theblaze--2020-07-08--'The car is innocent': Stars of 'The Dukes of Hazzard' defend classic show and iconic 'General Lee'

'The car is innocent ' : Stars of 'The Dukes of Hazzard ' defend classic show and iconic 'General Lee' @ @ @ @ @ has gotten way out of hand '

As the nation continues to fight over Confederate monuments and statues — as well as figures important to the United States' founding — a classic CBS TV show is getting caught up in the controversy ... again. But the show's human stars are coming out to defend their work and their mechanical co-star.
Where did the show go?
"The Dukes of Hazzard," which launched in January 1979 and ran through 1985, had tens of millions of fans when its episodes initially ran, and it kept a healthy fan base in syndication.
The adventures of Bo and Luke Duke — a pair of cousins who tore through the back roads of the fictional Southern rural Hazzard County in their iconic 1969 Dodge Charger, named General Lee and adorned with a Confederate flag on its roof — were enjoyed and celebrated for nearly 40 years.
John Schneider, Catherine Bach, and Tom Wopat on the set of 1997's "Dukes of Hazzard Reunion" (Getty Images)
Until 2015, when Dylann Roof, who had posted online messages supporting white supremacy and the Confederate flag, shot and killed black churchgoers. Then a fight over the Confederate flag blew up. As calls grew louder for states and organizations to rid themselves of the Stars and Bars, the Duke boys' muscle car suddenly found itself in protesters' crosshairs.
Within days, TV Land canceled its syndication of the hit show without explanation, angering fans; Warner Bros. stopped production of all toys and replicas of the General Lee; and PGA great Bubba Watson announced he would paint over the Confederate flag on the roof of an original General Lee car he bought at auction.
What are the Duke boys saying?
Fast-forward to 2020, and again American culture is waging a fight over Confederate symbols. And again the action comedy is taking its lumps. But now the actors who played the Duke boys and one of the show's other famous characters are coming to the show's — and the General's — defense.
John Schneider, who played Bo Duke, told the Hollywood Reporter, "I have never had an African American come up to me and have any problem with it whatsoever."
"The whole politically correct generation has gotten way out of hand," he added.
Schneider believes the show was a "unifying" one that was given short shrift by the PC crowd.
"'Dukes of Hazzard' was a unifying force. Mom, grandma, everyone wanted to watch it together. But who benefits from division?" he told the Hollywood Reporter. "'The Dukes of Hazzard' has been shot down, I believe unfairly. We haven't missed a generation yet, but we may miss this next one."
Schneider's co-star, Tom Wopat, who played Luke Duke, added that though he agrees that the show should not be an issue, he supports the attitude behind racial justice being debated in America.
"The situation in the country has obviously changed in the last 40 years. I feel fortunate to be living in a time when we can address some of the injustices of the past," he told the outlet.
However, he noted that the world's most famous Dodge Charger is not the problem.
"But the car is innocent," Wopat said.
'Taking the "S" off of Superman's chest'
Ben Jones, who starred as Cooter the mechanic and then served as a Democratic U.S. representative from Georgia in the late 1980s and early 1990s, stands by the show.
"This was a family show. Black families watched it for generations. I know this. I had a [congressional] office right there in the Martin Luther King district," Jones said, according to the Hollywood Reporter. "King's right-hand man Andy Young is a dear friend of mine. We couldn't care less about rebel flags."
The General Lee from "The Dukes Of Hazzard" television show, sits outside Cooter's The Dukes Of Hazzard Museum in Nashville, Tennessee. (Photo By Raymond Boyd/Getty Images)
Asked about digitally erasing the flag from the General Lee in order to get the show back on air, Jones responded, "That wouldn't please anybody. Because after 40 years seen all over the world — in thousands of jigsaw puzzles, on model cars and lunch boxes — the General Lee, by not having the flag there, would just draw attention to itself."
"That would be like taking the 'S' off of Superman's chest," he added.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman — key witness in Trump impeachment trial — announces military retirement

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman — key witness in Trump impeachment trial — announces military retirement following what he says was political retaliation

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman — key witness in Trump impeachment trial — announces military retirement following what he says was @ @

Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, a key witness in President Donald Trump's impeachment trial, announced his military retirement on Wednesday.
What are the details?
Vindman said that his future in the military would "forever be limited" due to political retaliation by Trump and his allies, according to his attorney, David Pressman.
Vindman — a Purple Heart recipient — served in the armed forces for 21 years and is an expert on Ukraine, his birth country.
Pressman added that Vindman has endured a "campaign of bullying, intimidation, and retaliation" since testifying against the president in 2019. He said that Trump has led the effort against Vindman since the impeachment trial.
Trump fired the military officer from the National Security Council after Vindman testified about his purported knowledge of a 2019 phone call between Trump and the Ukrainian president.
During explosive November testimony, Vindman said that Trump's insistence on the Ukraine investigating former vice president and presidential candidate Joe Biden was inappropriate and he knew "without hesitation" that he should report the knowledge to superiors in order to hold the president accountable.
Since delivering the testimony and losing his position at the NSC, Vindman has said that Trump and his allies have reportedly attempted to blackball Vindman, including blocking a promotion to colonel.
Vindman, who was bound for the National War College as his next assignment, said that he opted to retire rather than be forced underneath a glass ceiling because of his role in the president's impeachment trial.
In a statement to CNN, Pressman said, "The President of the United States attempted to force LTC Vindman to choose: between adhering to the law or pleasing the president. Between honoring his oath or protecting his career. Between protecting his promotion or the promotion of his fellow soldiers."
"These are choices that no one in the United States should confront, especially one who has dedicated his life to serving it," he added. "[Vindman] did what the law compelled him to do, and for that, he was bullied by the president and his proxies."
You can read more about his testimony here.
On Wednesday, Vindman tweeted, "Today I officially requested retirment from the US Army, an organization I love. My family and I look forward to the next chapter of our lives."
What else?
Earlier in July, John Bolton, Trump's former national security adviser, told CNN that he fully believed Vindman deserved the promotion.
"Based on not just his service, but his twin brother's service at the NSC, both of whom were pushed out of their assignments early, I think they certainly deserve a promotion based on what I saw," Bolton said. "They shouldn't be discriminated against. I hope there's nobody in the White House who's holding this up or putting bureaucratic obstacles in the way. I think this is something, this kind of corruption of this promotion process, unfortunately, typical of a number of things that have happened in the administration, [and] I think it's a bad signal to all of our military."


theblaze--2020-07-08--Rutgers announces majority of fall classes will be online. Now its students are demanding tuition re

Rutgers announces majority of fall classes will be online. Now its students are demanding tuition reimbursements.

Rutgers announces majority of fall classes will be online .
Now its students are demanding tuition reimbursements .

Students at Rutgers University are demanding that the school reduce or reimburse tuition expenses after the New Jersey-based school announced that the majority of fall 2020 semester classes will be conducted online.
What are the details?
Rutgers, according to Fox News, recently announced it would freeze tuition instead of implementing a 3% increase as previously planned. The school opted to freeze tuition at its current level due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
Shreya Patel is just one Rutgers student who is calling for the university to reduce its costs, considering most of the instruction will be through remote lessons.
In a petition, Patel wrote, "They are failing to recognize that just because we have a 'world-class education' does not mean that remote learning is a substitute for in-class learning and other on-campus services. What we pay for as part of our tuition is to be taught by a professor in a class setting where we can actively engage, ask questions, and interact with our peers."
"How could the current decision made not impact tuition if we cannot utilize resources to the fullest extent?" she wrote. "If there are strains on the university's ability to pay for expenses, why should students have to pay full price?"
At the time of this writing, Patel's petition has received more than 17,000 signatures in support of reducing tuition and other fees.
A spokesperson for the school told NJ.com that the instruction — remote or otherwise — is "provided by some of the finest scholars in American higher education."
"Tuition and fees are set at the minimum amount required to provide our 70,000 students with a world-class education," the spokesperson said. “A robust Rutgers education, whether delivered in a remote, hybrid or in-person fashion, is comprehensive and is provided by some of the finest scholars in American higher education."


theblaze--2020-07-08--Netflix show will feature transgender character who is 9 years old

