The Violent Vigilante Murder of Ahmaud Arbery

By Ken Gulley

UPDATE: Prior to the completion of this blog, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation (GBI) moved to have the McMichael’s arrested and charged: see link:


If you’re like me, It has been difficult to locate any news articles that have not been dripping with a highly opinionated narrative of this event.

That is perhaps understandable. What happened was not only horrific but there seemed to be no true effort at seeking justice. Until now…

Below, I’ll attempt to present to you the raw facts of the violent incident and then save the opinion portion for the end. Sources and links are presented at the bottom.


The encounter takes place between a 25 year old man named Ahmaud Arbery and two other adults, Gregory and Travis McMichael.

Ahmaud, a black man, is a former football player and was actively seeking to land an electricians job in his home county of Glynn, Georgia.

Gregory, 64, is a former investigator for the district attorney in Brunswick, Georgia (Glynn County) and a former police officer. Travis, Gregory’s son, is 34 years of age.


The incident took place in a small riverside community of Satilla Shores, in Brunswick, Georgia. Brunswick is 60% black and 33% white. The town is sparsely populated in parts and hugs a large number of waterways that branch out to the Atlantic Ocean. The area is filled with wetlands and wooded areas.


On Sunday, February 23rd, a call came into 911 Dispatch stating that, “a black male running down the street” might be responsible for a “rash of burglaries” in the neighborhood.

The caller advised dispatch that there was a man, “in a house right now. It’s a house under construction.” When 911 Dispatch attempted to get a clarification for what crime was occurring (outside of a possible trespass). No answer was given but rather the caller (name censored) stated, “He has been caught on camera a bunch before at night. It’s kind of an ongoing thing here.”

Instead of waiting for police, Travis and Gregory notified their neighbor and loaded up onto a pickup truck to confront the man they suspect of the recent burglaries. That man was Ahmoud Arbery.

During the encounter and video shot by the neighbor trailing the Arbery; Arbery can be seen running at a jogging pace wearing khaki shorts and a white shirt. Arbery zig-zags to avoid the truck which cut of his route of travel.

After going out of sight in front of the vehicle, a shot rings out as Travis attempts to “detain” Arbery. Arbery engaged Travis and attempt to disarm him while Gregory dismounted the pickup truck. As the struggle continued, two more shots ring out. Blood can be seen on Arbery’s white shirt as he stumbled away from the truck and fell to the ground where he died soon after.


The MicMichael’s maintain they were attempting to detain a suspected burglar involved in a rash of burglaries in their neighborhood.

According to Georgia State Law, a citizen arrest is lawful if it meets certain criteria:

“A private person may arrest an offender if the offense is committed in his presence or within his immediate knowledge. If the offense is a felony and the offender is escaping or attempting to escape, a private person may arrest him upon reasonable and probable grounds of suspicion.”

Furthermore, the McMichaels declare that during the attempted detention, Arbery attacked Travis. The attack, the McMichaels allege, alters the detention and turned the incident into one of self-defense. Georgia law, like most state laws, allow for justifiable use of firearms in instances where the victim of an attack believes their life is in danger.

Only 1 official police report of a burglary is documented in the area 7 weeks prior to this incident. Therefore the notion of a “rash of burglaries” is brought into question. Though it is not uncommon for many more instances to go unreported.

According to the anonymous neighbor (who’s house was “trespassed”) a man was seen on video who looked like Arbery. The man was seen walking onto the dock of the home that went out to the Little Satilla River. The anonymous neighbor could only confirm a possible “trespassing” violation at this time.


According to media sources and official reports, a police investigation was conducted listing the McMichaels as “suspects” of a homicide. Homicides can be justified or not. With Travis and Gregory as cooperative parties in the investigation, the report was handed to the District Attorney’s office for evaluation on possible criminal charges.

Given Gregory’s prior profession as an investigator for the District Attorney’s office, two DA’s had recused themselves from the investigation for conflicts of interest and any depiction of impropriety or bias toward the McMichaels.

The third prosecutor, Tom Durden, sent the case over to a Grand Jury rather than pressing for charges from his own office. The move itself has led to part of the outrage.

The video that leaked led to national outcry and speculations of racism (among other things). The limited and short in scope. Much like police body worn cameras, it doesn’t tell the entirety of the story but it does offer an objective viewpoing and a voice for the decedant (where none would usually exists). Outside of loud gun shots, nothing said could be heard between Arbery and the McMichaels.


The video itself has been in evidence since the incident. The investigating department and District Attorney’s office had refused to hand over the video to Arbery’s family attorney until it was leaked online. That in itself is not unusual but will no doubt adds to suspicion.

The public both in Georgia and throughout the nation have since become inflamed by the incident and its subsequent delays – undoubtedly hampered by the recusals and the corona virus measures taken in the state.

Politicians have also jumped into the fray. Some for political points no doubt and others to answer the call of the public’s outcry.

On May 5th, Governor Brian Kemp (R) offered the state’s law enforcement personnel (GBI) resources and oversight into the investigation taking place at the county level.

Joe Biden (D) suggested the video clearly showed a man “killed in cold blood.” Former Congressman & Prosecutor (R) Trey Gowdy questions why the investigation “took a video [becoming public]” before actions were carried out – acknowledging that the minority communities must question if justice would ever be pushed had there been no video in this case or others.

MY TAKE (Opinion)

As a law enforcement officer, I have to practice objectivity. On most calls for service, I am not present to see the allegations presented by a civilian regarding an assault or similar allegation against another person. Objectivity comes naturally to me by practice.

I want you, the reader, to practice your best to be objective with me. Put aside the forced “two white men kill an unarmed black man” racism narrative that is being pushed by the media and lets consider the facts at hand. I will address those issues later.

(1) Legalities of the Incident

The Legalities of the incident are first and foremost important factors to this tragedy is to be judged. The two overarching legal issues here are that of a citizens arrest (a) and self defense (b).

(a) Given that the actions by the McMichaels – who determined to locate and detain Arbery as a suspect in a series of burglaries – to try and affect an arrest. The two men essentially instigate the entirety of the incident. Therefore must determine first if the citizen arrest itself was justifiable.

There are two key issues with the McMichael’s claims of a citizen’s arrest. First, at best, the incident at hand was tantamount to a trespassing incident. No burglary took place on this date and time and therefore the “citizen arrest” in this instance is unlawful (see law above) as the crime committed was no longer taking place.

Now, as a police officer, there are times where I must detained people on the basis of suspicion of a crime. This is a lawful act in my duties. And sometimes we are wrong. Police officers can detain and arrest in felonies, misdemeanors, and infractions (only if present and witnessed by the officer).

