wnd--2020-05-21--Homeless camps on private property?

Homeless camps on private property?

Seattle 's notorious problem with homelessness has been exacerbated in recent years by failed policies , and now some City Council members have proposed a new measure that essentially would remove public safety concerns as a reason to clean up a homeless encampment .
The proposal would allow unauthorized encampments throughout the entire city , including on private property , in public parks and in any public area , reported Fox affiliate KCPQ TV in Seattle .
`` It 's not a homelessness issue , it 's a drug and mental health issue , the majority of the reason why @ @ @ @ @ @ @ said James Wong , the CEO of Vibrant Cities .
He told KCPQ that two unsanctioned encampments have struck fear in people walking the streets of the city 's Chinatown-International District .
He called the proposal by Seattle Council Member Tammy Morales `` absolutely crazy . ''
Cosponsored by Teresa Mosqueda and Kshama Sawant , it would limit the work of a team tasked with removing and cleaning up homeless sites that have been deemed too dangerous .
KCPQ said Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan ’ s office also has major concerns over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that in his 20 years at City Hall , the proposal stands out .
`` This bill is as poorly drafted and analyzed as I 've ever seen and fails to recognize basic and legitimate operational , legal , and policy considerations , without any consultation with the impacted city departments , '' Fong said .
In a statement , Sawant complained the city has not done enough to prohibit enforcement of restrictions on the homeless , including the removal of camps because of public safety and health concerns .
Police report a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ including homicide .

Seattle's notorious problem with homelessness has been exacerbated in recent years by failed policies, and now some City Council members have proposed a new measure that essentially would remove public safety concerns as a reason to clean up a homeless encampment.
The proposal would allow unauthorized encampments throughout the entire city, including on private property, in public parks and in any public area, reported Fox affiliate KCPQ TV in Seattle.
"It's not a homelessness issue, it's a drug and mental health issue, the majority of the reason why the folks are out here," said James Wong, the CEO of Vibrant Cities.
He told KCPQ that two unsanctioned encampments have struck fear in people walking the streets of the city's Chinatown-International District.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
He called the proposal by Seattle Council Member Tammy Morales "absolutely crazy."
Cosponsored by Teresa Mosqueda and Kshama Sawant, it would limit the work of a team tasked with removing and cleaning up homeless sites that have been deemed too dangerous.
KCPQ said Seattle Mayor Jenny Durkan’s office also has major concerns over the proposal.
Deputy Mayor Mike Fong said that in his 20 years at City Hall, the proposal stands out.
"This bill is as poorly drafted and analyzed as I've ever seen and fails to recognize basic and legitimate operational, legal, and policy considerations, without any consultation with the impacted city departments," Fong said.
In a statement, Sawant complained the city has not done enough to prohibit enforcement of restrictions on the homeless, including the removal of camps because of public safety and health concerns.
Police report a rise in crime among the homeless, including homicide.


wnd--2020-05-21--Rush Limbaugh: Voting Democrat is 'voting for your economic death'

Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday warned that voting Democrat in today 's America is `` voting for your economic death . ''
`` Look at the Obama economy for eight years .
You know , Obama 's out there talking about how incompetent Trump is .
For crying out loud , Obama rewrote the book on presidential incompetence .
And all you need to do is look at his economy for the evidence and what Trump was able to do to correct it in three years , '' he said .
`` And now look where we are , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy and lower , '' he said .
`` And who is it that 's happy about that and wants to keep us there ?
Your Democrat Party . ''
He said the Democrats do n't `` deserve your vote . ''
`` I do n't care if you 're a lifelong Democrat , voting for a Democrat is voting for your economic death , '' he said .
`` Voting for a Democrat is voting for the transformation of America , which I doubt a lot of you Democrats are really all @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solution for America 's economic woes is to open up for business .
`` The states that remain on lockdown are obviously blue states , Democrat governors with a political objective behind it .
And now there ’ s this big op-ed in the New York Post which just calls attention to the outright destruction that is done , that has been done to New York City .
It is just incredible what has happened here and what ’ s ongoing .
And now we ’ ve got the ability to make side-by-side @ @ @ @ @ @ @ let freedom ring , let people be responsible for themselves .
And you see what happens .
It all works out , '' he said .
He cited a `` doomsday forecast '' from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania claiming that by July 24 , there will be 5.4 million COVID-19 cases and 290,000 deaths without social distancing , or 4.3 million cases and 230,000 deaths with mitigation .
`` Since everything is politicized , since everything has been corrupted that the left touches , what do you think this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of 2.2 million people could die if you don ’ t shut down , 2.2 million people do die if you don ’ t mitigate .
This is all part of the relentless effort to prevent or to slow down the reopening of the U.S. economy .
That ’ s all this is .
Do not doubt me .
It ’ s an attempt to scare everybody into resisting opening up , '' he said .
`` Even if your state opens up , you ’ re supposed to stay scared and not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forecasts are `` to get you not to open up , not to participate in the opening up . ''
But that 's an effort that will fail .
He cited a report that in 21 states that have eased restrictions since May 4 or earlier , there have been no reports of major increases in cases .
`` I think it ’ s already falling apart .
I think the blue states are falling apart .
I think the blue states and these blue state governors are under intense pressure like you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it isn ’ t being reported , '' he said .
`` But who ’ s giving the standing orders to the blue state governors to stay locked down ?
Are they doing it on their own ?
Or is it coming from higher up ?
Is it coming from whoever ’ s running the DNC ?
Is it coming from Pelosi ?
Is it coming from Schumer ?
Or are they just doing it instinctively because this is what they do ? ''

Talk-radio host Rush Limbaugh on Wednesday warned that voting Democrat in today's America is "voting for your economic death."
"Look at the Obama economy for eight years. You know, Obama's out there talking about how incompetent Trump is. For crying out loud, Obama rewrote the book on presidential incompetence. And all you need to do is look at his economy for the evidence and what Trump was able to do to correct it in three years," he said.
"And now look where we are, trending right back down to the Obama economy and lower," he said. "And who is it that's happy about that and wants to keep us there? Your Democrat Party."
He said the Democrats don't "deserve your vote."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"I don't care if you're a lifelong Democrat, voting for a Democrat is voting for your economic death," he said. "Voting for a Democrat is voting for the transformation of America, which I doubt a lot of you Democrats are really all in with."
He said the solution for America's economic woes is to open up for business.
"The states that remain on lockdown are obviously blue states, Democrat governors with a political objective behind it. And now there’s this big op-ed in the New York Post which just calls attention to the outright destruction that is done, that has been done to New York City. It is just incredible what has happened here and what’s ongoing. And now we’ve got the ability to make side-by-side comparison of things. Open up, let freedom ring, let people be responsible for themselves. And you see what happens. It all works out," he said.
He cited a "doomsday forecast" from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania claiming that by July 24, there will be 5.4 million COVID-19 cases and 290,000 deaths without social distancing, or 4.3 million cases and 230,000 deaths with mitigation.
"Since everything is politicized, since everything has been corrupted that the left touches, what do you think this is? This is the new version of 2.2 million people could die if you don’t shut down, 2.2 million people do die if you don’t mitigate. This is all part of the relentless effort to prevent or to slow down the reopening of the U.S. economy. That’s all this is. Do not doubt me. It’s an attempt to scare everybody into resisting opening up," he said.
"Even if your state opens up, you’re supposed to stay scared and not participate," said Limbaugh.
The forecasts are "to get you not to open up, not to participate in the opening up."
But that's an effort that will fail.
He cited a report that in 21 states that have eased restrictions since May 4 or earlier, there have been no reports of major increases in cases.
"I think it’s already falling apart. I think the blue states are falling apart. I think the blue states and these blue state governors are under intense pressure like you and I can’t believe because it isn’t being reported," he said.
"But who’s giving the standing orders to the blue state governors to stay locked down? Are they doing it on their own? Or is it coming from higher up? Is it coming from whoever’s running the DNC? Is it coming from Pelosi? Is it coming from Schumer? Or are they just doing it instinctively because this is what they do?"