Netflix has announced that it plans to allow a 9-year-old transgender child at the center of a bathroom controversy in Texas to star in its upcoming series, "The Baby-Sitters Club," and that the character played by the child will also be transgender.
The child, who was born male and named Joseph but who now identifies as female and goes by the name Kai Shappley, was at the center of a legal fight back in 2016. When he was just a kindergartner, Shappley's parents insisted that in spite of the fact that he was just 5 years old, he was actually trans and should be permitted to use the girls' restroom. Shappley's mother said at the time that her child had claimed to be a girl since the time he was 2 or 3 years old.
The Pearland, Texas, Independent School District offered to allow Shappley to use private, gender-neutral restrooms, which were located in each kindergarten room on the school's campus, but Shappley's mother insisted that the child should be allowed to use the girls' restroom. When the school district refused, Shappley's mother moved the family nearer to Austin in order to hopefully find a more pliant school district.
Now, the younger Shappley will be playing the character of "Bailey" — a trans female character — on the upcoming Netflix show. According to KPRC-TV, Shappley's mother said, "I got a Facebook message from someone in LA that there was a spot for a trans girl on The Babysitter's Club and they asked if she wanted to play the part of Bailey." The family then flew to Vancouver, Canada, a week later for filming.
Shappley has already been the subject of a documentary produced by the ACLU called "Trans in America: Texas Strong," and also hopes to have other future acting opportunities. According to KPRC, Shappley is already involved in another filming project.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Hate hoax once again: Former county political candidate admits writing racist letter he claimed was

Hate hoax once again: Former county political candidate admits writing racist letter he claimed was left in his mailbox

Hate hoax once again : Former county political candidate admits writing racist letter he claimed was left in his mailbox @ @ @ @ @ to himself declared , in part , 'we will make sure you never win and @ @ @ @ @ all the other f****** Mexicans in the area ! '

A former commissioner candidate for Umatilla County, Oregon, admitted to police that he wrote a racist letter to himself that he had claimed was left in his mailbox, the East Oregonian reported.
What are the details?
The outlet said Jonathan Lopez previously posted a photo of the typed letter to Facebook, stating he'd received the letter but held "no resentment for whomever wrote this."
The letter — which he said he found June 23 — begins with "Mr. Lopez" and follows with racist statements such as, "Don't waste your time trying to become anything in this county we will make sure you never win and your family suffers along with all the other f****** Mexicans in the area!" KEPR-TV reported.
The East Oregonian said the letter also contained homophobic and misogynist slurs. There were also subtle threats, such as "Umatilla County kills [redacted] like you and are dumped in the fields and river. That's why our crops are the best!" The letter was signed, "Sincerely, America!"
Hermiston Police Chief Jason Edmiston on Monday told the outlet that Lopez confessed verbally and in writing to writing the letter. Edmiston added to the East Oregonian that the case would be forwarded to the Umatilla County district attorney's office for initiating a false report — a Class A misdemeanor in Oregon.
Edmiston told KEPR police had been conducting a criminal investigation for intimidation in the second degree until Lopez admitted to fabricating the letter.
"This investigation is particularly frustrating as we are in the midst of multiple major investigations while battling a resource shortage due to the current pandemic," the chief told the East Oregonian. "The time spent on this fictitious claim means time lost on other matters, not to mention it needlessly adds to the incredible tension that exists in our nation today. As a lifelong resident of this diverse community, I'm disgusted someone would try to carelessly advance their personal ambitions at the risk of others."
More from the outlet:
Edmiston said his department was also forwarding information to the district attorney's office about possibly fraudulent statements in Lopez's entry in the May 2020 voter's guide about his background and education. Those claims were also reported in the East Oregonian leading up to the election.
Edmiston also alleged that HPD has learned that Lopez never served in the U.S. Coast Guard as stated, which would be a violation of the 2013 Stolen Valor Act. Lopez has not provided documentation to the East Oregonian to confirm his claim of Coast Guard service when asked.
Lopez ran for a seat on the Umatilla County Board of Commissioners during the May 2020 primary and placed fourth, the East Oregonian said, adding that he's also a member of the city of Hermiston's Hispanic Advisory Committee.
Lopez has removed his public Facebook profile, KEPR reported. His website, lopez4umatillaco.com, also was down Wednesday.
Encore, encore!
As TheBlaze has extensively reported, hoaxes perpetrated to draw attention to social issues aren't uncommon. In June a black man was charged with tagging the campus of Salisbury University in Maryland with racist graffiti five times between last October and February of this year, which authorities characterized as a "hate crime." Here's a look at 20 recent hate crime hoaxes.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Thief steals church's American flags for military heroes, issues apology — but the church is the rea

Thief steals church's American flags for military heroes, issues apology — but the church is the real star in this story

Thief steals church 's American flags for military heroes , issues apology — but the church is the real star @ @ @ @ @ was drinking and had a dumb idea '

An unidentified Alabama thief issued a lengthy apology after stealing a church's flag tribute to military heroes — but the church stole the show with its response to the thief.
What are the details?
The incident took place at First Baptist Church in Grand Bay, Alabama, over the Independence Day holiday weekend.
The church had erected a patriotic display of 100 American flags that bore the names of veterans and fallen military heroes to honor the holiday.
The thief, however, made off with several of the flags, but returned them after realizing what he or she had actually done.
In a lengthy message to the church, the person wrote, "I'm sorry for taking the flags. I did not mean any disrespect. ... I was drinking and had a dumb idea. ... I myself do not own an American flag and think they will stop being made soon."
"I had no idea that there were names of fallen heroes, which makes it even worse, as if stealing from the church wasn't bad enough to begin with," the person continued.
The message concluded, "I'm not a bad person, just a little messed up."
What is the church saying now?
Instead of pressing charges against the thief, the church had a better idea: freely forgive the culprit and extend an open invitation to join the church.
A Facebook post from the church and its members — which included a photo of the apology — said, "Praise God our stolen flags from First Baptist Church Grand Bay were returned with a note of apology. We would like to let whoever it was, since you didn't sign your note, know that your apology is accepted and you are invited to attend our Church services anytime."
Patty Webb Tripp www.facebook.com
The church's pastor, Royce Dubose, said that the note was "very sincere."
"You can tell whoever took [the flags] was very, very upset with themselves," Dubose added. "To be honest, we don't want to know. And not because we are angry at them, but because we don't want to embarrass them to feel any more remorse than they are already feeling."


theblaze--2020-07-08--SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts hospitalized after fall at country club in June

SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts hospitalized after fall at country club in June The chief justice was apparently very dehydrated

Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts was briefly hospitalized last month after falling at a Maryland country club.
According to the Washington Post, Roberts suffered a fall while at the Chevy Chase Club on June 21, serious enough that he required stitches and spent the night in the hospital for observation. He was released the next morning.
Supreme Court spokeswoman Kathleen Arberg told the Post that doctors believe Roberts fell due to light-headedness caused by dehydration:
The Chief Justice was treated at a hospital on June 21 for an injury to his forehead sustained in a fall while walking for exercise near his home. The injury required sutures, and out of an abundance of caution, he stayed in the hospital overnight and was discharged the next morning. His doctors ruled out a seizure. They believe the fall was likely due to light-headedness caused by dehydration.
Roberts, 65, has a brief history of seizures, one in 1993 and another in 2007.
However, as Arberg's statement indicated, last month's incident was unrelated to neurological problems.
The high court disclosed Roberts' injury only after a witness told the Post about the incident. According to the Post, that witness saw Roberts with a bloody head.
Roberts is not the only Supreme Court justice who has been recently hospitalized.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court's eldest justice at 87, has been hospitalized numerous times over the last decade, including to treat cancer. Her latest hospitalization was just two months ago.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Commentary: Not all or even most liberals are enemies of America, but yesterday some of them proved

Commentary: Not all or even most liberals are enemies of America, but yesterday some of them proved that they are

Commentary : Not all or even most liberals are enemies of America , but yesterday some of them proved that @ @