The statue above does not allow citizens to affect an arrest for anyone for a crime below a misdemeanor.

Now lets suggest the McMichael’s thought a burglary had just taken place. Is their platform solid? Even in law enforcement, officers must be careful about the action of detaining or arresting someone based on the crime at hand. We call it, “having a solid platform.” It isn’t worth the fight (literally) at the present moment or later in court (via civil lawsuits) to justify why you had to subdue the jaywalker with flurry of baton strikes. It’s not worth the battle. Now had the same use of force taken place against someone wanted for murder, then the battle is worthwhile.

The call to 911 made by someone among the McMichael’s party does nothing to defend the mindset that they believed a burglary had just taken place. At best it suggest suspicion of prior incidents.

This therefore violates another key portion of the legal statue that states the incident must be committed “in his presence or immediate knowledge of.” A “stale” felony (one that occurred at a different time) does not warrant a civilian to act to arrest anyone.

Furthermore, it is difficult to suggest that Arbery was attempting to flee. Arbery can be seen jogging steadily toward the McMichael’s truck (which was parked ahead of him waiting) – not running away from him. Had Arbery desired to get away, he could easily flee toward the wooded side yards of the streets he ran on – not jog through the street in plain view.

(b) Self-defense.

Georgia is a “stand your ground” State. In such states, individuals who are on the receiving end of unlawful violence need not back down before defending themselves with reasonable force. Such a removal of a need to stand down is similar to the right afforded to law enforcement (CPC 835) but does not extend them the duty to place themselves in such situations with authority. Gregory being a former law enforcement official lost similar authority and rights when he retired.

Other states that do not have “stand your ground” laws limit the scope of self defense to homes or specified areas. While those states don’t explicitly suggest the right to self-defense outside certain areas, it is understood to be both reasonable and implied that one may defense themselves to a violent attack.

Deadly force is also applicable if the person reasonably believes that the attacker poses a threat of great bodily injury or death. The law does note that (a) you cannot be the aggressor and (b) you cannot be involved in the crime.

Many have attacked “stand your ground” laws especially in the wake of Trayvon Martin’s death at the hand of George Zimmerman. But the legalities behind the law are not an issue – what is an issue is the perversion of the law in the minds of vigilantes like Zimmerman and in this case the McMichael’s.

In fact the “stand your ground law” gave Arbery the right to fight with all his might and try and disarm Travis.

The McMichael’s did not have a legal basis to detain or arrest Arbery and therefore were indeed the aggressors in this situation. Also consider the video. While obscured and very short in length, the initial shot happens almost immediately upon contact between Arbery and Travis. I would venture to judge that there was hardly any time to suggest that Arbery posed any grave danger to Travis, especially given that Travis was armed and Arbery was not. This, therefore, makes Travis the aggressor.

At minimum, the case should be forward by the DA as voluntary manslaughter – if not murder. In my opinion, especially with the lack of standing on either legal issue above, a charge for murder is most accurate.

(2) Socio-Politicization

As with most of these incidents, race is highlighted and politics come into play some times more than they should.

Two white men killing an unarmed black jogger made it very easy to do without much trying. Then add the fact that the incident took place in the south, in a state that incorporated the confederate battle flag into their state flag in 1956 before purging it in 2001.

To completely ignore the racial implications present is to be intentionally ignorant (a soft way of calling someone stupid). Trey Gowdy acknowledges that eloquently on Fox News (see link).

The incident has the hallmarks of a modern day lynching without the overt racism.

We have no idea if the McMichael’s are racists or not. In the court of public opinion, they have received that label and that appears to be all that matters. It is my hope that the facts above show you that both Travis and Gregory were clearly in the wrong regardless of race or racism.

Outside of the implied historical context of the South and the similarities of old lynchings gangs that would take place – I have no evidence to prove that either men were racist. Afterall, Gregory served as an investigator for the DA in Brunswick and likely helped many in the majority black community find justice. That also does not prove him not to be as racist either subconsciously or overtly. Many will argue the subconscious take over in such matters. Perhaps, but thats not something we can neither measure nor prove.

If there is anything to be happy about in this tragedy, it appears that both the Left and Right have found grave fault and major issues with the actions taken by these two men and the subsequent lack of justice from the DA’s office. We both agree something must be done, and answers must be given.

Unfortunately, though, that doesn’t excuse many on the right end of the spectrum from hiding behind the “wait to all the facts come out” excuse to avoid the issues and evils behind bias and/or racial injustices. Thats a damn shame. After all, we conservatives hold government in suspicion and tout the corrections of Republicans in Congress to overthrow the evils of the Jim Crow Democratic South. We therefore should have no issue understanding the lingering effects of what governments helped institutionalized there.

That said its also important to understand how and when race should play a factor. All too often the Left has willingly used race in situations where it is unwarranted – making it difficult and exhausting to those on the Right to swallow situations where it is warranted. When they boy cries wolf, he is no longer taken seriously.

I have already seen some on the Left, friends included, ready to condemn all of America and all of the Caucasian community for the stupid actions of these two men. One friend suggested they weren’t willing to say the South has changed since the civil rights area – spitting in the face of all of the heroes who fought so hard to change things in those communities.

America is one of the least racist multi-ethnic nations on earth. People that condemn America for these crimes as a whole ignore the fact that more African’s have moved to the US voluntarily for freedom and prosperity than ever came on slave ships.

Another friend of mine put Arbery’s name alongside other famous killings of black men like Alton Sterling – saying “we can’t go jogging” and “we can’t sale CDs.” This is highly ignorant as it ignores the fact that such instances are rare (and therefore gain national attention) and completely different.

Sterling wasn’t just selling counterfeit CDs, he was a documented gang member who just threatened a woman with a gun despite being on probation (restricting him from firearms) before fighting the police and dying while trying to pull a gun on the cops. His death is nothing like that of a Arbery and does little to heal the issue of race – rather suggesting instead that the black community is willing to stand beside the wrong and treat them as if they were in the right.

Lebron James stated “We are literally hunted everyday/everytime.” While undoubtedbly hyperbolic, the statement is nowhere near the truth and only moves to assist the paranoia and reactions black men have to certain situations involving the police (since this issues is being lumped in) – turning simple investigatory situations into confrontations. But i understand his frustration and anger. Failing to understand that sentiment and pain is exacerbated by those who dismiss it outright.

