freebeacon--2020-06-17--Tim Kaine: America Created Slavery

Tim Kaine: America Created Slavery

In a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday , Sen. Tim Kaine ( D. , Va. ) blamed the United States , specifically the Virginia General Assembly , for inventing slavery .
`` The United States did n't inherit slavery from anybody .
We created it , '' Kaine said .
`` It got created by the Virginia General Assembly and the legislatures of other states . ''
He added that the country needs to do `` much more '' to `` dismantle the structures of racism that our federal , state , and local governments erected and maintained over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Hillary Clinton 's running mate in 2016 , spoke in support of the Justice in Policing Act of 2020 .
The bill would implement police reform on a national level by banning choke holds , requiring police officers to use body cameras , and mandating training on racial profiling .
Kaine , along with Democratic colleagues Sens .
Cory Booker ( N.J. ) and Kamala Harris ( Calif. ) , introduced the bill last week amid widespread protests over racial injustice and calls to defund and abolish the police following the deaths of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ others .
Referencing the New York Times magazine 's controversial 1619 Project , Kaine noted that the English brought the first slaves to Point Comfort , Virginia , in 1619 , and then began implementing laws enforcing slavery in the colonies .
He cited that year as the beginning of slavery .
Though some historians have pointed to inaccuracies in the 1619 Project 's retelling of the American founding , writer Nikole Hannah-Jones won a Pulitzer Prize for her work in May .
Many public schools across the country have added the 1619 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mentioned in the Code of Hammurabi , the oldest-known law code , which was written in approximately 1760 B.C.—over 3,300 years before slavery began in the United States .
The existence of slavery is also well-documented in Europe , the Middle East , and Africa .

In a speech on the Senate floor Tuesday, Sen. Tim Kaine (D., Va.) blamed the United States, specifically the Virginia General Assembly, for inventing slavery.
"The United States didn't inherit slavery from anybody. We created it," Kaine said. "It got created by the Virginia General Assembly and the legislatures of other states." He added that the country needs to do "much more" to "dismantle the structures of racism that our federal, state, and local governments erected and maintained over centuries."
Kaine, who was Hillary Clinton's running mate in 2016, spoke in support of the Justice in Policing Act of 2020. The bill would implement police reform on a national level by banning choke holds, requiring police officers to use body cameras, and mandating training on racial profiling. Kaine, along with Democratic colleagues Sens. Cory Booker (N.J.) and Kamala Harris (Calif.), introduced the bill last week amid widespread protests over racial injustice and calls to defund and abolish the police following the deaths of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and others.
Referencing the New York Times magazine's controversial 1619 Project, Kaine noted that the English brought the first slaves to Point Comfort, Virginia, in 1619, and then began implementing laws enforcing slavery in the colonies. He cited that year as the beginning of slavery.
Though some historians have pointed to inaccuracies in the 1619 Project's retelling of the American founding, writer Nikole Hannah-Jones won a Pulitzer Prize for her work in May. Many public schools across the country have added the 1619 Project to their curricula.
Slavery is mentioned in the Code of Hammurabi, the oldest-known law code, which was written in approximately 1760 B.C.—over 3,300 years before slavery began in the United States. The existence of slavery is also well-documented in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.


freebeacon--2020-06-17--After Dodging Dem Primary Debate, Sara Gideon Participates in Private PAC Fundraiser

Shortly after dodging a primary debate , Maine Democratic Senate candidate Sara Gideon participated in a private fundraiser with a PAC awash in corporate cash .
Gideon , who has failed to appear at any of the scheduled primary debates , has made an anti-corporate message a central part of her campaign .
On Tuesday morning , however , she participated in a fundraiser with Moderate Democrats PAC , which primarily fundraises from corporate sources .
Of the $ 822,800 the PAC has raised so far this election cycle , $ 522,500 came from corporate PACs .
This amount includes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Boeing , Lockheed Martin , Exxon Mobil , and dozens of others .
Tuesday 's virtual meet-and-greet with Gideon—which was not publicly announced—was for the PAC 's `` Trustees and Executive Members , '' according to an invitation obtained by the Washington Free Beacon .
Gideon , Maine 's speaker of the house , is the favorite to win the state 's July 14 primary and go on to challenge Republican senator Susan Collins .
The race is expected to be a close contest with Congress 's upper chamber on the line .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , has repeatedly refused to debate her primary opponents , human rights activist Betsy Sweet and criminal defense attorney Bre Kidman .
Over the course of the primary campaign , Gideon has touted her commitment that she `` is n't taking any money from corporate PACs in her campaign or as a U.S .
Senator so that Maine people will never have to doubt whose interests she 's representing in the Senate . ''
Despite her pledges , however , Gideon 's campaign has received money from PACs that are heavily funded by @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tens of thousands from out-of-state lobbyists .
The Gideon campaign and the organizer of the fundraiser did not respond to inquiries into the Democrat 's involvement and the other individuals who participated in the event .
Gideon joined the virtual event with the group 's unknown trustees and executive members just days after dodging a primary debate with two of her Democratic rivals .
`` [ Gideon is ] refusing to appear in forums where she would have to answer unscripted questions without being able to simply end the event when she got @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' Kidman told the Free Beacon last week .
Kidman added that two Maine groups had previously tried to schedule forums with the candidates but axed the plans after Gideon and another candidate , who has since dropped out , refused to participate .
The Maine house speaker 's now-dissolved state leadership PAC received substantial funding from numerous corporations including Anthem BlueCross BlueShield , AT & T , and American Express .
Gideon was hit with numerous ethics complaints over the PAC 's operations .
An ethics watchdog unanimously found that she had @ @ @ @ @ @ @ political contributions to federal campaigns from the corporate-funded PAC .
Gideon recently accused Collins of prioritizing corporate donors in an advertisement .
The ad received three `` Pinocchios '' from the Washington Post , which called its contents `` highly misleading . ''

Shortly after dodging a primary debate, Maine Democratic Senate candidate Sara Gideon participated in a private fundraiser with a PAC awash in corporate cash.
Gideon, who has failed to appear at any of the scheduled primary debates, has made an anti-corporate message a central part of her campaign. On Tuesday morning, however, she participated in a fundraiser with Moderate Democrats PAC, which primarily fundraises from corporate sources. Of the $822,800 the PAC has raised so far this election cycle, $522,500 came from corporate PACs. This amount includes thousands from PACs tied to Citigroup, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Exxon Mobil, and dozens of others. Tuesday's virtual meet-and-greet with Gideon—which was not publicly announced—was for the PAC's "Trustees and Executive Members," according to an invitation obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.
Gideon, Maine's speaker of the house, is the favorite to win the state's July 14 primary and go on to challenge Republican senator Susan Collins. The race is expected to be a close contest with Congress's upper chamber on the line. Gideon, backed by the Democratic establishment, has repeatedly refused to debate her primary opponents, human rights activist Betsy Sweet and criminal defense attorney Bre Kidman.
Over the course of the primary campaign, Gideon has touted her commitment that she "isn't taking any money from corporate PACs in her campaign or as a U.S. Senator so that Maine people will never have to doubt whose interests she's representing in the Senate." Despite her pledges, however, Gideon's campaign has received money from PACs that are heavily funded by corporate PACs. She has additionally collected tens of thousands from out-of-state lobbyists.
The Gideon campaign and the organizer of the fundraiser did not respond to inquiries into the Democrat's involvement and the other individuals who participated in the event. Gideon joined the virtual event with the group's unknown trustees and executive members just days after dodging a primary debate with two of her Democratic rivals.
"[Gideon is] refusing to appear in forums where she would have to answer unscripted questions without being able to simply end the event when she got one she didn’t like," Kidman told the Free Beacon last week. Kidman added that two Maine groups had previously tried to schedule forums with the candidates but axed the plans after Gideon and another candidate, who has since dropped out, refused to participate.
The Maine house speaker's now-dissolved state leadership PAC received substantial funding from numerous corporations including Anthem BlueCross BlueShield, AT&T, and American Express. Gideon was hit with numerous ethics complaints over the PAC's operations. An ethics watchdog unanimously found that she had violated state laws after reimbursing herself for political contributions to federal campaigns from the corporate-funded PAC.
Gideon recently accused Collins of prioritizing corporate donors in an advertisement. The ad received three "Pinocchios" from the Washington Post, which called its contents "highly misleading."


freebeacon--2020-06-17--FSU Students Tap Anti-Semite as Senate President After Ousting ‘Bigoted’ Catholic