As I get older, I hope I am getting better at realizing that most people who disagree with me are not evil and do not hate America. Almost no one wants the world to be a worse place or actively wishes their neighbors or their country harm.
I think some of their ideas are evil and would have the unintended consequence of harming themselves, their neighbors, and their country, but I think most people get politically involved because they care and want to make a positive difference, regardless of how misguided their ideas might be. I think overall it would be helpful and great if people would see their ideological opponents as good people with bad ideas.
I found some exceptions to that rule yesterday on Twitter during the truly incredible fracas over the amazingly benign letter a number of prominent liberal media types signed for Harper's Magazine. The letter made the argument, which should be entirely non-controversial, that free speech is a valuable thing in American society and that the robust exchange of ideas should be encouraged, even when those ideas are contrary to current liberal orthodoxy.
The letter itself was full of generalities and platitudes, but sprinkled in some apparently highly controversial statements like, "We uphold the value of robust and even caustic counter-speech from all quarters. But it is now all too common to hear calls for swift and severe retribution in response to perceived transgressions of speech and thought. More troubling still, institutional leaders, in a spirit of panicked damage control, are delivering hasty and disproportionate punishments instead of considered reforms."
If you had slept through the last 10 years or so, you might think that these statements could not possibly generate controversy. Who, in America, would speak out publicly against the very idea that both sides of an issue deserve a public airing?
Enter some of the Vox colleagues of Matt Yglesias, who signed the letter. Apparently, Yglesias' decision to sign such a letter was so disturbing to these individuals that they not only felt the need to tell him they disagreed with him, but they actually went public with what amounted to HR complaints against Yglesias for literally making them feel less safe in their workplace.
I am not kidding.
Now, the Harper's letter is three paragraphs long. I have read it several times. It does not refer to transgenderism at all, even obliquely. In fact, there are no issues whatsoever in particular that are discussed. It doesn't discuss abortion, taxes, spending, foreign policy, LGBTQ issues, or any specific issues of any kind. There are no dog whistles of any sort, unless you think that the concept of free speech is an anti-trans dog whistle.
I feel very strongly about some political issues that affect us in this day and age. I feel even more strongly that people who disagree with me should be allowed to say so without losing their freedom or their jobs. If people want to go on Twitter and say that we should raise taxes, drastically increase government spending, keep America locked down forever, or anything else I disagree with, then I encourage them to do so. I will disagree with them, but I believe in the benefit of allowing their beliefs to be aired. People who are on the fence should be able to choose.
And that also goes for my coworkers. I disagree with them, a lot. It is a daily occurrence that someone who works for this company says or does something in public that I don't agree with. But as a grown adult, I understand that they don't speak for me, that I am capable of speaking for myself, and the fact that I work with people who disagree with me about some things does not make me in any way less safe or valued as an employee.
Belief in the free exchange of ideas is perhaps the core concept of America. Our Founders enshrined the right to free speech in the Constitution to ensure that individuals would be free from harassment from their government for participating in that exchange of ideas.
Obviously, it's a different animal when the pressure applied against speech is not exerted by government but rather by a mob of angry Twitterati. No one is suggesting that cancel culture should be illegal or that it should be illegal for businesses to fire people who are caught up in the midst of it. But its very existence is antithetical to the values that make America — or any free society, for that matter — great.
That also goes, by the way, for Yglesias' painfully fragile coworkers. They're entitled to publicly air an opinion, even if I consider it to be a fundamentally un-American one. Whether they keep their jobs or not is between them and their employer. I will say that I hope that if any action is taken against them, it isn't because of the content of what they said, but rather because they chose to engage in grossly unprofessional behavior by essentially tweeting their HR complaints about a fellow employee for the whole world to see before the company had the chance to act on it.
A society that immediately hounds anyone who is guilty of wrongthink into perpetual unemployment cannot be said to value free speech, or even freedom itself, even if cancel culture isn't or shouldn't be illegal. The people who disagree with this don't just disagree with my opinions about public policy, they disagree with one of the core values of a free society.
The people who signed the letter in Harper's are, for the most part, people whom I disagree with about almost everything from a political standpoint, but they aren't enemies of America. The people who are criticizing them, however, are.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Trump threatens to cut federal funding for schools that refuse to reopen in the fall

Trump threatens to cut federal funding for schools that refuse to reopen in the fall 'May cut off funding if @ @ @ @

President Donald Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos are threatening to cut federal funding for schools that elect not to fully reopen come the start of the school year this fall.
In a tweet Wednesday morning, the president wrote: "In Germany, Denmark, Norway, Sweden and many other countries, SCHOOLS ARE OPEN WITH NO PROBLEMS. The Dems think it would be bad for them politically if U.S. schools open before the November Election, but is important for the children & families. May cut off funding if not open!"
Trump added in a separate tweet his displeasure with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's guidance on reopening schools in the fall, calling it "impractical" and "expensive."
The CDC guidelines suggest virtual classes and activities, modified seating layouts, sneeze guard installations, and separated lunch times, among other things, in order to reduce the risk of spreading the virus.
What else?
The president's comments came alongside a similar message from DeVos Tuesday night when the secretary spoke with Fox News' Tucker Carlson about what the federal government could do to make sure kids return to classrooms in the coming months.
DeVos confirmed to Carlson that she is "very seriously" considering withholding federal funds from schools that remain physically closed.
"Kids have got to continue learning," she said. "Schools have got to open up, there has got to be concerted effort to address the needs of all kids, and adults who are fearmongering and making excuses simply have got to stop doing it and turn their attention on what is right for students and for their families."
DeVos did note, however, that the bulk of funding for public schools across America does not come from the federal level, but from the state and local levels — "in excess of 90%," she said.
Though it may be a small percentage, federal funding for K-12 schools is still significant. According to Politico, it "includes billions for low-income schools and special education." So by withholding funding, the Trump administration would certainly heap pressure on school districts across the country to reopen.
Anything else?
A national consensus on reopening schools has yet to develop, as several states, especially across the South and West regions of the country, have experienced a surge in confirmed COVID-19 cases in recent weeks.
Some state leaders, such as the education commissioner in Florida who ordered all schools to open full-time come August, are pushing for full reopening, while others are more wary.
Top public health expert Dr. Anthony Fauci indicated in early June that it was time to start thinking about reopening schools, arguing that saying we "shouldn't open schools" is "a bit of a reach." But that was before the recent surge.
Fauci appeared to change tune Tuesday — though not commenting specifically on schools — when he said, "the current state [of the virus spread] is really not good ... we are still knee deep in the first wave."


theblaze--2020-07-08--Horowitz: Asian-American researcher fired from Michigan State administration for advancing facts abo

Horowitz: Asian-American researcher fired from Michigan State administration for advancing facts about police shootings

Horowitz : Asian-American researcher fired from Michigan State administration for advancing facts about police shootings '' The victory of the @ @ @ @ @ a chilling effect on academic freedom on campus . ''