Lastly, while it is the job of the defense attorney to justify their client’s actions – in this case the McMichael’s – it doesn’t mean the public is accountable to the actions undertaken. Yes, Arbery had a short criminal record (shoplifting as an 19 year old) and bringing a gun to a HS basketball game as a 13 year old but neither acts were factors in McMichael’s justifications nor are they relevant to the perceived threats and crime that supposedly took place on that day.

Even if Arbery had correctly been identified as the burglar from previous incidents – the McMichael’s ability to detain Arbery and their defense justification would still be indefensible as they agitated the situation. They made the move as civilians to threaten a fellow civilian far from the scene of a crime they did not witness.

Not even in criminal trials are Law Enforcement Officers able to bring up the active parole or probation status’ of certain individuals duding a trial. So, far be it from the public to utilize these past indiscretions to excuse or justify the McMichael’s actions against Arbery.

This is a tragedy that should have never happened. Two men went above and beyond the law, violating the law, and arrest a man with force not authorize to them in any way. The the result was horrific.

Imagine yourself, presumably minding your own own business only to be accosted at gun point by strange men who are obviously not uniformed law enforcement officers. How would you react?

This thought is something that leaps off the page in my mind. As a police officer, during a report of a lawful detention and arrest, I have to explain what I was wearing and how it signified I was an officer with the authority to enforce the law. Simply being one is not enough for the court, it has to be written on me and a badge or a symbol must be showing. Now imagine trying to defend the act of an arrest by a citizen without the very uniform presence let alone probable cause.

A man’s life was taken, a son was lost. While some may argue that the outcome was not what either McMichael had in mind, I can tell you that I’ve spoke with thieves who never intended to injure or kill their victims as well. It happened and they should be brought to justice for murder.


• NBC (Liberal lean)

• NYT (Left lean)

• FOX (Right bias)

• WP (Leftist bias)

• BBC (Liberal lean)

• CNN (Left bias)

• Time (Liberal bias)

• WSJ (Right lean)

• 11A (local affiliate)

• FOX (Right bias)

• State Law:

• CPC Authority

• NR (Conservative bias)

• PB (Conservative bias)

#MeToo for thee, but not for me

By Joshua Weigert
April 17, 2020

In a shocking turn of events, the Democrats and the mainstream media are largely ignoring or questioning Democratic Presidential Nominee Joe Biden’s sexual assault accuser.

Unfortunately, if you’ve been paying attention to politics over the last number of years, this really isn’t shocking.

In an interview with podcast host Katie Halper, Tara Reade, a former Biden staffer in the 90s, described the sexual assault allegation. Reade claims that in 1993, Joe Biden pushed her against a wall and placed his fingers between her legs and penetrated her. She eventually pulled away and Biden allegedly told her that he thought she “liked” him (1).

Reade was one of several women who came forward publicly last year alleging Biden had kissed or touched them in uncomfortable ways. When asked why she waited a year to reveal her more serious allegation, she claimed it was because no one else witnessed the incident. She does claim that others saw Biden harass her on different occasions, though (1).

In January, Reade approached the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund looking for assistance. Reade was told that they were unable to provide assistance to her because Biden is a candidate for federal office and that pursuing a case could jeopardize their non-profit status (2).

Kate Bedingfield, Biden’s deputy campaign manager, said in a statement that “Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims. We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false” (1).

So, what happened to #BelieveAllWomen? What happened to #MeToo? What happened to #TimesUp?

Politics and Agendas. That’s what happened.

Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post claimed in a tweet in September of 2018 that Brett Kavanaugh didn’t deserve the benefit of the doubt because the Supreme Court was on the line. Now, she seems to put the burden of proof on the woman’s allegation. Is the President not as serious of a job than a Supreme Court Justice? It’s likely the President will have to nominate a new justice within the next 4 years.

What about Michelle Goldberg of the New York Times? In her article in September of 2018, Christine Blasey Ford was a hero. The villains in the Ford article are the Republicans and Brett Kavanaugh. In Goldberg’s article of Reade, the villains are “bad faith” trolls who have the nerve to hold the #MeToo crowd to the same standards they had for Kavanaugh and conservative men.

Then we have Joan Walsh of the Nation. She had no problems writing deeply emotional articles about the plight of women when Ford was accusing Kavanaugh, but has a critical and skeptical take on Reade’s accusations against Joe Biden. She seems to only want women to tell stories that get conservative men in hot water.

When the New York Times finally decided to publish the story about Reade’s allegations against Biden, the headline of the article read “Examining Tara Reade’s Sexual Assault Allegation Against Joe Biden”. Again, an odd headline in the era of #MeToo. It does get worse, though.

The New York Times tweeted that they found “no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, beyond hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable”. In other words, “we found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Biden, beyond the documented history of sexual misconduct”. The New York Times’ tweet is like if the police arrive at the scene of a suspected burglary and say “we found no pattern of burglary, beyond shattered windows, forced entry and expensive china and diamonds missing”. The tweet has since been deleted, but the line “we found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Biden” is still in the article (3).

In the same piece, the authors wrote (in regards to Reade filing a police report) “Ms. Reade said she filed the report to give herself an additional degree of safety from potential threats. Filing a false police report may be punishable by a fine and imprisonment” (3).

May be punishable by a fine and imprisonment? Have the New York Times ever written that while reporting on any other sexual assault allegation? If no one is accusing her of filling a false police report, why is this line even in the article, then? This is the disgusting way the mainstream media frames allegations against left-wing figures in a positive way towards the figure. The mainstream media knows what they’re doing.

The media’s cover and protection of their candidate, Joe Biden, isn’t just in the framing of their articles and stories, it’s even more evident by the lack of coverage in general.

What is the justification behind CNN not having a single article mentioning Tara Reade? What’s the rationale behind CNN host Brian Stelter, an apparent truth seeker, to tweet about Ford 44 times but completely ignore Reade’s story?

Are Reade’s allegations against Biden any less credible than Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh?

Ford did not tell a single person about her assault and no one was able to corroborate the story. Reade claims she told people about Biden’s assault and inappropriate touching and kissing.  

Ford remembers virtually nothing about when it happened or specific details of the assault. Reade remembers almost all the details pertaining to the incidents.

Ford accused a man who has no established history of inappropriate behaviours, besides a few beers during highschool. Reade is accusing a man with a recent history of inappropriate behaviour and who just recently had seven other women accuse him of inappropriate behavior. We can even see recent video footage of Biden smelling women’s hair and touching them in inappropriate ways. It isn’t enough for the mainstream media, however, as President Trump must be stopped at any cost.