Florida State University 's student government tapped a student who called an Israeli a `` stupid Jew , '' among other anti-Semitic online remarks , to replace as president a member they ousted for expressing his Catholic beliefs in leaked private messages .
FSU 's student senate impeached president Jack Denton for expressing Catholic teaching on abortion and transgenderism in conversations on the group messaging app GroupMe .
The student government appointed Ahmad Daraldik , who created a website calling Israel 's existence a continuation of the Holocaust , to take his place as student senate president .
In two @ @ @ @ @ @ @ f**k Israel , '' and `` stupid Jew , '' as captions .
He also created a website connecting the `` occupation of Palestine '' to the Holocaust , writing that `` the Holocaust never ended , it just moved to Palestine . ''
The website also draws a comparison between the Gaza strip—an area controlled by the Palestinian Authority and the terrorist organization Hamas—and concentration camps in Nazi Germany .
An anonymous FSU student created a Change.org petition calling for Daraldik to be removed from his leadership position .
`` These anti-semitic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campus , in the United States , and most important on this Earth , '' the petition reads .
`` There is no justification for his remarks , and [ he ] needs to be removed from his position of power . ''
The university 's Hillel organization told the Washington Free Beacon they were concerned about the anti-Semitic claims made by Daraldik .
`` These claims go beyond legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and into modern reincarnations of centuries-old ‘ blood libels ' that have been used as the justification for the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ past millennium , '' said FSU 's Hillel executive director Dan Leshem .
`` We are calling on the Senate President to immediately address these issues and commit himself to learning how and why this type of discourse is so hurtful to Jews and damaging to public discourse . ''
Daraldik did not respond to a request for comment .
The FSU student senate will vote Wednesday on whether to remove Daraldik for his comments .
The scheduled vote comes less than two weeks after a vote of no confidence ousted Denton .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ group , Denton said that some policies embraced by Black Lives Matter , Reclaim the Block , the ACLU , and other left-wing groups `` advocate for things that are explicitly anti-Catholic . ''
He pointed to how some advocates defend laws protecting abortions and affirming transgenderism—both of which are at odds with the teachings of his faith .
`` I do n't mean to anger anyone.… It is important to know what you 're supporting when you 're Catholic .
If I stay silent while my brothers and sisters may be supporting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I have sinned through my silence , '' Denton said .
`` I love you all , and I want us all to be aware of the truth . ''
Denton 's texts were posted in a student opinion newspaper that deemed his words `` disqualifying . ''
Both Denton and his lawyers at the religious liberty law firm Alliance Defending Freedom declined to comment .
A Change.org petition was started soon after Denton 's texts were published , calling on the student senate to remove Denton for his `` transphobic '' and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the FSU student who created the petition , told the Free Beacon that Denton 's views could not be justified with his role as student body president .
`` Denton 's use of the word ‘ transgenderism ' was an indication of his ignorance towards queer points of view and lack of understanding of the complexities many queer college students face , '' Callahan said .
She declined to answer questions about Daraldik 's anti-Semitic posts .

Florida State University's student government tapped a student who called an Israeli a "stupid Jew," among other anti-Semitic online remarks, to replace as president a member they ousted for expressing his Catholic beliefs in leaked private messages.
FSU's student senate impeached president Jack Denton for expressing Catholic teaching on abortion and transgenderism in conversations on the group messaging app GroupMe. The student government appointed Ahmad Daraldik, who created a website calling Israel's existence a continuation of the Holocaust, to take his place as student senate president.
In two separate posts, Daraldik wrote, "f**k Israel," and "stupid Jew," as captions. He also created a website connecting the "occupation of Palestine" to the Holocaust, writing that "the Holocaust never ended, it just moved to Palestine." The website also draws a comparison between the Gaza strip—an area controlled by the Palestinian Authority and the terrorist organization Hamas—and concentration camps in Nazi Germany.
An anonymous FSU student created a Change.org petition calling for Daraldik to be removed from his leadership position. "These anti-semitic remarks are not welcomed on FSU's campus, in the United States, and most important on this Earth," the petition reads. "There is no justification for his remarks, and [he] needs to be removed from his position of power." The university's Hillel organization told the Washington Free Beacon they were concerned about the anti-Semitic claims made by Daraldik.
"These claims go beyond legitimate criticism of Israeli policies and into modern reincarnations of centuries-old 'blood libels' that have been used as the justification for the murder of thousands of Jews over the past millennium," said FSU's Hillel executive director Dan Leshem. "We are calling on the Senate President to immediately address these issues and commit himself to learning how and why this type of discourse is so hurtful to Jews and damaging to public discourse."
Daraldik did not respond to a request for comment.
The FSU student senate will vote Wednesday on whether to remove Daraldik for his comments. The scheduled vote comes less than two weeks after a vote of no confidence ousted Denton.
In a Catholic student union GroupMe chat group, Denton said that some policies embraced by Black Lives Matter, Reclaim the Block, the ACLU, and other left-wing groups "advocate for things that are explicitly anti-Catholic." He pointed to how some advocates defend laws protecting abortions and affirming transgenderism—both of which are at odds with the teachings of his faith.
"I don't mean to anger anyone.… It is important to know what you're supporting when you're Catholic. If I stay silent while my brothers and sisters may be supporting an organization that promotes grave evils, I have sinned through my silence," Denton said. "I love you all, and I want us all to be aware of the truth."
Denton's texts were posted in a student opinion newspaper that deemed his words "disqualifying." Both Denton and his lawyers at the religious liberty law firm Alliance Defending Freedom declined to comment.
A Change.org petition was started soon after Denton's texts were published, calling on the student senate to remove Denton for his "transphobic" and "racist" remarks. Lauren Callahan, the FSU student who created the petition, told the Free Beacon that Denton's views could not be justified with his role as student body president.
"Denton's use of the word 'transgenderism' was an indication of his ignorance towards queer points of view and lack of understanding of the complexities many queer college students face," Callahan said. She declined to answer questions about Daraldik's anti-Semitic posts.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Congress Targets Social Media Companies for Circulating Chinese Propaganda

The country ’ s largest social media companies are allowing the Chinese Communist Party to disseminate propaganda to American audiences with little oversight or warning , according to an ongoing congressional investigation into these companies ’ failure to police suspect content .
Investigators with the House Foreign Affairs Committee have been pressing Twitter , Facebook , and YouTube to deplatform Chinese Communist Party officials and news outlets for disseminating propaganda , particularly related to the coronavirus , but each of the sites has failed to take adequate action .
In most cases , Communist Party propaganda freely circulates on these @ @ @ @ @ @ @ questionable .
While each of these sites has begun aggressively policing conservative provocateurs and even President Donald Trump , they have been lax about applying the same standards to Chinese officials and state-controlled news outlets that regularly traffic in unfounded conspiracy theories , congressional officials with knowledge of the investigation told the Washington Free Beacon .
In many cases , these websites allowed communist leaders and outlets to post outright lies about the coronavirus pandemic , including the claim that American military leaders created the coronavirus and planted it in China .
The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Committee leader Rep. Michael McCaul ( R. , Texas ) , is part of a broader effort by congressional leaders to crack down on China ’ s influence operations in the United States .
The findings of the investigation were presented in the form of report cards grading each company on whether it has banned communist officials and news outlets , applied warning labels to their content , and fact-checked their claims for accuracy .
All of the websites failed these tests : Twitter received a D- , Facebook a C+ , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ each still permits the dissemination of anti-U.S. communist propaganda , often without warning labels for readers .
`` The Chinese Communist Party has weaponized American social media platforms to push their disinformation and promote their propaganda .
The solution is simple—deplatform CCP officials and propagandists who consistently spread lies , '' McCaul told the Free Beacon .
`` Sadly , while we had some positive conversations and some steps have been taken , these companies have chosen to allow CCP officials to continue to operate on their sites instead of doing what ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team first started investigating these sites in March , when he petitioned them to ban Communist Party officials and state-controlled news outlets for their dissemination of lies about the coronavirus pandemic .
Twitter emerged as the most abused platform and also the one with the least oversight .
While the company cooperated with McCaul ’ s probe , it did not remove any of the propaganda posts identified by the congressional investigators .
`` Despite a willingness to discuss HFAC Minority staff concerns , Twitter does not appear to have removed any CCP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ meaningful policy changes in response to our concerns to prevent the CCP from spreading propaganda on its platform , '' according to the investigation .
`` Moreover , Twitter does not label or provide transparency about the nature and operations of CCP propaganda outlets .
Rather , it legitimizes them by allowing them to operate as verified users . ''
While average Chinese citizens are blocked from accessing Twitter due to the country ’ s strict censorship policies , Communist Party officials are often verified by the website , providing legitimacy to their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ this violates Twitter ’ s own policies barring individuals and organizations guilty of gross human rights violations from operating accounts on the site .
Additionally , Twitter does not equally apply its rules .
Prominent conservatives , including Trump , have had their content censored or removed in recent months .
But Chinese officials and news outlets are not held to a similar standard .
`` Of all the companies we engaged with , Twitter is the platform most heavily abused by the CCP , '' investigators found .
`` Twitter only applied @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus originating with the U.S. military after it had been on the platform for more than a month .
They are the most unwilling to do anything to stop the CCP from spreading harmful misinformation or provide transparency through labels that inform users they are viewing content from a state-funded or state-directed media outlet . ''
Twitter has said that it will only fact-check tweets from prominent voices , such as the president .
Congressional investigators remain concerned that China does not rank as a top priority for the website .
Facebook @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to freely post misinformation , potentially reaching millions of Americans .
These outlets include China Daily , Xinhua , and CGTN , all of which are leading purveyors of Chinese government-approved propaganda .
Facebook received the highest grade awarded , a C+ , due to its efforts to specifically inform readers they are consuming state-funded information .
It still permits these outlets to freely post content on its site , however .
Facebook does not `` currently plan to take down content flagged by the staff or take sufficient action to prevent the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and lies about COVID-19 , '' according to the report .
YouTube demonstrated similar failures .
It does not block communist officials and news outlets or remove their materials .
YouTube does , however , attempt to fact-check and police this content for inaccuracies .
`` YouTube does label videos by CCP propaganda outlets , but the labeling is inconsistent , '' according to the report .
In many cases , YouTube failed to label CCP content as propaganda and did not provide viewers with complete information about the biased nature of these @ @