The entire purpose of academic research is to discover the truth about vexing scientific and societal questions through the use of research and data. However, if the truth refutes a sacred political agenda, you can no longer publish such research or even cite it. The latest victim of this reverse Jim Crow witch hunt against truth in data and academic research is Stephen Hsu, vice president for research at Michigan State University.
On June 2, I cited a study from researchers at the Michigan State and the University of Maryland that concludes, "We did not find evidence for anti-Black or anti-Hispanic disparity in police use of force across all shootings, and, if anything, found anti-White disparities when controlling for race-specific crime." This study analyzed 917 officer-involved fatal shootings and found that that "per capita racial disparity in fatal shootings is explained by non-White people's greater exposure to the police through crime." The study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences last year.
Tucker Carlson mentioned this study on his show later that evening, and it has since gained more notoriety. Naturally, one would expect those who believe in the "systemic racism in policing" blood libel to cite evidence why this study is wrong and to provide counter-evidence that supports their position. But debate is not their strong suit, just censorship.
The College Fix reports that Stephen Hsu was fired from Michigan State University for citing this study and posting an interview of one of its authors, Michigan State colleague Joe Cesario, on his blog. He posted the interview with Cesario on June 2, the same day I cited the study.
On June 25, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Graduate Employees Union was calling for Hsu's head on twitter. The Journal pointed out that among other things, "The union also faulted him for having 'directed funding to research downplaying racism in bias in police shootings.'"
As Professor Hsu told the WSJ: "The MSU professor who conducted that work, psychologist Joe Cesario, tells me that 'we had no idea what the data was going to be, what the outcome was going to be, before we did this study.' Mr. Cesario has collected evidence from a simulator and from real-world interactions between police and citizens. He concluded that 'the nature of the interaction really matters the most, and officers were not more likely to be ready to shoot upon encountering a black versus white citizen.'
Commenting on the Wall Street Journal article in his blog, Professor Hsu noted, "Several years ago Cesario was granted a rare opportunity to study police shootings and officer behavior in simulators in a large city. My office provided him with a small amount of funding to create realistic simulator video of police stops and other situations. This is an important topic to study if we want to understand and improve policing."
In his post publicizing his resignation, Hsu revealed that many academics wanted to sign a counter petition supporting him, but they "were afraid to sign our petition -- they did not want to be subject to mob attack."
He warned, "The victory of the twitter mob will likely have a chilling effect on academic freedom on campus."
Now, even the authors of the Michigan State study are asking that their report be pulled, citing "continued misuse" by some commentators, particularly anti-crime advocate Heather Mac Donald, who used it in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed titled, "The Myth of Systemic Police Racism." The authors now contend that the main point of the study was to examine the question of "Is there a relationship between the race of officers and the civilians they fatally shot?" not to "address the larger question of how race impacts the probability of being shot by police."
However, the aforementioned quotes from their original study that there is no evidence of anti-black bias in police shootings and that, if anything, there is more of an anti-white bias, were stated clearly in their study. Do you really have confidence, given the motivation behind the firing of another Michigan State administrator, that this is really about some epiphany in the methodology of their study that they feel is now wrong? Heather Mac Donald cited this study the same way she did last month roughly a year ago in a column for National Review. Was there concern about misuse of their study in 2019, before cancel culture and before BLM's agenda became a national religion?
Americans need to think long and hard about the implications of this story and the authenticity of academic and scientific research in general. If the only research that is allowed to be published is flat-earth "science" that is rooted in woke political sentiment and not in facts and data, then how can we trust anything published by the academic world? This is not just about policing. We are seeing the country turned upside down over assertions about COVID-19 that are already refuted by the public data we have about the lethality of the virus and how it spreads. The same censorship we see on policing and racial issues is playing out in coronavirus research. Policies that affect the safety, liberty, and way of life of the whole of the people are now being propelled by one-sided research.
Minnesota state Sen. Scott Jensen, who was named the Family Physician of the Year in 2016, announced in a video that he is now under investigation by the Minnesota Board of Medical Practice for questioning the official virus death count and implying that not all those people died because of COVID-19. That is a simple fact acknowledged by White House Coronavirus Task Force response administrator, Dr. Deborah Birx, and the Illinois health director. This is especially evident from an analysis of Minnesota's death certificates. Yet Jensen is not allowed to speak the truth.
This cancel culture and censorship have now reached every aspect of our lives. You are no longer allowed to believe in common sense or traditional values, even outside your official job. Most recently, a Boeing executive was fired for having written an essay … in 1987 … opposing putting women in combat.
This culture has accelerated because Republicans, who serve as a fake opposition movement to the cultural jihad of the Left, have taught the modern-day book-burners that the minute they bark racism, sexism, or any other -ism, Republicans will run like a scared child from a barking dog. The time has come for a new movement that will stand our ground at all costs. There is no other choice.


theblaze--2020-07-08--San Francisco official pushes 'CAREN Act' that would criminalize 'racist 911 calls' — and quite a fe

San Francisco official pushes 'CAREN Act' that would criminalize 'racist 911 calls' — and quite a few folks love it

San Francisco official pushes 'CAREN Act ' that would criminalize 'racist 911 calls ' — and quite a few folks @ @ @ @ @ that some people act 'as though the police are their private security guards .
It @ @ @ @

A San Francisco supervisor on Tuesday introduced the "CAREN Act" — an ordinance that would criminalize racially motivated 911 calls, KTVU-TV reported.
The full name of Shamann Walton's proposed legislation is Caution Against Racially Exploitative Non-Emergencies, the station said.
"Racist 911 calls are unacceptable," he wrote on Twitter in regard to his proposal, adding that "this is the CAREN we need."
"Karen" has become mockingly synonymous with women — usually white women — who confront others without provocation over small issues and sometimes call 911 so police can step in and stop it. Sometimes a "Karen" adds race to the mix when contacting authorities.
"One police call — when it comes to a black male, when it comes to a black person, when it comes to a person of color — can and has led to detrimental consequences, including death," Walton added in a clip aired by KTVU.
The station said the CAREN Act is similar to state Assembly member Rob Banta's Assembly Bill 1550, as it also calls for consequences for those who call 911 based on biases toward race, class, outward appearance, and religion.
Walton said during the board of supervisors meeting that both measures "are part of a larger nationwide movement to address racial biases and implement consequences for weaponizing emergency resources with racist intentions," KTVU reported.
Quite a few folks love it
While some observers are concerned that such a law will lead to people not calling 911 when police assistance is truly needed, it appeared that more commenters on Walton's tweet were very much in favor of his proposal:


theblaze--2020-07-08--SCOTUS rules religious, moral objection exceptions to Obamacare's birth control mandate are lawful

The Supreme Court handed religious freedom and the Trump administration a significant victory on Wednesday .
In a 7-2 ruling , the court said the Trump administration acted lawfully when it expanded exemptions to the Affordable Care Act 's mandate that forces employers to provide free contraceptives to employees .
The case — Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania — centered on whether the executive branch may lawfully make it easier for organizations with religious objections , including some for-profit businesses , to opt out of Obamacare 's contraceptive mandate .
What did the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rulings of both lower courts .
Justice Clarence Thomas , in writing the majority opinion , explained that the Trump administration had the `` statutory authority '' to issue the exceptions .
In a concurring opinion , Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch pushed back against the ruling 's dissenters — Justices Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer — for claiming the Trump administration 's rule imposes a burden on employers .
`` A woman who does not have the benefit of contraceptive coverage under her employer 's plan is not the victim of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ her employer .
She is simply not the beneficiary of something that federal law does not provide , '' the justices explained .
`` She is in the same position as a woman who does not work outside the home or a woman whose health insurance is provided by a grandfathered plan that does not pay for contraceptives or a woman who works for a small business that may not provide any health insurance at all . ''
Going a step further , Alito and Gorsuch argued that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the religious and moral objection exception .

The Supreme Court handed religious freedom and the Trump administration a significant victory on Wednesday.
In a 7-2 ruling, the court said the Trump administration acted lawfully when it expanded exemptions to the Affordable Care Act's mandate that forces employers to provide free contraceptives to employees.
The case — Little Sisters of the Poor Saints Peter and Paul Home v. Pennsylvania — centered on whether the executive branch may lawfully make it easier for organizations with religious objections, including some for-profit businesses, to opt out of Obamacare's contraceptive mandate.
What's the background?
From CNBC:
The Supreme Court challenge came after Pennsylvania and New Jersey had successfully halted implementation of the regulations in the lower courts. The states argued that the federal government failed to follow the legal protocol known as notice-and-comment in creating the rules.
The states said that if the rules went into effect, they would be saddled with increased costs to run their taxpayer-funded family-planning programs. A federal district court sided with the states and prevented the new rules from going into effect. That decision was affirmed by the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Philadelphia.
The Trump administration, via the Department of Justice, and the Catholic nonprofit Little Sisters of the Poor, asked the Supreme Court to reverse those rulings.
What did the Court say?
The court reversed the rulings of both lower courts. Justice Clarence Thomas, in writing the majority opinion, explained that the Trump administration had the "statutory authority" to issue the exceptions.
In a concurring opinion, Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch pushed back against the ruling's dissenters — Justices Elena Kagan and Stephen Breyer — for claiming the Trump administration's rule imposes a burden on employers.
"A woman who does not have the benefit of contraceptive coverage under her employer's plan is not the victim of a burden imposed by the rule or her employer. She is simply not the beneficiary of something that federal law does not provide," the justices explained. "She is in the same position as a woman who does not work outside the home or a woman whose health insurance is provided by a grandfathered plan that does not pay for contraceptives or a woman who works for a small business that may not provide any health insurance at all."
Going a step further, Alito and Gorsuch argued that the Religious Freedom Restoration Act of 1993 compelled the government to issue the religious and moral objection exception.


theblaze--2020-07-08--VIDEO: Black Lives Matter protester punches black reported Trump supporter in the face — immediately

VIDEO: Black Lives Matter protester punches black reported Trump supporter in the face — immediately gets arrested

VIDEO : Black Lives Matter protester punches black reported Trump supporter in the face — immediately gets arrested Pro-tip : @ @ @ @ @ in front of the police