Former President Barack Obama and former Democratic Presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have come out this past week to endorse Joe Biden. All three politicians have claimed to be supporters of the #MeToo movement and against the silencing of women who have experienced sexual assault.

Obama has always claimed to be a champion of women’s rights. In a speech in September of 2018, Barack Obama said “If you support the #MeToo movement, you’re outraged by stories of sexual harassment and assault, inspired by the women who have shared them, you’ve got to do more than retweet a hashtag” (4). He’s right, you have to do more than retweet a hashtag. I don’t think endorsing and trying to get the accused into the White House was what he had in mind, though.

What about Michelle Obama? She had strong words to say in 2018 in support of the #MeToo movement. What does she have to think about her pal Joe Biden being credibly accused of sexual assault?

In an interview with the Cut, Senator Elizabeth Warren said:

“the #MeToo movement is grassroots at its most powerful. It’s the reminder that we are stronger when we stand up for each other. The first women who spoke up in the #MeToo movement inspired a wave of women who spoke up, and they in turn inspired another wave and another wave and another wave until the world no longer looks the same.” (5)

Tell me, Warren, did you “stand up” for Reade? Did Reade inspire another wave of women? Or did victims become unmotivated to share their experiences because of the way they see the media and Democrats treating and ignoring Reade?

Bernie Sanders claims to be a champion of the people, fighting against the establishment and the 1%. Where is Bernie in championing for Reade? Instead of tweeting platitudes, why not take action? Bernie could take a stand against sexual harassment by condemning Biden. But instead, Bernie endorsed him knowing full well the allegations against him.

The mainstream media, the Democrats, they’re all hypocrites. They never supported women who’ve experienced sexual assault. They only supported those accusations against conservatives because it was politically convenient at the time.

These people don’t care about women. Don’t let them fool you.



The Next Battleground: The Voting Booth

By Ken Gulley

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

Rahm Emmanuel

As Democrats, and some Republicans, quickly jump to flex their authoritarian muscles during this unprecedented pandemic and economic crisis; Democrats have also been quick to push forward the old idea of nationwide mail-in elections for state primaries and Federal elections. (1)

In the name of “public safety” of course.

It wouldn’t be the first time Democrats have sought to Federalize state elections – seeking to do so during the first Covid 19 Stimulus deal in March (2).

Image 1: Breitbart News

While mainstream media touting the Democratic message of easing mail-in ballots nationally, Breitbart, the notorious Right winged-based media source, broke a story suggesting that up to 16.4 Million vote ballots went missing (included in these numbers are ballots that were misdirected and/or undeliverable). (Image 1)

Whereas Democrats already refuse the validity of Voter ID laws, calling them racist or restrictive, some have even made moves to repeal Voter ID laws already in place, as Virginia Gov. Northam did today. (3)

With issues concerning mail-in ballots and suspicions regarding “ballot harvesting,” (4) it is safe to suggest that concerns over the Left’s desire to transform the election system are more than warranted.

Image 2: New York Times

One doesn’t need to reach back to 2016-2018 to see the concerns every American should have regarding mail-in ballots. Wisconsin is currently reeling from a smaller but considerable issue from early April. (Image 2)

While these incidents do not necessarily denote “voter fraud” – they also don’t necessarily refute the possibility that sometimes large sums of mail – or just ballots themselves – are conveniently lost (5). No matter how small of a scale, proven cases of Voter Fraud are in fact taking place in the United States (Image 3).

Image 3: Heritage Foundation

Democrats attempts to push-vote by-mail elections no doubt is tied to the push to bail out the USPS, which is losing millions every year. (6)

As President Trump stone walls Democrat attempts for the time being, you can rest assured that this issue will continue to be pushed forward even well beyond the time this crisis has passed. The reasoning for the necessity will simply change without any push back from mainstream media.

Mail-in ballots are a workaround to Voter ID laws and a boost to ballot harvesting methods championed by the Left. Full disclosure, I currently vote by mail but hand deliver the ballot to voting booths and/or deliver it directly to state approved referees to assure they are counted. (I’ll be repealing my mail-in ballot in the future in favor of in person voting.)

The election system is safe only when a man or woman arrives in person to cast their own ballot with proper identification insuring their proper Right to do so is secured with identification. There’s nothing racist about that. (Image 4)

Image 4: Nelson Mandela


> Image 1: B – Right bias

• Internal Source (from Breitbart Article):

– PILF – Conservative Bias:

– USEAC – non-partisan entity

> Image 2: NYT – Liberal/ Left lean

> Image 3: Heritage Foundation – (Conservative lean)

> Image 4: Nelson Mandela – Voter ID

(1) (Politico – liberal lean)

(2) (WT – conservative bias)

(3) (local affiliate)

(4) (TH – liberal lean)

(5) (Right lean)

(6) (WP – leftist bias)

Are our freedoms and liberties being destroyed by COVID-19?

By Joshua Weigert
April 11, 2020


Yesterday, I was stunned to see a video of a man in Philadelphia being forcibly removed from a bus because he was not wearing a face mask. There is no actual law enforcing people wearing face masks, but that didn’t stop law enforcement from manhandling him off the bus. It was a totalitarian and authoritarian move. I then read and watched more and more videos and articles of governors and mayors enforcing strict decrees infringing on the rights of their constituents. It seems surreal. America, where freedom and liberty is absolutely paramount, is now a land where citizen’s rights are being chipped away all in the name of security.

Why was it necessary for ten police officers to remove a man because he wasn’t wearing a mask? Why didn’t the police just give the man a mask? If his crime was not protecting himself and others by not wearing a mask, why would then ten police officers come in close proximity to this man? This video looks eerily similar to videos coming out of Wuhan, China in January. Will we see more and more of these sorts of authoritarian acts? What if people refuse to take a COVID-19 vaccine? Will they be thrown off buses like this man? What if our cities partially reopen for commuting to and from work? If you’re caught going to a place you’re not “authorized” to go, will this happen to you?

Then you have Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear who, on one of the most holy weekends on the Christian calendar, will send law enforcement officers to churches and write down the license plates of the church goers to enforce a mandatory quarantine. Now, I do not think churches should have in person services during this pandemic, however, it’s hard to argue that this is not religious persecution. If we set the precedent that governors can force churches closed in the interest of public safety, then we will have some serious issues in the future if a true authoritarian does come to power.