The country’s largest social media companies are allowing the Chinese Communist Party to disseminate propaganda to American audiences with little oversight or warning, according to an ongoing congressional investigation into these companies’ failure to police suspect content.
Investigators with the House Foreign Affairs Committee have been pressing Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube to deplatform Chinese Communist Party officials and news outlets for disseminating propaganda, particularly related to the coronavirus, but each of the sites has failed to take adequate action. In most cases, Communist Party propaganda freely circulates on these sites without labels identifying the information as questionable.
While each of these sites has begun aggressively policing conservative provocateurs and even President Donald Trump, they have been lax about applying the same standards to Chinese officials and state-controlled news outlets that regularly traffic in unfounded conspiracy theories, congressional officials with knowledge of the investigation told the Washington Free Beacon. In many cases, these websites allowed communist leaders and outlets to post outright lies about the coronavirus pandemic, including the claim that American military leaders created the coronavirus and planted it in China.
The investigation, run by House Foreign Affairs Committee leader Rep. Michael McCaul (R., Texas), is part of a broader effort by congressional leaders to crack down on China’s influence operations in the United States.
The findings of the investigation were presented in the form of report cards grading each company on whether it has banned communist officials and news outlets, applied warning labels to their content, and fact-checked their claims for accuracy. All of the websites failed these tests: Twitter received a D-, Facebook a C+, and YouTube a C-, grades that imply each still permits the dissemination of anti-U.S. communist propaganda, often without warning labels for readers.
"The Chinese Communist Party has weaponized American social media platforms to push their disinformation and promote their propaganda. The solution is simple—deplatform CCP officials and propagandists who consistently spread lies," McCaul told the Free Beacon. "Sadly, while we had some positive conversations and some steps have been taken, these companies have chosen to allow CCP officials to continue to operate on their sites instead of doing what’s right."
McCaul’s team first started investigating these sites in March, when he petitioned them to ban Communist Party officials and state-controlled news outlets for their dissemination of lies about the coronavirus pandemic.
Twitter emerged as the most abused platform and also the one with the least oversight. While the company cooperated with McCaul’s probe, it did not remove any of the propaganda posts identified by the congressional investigators.
"Despite a willingness to discuss HFAC Minority staff concerns, Twitter does not appear to have removed any CCP disinformation from its platform nor made any meaningful policy changes in response to our concerns to prevent the CCP from spreading propaganda on its platform," according to the investigation. "Moreover, Twitter does not label or provide transparency about the nature and operations of CCP propaganda outlets. Rather, it legitimizes them by allowing them to operate as verified users."
While average Chinese citizens are blocked from accessing Twitter due to the country’s strict censorship policies, Communist Party officials are often verified by the website, providing legitimacy to their claims. McCaul’s team maintains this violates Twitter’s own policies barring individuals and organizations guilty of gross human rights violations from operating accounts on the site.
Additionally, Twitter does not equally apply its rules. Prominent conservatives, including Trump, have had their content censored or removed in recent months. But Chinese officials and news outlets are not held to a similar standard.
"Of all the companies we engaged with, Twitter is the platform most heavily abused by the CCP," investigators found. "Twitter only applied a factcheck label to the Tweet about the virus originating with the U.S. military after it had been on the platform for more than a month. They are the most unwilling to do anything to stop the CCP from spreading harmful misinformation or provide transparency through labels that inform users they are viewing content from a state-funded or state-directed media outlet."
Twitter has said that it will only fact-check tweets from prominent voices, such as the president. Congressional investigators remain concerned that China does not rank as a top priority for the website.
Facebook also allows several Chinese state-controlled propaganda organs to freely post misinformation, potentially reaching millions of Americans. These outlets include China Daily, Xinhua, and CGTN, all of which are leading purveyors of Chinese government-approved propaganda.
Facebook received the highest grade awarded, a C+, due to its efforts to specifically inform readers they are consuming state-funded information. It still permits these outlets to freely post content on its site, however.
Facebook does not "currently plan to take down content flagged by the staff or take sufficient action to prevent the CCP from using Facebook to spread propaganda and lies about COVID-19," according to the report.
YouTube demonstrated similar failures. It does not block communist officials and news outlets or remove their materials. YouTube does, however, attempt to fact-check and police this content for inaccuracies.
"YouTube does label videos by CCP propaganda outlets, but the labeling is inconsistent," according to the report.
In many cases, YouTube failed to label CCP content as propaganda and did not provide viewers with complete information about the biased nature of these videos.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Defunders Call for Alternatives to Cops—But Do They Work?

Progressive protesters envision a future where unarmed `` de-escalators '' and `` violence interrupters '' replace police—but the evidence indicates those practices would be no match for violent crime .
The burgeoning movement to defund police has in recent days produced a bevy of proposals for replacing cops , from hiring more drug counselors to creating unarmed traffic officers .
Asked how to address the 1.2 million violent crimes that occur every year , police critics have argued that funds should be redirected to unarmed agents trained to stop violence with words : so-called interrupters or de-escalators whose job is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ These ideas would expand on policies already adopted in part by police forces in New York , Chicago , Baltimore , and elsewhere .
But , as local lawmakers consider replacing cops wholesale with unarmed counterparts , a closer look at the evidence indicates that such alternatives are erratically and questionably effective at stopping violent crime .
Although it is widely used , there is surprisingly little high-quality evidence to support de-escalation as a tactic .
Violence interrupters are more widely analyzed , but the results of numerous pilot programs are mixed at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ increases in crime under their auspices .
Though they may sound like a good idea to those who fear police violence , it is hard to conclude that the nonviolent alternatives currently being trumpeted have much to back them up .
Calls for replacing police with unarmed `` violence interrupters '' are growing louder .
Sociologist Patrick Sharkey , writing in the Washington Post , mentioned `` conflict mediators '' and `` violence interrupters '' as part of a hypothetical nonviolent policing alternative .
Nashville-based protest group Gideon 's Army has argued interrupters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Some local governments are listening .
The mayor of Harrisburg , Pa. , plans to move police budgets toward interrupters .
New York City comptroller Scott Stringer has called for moving $ 1.1 billion out of the NYPD 's budget toward `` social workers , counselors , community-based violence interrupters , and other trained professionals . ''
Just because a policy has support among activists or lawmakers , however , does not mean it works .
Police-worn body cameras , for example , are wildly popular ; both Democrats and Republicans are expected @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reform proposals .
But study after study after study has found that body cameras do n't actually reduce police misconduct .
One particularly large study found they actually increase the risk of assault against officers .
Such findings seem counterintuitive , but naturally raise the question : Does research support violence interruptors and de-escalators ?
De-escalation—using verbal tactics , rather than force , to calm violent or angry people—began to see widespread use after the 2014 protests in Ferguson , Mo .
In a 2015 report , the Obama administration explicitly called for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to minimize the use of potentially lethal force .
Defunding advocates argue that such tactics , in the hands of unarmed police alternatives , could mitigate violence .
But there 's little robust evidence about the effectiveness of de-escalation training .
Natalie Todak , a professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham , wrote in her 2017 dissertation that `` de-escalation has not received specific empirical attention . ''
Todak told the Washington Free Beacon by email that to the best of her knowledge , there remains `` a huge gap in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ A comprehensive review released in January analyzed 64 studies conducted over 40 years , finding that while there were few downsides and `` slight to moderate individual and organizational improvements '' from de-escalation training , any conclusion `` is limited by the questionable quality of almost all evaluation research designs . ''
In other words , none of the studies allow us to draw strong conclusions about what , if anything , de-escalation training accomplishes .
`` As it stands , de-escalation training is a promising practice ; that is , a well-intended @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , '' the study 's authors conclude .
`` [ R ] ecommendations that de-escalation must be used as a primary tool should await additional evidence regarding its effectiveness and any unintended consequences that may impact officer and public safety . ''
The story on interrupters is a little more complicated .
Many cities have implemented violence interrupter programs , most following a model first developed to fight crime in Chicago .
Initially called `` CeaseFire , '' and later relabeled `` Cure Violence , '' the program uses what creator professor Gary @ @ @ @ @ @ @ '' approach to violence .
Under the Cure Violence framework , `` violence interrupters , '' usually residents of a particular violence-plagued community , establish rapport with young men who are in gangs or otherwise at risk for violence .
Interrupters often `` patrol '' neighborhoods , defusing tensions through discussion .
They also discourage retaliation after shootings and sometimes offer would-be shooters access to social services .
How well do these programs work to reduce violence ?
As many cities have implemented Cure Violence programs , there have been lots of opportunities @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evaluation of Chicago 's program , authored by a research team funded by the National Institute of Justice , offers characteristic results .
The study compared eight Cure Violence `` treated '' neighborhoods in Chicago to comparison neighborhoods .
In three of the treatment areas , there was a significant decline in shootings , but in the others there were not ; gun homicides fell by a statistically significant amount in just one of the neighborhoods , while gang homicides changed in none of them .
That 's not nothing , but it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The NIJ evaluated the practice as `` promising , '' but declined to give it the `` effective '' rating .
• Baltimore 's `` safe streets '' program cut homicides and nonfatal shootings in one neighborhood , but another saw a drop in homicides and an increase in shootings , while a third saw no effect on homicides and a drop in shootings .
• In two New York City neighborhoods , Cure Violence significantly cut gun injuries , but only significantly reduced shooting victimizations ( being shot at ) in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ study , Cure Violence neighborhoods saw homicides fall by more than the city as a whole , but shootings by the same amount and violent crime by less .
• A Phoenix pilot saw violence and assault decline significantly in treatment areas , but shootings increase significantly .
• Newark 's implementation had no significant effect on gunshot wounds in the three years following its debut .
• A Pittsburgh pilot saw rates of homicide , aggravated assault , and gun assault rise following implementation .
There are more successful outcomes , though @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Studies in Boston and Las Vegas find big effects , but do not use other parts of the city as controls .
Other successes are questionably analogous : Cure Violence helped a lot in Trinidad and Tobago , where the murder rate is six times higher than America 's .
There 's one other problem with the idea that violence interrupters can replace cops : Many of the most successful variations rely on the police to discourage violence .
The Group Violence Reduction Strategy , a variant on Cure Violence which cut @ @ @ @ @ @ @ offers potential offenders both access to social services and the threat of imprisonment if they commit acts of violence .
Similarly , Los Angeles 's implementation of Cure Violence had a robust effect on gang violence ; a National Institute of Justice analysis found that that outcome was driven not by increased access to social services , but by `` intensive law enforcement . ''
What does all this evidence add up to ?
Neither de-escalation nor violence interruption are obviously bad ideas , and there 's even evidence that the latter is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conclude from the available research , however , that either is anything like a substitute for the police , who remain one of the most proven violence-reducing forces available .
When it comes to stopping violent crime , words are not as effective as we might like them to be—sometimes , only force will do .