wnd--2020-05-21--Keys to safely opening up businesses: Confidence & technology

No matter how the actual risk of COVID-19 is ultimately interpreted , the way people engage with each other and the marketplace will be forever changed .
We all remember 9/11 and since then have modified how we live .
The same will be true for COVID .
As states begin to reopen , those places where people naturally gather will need to address consumer confidence around safety and manage the risks that will arise as citizens are once again free to gather .
How long will people be mindful of physical distancing ?
Will people feel uneasy when too @ @ @ @ @ @ @ And while consumer confidence is important , what about the confidence of businesses amid the liability risk of opening ?
You can bet the lawyers that advertise on TV late at night will hawk their services to people who claim they contracted an illness from visiting a business that allegedly did not create a safe environment .
Call it the viral version of the banana peel on the floor accident claim .
Government 's regulatory response might require occupancy limits to a set percentage of the fire code limit , or permit only @ @ @ @ @ @ @ foot .
In contrast , and in addition to government-initiated financial support , legislation providing the marketplace protections from COVID-based liability claims will also be important .
There is a political call to hinge federal financial assistance to states on states ' adopting these type protections .
The best way to kill a recovery is to expose businesses to unmanageable litigation , closing businesses and costing workers their jobs .
And insurance is not an easy answer .
Complicated legal questions arise surrounding the availability of insurance coverage for liability stemming from a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to provide at least some level of liability protection are really waging an assault on the American worker .
While businesses should not get a pass to be as reckless as they want to be , there must be some exercise of reason and diligence , that if undertaken will shield them from frivolous claims .
Apart from regulatory restrictions and liability protections , businesses will need to act in a way that communicates responsibility as a good steward of their customer 's safety in order to restore confidence .
It will require @ @ @ @ @ @ @ accommodate the most fearful among us to the detriment of the less fearful .
Managing traffic flow within a business will be one way to minimize exposure .
In the retail context , for example , there are several analog-type measures that could be employed to manage traffic flow , including one-way aisles and removing unnecessary displays .
However , there are digital technologies that could advise a business as to which portions of the store are more heavily trafficked .
Not only would this help the store manage congestion , but the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shopping journey as they enter a store .
Why run straight to the toilet paper aisle when that might be the most congested place in the store ?
iViu Technologies has developed a system that gives a digital heads-up that a particular space may be trending toward overcrowding .
`` Not only is the technology combination innovative , but the need is critical , '' said Chris Turner , iViu 's CEO .
`` Just knowing how many people are in a building can give a false sense of security .
The ability @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their facility will give the companies critical information they need to minimize congestion , providing a healthy and safe environment for staff , visitors and customers , as well as better understand staff utilization , inventory distribution and physical layout opportunities . ''
There are other technologies that could help create a safe environment .
Surface cleaning and air purification technologies are available .
Other technologies can help people find and opt-in for places that meet their personal acceptable balance between safety and common sense .
The most significant keys to a successful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and an adjusted view of risk management .
In order to build consumer confidence around health and safety , public gathering spaces will need to adopt a what 's best for the user ( consumer , patient , participant ) approach rather than what easiest or least risky for the provider .
The marketplace will need to reimaging risk management to address new risks that now exist .
And , states will have to create a legal environment that does n't spell defeat before we get started .
Like 9/11 changed the way @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fear among some for the next one will change everything else .
Wayne Allen is a principal at IE Advisory focused on innovation as it relates to insurance and risk management .

By Wayne Allen
No matter how the actual risk of COVID-19 is ultimately interpreted, the way people engage with each other and the marketplace will be forever changed. We all remember 9/11 and since then have modified how we live. The same will be true for COVID. As states begin to reopen, those places where people naturally gather will need to address consumer confidence around safety and manage the risks that will arise as citizens are once again free to gather.
How long will people be mindful of physical distancing? Will people feel uneasy when too many congregate in a limited space? And while consumer confidence is important, what about the confidence of businesses amid the liability risk of opening? You can bet the lawyers that advertise on TV late at night will hawk their services to people who claim they contracted an illness from visiting a business that allegedly did not create a safe environment. Call it the viral version of the banana peel on the floor accident claim.
Government's regulatory response might require occupancy limits to a set percentage of the fire code limit, or permit only a defined number of people per square foot. In contrast, and in addition to government-initiated financial support, legislation providing the marketplace protections from COVID-based liability claims will also be important. There is a political call to hinge federal financial assistance to states on states' adopting these type protections. The best way to kill a recovery is to expose businesses to unmanageable litigation, closing businesses and costing workers their jobs. And insurance is not an easy answer. Complicated legal questions arise surrounding the availability of insurance coverage for liability stemming from a pandemic.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Those politicians who are unwilling to provide at least some level of liability protection are really waging an assault on the American worker. While businesses should not get a pass to be as reckless as they want to be, there must be some exercise of reason and diligence, that if undertaken will shield them from frivolous claims.
Apart from regulatory restrictions and liability protections, businesses will need to act in a way that communicates responsibility as a good steward of their customer's safety in order to restore confidence. It will require a careful balance by business not to accommodate the most fearful among us to the detriment of the less fearful.
Managing traffic flow within a business will be one way to minimize exposure. In the retail context, for example, there are several analog-type measures that could be employed to manage traffic flow, including one-way aisles and removing unnecessary displays. However, there are digital technologies that could advise a business as to which portions of the store are more heavily trafficked. Not only would this help the store manage congestion, but the technology could also help people plan their shopping journey as they enter a store. Why run straight to the toilet paper aisle when that might be the most congested place in the store?
iViu Technologies has developed a system that gives a digital heads-up that a particular space may be trending toward overcrowding. "Not only is the technology combination innovative, but the need is critical," said Chris Turner, iViu's CEO. "Just knowing how many people are in a building can give a false sense of security. The ability to monitor occupancy in specific zones within their facility will give the companies critical information they need to minimize congestion, providing a healthy and safe environment for staff, visitors and customers, as well as better understand staff utilization, inventory distribution and physical layout opportunities."
There are other technologies that could help create a safe environment. Surface cleaning and air purification technologies are available. Other technologies can help people find and opt-in for places that meet their personal acceptable balance between safety and common sense.
The most significant keys to a successful reopening of the economy are public confidence and an adjusted view of risk management. In order to build consumer confidence around health and safety, public gathering spaces will need to adopt a what's best for the user (consumer, patient, participant) approach rather than what easiest or least risky for the provider. The marketplace will need to reimaging risk management to address new risks that now exist. And, states will have to create a legal environment that doesn't spell defeat before we get started. Like 9/11 changed the way we travel, this pandemic and the fear among some for the next one will change everything else.
Wayne Allen is a principal at IE Advisory focused on innovation as it relates to insurance and risk management.


wnd--2020-05-21--Dershowitz doubles down: State can force vaccination if it's 'safe'

After drawing attention for saying the state can forcibly `` plunge a needle into your arm , '' noted civil libertarian Alan Dershowitz affirmed his insistence that forced vaccination is constitutional while acknowleding the issue also has a moral dimension .
`` I think one can make a plausible argument that nobody should be required to be subject to a dangerous vaccination to help other people , '' he said in an interview Wednesday with Fox News ' Tucker Carlson .
`` And I think we should continue to debate that . ''
But the the Harvard Law School emeritus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccination , saying he would n't require someone to take a vaccine `` unless it would prove very , very safe . ''
`` In general , if the vaccine is deemed extremely safe , then the state does have a right to compel you to take it , '' he said .
Dershowitz argued that vaccines work on a theory of mass innoculation .
`` You 're not taking it to help yourself , '' he said .
You have a right to die if it 's a disease such as cancer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but you `` do n't have a right to be Typhoid Mary . ''
Carlson pressed him on the premise of a vaccine being safe .
`` There is so much lying about vaccines , '' he said .
As WND reported , Dershowitz said in an interview Sunday that the government has a constitutional right under the 10th Amendment to forcibly vaccinate a citizen to curb the spread of a contagious disease .
`` Let me put it very clearly , you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ disagree .
You have no right not to be vaccinated , you have no right not to wear a mask , you have no right to open up your business , '' he said .
The interviewer , Jason Goodman , interjected , asking if the famed constitutional scholar was saying that if the government decides `` you have to be vaccinated , we have to be vaccinated . ''
`` Absolutely , '' Dershowitz replied .
`` And if you refuse to be vaccinated , the state has the power to literally @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and plunge a needle into your arm . ''
`` Where is that in the Constitution ? ''
Goodman asked on his web show , `` Crowdsource the Truth , '' which was posted Sunday on YouTube .
Dershowitz clarified that if a person is threatened with a deadly disease that is not contagious , he can refuse treatment .
`` But you have no right to refuse to be vaccinated against a contagious disease , '' he said .
`` Public health , the police power of the Constitution gives the state @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Dershowitz said .
`` And there are cases in the United States Supreme Court . ''
Dershowitz added that there are `` cases after cases after cases '' in which courts have ruled in favor of `` reasonable actions to prevent the spread of communicable diseases . ''
RELATED : DRUNK ON POWER : Pandemic crisis reveals many politicians ' love affair with totalitarianism The Harvard professor – who defended President Trump in his Senate impeachment trial – was referring to the state police power doctrine derived in part from the 10th Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state 's `` police power '' – defining `` police '' as polity or government rather than law enforcement specifically – which gives the state authority to enact health laws , including quarantine and vaccination requirements , to protect public health .
On Monday , amid a race for a vaccine against the novel coronavirus , the drugmaker Moderna received positive results from a Phase 1 clinical trial for its experimental COVID-19 vaccine , sparking a 900-point rise in the Dow .
The argument against forcible vaccination is based on the 14th Amendment @ @ @ @ @ @ @ make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ; nor shall any state deprive any person of life , liberty , or property , without due process of law . ''
But Dershowitz points to the Supreme Court 's Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision in 1905 , which concluded a state may require vaccination if the board of health deems it necessary for public health or safety .
The court found the police power of a state included reasonable regulations established by the legislature @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The regulations did n't violate the 14th Amendment right to liberty , the court said , because they fell within the restraints to which everyone is subject for the common good .
If any individual is allowed to act without regard to the welfare of others , true liberty does not exist , the court argued .
More than a century later , the Jacobson decision `` has not been revisited in any meaningful way , '' noted the AMA Journal of Ethics in 2006 .
It has stood all this time , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ refuse vaccination while he or she remains within the general population on the grounds that to make such an exception would strip the legislative branch of its function to care for the public health and safety when threatened by epidemic disease , '' wrote Sarah Fujiwara , MD , then a student at DePaul University College of Law and an intern at the American Medical Association .
`` This ruling prevails despite occasional injurious results from vaccinations and the impossibility of determining whether a particular person can be safely vaccinated , '' she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a mandatory vaccination is an offer of apparent or reasonably certain proof to the state ’ s board of health that the vaccination would seriously impair health or probably cause death . ''