A Black Lives Matter protester was arrested Tuesday evening literally seconds after he reportedly assaulted a man — right in front of police.
Daily Caller reporter Jorge Ventura posted the video of the incident to Twitter and said the man punched in the face — who was black — was a Trump supporter.
"Breaking - #BLM protester punches Trump supporter in the face then is immediately arrested. Things are getting hostile at BLM plaza. Stay tuned for more updates on the ground," Ventura tweeted.
Ventura told TheBlaze in an Instagram message that the man "was talking about how he couldn't wait to get Trump reelected and he kept yelling 'Trump 2020, 4 more years!' which angered the crowd."
The video starts by showing two individuals, the protester and a black man, arguing in the middle of a street near what has been called Black Lives Matter Plaza, located across from Lafayette Park in Washington, D.C. As the two men shouted at each other, a crowd began to surround them, appearing to urge the protester not to do anything. But he didn't listen.
The protester punched the man in the face while several police officers stood no more than 10 feet away. Then the officers immediately approached the protester and dragged him away from the crowd before detaining him.
The alleged Trump supporter appeared fine after the incident as he quickly signaled to police who the offender was before walking away from the scene.
You can hear one onlooker asking, "What he being detained for?" as if it wasn't obvious. Others shouted "He hit him first!" though available video does not show that to be the case.
Another video posted by Ventura minutes later shows protesters yelling and pushing into officers as they escort the protester who assaulted the man into a police vehicle.
Tensions between police and Black Lives Matter protesters remain high in several cities across the country, including Washington, D.C., in the weeks following the death of George Floyd.
Black Lives Matter Plaza is a two-block stretch of 16th Street NW in the nation's capital that was renamed by Democratic D.C. Mayor Mayor Muriel Bowser on June 5.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Kanye West throws away MAGA hat, slams Democratic Party, and explains his presidential campaign

Kanye West throws away MAGA hat , slams Democratic Party , and explains his presidential campaign ' I am in @ @ @ @ @ savior , Jesus Christ , and I put everything I get on the line to @ @ @

Rapper Kanye West revealed Wednesday that he no longer supports President Donald Trump.
West, who announced over the weekend that he would run for president in 2020, told Forbes in a wide-ranging interview that he has decided to lay aside his red "Make America Great Again" ball cap.
"I am taking the red hat off, with this interview," West said.
Kanye West inside the Oval Office, Oct. 2018. (SAUL LOEB/AFP via Getty Images)
West explained that he is campaigning "to win" — and in light of reports indicating that he would siphon votes away from Democratic nominee Joe Biden, West said he is OK hurting the Democratic Party to benefit Trump.
"To say that the Black vote is Democratic is a form of racism and white supremacy," West said.
The music mogul explained that he will run as an independent — but would campaign as a Republican if Trump were not seeking re-election.
However, despite running against Trump, West had nothing but praise for the president. "Trump is the closest president we've had in years to allowing God to still be part of the conversation," he said.
West also made his disdain for the Democratic Party very clear. He said:
That is a form of racism and white supremacy and white control to say that all Black people need to be Democrat and to assume that me running is me splitting the vote. All of that information is being charged up on social media platforms by Democrats. And Democrats used to tell me, the same Democrats have threatened me…. The reason why this is the first day I registered to vote is because I was scared. I was told that if I voted on Trump my music career would be over. I was threatened into being in one party. I was threatened as a celebrity into being in one party. I was threatened as a Black man into the Democratic party. And that's what the Democrats are doing, emotionally, to my people. Threatening them to the point where this white man can tell a Black man if you don't vote for me, you're not Black.
West also told Forbes:
His foreign policy would focus on "protecting America, first, with our great military."
He is pro-life because "I'm following the word of the Bible."
He believes Planned Parenthood clinics "do the Devil's work."
He has never voted in his life.
He contracted coronavirus in February.
Black History Month is "torture porn."
He is running for president because "God just gave me the clarity and said it's time."
Prayer should be reinstated in schools.
He is against the death penalty.
He wants to end police brutality, but "police are people, too."
"I am in service of our Lord and savior, Jesus Christ, and I put everything I get on the line to serve God," West said.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Iowa governor says state trooper who 'hit' BLM protester was justified in his actions: He 'acted app

Iowa governor says state trooper who 'hit' BLM protester was justified in his actions: He 'acted appropriately'

Iowa governor says state trooper who 'hit ' BLM protester was justified in his actions : He 'acted appropriately '

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds (R) said that the state trooper who was driving her from a state event last week was justified in bumping a Black Lives Matter protester with a vehicle.
The protester, Jaylen Cavil, was blocking the driveway of the business Reynolds and her driver were leaving when the trooper tapped him to move him out of the way. Cavil was unhurt in the incident.
Video footage of the incident shows the protester stepping into the path of the vehicle and stopping just as Reynolds' SUV taps him.
What are the details?
In a Tuesday news conference, Reynolds addressed the incident.
"I do feel like the driver acted appropriately," she told reporters at the conference in Urbandale, Iowa.
"As we were leaving the vicinity, the individual sped up and stepped in front of the vehicle intentionally, and you cannot block traffic as we're leaving an event."
Reynolds added that Cavil was in the wrong and had "acted inappropriately" in apparently trying to block her from leaving the business.
Cavil himself admitted that he was attempting to prevent Reynolds' vehicle from leaving. He explained, however, that Reynolds is mischaracterizing the incident and says that he didn't speed up and step in front of the vehicle.
"It's not like I went out of my way to jump in front of the vehicle in the way that she explains it or the State Patrol explains it," he insisted. "I was already standing where the vehicle was driving to."
Cavil complained that the governor is being given preferential treatment.
"Folks in the state of Iowa should really be concerned about the sheer lack of accountability that we're seeing and the exceptionalism that we're giving to Gov. Reynolds," he said. "Because if it was me or anyone else who was driving a car or riding in a car that struck another person, that car can't just drive away and everything be fine."
Gov. Reynolds: SUV driver who hit protester 'acted appropriately' www.youtube.com
What else?
A spokesperson for the Iowa State Patrol said that the department's investigation found that Cavil intentionally blocked the vehicle, placing himself in front of it, to stop Reynolds from leaving.
"The trooper was operating the vehicle in a safe and prudent manner and in accordance with dignitary protection training," the spokesperson said. "The trooper driving the vehicle will not be disciplined as he did not violate departmental policies or procedures."
Cavil and other protesters have been demanding Reynolds sign an executive order restoring voting rights to convicted felons.
Reynolds has said that she intends to sign the order "by the late summer or early fall," according to the Des Moines Register.
"The fact that she was riding in a car that struck me and she hasn't reached out or had anyone from her office reach out just to even have a conversation with me is also pretty troubling and concerning and disheartening, honestly," Cavill added.


theblaze--2020-07-08--VIDEO: Some students say they'd give up free speech, privacy so others can 'feel comfortable' and to

VIDEO: Some students say they'd give up free speech, privacy so others can 'feel comfortable' and to avoid offensiveness

VIDEO : Some students say they 'd give up free speech , privacy so others can 'feel comfortable ' and @ @ @ @ @ 'm just giving up a little of what I care about just to make others @ @ @ @ @ do that '

Amid public schools and colleges punishing students and staff members for offensive social media content, Campus Reform digital reporter Eduardo Neret asked students if they'd feel comfortable giving up their free speech and privacy to further the cause of not offending others.
Most students Neret interviewed not only said they'd be willing to give up some of their First Amendment rights, but they also said they'd be willing to turn over their social media accounts to their schools for offensive speech inspection.
What else did they say?
"I definitely think that they should be monitoring the hate speech because that shouldn't be allowed," one person said, adding that she'd be willing to let her social media accounts be examined "if it has to do with helping the school in ... creating a sense of more safety and security and erasing the hate speech."
The individual added that she would "be interested in doing anything I can to help others feel more comfortable."
Others also said they'd be willing to give up their free speech rights in the name of non-offensiveness:
"If that's something I can be helpful for, I'd be happy to."
"I would do that, 'cause I mean if I'm just giving up a little of what I care about just to make others feel better, I'd do that. I'd make that exchange."
"I'd like for everybody to feel comfortable."
But not every student agreed:
"People should have their own privacy; there's no reason to be monitoring everybody."
"I don't think that they should be taking like your privilege of being able to speak what you think."
"Free speech is so important ... giving it up is like giving up one of your rights."


theblaze--2020-07-08--Don Lemon wants to solve racism by putting Barack Obama 'front and center' on Mount Rushmore

Don Lemon wants to solve racism by putting Barack Obama 'front and center ' on Mount Rushmore 'The first black @ @ @ @ @ center '