Progressive protesters envision a future where unarmed "de-escalators" and "violence interrupters" replace police—but the evidence indicates those practices would be no match for violent crime.
The burgeoning movement to defund police has in recent days produced a bevy of proposals for replacing cops, from hiring more drug counselors to creating unarmed traffic officers. Asked how to address the 1.2 million violent crimes that occur every year, police critics have argued that funds should be redirected to unarmed agents trained to stop violence with words: so-called interrupters or de-escalators whose job is to peacefully defuse potentially violent situations.
These ideas would expand on policies already adopted in part by police forces in New York, Chicago, Baltimore, and elsewhere. But, as local lawmakers consider replacing cops wholesale with unarmed counterparts, a closer look at the evidence indicates that such alternatives are erratically and questionably effective at stopping violent crime.
Although it is widely used, there is surprisingly little high-quality evidence to support de-escalation as a tactic. Violence interrupters are more widely analyzed, but the results of numerous pilot programs are mixed at best, with some neighborhoods actually seeing increases in crime under their auspices.
Though they may sound like a good idea to those who fear police violence, it is hard to conclude that the nonviolent alternatives currently being trumpeted have much to back them up.
Calls for replacing police with unarmed "violence interrupters" are growing louder. Sociologist Patrick Sharkey, writing in the Washington Post, mentioned "conflict mediators" and "violence interrupters" as part of a hypothetical nonviolent policing alternative. Nashville-based protest group Gideon's Army has argued interrupters are an effective alternative to police.
Some local governments are listening. The mayor of Harrisburg, Pa., plans to move police budgets toward interrupters. New York City comptroller Scott Stringer has called for moving $1.1 billion out of the NYPD's budget toward "social workers, counselors, community-based violence interrupters, and other trained professionals."
Just because a policy has support among activists or lawmakers, however, does not mean it works.
Police-worn body cameras, for example, are wildly popular; both Democrats and Republicans are expected to include more funding for them in reform proposals. But study after study after study has found that body cameras don't actually reduce police misconduct. One particularly large study found they actually increase the risk of assault against officers.
Such findings seem counterintuitive, but naturally raise the question: Does research support violence interruptors and de-escalators?
De-escalation—using verbal tactics, rather than force, to calm violent or angry people—began to see widespread use after the 2014 protests in Ferguson, Mo. In a 2015 report, the Obama administration explicitly called for de-escalation training to be taught to police to minimize the use of potentially lethal force. Defunding advocates argue that such tactics, in the hands of unarmed police alternatives, could mitigate violence.
But there's little robust evidence about the effectiveness of de-escalation training. Natalie Todak, a professor at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, wrote in her 2017 dissertation that "de-escalation has not received specific empirical attention." Todak told the Washington Free Beacon by email that to the best of her knowledge, there remains "a huge gap in the research" on its effects.
A comprehensive review released in January analyzed 64 studies conducted over 40 years, finding that while there were few downsides and "slight to moderate individual and organizational improvements" from de-escalation training, any conclusion "is limited by the questionable quality of almost all evaluation research designs." In other words, none of the studies allow us to draw strong conclusions about what, if anything, de-escalation training accomplishes.
"As it stands, de-escalation training is a promising practice; that is, a well-intended police reform whose consequences are largely unknown," the study's authors conclude. "[R]ecommendations that de-escalation must be used as a primary tool should await additional evidence regarding its effectiveness and any unintended consequences that may impact officer and public safety."
The story on interrupters is a little more complicated. Many cities have implemented violence interrupter programs, most following a model first developed to fight crime in Chicago. Initially called "CeaseFire," and later relabeled "Cure Violence," the program uses what creator professor Gary Slutkin describes as a "public health" approach to violence.
Under the Cure Violence framework, "violence interrupters," usually residents of a particular violence-plagued community, establish rapport with young men who are in gangs or otherwise at risk for violence. Interrupters often "patrol" neighborhoods, defusing tensions through discussion. They also discourage retaliation after shootings and sometimes offer would-be shooters access to social services.
How well do these programs work to reduce violence? As many cities have implemented Cure Violence programs, there have been lots of opportunities to assess this question.
A pioneering evaluation of Chicago's program, authored by a research team funded by the National Institute of Justice, offers characteristic results. The study compared seven Cure Violence "treated" neighborhoods in Chicago to comparison neighborhoods. In three of the treatment areas, there was a significant decline in shootings, but in the others there were not; gun homicides fell by a statistically significant amount in just one of the neighborhoods, while gang homicides changed in none of them.
That's not nothing, but it is less decisive than one might hope. The NIJ evaluated the practice as "promising," but declined to give it the "effective" rating.
Other cities' programs follow a similar pattern:
Baltimore's "safe streets" program cut homicides and nonfatal shootings in one neighborhood, but another saw a drop in homicides and an increase in shootings, while a third saw no effect on homicides and a drop in shootings.
In two New York City neighborhoods, Cure Violence significantly cut gun injuries, but only significantly reduced shooting victimizations (being shot at) in one neighborhood.
In another Chicago study, Cure Violence neighborhoods saw homicides fall by more than the city as a whole, but shootings by the same amount and violent crime by less.
A Phoenix pilot saw violence and assault decline significantly in treatment areas, but shootings increase significantly.
Newark's implementation had no significant effect on gunshot wounds in the three years following its debut.
A Pittsburgh pilot saw rates of homicide, aggravated assault, and gun assault rise following implementation.
There are more successful outcomes, though they sometimes rely on questionable research designs. Studies in Boston and Las Vegas find big effects, but do not use other parts of the city as controls. Other successes are questionably analogous: Cure Violence helped a lot in Trinidad and Tobago, where the murder rate is six times higher than America's.
There's one other problem with the idea that violence interrupters can replace cops: Many of the most successful variations rely on the police to discourage violence.
The Group Violence Reduction Strategy, a variant on Cure Violence which cut shootings and homicides in New Orleans, offers potential offenders both access to social services and the threat of imprisonment if they commit acts of violence. Similarly, Los Angeles's implementation of Cure Violence had a robust effect on gang violence; a National Institute of Justice analysis found that that outcome was driven not by increased access to social services, but by "intensive law enforcement."
What does all this evidence add up to? Neither de-escalation nor violence interruption are obviously bad ideas, and there's even evidence that the latter is actively helpful.
It is hard to conclude from the available research, however, that either is anything like a substitute for the police, who remain one of the most proven violence-reducing forces available. When it comes to stopping violent crime, words are not as effective as we might like them to be—sometimes, only force will do.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Continetti: Bolton’s Book Won’t Change Minds

Washington Free Beacon founding editor Matthew Continetti said Wednesday that former national security adviser John Bolton 's new book will not change many minds because Bolton faces criticism from both sides of the aisle .
`` I 'm not sure that the Bolton narrative will change many minds , '' Continetti said on Fox News 's Special Report .
`` Especially since you have one group , the Trump supporters , saying that Bolton is a traitor and the other group , the Democrats , who we heard in the opening clips saying , ‘ Now you tell us [ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ no good to us now . '
'' Bolton joins former secretary of state Rex Tillerson , secretary of defense James Mattis , chief of staff John Kelly , and attorney general Jeff Sessions in publicly criticizing Trump 's management after leaving the administration .
But Continetti said Trump 's image is likely to withstand Bolton 's narrative .
`` When you read the Trump in the Bolton excerpt , he 's not much different than the Trump in public , '' he said .
Continetti argued that Trump has done publicly much @ @ @ @ @ @ @ did privately , including calling on China to investigate Hunter Biden .
In an excerpt of his new book published in the Wall Street Journal , Bolton criticized Trump 's China policies , which Bolton said included Trump asking Chinese president Xi Jinping for help in the upcoming presidential election .
Continetti concluded that Bolton 's book will be a bestseller , but the fact that his narrative does not please either side of the political spectrum means it will probably not turn the presidential election .

Washington Free Beacon founding editor Matthew Continetti said Wednesday that former national security adviser John Bolton's new book will not change many minds because Bolton faces criticism from both sides of the aisle.
"I'm not sure that the Bolton narrative will change many minds," Continetti said on Fox News's Special Report. "Especially since you have one group, the Trump supporters, saying that Bolton is a traitor and the other group, the Democrats, who we heard in the opening clips saying, 'Now you tell us [after impeachment failed]. You're no good to us now.'"
Bolton joins former secretary of state Rex Tillerson, secretary of defense James Mattis, chief of staff John Kelly, and attorney general Jeff Sessions in publicly criticizing Trump's management after leaving the administration. But Continetti said Trump's image is likely to withstand Bolton's narrative.
"When you read the Trump in the Bolton excerpt, he's not much different than the Trump in public," he said.
Continetti argued that Trump has done publicly much of what Bolton writes that the president did privately, including calling on China to investigate Hunter Biden.
In an excerpt of his new book published in the Wall Street Journal, Bolton criticized Trump's China policies, which Bolton said included Trump asking Chinese president Xi Jinping for help in the upcoming presidential election.
Continetti concluded that Bolton's book will be a bestseller, but the fact that his narrative does not please either side of the political spectrum means it will probably not turn the presidential election.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--What Happens When the Cops Have Had Enough?