After drawing attention for saying the state can forcibly "plunge a needle into your arm," noted civil libertarian Alan Dershowitz affirmed his insistence that forced vaccination is constitutional while acknowleding the issue also has a moral dimension.
"I think one can make a plausible argument that nobody should be required to be subject to a dangerous vaccination to help other people," he said in an interview Wednesday with Fox News' Tucker Carlson. "And I think we should continue to debate that."
But the the Harvard Law School emeritus professor left open the door for forced vaccination, saying he wouldn't require someone to take a vaccine "unless it would prove very, very safe."
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
"In general, if the vaccine is deemed extremely safe, then the state does have a right to compel you to take it," he said.
Dershowitz argued that vaccines work on a theory of mass innoculation.
"You're not taking it to help yourself," he said.
You have a right to die if it's a disease such as cancer that affects only you, he said, but you "don't have a right to be Typhoid Mary."
Carlson pressed him on the premise of a vaccine being safe.
"There is so much lying about vaccines," he said.
See Dershowitz on "Tucker Carlson Tonight":
As WND reported, Dershowitz said in an interview Sunday that the government has a constitutional right under the 10th Amendment to forcibly vaccinate a citizen to curb the spread of a contagious disease.
"Let me put it very clearly, you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread the disease, even if you disagree. You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business," he said.
The interviewer, Jason Goodman, interjected, asking if the famed constitutional scholar was saying that if the government decides "you have to be vaccinated, we have to be vaccinated."
"Absolutely," Dershowitz replied. "And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor's office and plunge a needle into your arm."
"Where is that in the Constitution?" Goodman asked on his web show, "Crowdsource the Truth," which was posted Sunday on YouTube.
Dershowitz clarified that if a person is threatened with a deadly disease that is not contagious, he can refuse treatment.
"But you have no right to refuse to be vaccinated against a contagious disease," he said.
"Public health, the police power of the Constitution gives the state the power to compel that," Dershowitz said. "And there are cases in the United States Supreme Court."
Dershowitz added that there are "cases after cases after cases" in which courts have ruled in favor of "reasonable actions to prevent the spread of communicable diseases."
RELATED: DRUNK ON POWER: Pandemic crisis reveals many politicians' love affair with totalitarianism
The Harvard professor – who defended President Trump in his Senate impeachment trial – was referring to the state police power doctrine derived in part from the 10th Amendment.
The Supreme Court has recognized each state's "police power" – defining "police" as polity or government rather than law enforcement specifically – which gives the state authority to enact health laws, including quarantine and vaccination requirements, to protect public health.
On Monday, amid a race for a vaccine against the novel coronavirus, the drugmaker Moderna received positive results from a Phase 1 clinical trial for its experimental COVID-19 vaccine, sparking a 900-point rise in the Dow.
See Dershowitz's remarks:
Right to liberty
The argument against forcible vaccination is based on the 14th Amendment's provision that no state "shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
But Dershowitz points to the Supreme Court's Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision in 1905, which concluded a state may require vaccination if the board of health deems it necessary for public health or safety.
The court found the police power of a state included reasonable regulations established by the legislature to protect public health and safety.
The regulations didn't violate the 14th Amendment right to liberty, the court said, because they fell within the restraints to which everyone is subject for the common good.
If any individual is allowed to act without regard to the welfare of others, true liberty does not exist, the court argued.
More than a century later, the Jacobson decision "has not been revisited in any meaningful way," noted the AMA Journal of Ethics in 2006.
It has stood all this time, not allowing "a single individual to refuse vaccination while he or she remains within the general population on the grounds that to make such an exception would strip the legislative branch of its function to care for the public health and safety when threatened by epidemic disease," wrote Sarah Fujiwara, MD, then a student at DePaul University College of Law and an intern at the American Medical Association.
"This ruling prevails despite occasional injurious results from vaccinations and the impossibility of determining whether a particular person can be safely vaccinated," she wrote.
"The only exception to a mandatory vaccination is an offer of apparent or reasonably certain proof to the state’s board of health that the vaccination would seriously impair health or probably cause death."


wnd--2020-05-22--Democrats' tired 'the election was rigged' excuse

In a recent Washington Post column warning Americans to `` prepare for the possibility of Trump rejecting election results '' – one of media 's favorite projections – Brian Klaas asks a question : `` If he loses , would it be more surprising if Trump graciously accepts defeat and congratulates his opponent or if he claimed to be the victim of a rigged election and a 'deep state ' plot ? ''
Considering Trump 's temperament , it would n't be surprising if he blamed the `` deep state '' for an election failure .
Really , though , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ what an attack on the sanctity of the electoral process would look like , since Democrats have been delegitimizing a valid election for the past four years .
Even as liberals make chilling predictions about Trump 's attack on democratic norms , they champion such politicians as Stacey Abrams , a middling Georgia state legislator whose national fame relies on a baseless contention that her gubernatorial seat was stolen in 2018 .
This weekend , that same Washington Post published a sycophantic feature story about Abrams ( headline : `` The Power of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ claims of voter suppression and put her in a superhero cape for good measure .
Abrams ' election claims have been adopted by virtually every major Democratic Party figure , including presidential hopeful Joe Biden .
If Biden winds up picking Abrams , will anyone challenge the presumptive Democratic Party nominee to explain why a woman who refused to acknowledge the validity of an election should be considered for the vice presidency ?
To be fair to Abrams , there are increasingly few close political contests in which Democrats do n't blame their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , `` democracy '' is just another word for partisan victory .
The last Democrat who lost a presidential race honorably was Michael Dukakis .
Al Gore not only eschewed graciousness in 2000 , he sparked a national crisis , and thereafter fueled the idea that the presidential election had been stolen by George Bush .
Even a decade after every recount showed that Gore had lost , partisans were still corroding trust in our elections .
John Kerry , without any viable legal way to challenge the veracity of the 2004 contest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ various imaginary crimes against democracy .
The United States , fortunately , boasts one of the , if not the , longest uninterrupted peaceful democratic transfer of power in the world .
A stable two-party , right-left consensus has allowed us to avoid turmoil in the transition of power .
It 's a system that relies on trust from the electorate and good behavior from our leaders .
We learned about these magnificent norms from 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton , who , when conventional wisdom anticipated her victory , said : `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We 've had free and fair elections and we 've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them .
… '' But Clinton discarded any deference to results after the election , when she , and many Democrats , blamed the Russians , sexism , the unfairness of a 240-year process , James Comey 's letter to Congress and a slew of other bogeymen .
These concerted attacks were not only aimed at Trump 's ideas , policies , or person – completely reasonable targets – but the validity of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an assortment of justifications for discrediting outcomes they may not like .
They can allege `` voter suppression '' – a perpetually evolving catch-all grievance that can never be satisfied and goes largely unchallenged because it harkens back to genuine crimes of the past .
They can blame foreign social media troll accounts .
They can blame the nation 's antiquated constitutional system .
They can blame Fox News , which is apparently the only network that can strip feeble-minded Americans of free will and convince them to vote against their own interests @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Pelosi maintained that `` Let the election decide '' was a `` dangerous position '' to hold because it was `` jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections . ''
Adam Schiff 's central rationale for impeachment was the notion that Trump had already cheated in 2020 .
`` Russia is interfering in our elections again .
And Trump supporters are emulating Russian tactics , '' argues a Washington Post column this week .
Democrats know there 's no genuine way , save wide-ranging censorship , to stop a foreign state from infiltrating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and amateurish social media accounts .
Yet , they have no compunction whipping up moral panic over foreign interference by conflating trolling social media accounts with Russia 's attempts to hack state voting systems .
The former has been ineffective , the latter is attempted `` meddling '' that failed .
And , yet , as of 2017 , a majority of Democrats believed that vote tallied had been tampered with by Russians , without a scintilla of evidence .
So we can speculate about what Trump might say if he loses – @ @ @ @ @ @ @ follow Hillary 's precedent .
But we already know what Democrats will say if they lose : the election was rigged .