In Arkansas, a twelve-year-old girl was playing basketball on a court near her home when law enforcement arrived and cut the hoop. They cut the hoop in order to enforce “social distancing”. The girl was playing basketball by herself. According to the girl’s mother, the court is never in use and is largely ignored by the city. The girls mother said they “used their own money to purchase a net for the basketball hoop, since it was missing. Her husband also dug a drainage canal to keep it from flooding, and regularly cleaned it of debris” (1).

Meanwhile in Michigan, Governor Gretchen Whitmer, who is being looked at as a potential Vice-Presidential Candidate for Joe Biden, has banned the sale of “non-essential” goods. Many baby goods, including baby car seats, are to be banned from sale. Even worse, vegetable and fruit seeds are banned from being sold as well. How is it possible for a governor to ban the sale of seeds to produce your own food? This is the type of authoritarianism that would make the Founding Fathers roll over in their graves.

Lastly, the mayor in Greenville, Mississippi banned all church services, even “drive-through” services. The police have been ticketing church-goers $500 for showing up to the services. These people are sitting in their cars. What possible issue can arise from this? Instead, police officers are forced to go car to car ticketing these people, literally creating the risk of spreading coronavirus.

It feels as though 200+ years of liberty and freedom is all being tossed out the window because of one pandemic. We have states where the liquor stores are open, and the churches are forced to close. We have states where you are even banned from being outside running by yourself on the beach/park, or even in your own car somewhere.

This is what the Founding Fathers feared. This is what many conservatives feared would happen if a crisis occurred. When do we say enough is enough? When do we start to not comply to these totalitarian measures?

We need to seriously consider how much more of this is acceptable.



How Are We Going To Pay For This?

By Joshua Weigert
April 3, 2020

The world is currently engulfed in an unprecedented pandemic that is threatening the lives of millions of people worldwide. Every western country has seen lockdowns initiated by the local, state and/or federal governments. Sporting leagues and events like the NBA, Summer Olympics, UEFA Euro 2020, and many others have been cancelled or delayed without a timetable to return. Wimbledon, which has not been cancelled wince World War II, was officially cancelled a few days ago.  More seriously, millions of people around the world have faced or will face job loss as a result of COVID-19. According to the US Labor Department, ten million Americans have already lost their jobs as a result of the business shutdowns caused by COVID-19.

The Canadian job market isn’t doing any better, either. According to the Angus Reid Institute, a leading research organization in Canada, 44% of Canadian household say they’ve lost work or experienced layoffs due to the COVID-19 pandemic (1). Another 18% of Canadian households expect layoffs in the near future. According to The Globe and Mail, the Canadian government expects four million Canadian workers to apply for government assistance for COVID-19 (2).

In both the US and Canada, these workers need assistance. These people need money to pay for food, amenities, loans, mortgage, rent, car payments, and a host of other things.

As a result of measures put in place by governments, many small businesses were forced to close. These business owners lost their income. Some may never reopen their businesses.

Even with the stimulus packages and social assistance programs, nobody knows if the lost jobs will ever come back.

Vox reported that Goldman Sachs projected gross domestic product (GDP) would fall at a 24% rate in the second quarter this year. According to Goldman Sachs “a decline of this magnitude would be nearly two-and-a-half times the size of the largest quarterly decline in the history of the modern GDP statistics” (6). We are facing a recession that could be worse than 2009.

Both the US and Canadian governments are giving away thousands of dollars per unemployed worker as a result of COVID-19. According to the Canadian Department of Finance website, the Canadian economic response plan aims to provide $2,000 a month for up to four months to workers who lost their income as a result of COVID-19 (3). In the US, the $2 trillion CARES Act was signed last week which provides $1,200 per worker, and additional funding for families (4). 

Who is paying for it?

I’m not arguing the validity or necessity of providing emergency funds and assistance to these people in need. As mentioned earlier, these people need money to pay for food for their families.

We constantly hear about the potential loss of life as a result of COVID-19, but mass unemployment and economic collapse will also have casualties. There really are no easy answers in this pandemic.

Although it may seem like this isn’t the time to discuss these things, it’s imperative we think about and discuss the long-term affects and implications of the decisions we make during this pandemic. We need to make decisions with an eye for the future. After all, the legislation passed in the US will cost $2 trillion, and Canada is planning on a record-breaking deficit of $130 billion this year (5).

We cannot continue giving cheques without any recourse. There are only two real options in regard to how we are going to pay for this:

  1.  Tax increases on the wealthy and middle classes


2. A drastic reduction and overhaul of social programs

Ideally, option 2 is best. A complete overhaul of social programs and wasteful government spending is a step we should have taken decades ago. Foreign aid, arts and corporate subsidies, inflated bureaucracy, and many other areas need to be reassessed and cut. However, this option is extremely unlikely as it entails a sort of self reflection for society and government. It would be difficult to accept cuts to programs a portion of society relies on and/or takes advantage of. The cuts to government programs also would lead to job losses for a large amount for government employees. The short-term would be incredibly difficult for a large amount of people in society. On the other hand, the long-term benefits of such drastic cuts will lead to a smaller government structure and spending. This option places long-term benefits over short-term pain.

Realistically speaking, option 1 is the likely outcome, as it is the easiest option to implement. Raising taxes will also mostly affect the “wealthy” in the short-term, which the vast majority of the population are not a part of. There is already growing resentment against the wealthy class perpetuated by the political left. The tax increases likely wouldn’t be a percentage or two, it would be dramatic increases. The US have already signed a $2 trillion spending bill. It’s likely that the spending won’t stop there, as more and more bills will need to be passed as this pandemic continues.

However, after we raise taxes, what then? Are the wealthy going to sit back and watch as government confiscates more and more of their wealth? Are corporations going to continue to hire workers? Will corporations pass along their tax increases down to the consumers? Are corporations even going to stay? These are the long-term ramifications of option 1. These are also grounds for increased socialism and the eventuality of communism.

We already see the power and scope of government increasing. We are even now seeing civil liberties and privacy evaporate in front of our eyes.

The famed libertarian economist Milton Friedman explained it best when he wrote “nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program.” Government programs have a habit of being introduced as a “temporary” measure, but end up being permanent. In the UK, income tax was a temporary measure in order to fund the war against Napoleon. The tax is still in place today. In the beginning of the 19th century, Germany introduced a sparkling win tax (Sektsteuer) in order to finance their war fleet. The German fleet is now at the bottom of the ocean, but the tax is still in place. During the Great Depression, the US government passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act, which provided subsidies to farmers facing economic struggles. In 1938, this bill was replaced by the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act. The Great Depression ended but the subsidies for farmers continued to grow.