What would you do if a split-second judgment at your job left you facing the death penalty ?
That question was doubtless on the minds of the many Atlanta police officers who called in `` sick '' Wednesday evening .
Whole zones reportedly went radio silent .
The call-out was a response to charges in the case of officer Garrett Rolfe 's killing of Rayshard Brooks , a black man shot while resisting arrest after passing out drunk in a Wendy 's drive through .
The shooting resulted in Rolfe 's dismissal , the Atlanta police chief 's resignation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Wendy 's .
But that was not enough for Democratic district attorney Paul Howard , who faces an uphill reelection battle amid two separate investigations for graft , and who on Wednesday charged Rolfe with 11 counts , including felony murder .
For this , Howard emphasized , Rolfe could face the death penalty .
Rolfe 's shooting of Brooks is not like the prolonged chokehold that killed George Floyd , which sparked nationwide protests—and led only to a charge of second-degree murder .
But in the minds of Howard , of Atlanta @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rabidly anti-police protesters , no difference can be admitted .
Brooks 's death , like any person 's , is tragic .
Police who kill unjustly should be held accountable .
But before he was shot , Brooks had attacked Rolfe and his partner , officer Devon Brosnan , and had taken and attempted to use Brosnan 's taser against Rolfe .
Brooks had a history of violence and was on probation—facts Rolfe may have known .
Rolfe made a split-second decision to protect himself and his partner from risk of death or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
For this , a corrupt DA—who lied about Brosnan testifying against Rolfe and charged him without informing the Georgia Bureau of Investigation—wants him executed or imprisoned for decades .
Is it any wonder that cops are walking out ?
In 2018 , more than 10 percent of officers were assaulted ; 158 were killed .
For taking such risks , police are afforded certain legal protections .
They also earn respect , even gratitude , for putting their lives on the line for their fellow citizens .
That 's how it 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , however , the media and Democratic politicians instead treat the police as brutal racists , pouncing on any misstep .
That hurts cops , like the Chicago officer who allowed herself to be beaten to the point of hospitalization rather than draw her weapon because , the police chief said , `` she did n't want her family or the department to go through the scrutiny the next day on the national news . ''
When doing your job can lead to a death sentence , when you ca n't fight back @ @ @ @ @ @ @ public recrimination , when prominent politicians want to punitively slash your funding—would n't you walk too ?
Many may not be able to do so in the current economy , but expect to see the cumulative impact of this approach when it bounces back .
Continuing down the path Democratic politicians are choosing will , inevitably , be the undoing of America 's hard-won crime decline .
Decades of research tell us so—just this month , two Harvard professors found that investigations of departments sparked by `` viral '' shootings suppressed police activity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and 34,000 felonies .
That 's a bloody fact .
If it becomes a national reality , we will have only those who now demagogue on hatred of the police to blame .

What would you do if a split-second judgment at your job left you facing the death penalty?
That question was doubtless on the minds of the many Atlanta police officers who called in "sick" Wednesday evening. Whole zones reportedly went radio silent.
The call-out was a response to charges in the case of officer Garrett Rolfe's killing of Rayshard Brooks, a black man shot while resisting arrest after passing out drunk in a Wendy's drive through.
The shooting resulted in Rolfe's dismissal, the Atlanta police chief's resignation, and an arsonist setting fire to the Wendy's. But that was not enough for Democratic district attorney Paul Howard, who faces an uphill reelection battle amid two separate investigations for graft, and who on Wednesday charged Rolfe with 11 counts, including felony murder. For this, Howard emphasized, Rolfe could face the death penalty.
Rolfe's shooting of Brooks is not like the prolonged chokehold that killed George Floyd, which sparked nationwide protests—and led only to a charge of second-degree murder. But in the minds of Howard, Atlanta mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms, and rabidly anti-police protesters, no difference can be admitted.
Brooks's death, like any person's, is tragic. Police who kill unjustly should be held accountable. But before he was shot, Brooks had attacked Rolfe and his partner, officer Devon Brosnan, and had taken and attempted to use Brosnan's taser against Rolfe.
Brooks had a history of violence and was on probation—facts Rolfe may have known. Rolfe made a split-second decision to protect himself and his partner from risk of death or great bodily harm—his right under Georgia law.
For this, a corrupt DA—who lied about Brosnan testifying against Rolfe and charged him without informing the Georgia Bureau of Investigation—wants him executed or imprisoned for decades. Is it any wonder that cops are walking out?
In 2018, more than 10 percent of officers were assaulted; 158 were killed. For taking such risks, police are afforded certain legal protections. They also earn respect, even gratitude, for putting their lives on the line for their fellow citizens.
That's how it's supposed to work, anyway. Increasingly, however, the media and Democratic politicians instead treat the police as brutal racists, pouncing on any misstep.
That hurts cops, like the Chicago officer who allowed herself to be beaten to the point of hospitalization rather than draw her weapon because, the police chief said, "she didn't want her family or the department to go through the scrutiny the next day on the national news."
When doing your job can lead to a death sentence, when you can't fight back against a brutal beating for fear of public recrimination, when prominent politicians want to punitively slash your funding—wouldn't you walk too? Many may not be able to do so in the current economy, but expect to see the cumulative impact of this approach when it bounces back.
Continuing down the path Democratic politicians are choosing will, inevitably, be the undoing of America's hard-won crime decline. Decades of research tell us so—just this month, two Harvard professors found that investigations of departments sparked by "viral" shootings suppressed police activity, leading to almost 900 added homicides and 34,000 felonies.
That's a bloody fact. If it becomes a national reality, we will have only those who now demagogue on hatred of the police to blame.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--African-American Gun Group Saw Membership Surge After George Floyd Killing

An African-American gun-rights group announced last Thursday it has seen unprecedented growth in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd .
The National African American Gun Association ( NAAGA ) saw thousands of new members join in the hours after the video emerged of Floyd 's death at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer .
That represents a new record in daily sign-ups for the group .
`` 2,000 people joined NAAGA in 36 hours after George Floyd , '' NAAGA founder Philip Smith said in a statement .
`` That broke our records .
We 're getting @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
Membership has surged in 2020 , a trend beginning with the coronavirus outbreak that drove Americans to gun stores in record numbers .
Black Americans have flocked to the group and its 112 chapters after Floyd 's death .
The single-day jump of 2,000 people accounted for nearly 20 percent of the more than 10,000 new members that have joined since January .
Ammo.com , an online ammunition retailer that 's partnered with the group , said sales to NAAGA members have also skyrocketed .
The number of transactions between Ammo.com @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the two weeks after Floyd 's death .
The company said the increased sales among NAAGA members were part of a record-breaking surge in ammunition sales seen across the country .
The uptick has mainly been characterized by greater sales of self-defense ammunition , such as 9mm and .223 Remington .
Experts say the spike in memberships and sales could indicate gun ownership among African Americans is on the rise .
The industry has embraced NAAGA since its founding in 2015 .
Ammo.com said it used a portion of its sales to donate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of gun-rights organizations including NAAGA .
`` The right to self-defense is natural , color-blind , and enshrined in our Constitution , '' said Alex Horsman , marketing director at Ammo.com .
`` That is why in 2017 , we selected the NAAGA Scholarship Fund as one of the several pro-freedom organizations to which we voluntarily donate 1 percent of our sales . ''
NAAGA boasts more than 40,000 members .
Its membership is 90 percent African American , more than half of whom are women , and includes more than 1,000 law @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 's scholarship fund helps African-American students in need of financial assistance .
`` The goal of the National African American Gun Association is to have every African American introduced to firearm use for home protection , competitive shooting , and outdoor recreational activities , '' the group said on its website .
`` We are a pro 2nd amendment organization focused on the preservation of our community through armed protection and community building . ''

An African-American gun-rights group announced last Thursday it has seen unprecedented growth in the aftermath of the death of George Floyd.
The National African American Gun Association (NAAGA) saw thousands of new members join in the hours after the video emerged of Floyd's death at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer. That represents a new record in daily sign-ups for the group.
"2,000 people joined NAAGA in 36 hours after George Floyd," NAAGA founder Philip Smith said in a statement. "That broke our records. We're getting a ton of folks from all over."
Membership has surged in 2020, a trend beginning with the coronavirus outbreak that drove Americans to gun stores in record numbers. Black Americans have flocked to the group and its 112 chapters after Floyd's death. The single-day jump of 2,000 people accounted for nearly 20 percent of the more than 10,000 new members that have joined since January.
Ammo.com, an online ammunition retailer that's partnered with the group, said sales to NAAGA members have also skyrocketed. The number of transactions between Ammo.com and NAAGA members increased 350 percent in the two weeks after Floyd's death. The company said the increased sales among NAAGA members were part of a record-breaking surge in ammunition sales seen across the country. The uptick has mainly been characterized by greater sales of self-defense ammunition, such as 9mm and .223 Remington.
Experts say the spike in memberships and sales could indicate gun ownership among African Americans is on the rise. The industry has embraced NAAGA since its founding in 2015. Ammo.com said it used a portion of its sales to donate $9,000 back to a select group of gun-rights organizations including NAAGA.
"The right to self-defense is natural, color-blind, and enshrined in our Constitution," said Alex Horsman, marketing director at Ammo.com. "That is why in 2017, we selected the NAAGA Scholarship Fund as one of the several pro-freedom organizations to which we voluntarily donate 1 percent of our sales."
NAAGA boasts more than 40,000 members. Its membership is 90 percent African American, more than half of whom are women, and includes more than 1,000 law enforcement and military members. The group's scholarship fund helps African-American students in need of financial assistance.
"The goal of the National African American Gun Association is to have every African American introduced to firearm use for home protection, competitive shooting, and outdoor recreational activities," the group said on its website. "We are a pro 2nd amendment organization focused on the preservation of our community through armed protection and community building."