In a recent Washington Post column warning Americans to "prepare for the possibility of Trump rejecting election results" – one of media's favorite projections – Brian Klaas asks a question: "If he loses, would it be more surprising if Trump graciously accepts defeat and congratulates his opponent or if he claimed to be the victim of a rigged election and a 'deep state' plot?"
Considering Trump's temperament, it wouldn't be surprising if he blamed the "deep state" for an election failure. Really, though, we have no need to speculate about what an attack on the sanctity of the electoral process would look like, since Democrats have been delegitimizing a valid election for the past four years.
Even as liberals make chilling predictions about Trump's attack on democratic norms, they champion such politicians as Stacey Abrams, a middling Georgia state legislator whose national fame relies on a baseless contention that her gubernatorial seat was stolen in 2018. This weekend, that same Washington Post published a sycophantic feature story about Abrams (headline: "The Power of Stacey Abrams") that echoed her claims of voter suppression and put her in a superhero cape for good measure.
Abrams' election claims have been adopted by virtually every major Democratic Party figure, including presidential hopeful Joe Biden. If Biden winds up picking Abrams, will anyone challenge the presumptive Democratic Party nominee to explain why a woman who refused to acknowledge the validity of an election should be considered for the vice presidency?
To be fair to Abrams, there are increasingly few close political contests in which Democrats don't blame their defeat on Republican chicanery. These days, "democracy" is just another word for partisan victory. The last Democrat who lost a presidential race honorably was Michael Dukakis. Al Gore not only eschewed graciousness in 2000, he sparked a national crisis, and thereafter fueled the idea that the presidential election had been stolen by George Bush. Even a decade after every recount showed that Gore had lost, partisans were still corroding trust in our elections. John Kerry, without any viable legal way to challenge the veracity of the 2004 contest, was left to blame Ohio for various imaginary crimes against democracy.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The United States, fortunately, boasts one of the, if not the, longest uninterrupted peaceful democratic transfer of power in the world. A stable two-party, right-left consensus has allowed us to avoid turmoil in the transition of power. It's a system that relies on trust from the electorate and good behavior from our leaders.
We learned about these magnificent norms from 2016 presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, who, when conventional wisdom anticipated her victory, said: "We've been around 240 years. We've had free and fair elections and we've accepted the outcomes when we may not have liked them. …"
But Clinton discarded any deference to results after the election, when she, and many Democrats, blamed the Russians, sexism, the unfairness of a 240-year process, James Comey's letter to Congress and a slew of other bogeymen. These concerted attacks were not only aimed at Trump's ideas, policies, or person – completely reasonable targets – but the validity of the election system itself.
Democrats now have an assortment of justifications for discrediting outcomes they may not like. They can allege "voter suppression" – a perpetually evolving catch-all grievance that can never be satisfied and goes largely unchallenged because it harkens back to genuine crimes of the past. They can blame foreign social media troll accounts. They can blame the nation's antiquated constitutional system. They can blame Fox News, which is apparently the only network that can strip feeble-minded Americans of free will and convince them to vote against their own interests.
During the impeachment hearings, Nancy Pelosi maintained that "Let the election decide" was a "dangerous position" to hold because it was "jeopardizing the integrity of the 2020 elections." Adam Schiff's central rationale for impeachment was the notion that Trump had already cheated in 2020. "Russia is interfering in our elections again. And Trump supporters are emulating Russian tactics," argues a Washington Post column this week.
Democrats know there's no genuine way, save wide-ranging censorship, to stop a foreign state from infiltrating our open information stream with their ineffective and amateurish social media accounts. Yet, they have no compunction whipping up moral panic over foreign interference by conflating trolling social media accounts with Russia's attempts to hack state voting systems. The former has been ineffective, the latter is attempted "meddling" that failed. And, yet, as of 2017, a majority of Democrats believed that vote tallied had been tampered with by Russians, without a scintilla of evidence.
So we can speculate about what Trump might say if he loses – and let's hope he doesn't follow Hillary's precedent. But we already know what Democrats will say if they lose: the election was rigged.


wnd--2020-05-22--3 Democrats just got voted off council in city Obama won twice

Polls being touted by the establishment media are telling us the presidential race is all but over , and that presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is destined to sit in the Oval Office .
According to a Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday , President Donald Trump had better be ready to pack it up and head to Mar-a-Lago for an extended vacation .
The poll indicates Biden holds an 11-point advantage over Trump nationally .
Biden leads the president 50 percent to Trump ’ s 39 percent , with fewer than six months until the November election .
An ABC News @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Clinton with a 12-point lead over Trump just weeks before the election .
Clinton led in the poll 50 percent to Trump ’ s 38 percent .
We all know how that turned out , and yet here we find ourselves , four years later , with polls purporting to show a blue wave on the horizon .
But , what is happening on the ground is telling a very different story than polling , and it could also be a preview of the coming 2020 election .
Republicans , despite the disastrous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ country .
Mike Garcia , a Republican endorsed by Trump , flipped California ’ s 25th Congressional District last week , several months after Democratic Rep. Katie Hill resigned in disgrace .
Tom Tiffany , another Trump-backed candidate , won Wisconsin ’ s Seventh Congressional District , fighting back Democrats hoping to take the seat following the resignation of former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy .
And now we turn to Northern Virginia , where voters in two communities took to the polls this week and sent incumbent Democrats packing in an apparent referendum @ @ @ @ @ @ @ other state and local Democrats .
Republicans showed up in large numbers , and now three Democratic incumbents on the city council are out of a job in the city of Staunton , according to the Daily Caller .
The community , which twice voted for former President Barack Obama , ousted Democrats Erik Curren , Ophie Kier and James Harrington .
Republicans Mark Robertson , Amy Darby and Steve Claffey will replace the Democrats on the council , according to WHSV , while incumbent Republican Andrea Oakes won re-election -- allowing conservative @ @ @ @ @ @ @ contests and giving Republicans a majority on the council .
Voters in the neighboring city of Waynesboro also elected two Republicans , Lana Williams and Bruce Allen , which gives that city council a Republican majority as well .
Chris Graham , writing for the area outlet the Augusta Free Press , noted the shocking election results in Staunton , where the three incumbent Democrats nearly doubled their overall vote total from 2016 , yet still all managed to lose .
According to Graham , Democrats turned out in unusually large numbers , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
`` Staunton City Council incumbents Ophie Kier , James Harrington and Erik Curren all outperformed their 2016 vote totals in their 2020 re-election runs , '' he wrote .
“ Democrats got their voters out better than they have in a May cycle in years , ” Graham wrote .
“ Republicans got turnout more akin to , not quite a presidential year , but approaching gubernatorial.
” “ A city that voted for Barack Obama , twice , voted for Hillary Clinton , voted for Terry McAuliffe and Ralph Northam , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Lewis in her 2018 congressional run against Ben Cline , is now controlled by Republicans , ” Graham added , “ I ’ m rarely shocked by something that happens in politics , but I have to admit , I didn ’ t see this one happening . ''
As lawmakers in Virginia have threatened civil liberties , first with gun-grabbing proposals and now with prolonged draconian lockdowns amid the coronavirus , voters in a Democratic stronghold sent a strong message .
`` The conservative slates in both cities ran as a unit @ @ @ @ @ @ @ key issue in their campaigns , '' Graham wrote .
`` Bottom line is that the strategies worked , flipping both from D to R , but the change in Staunton is stunning almost beyond words . ''
Those in Virginia join Californians and Wisconsinites in sending a similar message to Democrats , and all in the same month .
Voters have stood up for their rights during a time when Democrats have shown us just how vulnerable those rights can be .
National polls tell us it ’ s time to start @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The reality seems to be that Republicans are energized from coast to coast , and they are ready to stand against Democrats and the tyrannical big government overreach that liberals support .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