It’s difficult to give people money and/or subsidies, then take it away from them. That will be the difficulty in stopping these COVID-19 related payments to workers out of work. Many experts and government officials believe this lockdown will continue for twelve weeks and potentially beyond. If people are receiving payments for three months to stay at home, will they even have a will to work? How will productivity be affected by this? It may be that we become lazier as a society. It’s easy to view these relief payments as “free” money. This would, again, be a breeding ground for socialism. We’ll have politicians advocating to keep the COVID-19 relief payments and that only a few need to actually work.

In the eleventh hour, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi attempted to add leftist provisions in the CARES Act. Fortunately, not many of her provisions made it in. However, a fourth relief package is being planned by congress, and we should expect more unrelated government expansions and overreach in it. According to the National Review, Pelosi originally wanted to add:

  • Reduction of student loan debt by $10,000 per borrower
  • Permanently expand Affordable Care Act premium subsidies
  • Forgive all the U.S. Postal Services debt’
  • Make the Child Tax Credit (CTC) fully refundable for the next 6 years
  • Increase the size of the CTC by $1,600 for children under the age of 6
  • Bail out multi employer pension plans that were failing prior to the crisis
  • Temporarily expand dependent care tax breaks (7)

The Democrats have already stated that this is the perfect time to impose their agenda on America. The House Majority Whip, Rep. James Clyburn, stated that this crisis is a “tremendous opportunity to restructure things to fit our vision” (8).

What vision is that, exactly? Judging by the Democrat talking points, it’s class warfare and all-out socialism.

It is imperative we have an eye on the future. We need to talk about how we’re going to pay for these stimulus packages and the long-term affects. It’s absolutely irresponsible if we don’t.

But then again, when has government ever really been responsible?


  4. $1200


You’ve probably come across it.

With Bernie Sanders seriously contending as the Democratic candidate for President in the past two elections seasons, champions of Socialism have crawled out of their parent’s basement to declare their love for all things Socialism. In doing so, they have declared that all things that glitter is obviously not capitalism.

But it’s “Democratic”

“If you’re against socialism, don’t drive on our roads. Don’t call the police.”

Unfortunately for the layman, a quick quip in return isn’t exactly going to drive the point home with much clarity. Some things are better explained with reasoned argument, which unfortunately is lost in a world of instant gratification.

Socialism isn’t everything that benefits society. That loose definition of socialism has plagued millennials and likely contributes to their erroneously positive outlook on the socio-political economic system that truly doesn’t work.

The best short defined explanation for how socialism operates is this:

“Socialism by definition involves community [read: “workers” – Marx] ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange.”

Marx says hello you are all bourgeoisie.

If that sounds very close to communism, well there is no wonder Karl Marx used socialism and communism interchangeably.

Obviously, that isn’t taking place with American roads. Far from it. But how do we explain the nature of them?

We’ll, roads and other public programs are “socialistic” in nature, if we must use the term. They are communal goods, but not not attributed to socialism.

If it sounds like splitting hairs, it’s not. Consider the difference between Leftism and Liberalism.

As the explanation goes, In the US, “only one of those elements – “exchange” – is the function of the community or its government.” While the government acts as the “purchasing agent on on behalf of the public at large” non-profit and private organizations that own the means of the production “submit bids for projects…subject to oversight from [the public].”

It’s sort of an academic work around. Technical and wordy, it doesn’t deliver a quick punch like that of absurd statements about roads and emergency services.

After-all, the US governments had begun to establish a system of roads and infrastructure long before Marx came up with the very definitions that define socialism (and communism) today. So it would be anachronistic to suggest our roads are socialism.

If we must, we could also point to the 250,000 miles of roads built by the Romans in antiquity, surely Marx didn’t time travel and give them the idea of socialism.

So why the heck am I talking about this unfortunate misrepresentation of our tax dollars at work to begin with? Well for one thing, millions of young new voters are suggesting Socialism, even Democratic Socialism, is the new way forward all the while being unable to truly understand what the authoritarian system enacts.

$2 Trillion passed by the US Senate, and presumably to be followed by the US House. $2 Trillion American Dollars to bail out an ailing economy.

In figures, thats $2,000,000,000,000. A number so large it is difficult for the mind to fully understand. So here is a visualization of sorts:

The other issue of course is Covid-19. The Corona Virus. The Wuhan Flu. La Rona, if you will.

The word is, Americans and Capitalists have come running to Socialism to save the country. After all, raw money checks from Uncle Sam are being distributed to about 90% of the American people.

Yay, Socialism! Right!?


Especially considering why the move has been made to begin with. Dan Crenshaw puts it short and sweet:

You’ve probably seen the memes. A Republican wearing a MAGA hat and attempting to choose between two buttons, a check from the Federal Government or denouncing socialism.

But the memes (like most poorly made Liberal memes – that was redundant) have the advantage of being funny over being accurate. Since socialism isn’t in play here, the dichotomy is false.

But why wouldn’t this wealth sharing move be considered socialism? Well, not only does it fail to meet the definition above but the necessity for the action is artificial induced upon the market.

In other-words, the community (read: Government) imposed actions on the market that forced it to shutter up its goods and services. Therefore, the Government effectively used force to institute a market shutdown and is acting as a sort of insurance on behalf of the people (individuals and organizations).

We have already seen an example of this before Covid 19.

Consider the Trade War war with China. The trade war has harmed American farmworkers in a direct way, forcing them to lose millions in profit.

Since the government has forced this hardship, that same government has smartly interceded on their behalf – using tariffs imposed as a means to cover farm profit losses.

As an individual, you also go through a similar trade with the government when you file taxes. Whether you use a tax professional or pay for an online software, filing taxes costs. Since filing taxes is an imposed hardship placed by government, you have the opportunity include this expense in your taxes as a “write off.” Same goes for DMV registration.

The $1,200 (+$500 per child) one might receive is hardly going to make a dent for those dealing with a lost livelihood but it’s an attempt to help with an economic issue government forced to take place. That is hardly socialism but it is a welfare safety-net move that one can say is very much owed to the American people.

A people who may otherwise have simply pushed through the storm, rolled up their sleeves, and continued to work, like we always do.

After all, this $2 Trillion dollar “socialist” bail out would never be possible if it weren’t for Capitalists.

⁃ Ken Gulley



Covid 19 has presented government with a plethora of different challenges, a principal one being how to track and determine real cases of this virus.

Yesterday news broke of a 17 year old boy in LA County who had died. The media jumped on the case as a death attributed to Covid 19 but that information has now been placed on hold seeing that the teen suffered from a number of complications prior to being infected. The US mortality rate for those infected is hovering around 1.4-1.5% (or 0.5-0.6%) more than the yearly viral influenza.