CNN anchor Don Lemon suggested putting former President Barack Obama "front and center" on Mount Rushmore as a way of solving the controversy around monuments in America and around racism in general.
Lemon made the suggestion Tuesday night on CNN during a wide-ranging discussion with fellow network anchor Chris Cuomo about race relations in America and the recent left-wing movement to remove or vandalize monuments and statues of prominent Americans.
What are the details?
The conversation started with Cuomo and Lemon reacting to news that a California couple was charged with a hate crime for painting over a city of Martinez-approved "Black Lives Matter" mural.
Lemon attempted to characterize the "right wing [media] machine" messaging that drove the couple to paint over the mural, saying, "They kick in with 'Democratic cities are in chaos right now — is this what you want from Joe Biden? And they're gonna take your country away and they're taking down the statues. Crime is rising as they defund police.'"
"And the people who you saw there ... fall for it," Lemon added. "They fall for it. That's why they do things like what they did."
"They want to paint over signs and they think it's 'our country.' 'This is the country that we built,'" he continued. "Even though a rich diversity of people helped to build this country, and many of us — meaning our ancestors — for free, did not get paid for it, could not get an education, could not build wealth, are not on statues, Confederate or otherwise, are not on Mount Rushmore."
Here's the money quote: "I think, listen ... if they are going to put someone on Mount Rushmore, considering the history of this country, the first black president should be front and center."
Cuomo and Lemon on people vandalizing Black Lives Matter mural: This is just wrong youtu.be
Anything else?
At that point Cuomo chimed in, saying, "Add to Mount Rushmore. I think that's first of all, it's a more salable idea than the idea of taking away Founding Fathers."
Lemon then continued his argument: "So what's wrong with all of us together thinking or reshaping our country so that more people rethinking our country in the way we think and where our priorities are so that this country ... it belongs to everyone."
"Nothing is wrong with it," Cuomo bluntly stated.
Lemon said: "Maybe some of the people up there on Mount Rushmore, who knows? ... The name shouldn't be Mount Rushmore if you talk to Native Americans. They say it is stolen land. It was only Mount Rushmore 40 years before they started to carve presidents' faces in it. No one got any money for that."
"You're totally right. The premise is where we're gonna have to work towards, which is if we all decide. It's about consensus and collective consciousness," Cuomo concluded.


theblaze--2020-07-08--Texas county warns it will arrest COVID-19 positive people if they refuse to self-quarantine: 'You'r

Texas county warns it will arrest COVID-19 positive people if they refuse to self-quarantine: 'You're going to be punished if you don't'

Texas county warns it will arrest COVID-19 positive people if they refuse to self-quarantine : 'You 're going to be @ @ @ @ @ '

Brooks County, Texas, officials are willing to arrest any patients positive for COVID-19 who refuse to self-isolate in their homes.
What are the details?
According to a Tuesday report from KTVT-TV, the county issued a countywide warning via Facebook promising that any resident who tests positive for coronavirus and refuses to self-quarantine could face jail time.
The Facebook post cites Texas Penal Code 22.05 (a), which states, "A person commits an offense if he recklessly engages in conduct that places another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury."
The Facebook post has been widely reported, and a portion of the warning reads, "Any person who has tested positive for Covid-19, and has not subsequently tested negative, must isolate themselves from other people until they receive a negative result."
"Please note that the victim does not have to get Covid-19 but just be exposed to it without previous warning," the notice continues. "Appearing in public after testing 'Positive' EXCEPT to get medical care, can lead to your arrest."
The warning notes that anyone who believes they have been exposed to someone with COVID-19 who did not self-isolate should call their local law enforcement agency or the Brooks County Attorney's Office.
The notice was signed by David T. Garcia, Brooks County Attorney.
Anything else?
In a statement, Garcia told KVII-TV that the county will prosecute people for violating the directive.
"If you're going to go out and endanger other people, and we find out about it, we will prosecute you," he explained. "People have not really embraced the dangers of COVID-19. It's dangerous. It's killing people, and it's making people very sick. So either do it because you're concerned about others or do it because you're going to be punished if you don't."
He added, "There's a number of statutes out there that can be used so once you test positive, stay home."


theblaze--2020-07-09--'I’m not going to be the mask police': Ohio sheriff defies governor's order to enforce social distan

'I’m not going to be the mask police': Ohio sheriff defies governor's order to enforce social distancing

' I ’ m not going to be the mask police ' : Ohio sheriff defies governor 's order to @ @ @ @ @ believe you and the media are confused ! '

A Ohio sheriff said Wednesday that he refuses to be the "mask police" and will not enforce new social distancing rules ordered by his state's governor to stop the spread of coronavirus.
Butler County Police Sheriff Richard K. Jones appeared on CNN to explain his defiance of the order by Gov. Mike DeWine, who is a Republican.
"I'm not going to be the mask police," Jones told anchor Brianna Keilar.
"I'm telling people don't call 911. All the police have been decimated as far as being laid off, having budgets cut," he added, "and I am not going to enforce the mask wearing."
Jones said that he wears a mask and washes his hands, but that he did not like the government making the social distancing into a mandate.
"I believe you and the media are confused!" Jones said to Keilar when she pressed him about the coronavirus case statistics.
DeWine's mask order
"In addition to social distancing and reducing unnecessary interactions with others, we know that wearing a mask helps protect others in the community. It has been, and remains, a very strong recommendation that I urge all Ohioans to continue doing even if you are not in a red-alert county," DeWine said about the order.
There has been a passionate movement against the mask and social distancing orders in the United States, despite the fact that most polls show a majority of Americans approve of the lockdown guidelines.
Here's the interview with Sheriff Jones:


theblaze--2020-07-09--Planned Parenthood responds after Kanye West says the abortion provider does the 'devil's work'

Planned Parenthood responds after Kanye West says the abortion provider does the 'devil 's work' A spokeswoman for the organization @ @ @ @ @ are the 'real ' threats to black communities

Abortion giant Planned Parenthood has issued a response after mogul Kanye West said that the group is doing "the devil's work" in black communities.
What are the details?
During an interview with Forbes published Wednesday, the rapper said he believes that "Planned Parenthoods have been placed inside cities by white supremacists to do the devil's work."
Planned Parenthood Federation of America's director of black leadership and engagement, Nia Martin-Robinson, told Blast in response:
Black women are free to make our own decisions about our bodies and pregnancies, and want and deserve to have access to the best medical care available.
Any insinuation that abortion is Black genocide is offensive and infantilizing. The real threat to Black communities' safety, health, and lives stems from lack of access to quality, affordable health care, police violence and the criminalization of reproductive health care by anti-abortion opposition. At Planned Parenthood, we trust and we stand with Black women who have, and continue to lead the charge when it comes to the health, rights, and bodily autonomy of those in their communities.
The Planned Parenthood organization also tweeted, "Stigmatizing Black people by suggesting that they are unable to make their own decisions about their bodies, families, and lives isn't new, nor is it a coincidence - it's a ploy pulled directly from the anti-abortion playbook."
In a post linked to an article on West's comments, the organization added, "We don't know who needs to hear this, but when we say that no one should stand between a woman and decisions about her body when it comes to health care, that really means NO ONE."
West, who announced via tweet on July 4th that he is running for president in 2020, also reportedly doubled down on his anti-abortion stance on Twitter Wednesday evening but then re-thought his post.
According to Complex, West "took to Twitter to post a screenshot of a Google search of 'what does a 6 month fetus look like.' He captioned the tweet, which he's since deleted, 'These souls deserve to live.'"


theblaze--2020-07-09--Woman loses job over viral video of her yelling 'white lives are better' at Black Lives Matter prote

Woman loses job over viral video of her yelling 'white lives are better' at Black Lives Matter protesters

Woman loses job over viral video of her yelling 'white lives are better ' at Black Lives Matter protesters Holt @ @ @ @ @ at whom she made the comments

A woman regrets yelling "white lives are better" at a group of Black Lives Matter protesters after the video of her comments went viral and she lost her job over it.
The incident happened at a protest in Elizabethton in Tennessee.
In another part of the video, she yells at a protester, "You're a gay homosexual piece of crap who's going to burn in hell."
A man standing next to her says in the video, "We should have kept you (expletive) slaves, that's what we should've done."
The video was recorded by Sierra Gilmer, a teenager who told WJHL-TV she was simply recording reactions from people in the crowd when she happened upon Sonya Holt.
"I was live streaming on the Instagram on Johnson City BLM and just happened to get that on video. It was crazy. We kind of knew what to expect going into it," said Gilmer.
"She started screaming everything that she did and telling me that, I'm just a poor little black girl with a messed up mind that, we should have been kept as slaves and all these things," Gilmer said of Holt.
Keith Family Vision Clinic told WCYB-TV that Holt was fired from her job after the video went viral.
Holt apologizes
In an interview with WJHL-TV, Holt said she regretted her comments.
"I would like to apologize to the little girl. I did not know that she was a minor. If I had known she was a minor, I would have never spoken to her," Holt said.
She confirmed that she lost her job over the video.
"I no longer have a job. I don't have any animosity towards the doctors I worked for. They're great people. Of course, I didn't want their business to suffer because of mistakes that I made and I have great respect for them. They did what they had to do to protect their business," Holt said.
Here's the video of the heated interaction:


theblaze--2020-07-09--Band formerly known as Lady Antebellum sues black singer Lady A after taking her name