Polls being touted by the establishment media are telling us the presidential race is all but over, and that presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden is destined to sit in the Oval Office.
According to a Quinnipiac poll released Wednesday, President Donald Trump had better be ready to pack it up and head to Mar-a-Lago for an extended vacation.
The poll indicates Biden holds an 11-point advantage over Trump nationally. Biden leads the president 50 percent to Trump’s 39 percent, with fewer than six months until the November election.
Sound familiar? It should.
An ABC News tracking poll from October 2016 showed Hillary Clinton with a 12-point lead over Trump just weeks before the election.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Clinton led in the poll 50 percent to Trump’s 38 percent.
We all know how that turned out, and yet here we find ourselves, four years later, with polls purporting to show a blue wave on the horizon.
But, what is happening on the ground is telling a very different story than polling, and it could also be a preview of the coming 2020 election.
Republicans, despite the disastrous polling, are winning races across the country.
Mike Garcia, a Republican endorsed by Trump, flipped California’s 25th Congressional District last week, several months after Democratic Rep. Katie Hill resigned in disgrace.
Tom Tiffany, another Trump-backed candidate, won Wisconsin’s Seventh Congressional District, fighting back Democrats hoping to take the seat following the resignation of former GOP Rep. Sean Duffy.
And now we turn to Western Virginia, where voters in two communities took to the polls this week and sent incumbent Democrats packing in an apparent referendum on far-left Gov. Ralph Northam and other state and local Democrats.
Republicans showed up in large numbers, and now three Democratic incumbents on the city council are out of a job in the city of Staunton, according to the Daily Caller.
The community, which twice voted for former President Barack Obama, ousted Democrats Erik Curren, Ophie Kier and James Harrington.
Republicans Mark Robertson, Amy Darby and Steve Claffey will replace the Democrats on the council, according to WHSV, while incumbent Republican Andrea Oakes won re-election -- allowing conservative candidates to sweep the city council electoral contests and giving Republicans a majority on the council.
Voters in the neighboring city of Waynesboro also elected two Republicans, Lana Williams and Bruce Allen, which gives that city council a Republican majority as well.
Chris Graham, writing for the area outlet the Augusta Free Press, noted the shocking election results in Staunton, where the three incumbent Democrats nearly doubled their overall vote total from 2016, yet still all managed to lose.
According to Graham, Democrats turned out in unusually large numbers, but Republicans brought on a tidal wave.
"Staunton City Council incumbents Ophie Kier, James Harrington and Erik Curren all outperformed their 2016 vote totals in their 2020 re-election runs," he wrote.
“Democrats got their voters out better than they have in a May cycle in years,” Graham wrote. “Republicans got turnout more akin to, not quite a presidential year, but approaching gubernatorial.”
“A city that voted for Barack Obama, twice, voted for Hillary Clinton, voted for Terry McAuliffe and Ralph Northam, even gave a solid majority to Jennifer Lewis in her 2018 congressional run against Ben Cline, is now controlled by Republicans,” Graham added,
“I’m rarely shocked by something that happens in politics, but I have to admit, I didn’t see this one happening."
As lawmakers in Virginia have threatened civil liberties, first with gun-grabbing proposals and now with prolonged draconian lockdowns amid the coronavirus, voters in a Democratic stronghold sent a strong message.
"The conservative slates in both cities ran as a unit and highlighted the Second Amendment as a key issue in their campaigns," Graham wrote.
"Bottom line is that the strategies worked, flipping both from D to R, but the change in Staunton is stunning almost beyond words."
Those in Virginia join Californians and Wisconsinites in sending a similar message to Democrats, and all in the same month.
Voters have stood up for their rights during a time when Democrats have shown us just how vulnerable those rights can be.
National polls tell us it’s time to start writing a eulogy for the Republican Party.
The reality seems to be that Republicans are energized from coast to coast, and they are ready to stand against Democrats and the tyrannical big government overreach that liberals support.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-05-22--County jails across U.S. reducing inmate populations at alarming rates

A study of local jails across America shows jail populations have been reduced at a shocking rate .
The Prison Policy Initiative -- a nonprofit group that aims to `` expose the broader harm of mass criminalization '' -- released its findings May 14 , detailing how much jail populations have shrunk since the start of the pandemic .
Since January and February , inmate numbers at some jails have been reduced by more than 50 percent .
The study reveals that counties in Oregon , Arkansas , New Jersey , Washington state , Iowa and Kentucky have cut their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the last few months .
The jail reductions are an apparent attempt to avoid embarrassing outbreaks of the coronavirus in lockup facilities .
The virus thrives in packed close quarters , making places like jails and nursing homes especially vulnerable .
`` The typical jail has reduced its population by more than 30 % , '' according to the initiative .
( The median jail reduction is 31 percent ) .
Not all of this jaw-dropping number is due to releases , either .
The initiative noted that a number of factors contribute @ @ @ @ @ @ @ some counties , police are issuing citations in lieu of arrests , prosecutors are declining to charge people for 'low-level offenses , ' courts are reducing the amounts of cash bail , and jail administrators are releasing people detained pretrial or those serving short sentences for 'nonviolent offenses . '
'' While a few counties have increased jail populations during the pandemic , the overwhelming trend appears to be a steady downward slide .
Those being held at county lockups might have hit the jackpot with the spread of COVID-19 , but inmates @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Despite jails depopulating at an staggering rate , prisons have maintained comparatively steady populations .
With the exception of a few states , most have only cut inmate populations by single-digit percentages .
Some places , meanwhile , are taking the initiative to permanently reduce the amount of prisoners by simply closing facilities .
Democratic California Gov .
Gavin Newsom , for example , wants to shutter two prisons amid a budget crisis .
It 's unclear how many criminals will end up in communities if his plan is successfully implemented .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ are already feeling the pain from inmate releases .
One family is now recovering after a man freed from jail allegedly assaulted an 11-year-old child during a carjacking .
For federal prisoners , cheerleaders in Washington , D.C. , are hard at work fighting to secure their freedom .
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi even invoked the Gospel of Matthew in an appeal for many of these inmates to be released .
This shocking stance is made even more insulting as law-abiding Americans are being arrested for violating unconstitutional lockdown orders .
Hopefully this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ will soon fade away , and be looked on with shame in the history books .
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal .

A study of local jails across America shows jail populations have been reduced at a shocking rate.
The Prison Policy Initiative -- a nonprofit group that aims to "expose the broader harm of mass criminalization" -- released its findings May 14, detailing how much jail populations have shrunk since the start of the pandemic.
Since January and February, inmate numbers at some jails have been reduced by more than 50 percent.
The study reveals that counties in Oregon, Arkansas, New Jersey, Washington state, Iowa and Kentucky have cut their inmate populations by more than half in the last few months.
The jail reductions are an apparent attempt to avoid embarrassing outbreaks of the coronavirus in lockup facilities.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
The virus thrives in packed close quarters, making places like jails and nursing homes especially vulnerable.
"The typical jail has reduced its population by more than 30%," according to the initiative. (The median jail reduction is 31 percent).
Not all of this jaw-dropping number is due to releases, either.
The initiative noted that a number of factors contribute to diminishing jail populations: "In some counties, police are issuing citations in lieu of arrests, prosecutors are declining to charge people for 'low-level offenses,' courts are reducing the amounts of cash bail, and jail administrators are releasing people detained pretrial or those serving short sentences for 'nonviolent offenses.'"
While a few counties have increased jail populations during the pandemic, the overwhelming trend appears to be a steady downward slide.
Those being held at county lockups might have hit the jackpot with the spread of COVID-19, but inmates in state prisons aren't so lucky.
Despite jails depopulating at an staggering rate, prisons have maintained comparatively steady populations. With the exception of a few states, most have only cut inmate populations by single-digit percentages.
Some places, meanwhile, are taking the initiative to permanently reduce the amount of prisoners by simply closing facilities.
Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom, for example, wants to shutter two prisons amid a budget crisis.
It's unclear how many criminals will end up in communities if his plan is successfully implemented.
Some unlucky residents of the Golden State are already feeling the pain from inmate releases.
One family is now recovering after a man freed from jail allegedly assaulted an 11-year-old child during a carjacking.
For federal prisoners, cheerleaders in Washington, D.C., are hard at work fighting to secure their freedom.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi even invoked the Gospel of Matthew in an appeal for many of these inmates to be released.
This shocking stance is made even more insulting as law-abiding Americans are being arrested for violating unconstitutional lockdown orders.
Hopefully this style of criminal justice "reform" will soon fade away, and be looked on with shame in the history books.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.


