data say a completely different thing. We now know that the death rate is far lower than previous estimates, and may only be twice as lethal as the regular flu. We also know that it is particularly lethal to the elderly and those with problematic health conditions, and particularly non-lethal to everyone else, particularly children.

Some seem to believe that we can control this virus. I think Birx has even made the comment that we do not have the virus under control. First, you don’t need to be an expert in epidemiology to know that it is impossible to control a virus. Second, in listening to experts in epidemiology other than Fauci and Birx it is clear to me that if we keep running from this virus that it will keep chasing us. Our immune systems are the only way we will be able to defeat this virus.

Therefore, it is time to open up the economy, and stop being completely stupid about this social distancing stuff. There certainly are reasonable actions that we as individuals can do, but someone standing on a beach alone is a threat to nobody.  Those who are at particular risk must take responsibility for and isolate themselves from everyone else, and those who cannot protect themselves such as nursing home residents should be protected to the greatest degree possible. This will allow the rest of the population go about their lives while developing herd immunity that will in the end benefit all, and particularly those who are most at risk. These stay at home edicts are akin to jailing persons before they have a chance to commit a crime, and that is definitely a bad thing.

The Anatomy of a Hoax

Hoaxes are generally very easy to spot. Especially the hoaxes that make allegations that reach into the political sphere that are then used by the inhabitants of that sphere for corrupt purposes. These hoaxes are very easy to spot because they are stated in such a way as to leave no doubt as to who the guilty party is and the motivations involved, or if the allegation is so bizarre that it just simply is not believable. Usually all you need is just one small snippet of the entire allegation, a Freudian slip of sorts, the desire to essentially force everyone to believe by shocking the conscious.

For instance, when Jussie Smollett made the claim that his attackers were wearing MAGA hats and made some comment about how this is MAGA country, I knew that he was lying.  Another one occurred when a young black girl claimed that her dreadlocks were cut off by some white kids and that she was called racist names. I don’t remember what it was the girl said specifically that exposed her allegations as a hoax to me, but I turned to my wife after we watched that report and told her that the girl was lying, and sure enough it turned out that she was.

I didn’t believe the Kavanaugh hoax from the beginning because the mainstays of leftist political character assassination are accusations of racism, sexism or sexual predation. So, when those accusations came out, I turned off immediately. I would have been more likely to believe that he had robbed a bank when he was younger.

Last, but certainly not least is the Trump/Russia hoax which wasn’t just a hoax, but was a large scale disinformation campaign. However, let’s just look at the first allegation designed to shock the conscious. I can still remember the day when I heard the allegation in the Steele Dossier that Donald Trump had hired prostitutes to urinate on a bed that the Obama’s had slept in. I knew right then that the dossier was a hoax. The notion that Donald Trump would hire prostitutes to do something so petty and bizarre simply was not believable.

There is a pattern of behavior by leftists that is unmistakable and undeniable, and it plays out nearly the same way every time. Theirs is a religion of a big and controlling government, and all of the tactics they use are designed to move more political power in their direction. So, it is of utmost importance to recognize when they are implementing one of their tactics so that it can be resisted from the start.