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Interest in ‘Anti-Racist’ Books Wanes as White Liberals Return to #Resistance Reading

White liberals just ca n't help themselves .
After a brief period during which many were compelled to purchase reading material on `` white fragility '' and `` how to be an anti-racist , '' they quickly returned to a topic of greater interest and comfort : the badness of Donald Trump .
John Bolton , the former national security adviser to President Trump , is publishing a memoir next week .
Most of the juicy tidbits were revealed on Wednesday as journalists pored over advance copies of the book , which instantly shot to number one on the Amazon @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reconcile their intense hatred for Bolton with their intense joy at reading bad things about Trump .
The heightened interest in Bolton 's forthcoming memoir—The Room Where It Happened—was enough to overtake the newfound interest in `` anti-racist '' books that white liberals had been posting about on Instagram .
Among them : How to Be an Anti-Racist by Ibram X. Kendi , White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo , who is white , and So You Want to Talk About Race by Ijeoma Oluo .
Those titles had been dominating the Amazon charts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ hit the preorder market .
Also rising up the charts is a forthcoming memoir by Donald Trump 's niece , Dr. Mary L. Trump .
The book , scheduled for release in late July , purports to document `` a nightmare of traumas '' and `` destructive relationships '' within `` one of the world 's most powerful and dysfunctional families . ''
Too Much and Never Enough : How My Family Created the World ’ s Most Dangerous Man has been jockeying for the number two slot on the Amazon bestseller list @ @ @ @ @ @ @ an Anti-Racist for the honor of being the runner-up to Bolton 's memoir .
It was only a matter of time before the white libs returned to their safe space .
At the end of the day , expressing opposition to Trump should be enough to prove they are n't racist so people will stop being mad at them .
It 's the best part about being a white lib !

White liberals just can't help themselves. After a brief period during which many were compelled to purchase reading material on "white fragility" and "how to be an anti-racist," they quickly returned to a topic of greater interest and comfort: the badness of Donald Trump.
John Bolton, the former national security adviser to President Trump, is publishing a memoir next week. Most of the juicy tidbits were revealed on Wednesday as journalists pored over advance copies of the book, which instantly shot to number one on the Amazon bestseller list. Aggrieved libs struggled to reconcile their intense hatred for Bolton with their intense joy at reading bad things about Trump.
The heightened interest in Bolton's forthcoming memoir—The Room Where It Happened—was enough to overtake the newfound interest in "anti-racist" books that white liberals had been posting about on Instagram. Among them: How to Be an Anti-Racist by Ibram X. Kendi, White Fragility by Robin DiAngelo, who is white, and So You Want to Talk About Race by Ijeoma Oluo.
Those titles had been dominating the Amazon charts for several weeks until Bolton's book hit the preorder market. Also rising up the charts is a forthcoming memoir by Donald Trump's niece, Dr. Mary L. Trump. The book, scheduled for release in late July, purports to document "a nightmare of traumas" and "destructive relationships" within "one of the world's most powerful and dysfunctional families."
Too Much and Never Enough: How My Family Created the World’s Most Dangerous Man has been jockeying for the number two slot on the Amazon bestseller list, occasionally beating out How to Be an Anti-Racist for the honor of being the runner-up to Bolton's memoir.
It was only a matter of time before the white libs returned to their safe space. At the end of the day, expressing opposition to Trump should be enough to prove they aren't racist so people will stop being mad at them. It's the best part about being a white lib!


freebeacon--2020-06-18--White House Says CNN Won’t Let Administration Push Back on Bolton Book

CNN is refusing to give the White House airtime to refute claims made by John Bolton in his upcoming book , an administration spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon Thursday afternoon .
The network told the White House it is `` focused on other breaking news , '' according to the spokesman .
The White House declined to specify which officials it was offering to CNN to defend the president or to name the shows that declined their requests .
CNN did not respond to a request for comment .
A review of CNN 's Thursday programming found Bolton 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ top stories throughout the day , serving as the subject of nearly a dozen segments—including a lengthy interview on the book with Washington Post columnist Max Boot , who called Bolton 's criticism of the president `` unprecedented . ''
Other topics given attention were Iceland 's efforts to scale back its coronavirus shutdowns , the upcoming Juneteenth holiday , and whether the NFL will be able to return to play next season .
The refusal comes as the Trump administration steps up its effort to discredit Bolton , characterizing him as a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ his time at the White House .
Top Trump adviser Peter Navarro , for example , referred to the former national security adviser as `` Book Deal '' Bolton during a gaggle with reporters .
`` The pattern of behavior of John ‘ Book Deal ' Bolton is to go into an administration , advance his own agenda , and when he gets fired from that administration or leaves like he did in the Bush administration , he leaves and then criticizes the people he left behind who gave him the job , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ joined the effort to delegitimize Bolton , taking to Twitter to say the upcoming book is a `` compilation of lies and made up stories . ''
The administration is actively attempting to block the release of Bolton 's book , The Room Where It Happened , arguing that it contains classified information the former official is unauthorized to disclose .
The book has already been distributed to book stores and is scheduled to be released Tuesday June 23 .
Bolton has also already sat for an interview with ABC News set to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not `` fit for office . ''

CNN is refusing to give the White House airtime to refute claims made by John Bolton in his upcoming book, an administration spokesman told the Washington Free Beacon Thursday afternoon.
The network told the White House it is "focused on other breaking news," according to the spokesman. The White House declined to specify which officials it was offering to CNN to defend the president or to name the shows that declined their requests. CNN did not respond to a request for comment.
A review of CNN's Thursday programming found Bolton's book was featured as one of the top stories throughout the day, serving as the subject of nearly a dozen segments—including a lengthy interview on the book with Washington Post columnist Max Boot, who called Bolton's criticism of the president "unprecedented." Other topics given attention were Iceland's efforts to scale back its coronavirus shutdowns, the upcoming Juneteenth holiday, and whether the NFL will be able to return to play next season.
The refusal comes as the Trump administration steps up its effort to discredit Bolton, characterizing him as a scorned ex-official attempting to cash in on his time at the White House. Top Trump adviser Peter Navarro, for example, referred to the former national security adviser as "Book Deal" Bolton during a gaggle with reporters.
"The pattern of behavior of John 'Book Deal' Bolton is to go into an administration, advance his own agenda, and when he gets fired from that administration or leaves like he did in the Bush administration, he leaves and then criticizes the people he left behind who gave him the job," Navarro said.
Trump has also joined the effort to delegitimize Bolton, taking to Twitter to say the upcoming book is a "compilation of lies and made up stories."
Bolton’s book, which is getting terrible reviews, is a compilation of lies and made up stories, all intended to make me look bad. Many of the ridiculous statements he attributes to me were never made, pure fiction. Just trying to get even for firing him like the sick puppy he is! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 18, 2020
The administration is actively attempting to block the release of Bolton's book, The Room Where It Happened, arguing that it contains classified information the former official is unauthorized to disclose. The book has already been distributed to book stores and is scheduled to be released Tuesday June 23.
Bolton has also already sat for an interview with ABC News set to air Sunday, in which he says Trump is not "fit for office."


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Facebook Pulls Trump Ads Over Inclusion of Antifa Symbol

Facebook removed Trump campaign ads from its site that included an image of an inverted red triangle on Thursday , after critics claimed the shape looked similar to a Nazi concentration camp badge .
While Facebook said it removed the ads for `` violating our policy against organized hate , '' the Trump campaign said the image is used by Antifa , a radical left-wing group that the Trump administration has accused of domestic terrorism .
`` The inverted red triangle is a symbol used by Antifa , so it was included in an ad about Antifa , '' said @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Trump ads published this week criticized `` Dangerous MOBS of far-left groups '' that `` are DESTROYING our cities and rioting . ''
They also asked Facebook users to sign a campaign petition supporting Trump ’ s decision to `` declare Antifa a Terrorist Organization . ''
The ads included an image of a red upside-down triangle .
In Nazi concentration camps , upside-down triangles of various colors , and other symbols , were used to denote classes of political prisoners .
`` We removed these posts and ads for violating our policy @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a spokesman for Facebook , told the Washington Free Beacon .
`` Our policy prohibits using a banned hate group 's symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol . ''
Media Matters for America , a left-wing activist group , called the triangle `` an infamous Nazi symbol . ''
The Anti-Defamation League said the symbol `` is practically identical to that used by the Nazi regime to classify political prisoners in concentration camps . ''
Murtaugh , however , said the image is not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ symbols of hate .
Facebook has been under pressure from Joe Biden and Democratic leaders to change its advertising policy in recent weeks .
The Biden campaign has called on the social media platform to put political speech restrictions into place to prevent alleged `` misinformation '' in Trump ads and posts .
Facebook has so far declined to change its policy .
While Biden has ramped up public criticism of Facebook , his campaign ’ s spending on Facebook ads skyrocketed in June , and he has declined to say if he @ @ @ @ @ @ @ executives .