This season’s Flu (A and B )have been especially lethal with somewhere between 23,000 and 59,000 deaths – a noticeably large range given the difficulty in tracking this “regular” disease, let alone a more highly contagious one (by means of transfer) like Covid 19. Some 38M Americans have had the flu this season (ranging back to Nov) and 390,000 required hospitalization. Without getting into the fallacy of making a comparison between the two viruses, the numbers beg the question about whether we will ever be able to accurately track Covid 19’s spread AND death rate, given the difficulty of tracking yearly influenza rates.

Doctors have admitted many could have had the virus and merely wrote off it’s mild symptoms as the flu or a cold, never truly addressing it. It is reported that Italy among other have simply written off most elderly deaths as Covid 19 related by regional association even without accurate tracking and testing given.

There is a great possibility that the death rate is even lower than the current 1.4 or 1.5% – while keeping in mind that it is believed the issue has yet to peak. So now the difficult question must be had and answered – with difficulty tracking the accuracy of the contagion’s infection rate, and issues with the death rate – when do we return to normal?

We obviously cannot live like shut-ins forever. We will eventually have to break out of this self-isolating routine – so where is that red line? Cuomo said all the measure taken in NY are worth it if one life is saved. Great sentiment but nothing more. It’s illogical and unreasonable thinking.

This question of when and how to return to norm is being ignored and only being brought forward by those on the Right. The Left is happy keeping people living out of the government’s hands – we know this. So they pass the buck and allow the Right to take the heat. The Left seems content with virtue signal type sentiment that avoids facing the reality that we as a nation cannot go on living like this. This isn’t about sacrificing old people over this nameless and faceless idea of an economy. It’s about returning people to their livelihoods which allow them to live fruitfully and raise families. We all know people out of work, laid off, furloughed and struggling to run their businesses (many of which they invested with their life savings). So for Leftists to simply rest on their laurels and say those of us on the Right just want to save the economy – no – we want to save the livelihood of Americans. Sacrificing millions of people’s livelihood to potentially save one life is not logical, Mr. Cuomo, even when you paint it as a noble platitude.

I don’t have all the answers. The answer no doubt must be measured and carefully procured. While Doctors and experts knowledge and potifications are important, they don’t run cities or nations. Their expertise, while appreciated greatly, doesn’t denote wisdom. And a wise decision is what is ultimately needed here, before we start anew. When we return to normal, we need to be careful not to reignite the fire of the contagion as it appears Honk Kong may have done. And if the ultimate goal (sans a cure) is to “flatten the curve,” we need to ultimately understand that this is something we’ll all have to live with.


• NYT – (Left lean)
• NPR (Left lean)
•NYP (Right lean)
•CNN (Left bias)

No, calling it "Wuhan" or "Chinese" virus is NOT racist

By Joshua Weigert
March 22, 2020

For the past week or so, the mainstream media, leftist celebrities and several Democrat politicians have been parroting a narrative that President Trump and others who refer to COVID-19 as “Wuhan” or “Chinese” virus, are racists.

Their contention is that calling the virus these things fuels racism. They claim that it suggests that Asians, or Asian-Americans, are “others” and are to be blamed for this pandemic. This in turn puts them at risk for victimization and race-incited attacks.

It’s interesting what the left deems as inflammatory rhetoric.

Calling the NRA and pro-Second Amendment activists terrorist and extremists? Not inflammatory.

Blaming straight white men for all of America’s problems? Not inflammatory.

Calling President Trump and his supporters evil and racists? No inflamatoria.

Referring to a virus which originated in China and has been causing havoc worldwide “Chinese”/ “Wuhan”? INFLAMMATORY!

Elizabeth Warren went so far as to actually censor the word “Chinese” in her quote tweet of President Trump.

Here’s the thing, no one thinks that Chinese Americans are to blame for the coronavirus. It appears that those who think that it is racist don’t have the ability to understand that this is in reference to the Chinese communist government, and not Chinese as an ethnicity. China has been actively hindering the world’s efforts to solve this pandemic by misinformation, lies and withholding vital information from the rest of the world.

Even the World Health Organization (WHO) argued against calling it “Chinese virus” because they claim “there is no blame in this”.

This is patently false. China IS to blame.

This is also from the same organization that believed the Chinese government when they told them that COVID-19 wasn’t transmittable person to person.

The whole point of referring to the virus as coming from China is to combat their communist propaganda blaming the US for the virus, and to remind the world that China lied about the virus. If they had told the truth we would not be in this state of crisis. Claiming that it’s racist to call this virus “Chinese”, or refusing to blame China for this pandemic is parroting Chinese communist propaganda. The Chinese government destroyed documents and lab samples, silenced critics and arrested whistle-blower doctors.

Celebrities and political talking heads seem to be blaming everyone BUT China.

Blaming bats? Did the bats decide to jump in a pot of bat soup? Did the bats supress information about the virus? Did the bats lie to the world about the virus?

Blaming New York City? Yes, you got it in New York City. But where did New York City get it from I wonder?

China, the country that locks Uighur Muslims in concentration camps, forces women to have abortions and where free speech and expression is non-existent, has the nerve to call the United States “racist” and the mainstream media and leftist celebrities are parroting their talking points. What is going on here?

The mainstream media themselves have called this virus “Chinese” and “Wuhan”. They know what they’re doing. This isn’t about if they actually think it’s racist, they know it isn’t. This is an active campaign to undermine President Trump and his efforts to manage this crisis.

A multitude of other viruses and illnesses are named after geographical locations. Ebola, Spanish Flu, German Flu, and several others are names of illnesses we use in everyday language.

Now, leftists are trying to rename historical pandemics and viruses.

Would these celebrities have an issue calling a virus coming from Tennessee as “Tennessee Flu”? The answer is that they would find no issue naming it this.

So in short, no, calling COVID-19 “Chinese” or “Wuhan” virus is NOT racist.

COVID-19 And Mainstream Media Distrust

By Joshua Weigert
February 14, 2020

I cannot remember a time I distrusted the mainstream media as much as I do with the COVID-19 coverage. I remember the Kavanaugh SCOTUS confirmation debacle. I remember Trump/Russia collusion. I remember Trump obstruction charges. I also remember Trump impeachment 2019.

I understand the new political game with all the aforementioned news stories.