wnd--2020-05-22--Dershowitz: 'Anti-vaxxers' misuing the Bible

Renowned civil libertarian Alan M. Dershowitz reacted Friday to Bible-citing critics of his contention that the Constitution gives the state the power to forcibly vaccinate citizens to curb an infectious disease .
`` Anti-vaxxers are free to cite science , philosophy , law — but do not miscite the Bible or God , '' he wrote in a column for the Gatestone Institute , where he serves as a senior fellow .
`` It is irreligious and insults the intelligence of those who have actually studied the Bible by assuming , as many do , that the Bible opposes everything @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Sunday when the famed Harvard Law School emeritus professor said in an interview the state has the power to forcibly `` plunge a needle into your arm , '' as WND reported in a story linked by the Drudge Report .
On Wednesday , Dershowitz told Fox News ' Tucker Carlson that `` one can make a plausible argument that nobody should be required to be subject to a dangerous vaccination to help other people . ''
However , emphasizing it 's settled as a constitutional issue , morally , he left open @ @ @ @ @ @ @ he would n't require someone to take a vaccine `` unless it would prove very , very safe . ''
`` In general , if the vaccine is deemed extremely safe , then the state does have a right to compel you to take it , '' he said Wednesday .
Now , in his Gatestone Institute column , he admonishes religious believers who have used the Bible to argue against his stance .
`` Invoking the Bible and God is intended not as a stimulus to further debate , but rather as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ; no further discussion , research or argument is necessary ; the debate is over , '' he writes .
`` They simply assume that God is on the side of every political or ideological position they espouse .
If that is not taking the name of God in vain , I do n't know what is .
And I have a source for that : The Ten Commandments . ''
To bolster his argument , Dershowitz cites the biblical book of Leviticus , chapters 13 and 14 , which says the `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for seven days and then an additional seven days if the contagion persists .
`` And he shall dwell alone ; his dwelling shall be outside the camp . ''
The quarantine , he argues , was not voluntary , noting the priest `` could compel it . ''
Dershowitz says most of the emails and phone calls he 's received since stating `` the Constitution permits safe mandatory vaccination against highly contagious and lethal diseases have been from anti-vaxxers who claim the authority of the Bible . ''
`` Have they actually @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Bible says nothing about vaccinations : they were not even imagined at the time , but the Bible speaks volumes about the need to prevent the spread of contagious diseases , '' he writes .
Noting the devil `` can cite scripture to his purposes , '' Dershowitz points to supporters of slavery , anti-Semites and `` anti-gay bigots '' citing the Bible .
`` And now anti-vaxxers are distorting and weaponizing the Good Book , religion and God against science , '' he says .
`` This has happened before , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ earth , abortion and assisted suicide .
But this time the anti-vaxxers who cite the Bible have no plausible argument as anyone can see by turning to Leviticus and other portions of both the Jewish Bible and the Christian New Testament . ''
Dershowitz says that while it 's not a crime to `` miscite the Bible for political or ideological purposes , '' it `` surely is a sin to take God 's name in vain . ''
`` The idea that a deity who demands that we choose life would have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Ebola and other contagious diseases whose spread has been prevented by vaccines , defies understanding by those of us who have actually studied the Bible . ''
'No constitutional right to endanger the public' Dershowitz said in the interview Sunday that the government has a constitutional right under the 10th Amendment to forcibly vaccinate a citizen to curb the spread of a contagious disease .
`` Let me put it very clearly , you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread the disease , even if you disagree .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ vaccinated , you have no right not to wear a mask , you have no right to open up your business , '' he said .
The interviewer , Jason Goodman , interjected , asking if the famed constitutional scholar was saying that if the government decides `` you have to be vaccinated , we have to be vaccinated . ''
`` Absolutely , '' Dershowitz replied .
`` And if you refuse to be vaccinated , the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor 's office and plunge @ @ @ @ @ @ @ `` Where is that in the Constitution ? ''
Goodman asked on his web show , `` Crowdsource the Truth , '' which was posted Sunday on YouTube .
Dershowitz clarified that if a person is threatened with a deadly disease that is not contagious , he can refuse treatment .
`` But you have no right to refuse to be vaccinated against a contagious disease , '' he said .
`` Public health , the police power of the Constitution gives the state the power to compel that , '' Dershowitz said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the United States Supreme Court . ''
Dershowitz added that there are `` cases after cases after cases '' in which courts have ruled in favor of `` reasonable actions to prevent the spread of communicable diseases . ''
RELATED : DRUNK ON POWER : Pandemic crisis reveals many politicians ' love affair with totalitarianism The Harvard professor – who defended President Trump in his Senate impeachment trial – was referring to the state police power doctrine derived in part from the 10th Amendment .
The Supreme Court has recognized each state 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ police '' as polity or government rather than law enforcement specifically – which gives the state authority to enact health laws , including quarantine and vaccination requirements , to protect public health .
On Monday , amid a race for a vaccine against the novel coronavirus , the drugmaker Moderna received positive results from a Phase 1 clinical trial for its experimental COVID-19 vaccine , sparking a 900-point rise in the Dow .
The argument against forcible vaccination is based on the 14th Amendment 's provision that no state `` shall make or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States ; nor shall any state deprive any person of life , liberty , or property , without due process of law . ''
But Dershowitz points to the Supreme Court 's Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision in 1905 , which concluded a state may require vaccination if the board of health deems it necessary for public health or safety .
The court found the police power of a state included reasonable regulations established by the legislature to protect public health and safety .
The regulations @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to liberty , the court said , because they fell within the restraints to which everyone is subject for the common good .
If any individual is allowed to act without regard to the welfare of others , true liberty does not exist , the court argued .
More than a century later , the Jacobson decision `` has not been revisited in any meaningful way , '' noted the AMA Journal of Ethics in 2006 .
It has stood all this time , not allowing `` a single individual to refuse vaccination @ @ @ @ @ @ @ general population on the grounds that to make such an exception would strip the legislative branch of its function to care for the public health and safety when threatened by epidemic disease , '' wrote Sarah Fujiwara , MD , then a student at DePaul University College of Law and an intern at the American Medical Association .
`` This ruling prevails despite occasional injurious results from vaccinations and the impossibility of determining whether a particular person can be safely vaccinated , '' she wrote .
`` The only exception to a mandatory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reasonably certain proof to the state ’ s board of health that the vaccination would seriously impair health or probably cause death . ''

Renowned civil libertarian Alan M. Dershowitz reacted Friday to Bible-citing critics of his contention that the Constitution gives the state the power to forcibly vaccinate citizens to curb an infectious disease.
"Anti-vaxxers are free to cite science, philosophy, law — but do not miscite the Bible or God," he wrote in a column for the Gatestone Institute, where he serves as a senior fellow. "It is irreligious and insults the intelligence of those who have actually studied the Bible by assuming, as many do, that the Bible opposes everything they oppose."
The debate began Sunday when the famed Harvard Law School emeritus professor said in an interview the state has the power to forcibly "plunge a needle into your arm," as WND reported in a story linked by the Drudge Report. On Wednesday, Dershowitz told Fox News' Tucker Carlson that "one can make a plausible argument that nobody should be required to be subject to a dangerous vaccination to help other people." However, emphasizing it's settled as a constitutional issue, morally, he left open the door for forced vaccination, saying he wouldn't require someone to take a vaccine "unless it would prove very, very safe."
"In general, if the vaccine is deemed extremely safe, then the state does have a right to compel you to take it," he said Wednesday.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Now, in his Gatestone Institute column, he admonishes religious believers who have used the Bible to argue against his stance.
"Invoking the Bible and God is intended not as a stimulus to further debate, but rather as an argument-stopper: God is against it; no further discussion, research or argument is necessary; the debate is over," he writes.
"They simply assume that God is on the side of every political or ideological position they espouse. If that is not taking the name of God in vain, I don't know what is. And I have a source for that: The Ten Commandments."
To bolster his argument, Dershowitz cites the biblical book of Leviticus, chapters 13 and 14, which says the "priest shall isolate" the contagious person for seven days and then an additional seven days if the contagion persists.
"And he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp."
The quarantine, he argues, was not voluntary, noting the priest "could compel it."
See Dershowitz's remarks Sunday:
Dershowitz says most of the emails and phone calls he's received since stating "the Constitution permits safe mandatory vaccination against highly contagious and lethal diseases have been from anti-vaxxers who claim the authority of the Bible."
"Have they actually read the Bible? Of course, the Bible says nothing about vaccinations: they were not even imagined at the time, but the Bible speaks volumes about the need to prevent the spread of contagious diseases," he writes.
'Weaponizing the Good Book'
Noting the devil "can cite scripture to his purposes," Dershowitz points to supporters of slavery, anti-Semites and "anti-gay bigots" citing the Bible.
"And now anti-vaxxers are distorting and weaponizing the Good Book, religion and God against science," he says.
"This has happened before, with evolution, the age of the earth, abortion and assisted suicide. But this time the anti-vaxxers who cite the Bible have no plausible argument as anyone can see by turning to Leviticus and other portions of both the Jewish Bible and the Christian New Testament."
Dershowitz says that while it's not a crime to "miscite the Bible for political or ideological purposes," it "surely is a sin to take God's name in vain."
"The idea that a deity who demands that we choose life would have opposed the ending of smallpox, polio, Ebola and other contagious diseases whose spread has been prevented by vaccines, defies understanding by those of us who have actually studied the Bible."
See Dershowitz's interview Wednesday on "Tucker Carlson Tonight":
'No constitutional right to endanger the public'
Dershowitz said in the interview Sunday that the government has a constitutional right under the 10th Amendment to forcibly vaccinate a citizen to curb the spread of a contagious disease.
"Let me put it very clearly, you have no constitutional right to endanger the public and spread the disease, even if you disagree. You have no right not to be vaccinated, you have no right not to wear a mask, you have no right to open up your business," he said.
The interviewer, Jason Goodman, interjected, asking if the famed constitutional scholar was saying that if the government decides "you have to be vaccinated, we have to be vaccinated."
"Absolutely," Dershowitz replied. "And if you refuse to be vaccinated, the state has the power to literally take you to a doctor's office and plunge a needle into your arm."
"Where is that in the Constitution?" Goodman asked on his web show, "Crowdsource the Truth," which was posted Sunday on YouTube.
Dershowitz clarified that if a person is threatened with a deadly disease that is not contagious, he can refuse treatment.
"But you have no right to refuse to be vaccinated against a contagious disease," he said.
"Public health, the police power of the Constitution gives the state the power to compel that," Dershowitz said. "And there are cases in the United States Supreme Court."
Dershowitz added that there are "cases after cases after cases" in which courts have ruled in favor of "reasonable actions to prevent the spread of communicable diseases."
RELATED: DRUNK ON POWER: Pandemic crisis reveals many politicians' love affair with totalitarianism
The Harvard professor – who defended President Trump in his Senate impeachment trial – was referring to the state police power doctrine derived in part from the 10th Amendment.
The Supreme Court has recognized each state's "police power" – defining "police" as polity or government rather than law enforcement specifically – which gives the state authority to enact health laws, including quarantine and vaccination requirements, to protect public health.
On Monday, amid a race for a vaccine against the novel coronavirus, the drugmaker Moderna received positive results from a Phase 1 clinical trial for its experimental COVID-19 vaccine, sparking a 900-point rise in the Dow.
Right to liberty
The argument against forcible vaccination is based on the 14th Amendment's provision that no state "shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."
But Dershowitz points to the Supreme Court's Jacobson v. Massachusetts decision in 1905, which concluded a state may require vaccination if the board of health deems it necessary for public health or safety.
The court found the police power of a state included reasonable regulations established by the legislature to protect public health and safety.
The regulations didn't violate the 14th Amendment right to liberty, the court said, because they fell within the restraints to which everyone is subject for the common good.
If any individual is allowed to act without regard to the welfare of others, true liberty does not exist, the court argued.
More than a century later, the Jacobson decision "has not been revisited in any meaningful way," noted the AMA Journal of Ethics in 2006.
It has stood all this time, not allowing "a single individual to refuse vaccination while he or she remains within the general population on the grounds that to make such an exception would strip the legislative branch of its function to care for the public health and safety when threatened by epidemic disease," wrote Sarah Fujiwara, MD, then a student at DePaul University College of Law and an intern at the American Medical Association.
"This ruling prevails despite occasional injurious results from vaccinations and the impossibility of determining whether a particular person can be safely vaccinated," she wrote.
"The only exception to a mandatory vaccination is an offer of apparent or reasonably certain proof to the state’s board of health that the vaccination would seriously impair health or probably cause death."