Band formerly known as Lady Antebellum sues black singer Lady A after taking her name The woke country group says @ @ @ @

The country group formerly known as Lady Antebellum changed their name to Lady A last month, apologizing for "the hurt" caused by their original band moniker due to its association with "the period of history before the Civil War, which includes slavery."
But a black gospel and blues artist, Anita White—who has used the stage name Lady A for decades—protested over Lady Antebellum's decision to hijack her brand. Now, the country group is suing White to be sure they can perform as Lady A without her claiming trademark infringement.
What are the details?
The group Lady A, comprised of members Dave Haywood, Hillary Scott, and Charles Kelley, said in a statement Wednesday:
Today we are sad to share that our sincere hope to join together with Anita White in unity and common purpose has ended. She and her team have demanded a $10 million payment, so reluctantly we have come to the conclusion that we need to ask a court to affirm our right to continue to use the name Lady A, a trademark we have held for many years. It was a stirring in our hearts and reflection on our own blindspots that led us to announce a few weeks ago that we were dropping the word 'Antebellum' from our name and moving forward using only the name so many of our fans already knew us by.
According to the lawsuit obtained by Pitchfork, the band holds federally registered trademarks for the brand names "Lady Antebellum" and "Lady A," and the group "started using 'Lady A' as a source indicator for their goods and services as early as 2006-2007."
It also noted that "prior to 2020, White did not challenge, in any way, Plaintiffs' open, obvious, and widespread nationwide and international use of the LADY A mark as a source indicator for Plaintiffs' recorded, downloadable, and streaming music and videos, Plaintiffs' lives musical performances, or Plaintiffs' sale of souvenir merchandise."
White told KING-TV last month that she holds a business trademark for Lady A LLC, and she was furious about Lady Antebellum's decision to go by the same name she had used for so many years without asking her first.
"I can't imagine that they could go on Google and not see me there, you can go on Spotify and see me, go on Amazon and see me," White said.
She added, "To totally disregard the fact that there is another Lady A out there, or is the Lady A, because I am, and have been for over 30 years, I don't understand how they would not reach out to me, and say something at least."
The plaintiffs are not seeking monetary damages in their lawsuit against White, and they are not attempting to prevent White from continuing to perform under the name Lady A.
After the lawsuit was announced on Wednesday, the blues singer Lady A tweeted, "No weapon formed against me shall prosper."


theblaze--2020-07-10--Former Blaze Radio host Jay Severin dead at 69

'This was a guy who liked free speech and was not afraid to push the boundaries . '

Longtime conservative political operative, civics connoisseur, and radio personality Jay Severin has passed away after battling cancer. He was 69.
Severin became a giant force in political talk in New England before spending years as a host on TheBlaze Radio Network's national platform.
"Jay was one of the rare talents that could not only see beyond the headline, but had the empathy to understand how it affected the listener," Glenn Beck told TheBlaze. "He was a good man, and I'm a better one for having known him."
Tom Shattuck, podcaster and senior editor of the Lowell Sun, paid tribute to Severin after news broke of his death on Thursday, calling him "the Boston talk titan."
"This was a guy who liked free speech and was not afraid to push the boundaries," Shattuck said of Severin, adding, "He made a difference...he was powerful, he was loud, he was poetic in the way he spoke, and he's going to be missed."
Severin was known for being fearless, a trait that he admitted sometimes got him into trouble.
Michael Graham, a colleague of Severin's from WTTK-FM, said of the late host, "What's fascinating to me is the number of people who say, 'I became a conservative because of Jay Severin'" surrounded by the liberal environment in Boston. He added, "That's his legacy—his civics lesson on the air, that nobody can take away from him."
Jay Severin was famous for saying, "Excelsior!" meaning, "higher" or "upward." From all of us at TheBlaze, Jay: Excelsior.


theblaze--2020-07-10--New poll shows very few Americans want to defund police

A new poll found that many more Americans want funding for police to increase or stay the same than those that want police to be defunded.
Black Lives Matter protesters and activists have made the defunding of police forces a central platform of their political demands.
A Pew poll released on Thursday shows that few Americans support the policy.
A plurality of Americans, 42%, said that they want the funding for police to stay the same. Another 31% of Americans said they want funding for police to increase.
Both of those groups are larger than the group that called for the defunding of police only 25% of those polled.
Of those who want the police defunded, 12% said they wanted police funding to decrease by a "a lot," while 14% said they wanted police funding to decrease "a little."
President Donald Trump has come out forcefully against the defunding of police, but when presumed Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden was asked if he supported the policy, he also said no.
A small increase in support for BLM
Other results from the poll show an increase in support for some parts of the narrative of the Black Lives Matter movement.
There was a small drop in Americans who said the police do an "excellent or good job of protecting people from crime," from 62% four years ago to 58% in the newest poll.
A greater drop was found among Americans who agreed that police are doing a good or excellent job of "treating racial and ethnic groups equally," from 47% down to 34%.
Two thirds of those polled also said that civilians should have the power to sue police officers "to hold them accountable for misconduct and excessive use of force."
Here's more about polling on the police protests:


theblaze--2020-07-10--BlazeTV's Chad Prather announces he’s running for Governor of Texas

BlazeTV personality and host of `` The Chad Prather Show , '' Chad Prather announced he 's throwing his hat @ @ @ @ @ of Texas in 2022 .
His announcement came in response to Texas Gov .
Greg @ @ @ @ @ executive order making face masks compulsory statewide in response to the COVID-19 pandemic last week @ @ @ @ @ to make Texas , Texas again , '' Chad said on the show .
`` @ @ @ @ @ whitewashed and been made lukewarm in so many ways .
It 's okay for us @ @ @ @ @ 'm a Texan and it 's time to take our state back ! ''
Watch @ @ @ @ @ : Want more from Chad Prather ?
To enjoy more of Chad 's comedy , @ @ @ @ @ subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America , defend @ @ @ @ @ American dream .

BlazeTV personality and host of "The Chad Prather Show," Chad Prather announced he's throwing his hat in the ring for governor of Texas in 2022. His announcement came in response to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's (R) executive order making face masks compulsory statewide in response to the COVID-19 pandemic last week.
"It's time to make Texas, Texas again," Chad said on the show. "We have been inundated and whitewashed and been made lukewarm in so many ways. It's okay for us to walk tall ... I'm a Texan and it's time to take our state back!"
Watch the video below for more:
Want more from Chad Prather?
To enjoy more of Chad's comedy, craziness and common sense, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.


theblaze--2020-07-09--Nancy Pelosi faces the wrath of social media after dismissive statement about mobs tearing down stat

Nancy Pelosi faces the wrath of social media after dismissive statement about mobs tearing down statues

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was criticized heavily online after she offered a dismissive statement on mobs vandalizing and tearing down historical statues.
Pelosi indicated that she didn't disapprove of the illegal vandalism of statues in a media briefing on Thursday. She was asked about a statue of Columbus that was thrown into Baltimore harbor by protesters.
"Well you know, I'm not a big, I don't even have my grandmother's earrings, I'm not a big, uh, let's see what we have in terms of monuments, I'm more interested in terms of what people have accomplished," Pelosi said.
"I think that it's up to the communities to decide what statues that they want to see," she added. "If the community doesn't want the statue there, the statue shouldn't be there."
Pelosi went on to say that the vandalism against the statue of Columbus didn't diminish her pride in her Italian heritage.
"I don't care that much about statues," she added.
When asked if it would be better if there were a formal process where a community could be involved in the political decision to tear down a statue, Pelosi appeared to be dismissive about the suggestion.
"People will do what they do," she replied, before adding that from a "safety standpoint" it might be better if the city was involved in the tearing down of statues.
The response
Critics of Pelosi circulated videos of her comments on social media.
"The House Speaker who runs the House of Representatives is encouraging mobs to tear down statues in our cities," said commentator Robby Starbuck.
"It's really telling that Nancy Pelosi can't or won't bring herself to condemn mobs tearing down statues in vigilante vandalism," said journalist Brad Columbo.
"This is a failure by @SpeakerPelosi. The destructive mobs vandalizing statues and destroying public property need to be condemned, not ignored. There is a legal, civil process for putting up and removing statues. That is what makes us a democracy, not a violent anarchy," replied Rep. Tim Burchett (R-Tenn.).
"The Left is encouraging lawlessness and mob rule. It's time these vandals are held accountable to the rule of law," responded the account for Young America's Foundation.
Protesters used the outrage over the death of George Floyd in police custody to justify mobs tearing down statues of historical figures of the confederacy, and then moved on to target all historical statues.
Here's the full context of Pelosi's comments:


theblaze--2020-07-09--Security guard charged with murder after shooting customer who entered store without wearing a mask