Facebook removed Trump campaign ads from its site that included an image of an inverted red triangle on Thursday, after critics claimed the shape looked similar to a Nazi concentration camp badge.
While Facebook said it removed the ads for "violating our policy against organized hate," the Trump campaign said the image is used by Antifa, a radical left-wing group that the Trump administration has accused of domestic terrorism.
"The inverted red triangle is a symbol used by Antifa, so it was included in an ad about Antifa," said Trump campaign spokesman Tim Murtaugh.
The Trump ads published this week criticized "Dangerous MOBS of far-left groups" that "are DESTROYING our cities and rioting." They also asked Facebook users to sign a campaign petition supporting Trump’s decision to "declare Antifa a Terrorist Organization."
The ads included an image of a red upside-down triangle. In Nazi concentration camps, upside-down triangles of various colors, and other symbols, were used to denote classes of political prisoners.
"We removed these posts and ads for violating our policy against organized hate,"Andy Stone, a spokesman for Facebook, told the Washington Free Beacon. "Our policy prohibits using a banned hate group's symbol to identify political prisoners without the context that condemns or discusses the symbol."
Media Matters for America, a left-wing activist group, called the triangle "an infamous Nazi symbol." The Anti-Defamation League said the symbol "is practically identical to that used by the Nazi regime to classify political prisoners in concentration camps."
Murtaugh, however, said the image is not included in the ADL's database of symbols of hate.
Facebook has been under pressure from Joe Biden and Democratic leaders to change its advertising policy in recent weeks. The Biden campaign has called on the social media platform to put political speech restrictions into place to prevent alleged "misinformation" in Trump ads and posts. Facebook has so far declined to change its policy.
While Biden has ramped up public criticism of Facebook, his campaign’s spending on Facebook ads skyrocketed in June, and he has declined to say if he will return campaign donations from top Facebook executives.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Cornell Trustees Silent on Attempted Ouster of Conservative Law Prof

Cornell University 's most prominent donors and trustees are staying silent in the face of a growing campaign to oust a conservative law professor .
Cornell trustees from Greenlight Capital founder David Einhorn to Goldman Sachs advisory director Abby Cohen and former Citigroup CEO Sanford Weill declined to comment on a pressure campaign pushing the university to dismiss conservative law professor William Jacobson .
Jacobson , meanwhile , is pressing the powers that be , including top university donors , to back him up after he ignited a firestorm by criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement , arguing that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ being subjected pose a threat to academic freedom and the core mission of the university .
`` I do n't know why someone who donates substantial sums to the university would not be interested in whether those funds are being used to foster a positive campus climate as opposed to a campus climate where free expression is not accepted , '' Jacobson told the Washington Free Beacon .
`` I do n't know why they are not more interested in the values of preserving free expression by students and faculty on campus .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ for comment and Einhorn declined to comment .
Cohen declined to answer questions about the controversy before asking the Free Beacon to leave a message with her voicemail .
She has not responded to subsequent requests for comment .
Black Lives Matter activists began protesting Jacobson on June 11 after the he criticized the movement on his popular blog , `` Legal Insurrection . ''
Jacobson wrote that the protests that emerged in the wake of George Floyd 's death in police custody are less about protecting African-Americans than about efforts to `` @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Marxist goals . ''
Cornell 's Black Law Students Association ( BLSA ) , the organization coordinating the campaign against Jacobson , called on the university to `` critically examine the views of the individuals they intend to employ '' and urged students to boycott the professor 's classes in subsequent Facebook posts .
`` [ Jacobson 's posts are ] a clear attempt to ‘ red bait ' black activists with McCarthyist rhetoric while refusing to acknowledge the tangible harm caused by structural racism and oppression , '' the post reads .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ boycott Jacobson 's classes in the future .
The Ivy League professor has made overtures to his critics , offering to debate BLSA executive board members about the issue .
The group declined , citing Jacobson 's `` lack of expertise . ''
Jacobson said student activists are attempting to replace academic debate with public pressure campaigns .
Jacobson said he is comfortable opining on current events , telling the Free Beacon , `` I do n't think you need a degree in order to give informed opinion on matters of public importance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and arguments to back you up . ''
The BLSA did not respond to requests for comment .
The Cornell chapter of the National Lawyers Guild , a left-wing legal group , created a document to `` amplify '' the boycott of Jacobson 's classes .
The letter called Jacobson 's posts `` racist '' and `` inflammatory , '' and urged student groups to sign a Google document showing solidarity with the boycott .
`` We have conferred with the leadership of BLSA , and would like to circulate the letter linked @ @ @ @ @ @ @ them to refrain from taking [ Jacobson 's ] classes , '' the letter reads .
`` While Jacobson has the right to write as he likes , the student body has the right to choose whether they are comfortable being instructed on the law by a person with these views . ''
The letter says the group intends to circulate the signed boycott letter to the student body on Thursday .
The National Lawyers Guild did not respond to requests for comment .
In a new blog post , Jacobson argued that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , BLM , and activists is not to promote a justified cause , but to silence students and other faculty members from dissenting .
`` This is an attempt not just to scare students away from my course , but to scare students away from speaking their minds , and to create a faculty and student purity test , '' Jacobson wrote .
`` This is n't activism , it 's anti-intellectualism . ''
Cornell University did not respond to a request for comment .

Cornell University's most prominent donors and trustees are staying silent in the face of a growing campaign to oust a conservative law professor.
Cornell trustees from Greenlight Capital founder David Einhorn to Goldman Sachs advisory director Abby Cohen and former Citigroup CEO Sanford Weill declined to comment on a pressure campaign pushing the university to dismiss conservative law professor William Jacobson.
Jacobson, meanwhile, is pressing the powers that be, including top university donors, to back him up after he ignited a firestorm by criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement, arguing that the sorts of protests to which he is being subjected pose a threat to academic freedom and the core mission of the university.
"I don't know why someone who donates substantial sums to the university would not be interested in whether those funds are being used to foster a positive campus climate as opposed to a campus climate where free expression is not accepted," Jacobson told the Washington Free Beacon. "I don't know why they are not more interested in the values of preserving free expression by students and faculty on campus."
Weill did not respond to requests for comment and Einhorn declined to comment. Cohen declined to answer questions about the controversy before asking the Free Beacon to leave a message with her voicemail. She has not responded to subsequent requests for comment.
Black Lives Matter activists began protesting Jacobson on June 11 after he criticized the movement on his popular blog, "Legal Insurrection." Jacobson wrote that the protests that emerged in the wake of George Floyd's death in police custody are less about protecting African Americans than about efforts to "tear down our society to achieve their Marxist goals."
Cornell's Black Law Students Association (BLSA), the organization coordinating the campaign against Jacobson, called on the university to "critically examine the views of the individuals they intend to employ" and urged students to boycott the professor's classes in subsequent Facebook posts.
"[Jacobson's posts are] a clear attempt to 'red bait' black activists with McCarthyist rhetoric while refusing to acknowledge the tangible harm caused by structural racism and oppression," the post reads. The group also calls on students to boycott Jacobson's classes in the future. The Ivy League professor has made overtures to his critics, offering to debate BLSA executive board members about the issue. The group declined, citing Jacobson's "lack of expertise." Jacobson said student activists are attempting to replace academic debate with public pressure campaigns.
Jacobson said he is comfortable opining on current events, telling the Free Beacon, "I don't think you need a degree in order to give informed opinion on matters of public importance as long as you have sound facts and arguments to back you up."
The BLSA did not respond to requests for comment.
The Cornell chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, a left-wing legal group, created a document to "amplify" the boycott of Jacobson's classes. The letter called Jacobson's posts "racist" and "inflammatory," and urged student groups to sign a Google document showing solidarity with the boycott.
"We have conferred with the leadership of BLSA, and would like to circulate the letter linked below to the student body, encouraging them to refrain from taking [Jacobson's] classes," the letter reads. "While Jacobson has the right to write as he likes, the student body has the right to choose whether they are comfortable being instructed on the law by a person with these views." The letter says the group intends to circulate the signed boycott letter to the student body on Thursday. The National Lawyers Guild did not respond to requests for comment.
In a new blog post, Jacobson argued that the goal of the National Lawyers Guild, BLM, and activists is not to promote a justified cause, but to silence students and other faculty members from dissenting.
"This is an attempt not just to scare students away from my course, but to scare students away from speaking their minds, and to create a faculty and student purity test," Jacobson wrote. "This isn't activism, it's anti-intellectualism."
Cornell University did not respond to a request for comment.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--Elizabeth Warren Pulls Support for Amy McGrath, Endorses Her Primary Opponent