wnd--2020-05-22--Michigan, Trump, Whitmer and the Chicoms

While President Trump is working hard to rebuild Michigan 's economy , Gov .
Gretchen Whitmer and her minions are doing everything they can to destroy it .
President Trump visited a Michigan Ford Motor Company auto plant his administration had retooled into a veritable `` arsenal of health care , '' turning out ventilators for the nation and the world .
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel 's response ?
Scold the company whose name is synonymous with Detroit .
But it gets worse .
The day after President Trump went to Ford to celebrate American know-how and the renaissance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ court to literally shut down the energy Michiganders depend on .
AG Nessel and her boss Whitmer want to close an existing pipeline now , years before its replacement is finished .
Their jihad would destroy thousands of good-paying jobs across the state .
How did Michigan get saddled with such Green New Deal true believers ?
You can thank Wall Street bigwigs Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer who pumped millions in dark money to elect them .
Bloomberg and Steyer are quite open about their passion to shut down the American energy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fortunes buying politicians who will push their job-killing policies and cripple America 's economy .
Having made millions in the fossil fuel industry here and in China , Steyer is now the Green New Deal 's leading evangelist .
Mike Bloomberg , meanwhile , has no use for manufacturing in America .
He would make it impossible for anyone to work in a factory – because there will be no factories .
Bloomberg is advancing his `` climate change '' agenda by paying activist lawyers working in 10 state attorney general offices run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their next home .
Emails obtained through a freedom of information request reveal Michigan Assistant Attorney General Skip Pruss in discussions to bring on one of Bloomberg 's legal mercenaries .
Whitmer 's hard lockdown order is of a piece with her green new deal anti-energy agenda .
They both shut down the way of life Americans are accustomed to and substitute it with government control over every aspect of life .
Let 's not miss the big picture : Whitmer , Nessel , Bloomberg and the other pied pipers of the Green @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hands of the Chinese Communist Party .
The CCP is intent on taking over the world and has been waging unrestricted economic warfare to achieve its goal .
The CCP destroyed our manufacturing industries through predatory trade practices .
It bought off Wall Street with lucrative deals in China , turning our finance industry and people like Mike Bloomberg into lobbyists for Beijing .
Our media industry includes investments and business interests in red China .
The CCP knows shutting down American energy is the quickest way to destroy the American economy .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ pandemic to overtake us as our economy is on the ropes .
The continue-the-shutdown crew are useful idiots for the CCP , just as they are when they push the Green New Deal and blame the pandemic on President Trump rather than on China 's dictator , Xi Jinping .
President Trump stood up to China and built an economy that was the envy of the world .
The Whitmer Democrats shut down Michigan 's economy .
Their crusade against energy would keep it shut down permanently .
Beijing is on their side @ @ @ @ @ @ @

While President Trump is working hard to rebuild Michigan's economy, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and her minions are doing everything they can to destroy it.
President Trump visited a Michigan Ford Motor Company auto plant his administration had retooled into a veritable "arsenal of health care," turning out ventilators for the nation and the world.
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel's response? Scold the company whose name is synonymous with Detroit.
But it gets worse. The day after President Trump went to Ford to celebrate American know-how and the renaissance of American manufacturing, Nessel went to court to literally shut down the energy Michiganders depend on.
AG Nessel and her boss Whitmer want to close an existing pipeline now, years before its replacement is finished. Their jihad would destroy thousands of good-paying jobs across the state.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
How did Michigan get saddled with such Green New Deal true believers?
You can thank Wall Street bigwigs Michael Bloomberg and Tom Steyer who pumped millions in dark money to elect them.
Bloomberg and Steyer are quite open about their passion to shut down the American energy industry. These two billionaires spend their fortunes buying politicians who will push their job-killing policies and cripple America's economy.
Having made millions in the fossil fuel industry here and in China, Steyer is now the Green New Deal's leading evangelist.
Mike Bloomberg, meanwhile, has no use for manufacturing in America. He would make it impossible for anyone to work in a factory – because there will be no factories.
Bloomberg is advancing his "climate change" agenda by paying activist lawyers working in 10 state attorney general offices run by Democrats.
And Michigan may be their next home. Emails obtained through a freedom of information request reveal Michigan Assistant Attorney General Skip Pruss in discussions to bring on one of Bloomberg's legal mercenaries.
Whitmer's hard lockdown order is of a piece with her green new deal anti-energy agenda. They both shut down the way of life Americans are accustomed to and substitute it with government control over every aspect of life.
Let's not miss the big picture: Whitmer, Nessel, Bloomberg and the other pied pipers of the Green New Deal are playing right into the hands of the Chinese Communist Party.
The CCP is intent on taking over the world and has been waging unrestricted economic warfare to achieve its goal.
The CCP destroyed our manufacturing industries through predatory trade practices. It bought off Wall Street with lucrative deals in China, turning our finance industry and people like Mike Bloomberg into lobbyists for Beijing. Our media industry is compromised by investments and business interests in red China.
The CCP knows shutting down American energy is the quickest way to destroy the American economy.
The CCP sees an opportunity in the pandemic to overtake us as our economy is on the ropes.
The continue-the-shutdown crew are useful idiots for the CCP, just as they are when they push the Green New Deal and blame the pandemic on President Trump rather than on China's dictator, Xi Jinping.
President Trump stood up to China and built an economy that was the envy of the world.
The Whitmer Democrats shut down Michigan's economy. Their crusade against energy would keep it shut down permanently.
Beijing is on their side.
President Trump is on ours.