The Kavanaugh confirmation was to prevent a conservative SCOTUS. The Trump/Russia collusion was actually an attempt (at first) to investigate allegations of wrongdoing. The obstruction charges, although far thinner than the collusion case, was another attempt to catch Trump in some sort of wrongdoing. Although Trump’s conduct wasn’t great or ideal by any stretch, Trump Impeachment 2019 was a last-ditch effort by the Democrats and the media to oust Trump from office for what they deemed as impeachable offenses.

However, what is the rationale behind the media’s hysterical, lying, manipulative, disingenuous, and China-sympathizing news coverage?
The only rationale I can find is this: Orange man bad.

That’s it.

During a pandemic and a time of public panic, the media (as well as the Democrats) think only about how they can criticize and ridicule every little aspect of Trump’s response to the pandemic.

First, we have “woke” members of the mainstream media like Chris Cuomo, Jim Acosta and Don Lemon claiming that adding “Wuhan” and/or “China” to coronavirus is actually racist. Besides the fact that the mainstream media has and continues to in fact add both Wuhan and China to labeling this virus, claiming it’s racist to add Wuhan or China whiling referring to this virus is absurd. German Measles, Ebola, Lyme Disease, MERS, West Nile Virus and so many more are all illnesses we named after the area it originated from. This is the latest attempt to label and deem anything and everything Trump says or does as racist.

This virus started in Wuhan, China. It has become a global crisis because China stifled and lied about information pertaining to this virus. They restricted and/or outright barred doctors and health officials from talking about it. This is a crisis because of China. Arguing against this simple fact is just communist-China propaganda.

Next you have a Politico article where Bernie Sanders claims that the deaths from coronavirus could be on par with World War II. This is irresponsible as well as insulting to not only our intelligence, but to the lives lost in World War II. No, this virus, as it currently stands, will NOT be anywhere near the extremes Bernie claims it could be. Again, this is an attempt to scare the public and turn public opinion against President Trump. It’s blatant fear-mongering.

The common criticism of not only the mainstream media, but celebrities like Stephen King, is that President Trump’s coronavirus response team is all male and not diverse enough.

This is a blatant lie.

It’s hard to understand why diversity is especially important in a virus response team? Does the virus care if there is a non-gender defining Muslim little-person on the team? Would this super oppressed person find a cure that a white male couldn’t? The obsession from the left and mainstream media with race, ethnicity, gender and any other social group is incredibly tiring and confusing. Does Stephen King plan on turning down book deals in the effort to promote visible minorities and/or women? I seriously doubt it. Again, this is a cheap attempt to undermine President Trumps response to this virus.

You know who disagrees with Brian Stelter about the European travel ban? Dr. Fauci and Dr. Redfield. Instead of sharing Stelter’s own ideas and thoughts about solutions to this problem, Stelter, Acosta and others in the mainstream media attempt to score political points by criticizing every action taken by the Trump administration. President Trump’s own scientific experts agree that a travel ban is a good idea. Logically, in order to stop the influx of new cases, it’s probably a good idea to prevent any more persons with the virus to enter the country. But yet again, this is an attempt to undermine anything and everything President Trump does.

If your first thought during a global pandemic is “how can I dunk on President Trump” or “does this hurt President Trump”, you’re doing compassion, civility and being a respectable human-being wrong. This is why trust in the mainstream media is at an all-time low. I only wish the folks in the mainstream media realize this.

What You Missed Last Week

News and headlines you missed from March 1st to the 8th

By Joshua Weigert
March 11th, 2020

There were several gaffes from Biden last week and it was difficult deciding on only one. However, this gaffe illustrates Biden’s mental state and his continual lapses in thought. Here, Biden actually utters “we cannot win this re-election” and “we can only re-elect Donald Trump”. How do the Democrats expect to put this man on a stage and debate President Trump? Even more ludicrous, how do the Democrats expect him to (if President) meet and negotiate with leaders like Vladimir Putin, Kim Jong Un, Xi Jinping, and others?

God help us if he does somehow win the Presidency.

Who would have thought letting children decide their gender and take puberty blockers would lead to serious issues and regrets down the road? Seems insane that allowing puberty blockers for children is a practice that is becoming more and more common. We’ll soon see even more cases like this young woman, who has now had her life severely altered by silly decisions her parents and doctors allowed her to make.

Siri, show me clear and transparent hypocrisy. Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are insufferable. Whether it’s their disrespectful attempt to remove themselves from the British monarchy, or their constant and torturous lectures about climate change, they don’t seem to have a lot of allies in the public at the moment. It doesn’t get better now that it’s been revealed Markle’s makeup artist was flown to London to “work” on her for an event. Did she have to use this one guy? The answer is no. But like most climate alarmists, do as I say, not as I do.

No, this is not a clip from Chernobyl documentary. Covid-19 will likely never be a serious pandemic, but videos like this doesn’t give me any reassurance. China has been manipulating their numbers in regard to this virus for months, they’ve been dragging people out of their homes in order to quarantine them and they have been standoffish with the WHO since this outbreak occurred. If nothing else, this virus is a great example why the west, and America in particular, is so great.

Nothing to see here. Just a large group of black teens brutally beating on a 15-year old Jewish girl in Brooklyn. Anti-Semitic attacks have unfortunately become common in New York City. Where is AOC? This occurred in her city. She constantly ignored attacks like these in her own city. I guess the Democrat narrative becomes undone when they start acknowledging that even African-Americans can be viciously racist.

Where to even begin with this? MSNBC had this segment PRE-PLANNED… There were several eyes that saw this in it’s planning stages and NO ONE saw an issue with the math. Brian Williams didn’t. Mekita Rivas didn’t. Mara Gay didn’t. And apparently, Sanders campaign didn’t see an issue with this either. These are the same people who lecture us about how we should have and can pay for Medicare for all, free tuition, living wages, etc. I guess it’s true what they say: The Left can’t math.

Socialism is a “new kind of politics”? That line might work for some of the young and naive youth, but not us regular people.

Remember when leftists recently claimed that no one celebrates abortions, and that it was just a right-wing myth? I guess we’re all hallucinating this crazy person screaming, huh?

Side Note: Women are the only people that can have abortions. I know, I know, science is bigoted.

I love this. Anytime TYT host Cenk Uygur loses it on air is when I sit back and watch with a bowl of popcorn. Like his 2016 election meltdown, Cenk seems to refer to a war with the DNC establishment a lot. Does Cenk have a thing for wars? I know he has a thing for denying a certain Armenian genocide… What wasn’t shown in this clip is how disastrous Cenk did in his bid to win a House seat in California, where he won under 5% of the vote. He is right about Biden being near senile or actually senile, though.