Sen. Elizabeth Warren ( D. , Mass . )
rescinded her endorsement of Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Amy McGrath on Thursday , instead backing progressive state legislator Charles Booker .
Warren expressed support for McGrath in a July 2019 tweet , calling the failed congressional candidate `` a real fighter '' who `` inspired us in 2018 . ''
But Warren joined a slew of national progressives throwing their support behind Booker , who has risen in the polls despite the $ 22 million that McGrath has spent on the primary to challenge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell ( R. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proud to endorse him and join his fight to root out corruption , dismantle systemic racism , and make big , structural change , '' Warren said in a Thursday tweet .
Endorsements have rolled in for Booker in recent days .
The Kentucky Democrat is now backed by Warren , Sen. Bernie Sanders ( I. , Vt. ) , and progressive Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ( D. , N.Y. ) and Ayanna Pressley ( D. , Mass. )
.
He also picked up local endorsements from the Louisville Courier Journal , Lexington Herald @ @ @ @ @ @ @ state Alison Lundergan Grimes , who lost to McConnell in 2014 .
In its endorsement , the Courier Journal called McGrath 's campaign `` unimaginative and uninspiring . ''
A Data Progress poll released Thursday showed Booker leading McGrath in the primary by 8 points .
He has spent just $ 500,000 on the race .
The poll also showed McGrath with a favorable rating of just 24 percent , compared to an unfavorable rating of 59 percent .
McConnell led both Democrats in the poll by double digits .
McGrath did not @ @ @ @ @ @ @

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D., Mass.) rescinded her endorsement of Kentucky Democratic Senate candidate Amy McGrath on Thursday, instead backing progressive state legislator Charles Booker.
Warren expressed support for McGrath in a July 2019 tweet, calling the failed congressional candidate "a real fighter" who "inspired us in 2018."
.@AmyMcGrathKY is a real fighter for working families in Kentucky and across the country. She inspired us in 2018, and now she’s running for the U.S. Senate. Go Amy! https://t.co/RCggL4Vlax — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) July 9, 2019
But Warren joined a slew of national progressives throwing their support behind Booker, who has risen in the polls despite the $22 million that McGrath has spent on the primary to challenge Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R., Ky.).
"I'm proud to endorse him and join his fight to root out corruption, dismantle systemic racism, and make big, structural change," Warren said in a Thursday tweet.
.@Booker4KY is a lifelong Kentuckian who has seen how Mitch McConnell and Washington, D.C. have failed working families. I’m proud to endorse him and join his fight to root out corruption, dismantle systemic racism, and make big, structural change. pic.twitter.com/6gUocCcPn6 — Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) June 18, 2020
Endorsements have rolled in for Booker in recent days. The Kentucky Democrat is now backed by Warren, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), and progressive Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) and Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.). He also picked up local endorsements from the Louisville Courier Journal, Lexington Herald Leader, and former Kentucky secretary of state Alison Lundergan Grimes, who lost to McConnell in 2014. In its endorsement, the Courier Journal called McGrath's campaign "unimaginative and uninspiring."
A Data Progress poll released Thursday showed Booker leading McGrath in the primary by 8 points. He has spent just $500,000 on the race. The poll also showed McGrath with a favorable rating of just 24 percent, compared with an unfavorable rating of 59 percent. McConnell led both Democrats in the poll by double digits.
McGrath did not respond to a request for comment.


freebeacon--2020-06-18--The Washington Post Costume Scandals No One Is Talking About

A years-old Halloween scandal is brewing at the Washington Post , the politics blog owned by Jeff Bezos .
That 's according to a lengthy report published in the `` social issues '' section of the Post .
`` Blackface incident at Post cartoonist 's 2018 Halloween party resurfaces amid protests , '' the headline explains , scandalously .
The incident in question , hosted by editorial cartoonist Tom Toles , featured an `` eclectic mix '' of guests—some who were members of the D.C. `` power elite '' and others who were not .
As it turns out , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rather offensive .
This egregious display of politically obsessed idol worship represented an insensitive cultural appropriation of a vulnerable population ( the elderly and infirm ) .
These party guests should have been banished on sight .
What 's more , the prominent government employee 's twee nickname— '' Notorious RBG '' —is an outrageous example of white privilege and cultural theft .
It is even more offensive given Ginsburg 's history of refusing to hire minority law clerks , not to mention her initial assessment of failed NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . ''
`` someone dressed as the ‘ Mueller Witch Hunt ' '' Whether as a deliberate act of violence against the transgender community , or a misguided attempt to make light of the historical oppression of female-identifying women , this `` someone '' is lucky that no one confronted them and immediately contacted their employer and family members .
A male witch ?
What sort of sadistic `` commentary '' was this individual attempting to make ?
Do they know how many women were brutalized and murdered as a result of actual @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that Robert Mueller is a Republican who willingly served under George W. Bush ?
How could any fellow guest feel safe upon seeing this so-called costume ?
`` Post columnist Dana Milbank came as just-confirmed Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh , complete with a beer-dispensing device on his head '' Perhaps you had to be there .
Milbank 's impersonation of a man whom the vast majority of the Post ‘ s reporting and editorial commentary described as a credibly accused rapist may have been super edgy and hilarious .
Probably not @ @ @ @ @ @ @ about making people laugh , it 's about sending a message .
What message was Milbank trying to send by making light of the role that copious alcohol consumption plays in the `` rape culture '' that prevails in our society ?
These are the Washington Post costume scandals no one is talking about .
Most of the outrage has focused on the actions of `` a middle-aged white woman named Sue Schafer , '' who donned blackface as part of a Megyn Kelly costume in a dumb attempt to satirize the former @ @ @ @ @ @ @ week forcefully `` resurfaced '' the incident by accusing Schafer of harassing them `` simply because we are not white '' and of wearing the costume `` with racist intent . ''
Schafer , a liberal who hates Trump , emailed Toles and his wife the day after the party to apologize for her `` huge mistake '' and for making some of the guests uncomfortable .
She told the Post that she would like the chance to apologize to the young women who confronted her at the party and accused her of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ graphic designer who works for a government contractor , informed her employer about the incident and the forthcoming article in the Post , she was fired .
Gov .
Ralph Northam ( D. , Va. ) , by contrast , still has his job after admitting to and apologizing for appearing in a yearbook photo dressed in a `` racist and offensive '' costume—it 's still not known whether he was wearing blackface or dressed in a full Ku Klux Klan outfit .
When the yearbook photo emerged in February 2019 , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to resign .
In December of that same year , the Post editors changed their minds and admitted they were `` wrong '' to call for Northam 's ousting .
These days , running afoul of the prevailing `` woke '' culture is a fireable offense .
But for whatever reason , elected Democratic politicians seem to be exempt .
MORE : Food Editor Ousted Over Brownface Scandal , But These Culturally Appropriating Dems Still Have Jobs

A years-old Halloween scandal is brewing at the Washington Post, the politics blog owned by Jeff Bezos. That's according to a lengthy report published in the "social issues" section of the Post.
"Blackface incident at Post cartoonist's 2018 Halloween party resurfaces amid protests," the headline explains, scandalously. The incident in question, hosted by editorial cartoonist Tom Toles, featured an "eclectic mix" of guests—some who were members of the D.C. "power elite" and others who were not. As it turns out, some of the costumes on display were rather offensive.
"several Ruth Bader Ginsburgs"
This egregious display of politically obsessed idol worship represented an insensitive cultural appropriation of a vulnerable population (the elderly and infirm). These party guests should have been banished on sight. What's more, the prominent government employee's twee nickname—"Notorious RBG"—is an outrageous example of white privilege and cultural theft. It is even more offensive given Ginsburg's history of refusing to hire minority law clerks, not to mention her initial assessment of failed NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick's national anthem protests as "really dumb."
"someone dressed as the 'Mueller Witch Hunt'"
Whether as a deliberate act of violence against the transgender community, or a misguided attempt to make light of the historical oppression of female-identifying women, this "someone" is lucky that no one confronted them and immediately contacted their employer and family members. A male witch? What sort of sadistic "commentary" was this individual attempting to make? Do they know how many women were brutalized and murdered as a result of actual witch hunts? Did they even realize that Robert Mueller is a Republican who willingly served under George W. Bush? How could any fellow guest feel safe upon seeing this so-called costume?
"Post columnist Dana Milbank came as just-confirmed Supreme Court Justice Brett M. Kavanaugh, complete with a beer-dispensing device on his head"
Perhaps you had to be there. Milbank's impersonation of a man whom the vast majority of the Post's reporting and editorial commentary described as a credibly accused rapist may have been super edgy and hilarious. Probably not, though, because comedy is not about making people laugh, it's about sending a message. What message was Milbank trying to send by making light of the role that copious alcohol consumption plays in the "rape culture" that prevails in our society?
These are the Washington Post costume scandals no one is talking about. Most of the outrage has focused on the actions of "a middle-aged white woman named Sue Schafer," who donned blackface as part of a Megyn Kelly costume in a dumb attempt to satirize the former Fox News anchor. Two attendees this week forcefully "resurfaced" the incident by accusing Schafer of harassing them "simply because we are not white" and of wearing the costume "with racist intent."
Schafer, a liberal who hates Trump, emailed Toles and his wife the day after the party to apologize for her "huge mistake" and for making some of the guests uncomfortable. She told the Post that she would like the chance to apologize to the young women who confronted her at the party and accused her of racial harassment.
When Schafer, a graphic designer who works for a government contractor, informed her employer about the incident and the forthcoming article in the Post, she was fired.
Gov. Ralph Northam (D., Va.), by contrast, still has his job after admitting to and apologizing for appearing in a yearbook photo dressed in a "racist and offensive" costume—it's still not known whether he was wearing blackface or dressed in a full Ku Klux Klan outfit.
When the yearbook photo emerged in February 2019, the Washington Post editorial board called on Northam to resign. In December of that same year, the Post editors changed their minds and admitted they were "wrong" to call for Northam's ousting.
These days, running afoul of the prevailing "woke" culture is a fireable offense. But for whatever reason, elected Democratic politicians seem to be exempt.
MORE: Food Editor Ousted Over Brownface Scandal, But These Culturally Appropriating Dems Still Have Jobs