wnd--2020-05-22--Homeschooling as a vast unplanned experiment

While the nation squares off in conflicts between the left and the right about when the country should reopen , parents everywhere have been coping with what Kevin Carey of the New America think tank called `` a vast unplanned experiment in mass homeschooling . ''
For many parents ( and students ) , this was uncharted territory as they grappled with online learning and zoom meetings , and a lot more parental involvement than ever before .
Clearly , school closures are hard on many parents , especially those who need to work .
Even for those able to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's a shock to the system to realize they 're now in charge of making sure the young minds in their care do n't atrophy during this unprecedented situation .
However , not everyone is viewing school closures as a disaster .
For decades , schools have become de facto one-stop babysitters , day cares , nannies , restaurants and indoctrination centers .
Stepping back from this monopoly may prove to be a silver lining to the dark cloud of hardship so many people face .
Some are viewing school closures as an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Having children take a break from government-controlled `` education '' means they 're removed from influences parents may vaguely know about , but have n't fully considered .
This can include a dumbed-down , one-size-fits-all curriculum ; bullying ; classroom distractions ; indoctrination in such issues as climate change , transgenderism and sex ed ; bathroom and locker room etiquette with children of the opposite gender ; and even regular time-wasting classroom necessities such as roll call and discipline .
Many parents are discovering homeschooling is n't as scary as they 'd been @ @ @ @ @ @ @ learning , and these parents may realize government indoctrination is n't a good thing .
This has caused a frantic and fretful push-back among educational elites .
Having closed all the schools and provided distance learning opportunities , educators now find themselves in the paradoxical position of trying to convince parents they 're doing a lousy job and only they , the educators , can teach .
Kevin Huffman , a former education commissioner of Tennessee and partner at a nonprofit that promotes public schools , penned an op-ed in late March for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the Coronavirus Will Set Back a Generation of Children . ''
He claimed the children sent home due to the coronavirus school closures are going to suffer academically ( without ever explaining what choice parents had ) , then cherry-picks disturbing data to support his dire claims .
And in a hilariously rip-roaring 80-page diatribe , Harvard law professor Elizabeth Bartholet wants homeschooling banned for the unforgivable crime of giving parents `` authoritarian '' control over their children .
She calls home education `` dangerous '' because it prevents children from receiving a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ child abuse and can socially isolate them .
She laments that homeschoolers often do n't expose their children to ideas such as secularism , atheism , feminism and value relativism .
Yet Harvard – among many other Ivy League schools – `` actively '' recruits homeschoolers because of their superior academic credentials .
Has anyone told this to Ms. Bartholet ?
I think she might have missed the memo .
So how do children feel about staying home from school ?
Sure , they 're away from their friends ; but they 're @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and classroom antics .
As it turns out , close to 90 percent of children enjoy being out of the school environment and home with their family .
Who'da thunk ?
I guess family life is n't the oppressive environment Harvard professors would like to think it is .
Even more interesting , a RealClear Opinion Research poll found that 40 percent of families are more likely to choose to homeschool their children or engage in virtual learning once the coronavirus pandemic subsides , as many families are seeing `` the inadequacies of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' One student explained why .
In a poignant letter from a New York City eighth grader published ( rather surprisingly ) in the New York Times , 13-year-old Veronique Mintz explained the realities of the environment in public schools and why she 's learning so much more at home .
`` Talking out of turn .
Destroying classroom materials .
Disrespecting teachers .
Blurting out answers during tests .
Students pushing , kicking , hitting one another and even rolling on the ground , '' she writes .
`` This is what @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
You may think I 'm joking , but I swear I 'm not .
… Students unable or unwilling to control themselves steal valuable class time , often preventing their classmates from being prepared for tests and assessments .
I have taken tests that included entire topics we never mastered , either because we were not able to get through the lesson or we could n't sufficiently focus .
… The fact that I am learning so much better away from the classroom shows that something is wrong with our system .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ the College Fix , `` COVID-19 may be a blessing .
It has shown a viable educational alternative to those who previously may have been unaware of it .
And there wo n't be any going back . ''
This sentiment is echoed by Corey DeAngelis , Reason Foundation 's director of School Choice , on a John Stossel TV video : `` Mass homeschooling during this pandemic may actually be a blessing in disguise .
… We have a lot of examples of families saying that they 're going to switch from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ post-pandemic . ''
`` As American children were sent home , parents filled the internet complaining about their online assignments as unproductive make-work and sometimes propaganda , '' noted Joy Pullmann , executive editor of The Federalist .
`` The question for these parents , and for the taxpayers sponsoring this sad excuse for an education , is : What makes you think things are any better during the rest of the school year you do n't see ?
The next question is : What are you going to do about it ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ School Closures Are A Big Threat To The Power Of Public Education , '' Mises Institute senior editor Ryan McMaken writes , `` With the image of schools as indispensable social institutions quickly fading , the political advantage they have long enjoyed will rapidly disappear as well , '' and he predicts severe budget cuts as parents abandon public education .
What will be the fallout from this `` vast unplanned experiment in mass homeschooling '' ?
Only time will tell .
However the numbers are encouraging .
If 40 percent of publicly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it would break the back of the government monopoly on education , encouraging competition among schools , and permit free thinking .
In short , there may be a very powerful silver lining to this nationwide disruption : More children will be freed from the tyranny of public education .
Let us hope so .

While the nation squares off in conflicts between the left and the right about when the country should reopen, parents everywhere have been coping with what Kevin Carey of the New America think tank called "a vast unplanned experiment in mass homeschooling."
For many parents (and students), this was uncharted territory as they grappled with online learning and zoom meetings, and a lot more parental involvement than ever before.
Clearly, school closures are hard on many parents, especially those who need to work. Even for those able to stay home with their kids, it's a shock to the system to realize they're now in charge of making sure the young minds in their care don't atrophy during this unprecedented situation.
However, not everyone is viewing school closures as a disaster. For decades, schools have become de facto one-stop babysitters, day cares, nannies, restaurants and indoctrination centers. Stepping back from this monopoly may prove to be a silver lining to the dark cloud of hardship so many people face. Some are viewing school closures as an opportunity, not an insurmountable obstacle.
Having children take a break from government-controlled "education" means they're removed from influences parents may vaguely know about, but haven't fully considered. This can include a dumbed-down, one-size-fits-all curriculum; bullying; classroom distractions; indoctrination in such issues as climate change, transgenderism and sex ed; bathroom and locker room etiquette with children of the opposite gender; and even regular time-wasting classroom necessities such as roll call and discipline.
TRENDING: Is this the 'Final Battle'?
Many parents are discovering homeschooling isn't as scary as they'd been told. Their children are thriving and learning, and these parents may realize government indoctrination isn't a good thing.
This has caused a frantic and fretful push-back among educational elites. Having closed all the schools and provided distance learning opportunities, educators now find themselves in the paradoxical position of trying to convince parents they're doing a lousy job and only they, the educators, can teach.
Kevin Huffman, a former education commissioner of Tennessee and partner at a nonprofit that promotes public schools, penned an op-ed in late March for the Washington Post entitled "Homeschooling During the Coronavirus Will Set Back a Generation of Children." He claimed the children sent home due to the coronavirus school closures are going to suffer academically (without ever explaining what choice parents had), then cherry-picks disturbing data to support his dire claims.
And in a hilariously rip-roaring 80-page diatribe, Harvard law professor Elizabeth Bartholet wants homeschooling banned for the unforgivable crime of giving parents "authoritarian" control over their children. She calls home education "dangerous" because it prevents children from receiving a meaningful education, leaves them open to child abuse and can socially isolate them. She laments that homeschoolers often don't expose their children to ideas such as secularism, atheism, feminism and value relativism.
Yet Harvard – among many other Ivy League schools – "actively" recruits homeschoolers because of their superior academic credentials. Has anyone told this to Ms. Bartholet? I think she might have missed the memo.
So how do children feel about staying home from school? Sure, they're away from their friends; but they're also away from bullies, peer pressure and classroom antics.
As it turns out, close to 90 percent of children enjoy being out of the school environment and home with their family. Who'da thunk? I guess family life isn't the oppressive environment Harvard professors would like to think it is.
Even more interesting, a RealClear Opinion Research poll found that 40 percent of families are more likely to choose to homeschool their children or engage in virtual learning once the coronavirus pandemic subsides, as many families are seeing "the inadequacies of school districts that are too inflexible."
One student explained why. In a poignant letter from a New York City eighth grader published (rather surprisingly) in the New York Times, 13-year-old Veronique Mintz explained the realities of the environment in public schools and why she's learning so much more at home.
"Talking out of turn. Destroying classroom materials. Disrespecting teachers. Blurting out answers during tests. Students pushing, kicking, hitting one another and even rolling on the ground," she writes. "This is what happens in my school every single day. You may think I'm joking, but I swear I'm not. … Students unable or unwilling to control themselves steal valuable class time, often preventing their classmates from being prepared for tests and assessments. I have taken tests that included entire topics we never mastered, either because we were not able to get through the lesson or we couldn't sufficiently focus. … The fact that I am learning so much better away from the classroom shows that something is wrong with our system."
"In this," observes the College Fix, "COVID-19 may be a blessing. It has shown a viable educational alternative to those who previously may have been unaware of it. And there won't be any going back."
This sentiment is echoed by Corey DeAngelis, Reason Foundation's director of School Choice, on a John Stossel TV video: "Mass homeschooling during this pandemic may actually be a blessing in disguise. … We have a lot of examples of families saying that they're going to switch from the government-run school system to homeschooling, post-pandemic."
"As American children were sent home, parents filled the internet complaining about their online assignments as unproductive make-work and sometimes propaganda," noted Joy Pullmann, executive editor of The Federalist. "The question for these parents, and for the taxpayers sponsoring this sad excuse for an education, is: What makes you think things are any better during the rest of the school year you don't see?The next question is: What are you going to do about it?"
In an article entitled "The School Closures Are A Big Threat To The Power Of Public Education," Mises Institute senior editor Ryan McMaken writes, "With the image of schools as indispensable social institutions quickly fading, the political advantage they have long enjoyed will rapidly disappear as well," and he predicts severe budget cuts as parents abandon public education.
What will be the fallout from this "vast unplanned experiment in mass homeschooling"? Only time will tell. However the numbers are encouraging. If 40 percent of publicly schooled children actually transitioned to homeschooling, it would break the back of the government monopoly on education, encouraging competition among schools, and permit free thinking.
In short, there may be a very powerful silver lining to this nationwide disruption: More children will be freed from the tyranny of public education.
Let us hope so.