Security guard charged with murder after shooting customer who entered store without wearing a mask The victim reportedly had a @ @ @ @ @ for a tow truck

A California security guard is facing murder charges after authorities say he fatally shot a customer in the back following an argument about the customer entering a store without wearing a state-mandated face mask.
The victim, Jerry Lewis—a famous 90s rapper known as Madd Head—had reportedly walked into the store while waiting for a tow truck after getting a flat tire.
What are the details?
The Daily Mail reported that security guard Umeir Hawkins, 38, was working security at the Green Farm Market in Gardena, when Lewis, 50, entered the store and was stopped by Hawkins for not wearing a required face covering. The two men became embroiled in an argument that became physical.
Lewis left for a short time and then returned, and another fight broke out between the two. Hawkins' wife, Sabrina Carter, 50, had been waiting for her husband's shift to end and became involved in the altercation. She allegedly pointed a handgun at Lewis and other customers in the store, police say.
As Lewis turned to leave again, Hawkins allegedly pulled out a separate firearm and fatally shot Lewis in the back.
According to KCAL-TV, Lewis had stopped into the store while waiting on a tow truck after getting a flat tire on his vehicle.
The outlet noted that "Lewis was also known by his rapper alias 'Madd Head.' He gained popularity in the 1990s for one of his songs, 'Pimp'n Ain't Ez,' which was featured on the 'Beavis and Butthead - Do America' soundtrack."
Fox News reported that in addition to Hawkins' murder charge, he and Carter "were each charged with one count of possession of a handgun by a felon, stemming from a prior conviction in 2013 for assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury."
Bail for Hawkins was set at $1 million, and he faces a maximum sentence of 50 years to life if convicted. Carter's bail was set at $35,000, and she faces up to three years incarceration.


theblaze--2020-07-09--Will there be a second stimulus check? Who might be eligible and when could it arrive?

Will there be a second stimulus check ?
Who might be eligible and when could it arrive ?
A timeline @ @ @ @ @ relief package would need to be passed by Congress this summer .

There are indications that there will be another stimulus relief package, which could be passed as early as the end of July. What most Americans want to know is: "Will there be a second stimulus check?"
There very well could be a second coronavirus stimulus check, but the financial support will likely have more stipulations and won't be doled out to as many Americans as the first check.
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said on Thursday that the Trump administration is working with the Senate to pass another stimulus relief package by the end of July, according to The Wall Street Journal. The Senate returns from its two-week Fourth of July recess on July 20, and at that time, will reportedly begin preparing the next COVID-19 stimulus bill.
Mnuchin said he "supports a second round of economic impact payments to households."
"We do support another round of economic impact payments," Mnuchin said in an interview with CNBC. "The level and criteria we'll be discussing with the Senate."
"I had a very productive call with [Senate Majority Leader] Mitch McConnell yesterday," Mnuchin added. "As soon as the Senate gets back, we're going to sit down on a bipartisan basis with the Republicans and the Democrats, and it will be our priority to make sure between the 20th and the end of the month that we pass the next legislation."
Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin: Traditional economic models don't work in shutdown scenario www.youtube.com
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R- Ky.) wants to put a limit on who receives a second stimulus check.
"I think the people who have been hit the hardest are people who make about $40,000 a year or less," McConnell said this week. "Many of them work in the hospitality industry. The hospitality industry, as all of you know, just got [decimated]—hotels, restaurants—and so that could well be a part of it."
If there was a $40,000 cap, approximately 80 million Americans would be eligible for the second stimulus check. In the first stimulus check, individuals who earned up to $75,000 and married couples with a combined income of $150,000 were eligible to receive the maximum stimulus payout of $1,200.
In March, 40% of households making less than $40,000 lost their jobs during the coronavirus pandemic, according to the Federal Reserve.
Mnuchin declined to comment on McConnell's proposed $40,000 income limit for the stimulus check.
President Donald Trump endorses a second stimulus check to individuals.
"I support it, but it has to be done properly," President Trump told the Fox Business Network on July 1. "I support actually larger numbers than the Democrats, but it's got to be done properly. We had something where it gave you a disincentive to work last time."
"I want the money getting to people to be larger so they can spend it," Trump added. "I want the money to get there quickly and in a non-complicated fashion."
"I think we will. I think we're going to be helping people out," Trump said in May. "We're going to be getting some money for them during the artificial — because it really is, it's an artificial closure. And now we're going to be able to open it up."
If there is a second round of COVID-19 stimulus checks, the IRS could start distributing the payments in late August or early September, according to Forbes.
The CARES Act had a cost of $2 trillion, and stimulus checks accounted for approximately $300 billion of the package.
When Congress returns, it will also decide on whether or not to continue the additional $600 per week in federal unemployment benefits that were added during the pandemic. Critics say the extra $600 weekly disincentives people from getting a new job because they could receive less money. The extra unemployment money is set to expire on July 31.
The Senate will be in session from July 20 through August 7, but the House starts their summer recess on August 3. The Senate and House return on September 8.


theblaze--2020-07-09--Police release conclusive evidence in hanging of black man in California that BLM protesters called

Police release conclusive evidence in hanging of black man in California that BLM protesters called a lynching The evidence all @ @ @ @

After angry protests claimed a black man was lynched in Palmdale, California, police released conclusive evidence to support the claim that he committed suicide.
Robert Fuller's body was found on June 10 hanging from a tree in Poncitlán Square. Investigators initially ruled it a suicide but walked the claims back after protesters accused them of hastily jumping to conclusions.
Many on social media suspected that the 24-year-old had been lynched, and some accused law enforcement officials of covering it up.
On Thursday, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Commander Christopher Marks told reporters at a media briefing that the evidence supported the conclusion that Fuller committed suicide.
"The Medical Examiner issued their final autopsy report and delivered it to the Sheriff's Department and deemed this case to be suicide," said Marks.
"There were no signs of a struggle. No defensive wounds observed and no other signs of trauma visible to Mr. Fuller. Mr. Fuller's hands were not bound and there were no signs he attempted to remove the ligature from his neck," Marks continued, according to KNX-1070.
"Investigators observed several prominent linear scars on Mr. Fuller's left wrist consistent with suicidal attempt."
Marks went on to say that Fuller had a history of psychiatric problems, including a number of suicide attempts.
Investigators also found that he had purchased a rope similar to the one he was found hanged with.
Despite the announcement, some on social media were still claiming malfeasance on the part of law enforcement officials.
"Robert Fuller didn't kill himself. Black people aren't hanging themselves from trees. That's called lynching. And it's murder. A hate crime. There's really no cameras in front of City Hall? Cmon," said one Twitter user.
"[Los Angeles County Sheriff] Villanueva is a monster who does everything he can to avoid transparency. he can never be trusted. we need justice for Robert Fuller," said another user.
In a similar case in nearby Victorville, a surveillance video proved that the hanging death of Malcolm Harsch, another black man, was a suicide and not a lynching as many claimed.
Here's the media briefing on Fuller's suicide:


theblaze--2020-07-09--Renowned historian reveals how woke politics are DESTROYING academia in America

Hoover Institution senior fellow, historian, and author Niall Ferguson joined Dave Rubin on "The Rubin Report" to talk about the decline of higher education, especially at some of the best universities in America.
Niall faulted the increasing emphasis on political correctness for squeezing out all diverse thought and heterodox views, and the failures of conservative professors for allowing the current dominance of progressivism in academia.
"Academic life in the United States, especially in the last five years, has really been damaged by a culture of what used to be called 'political correctness', but I don't think that quite captures it," Niall said. "It's a fundamental intolerance of a deep illiberalism, a deep hostility toward free debate and free inquiry that is killing the great institutions of American academia."
Watch the video clip below to catch more of the conversation:
Watch Dave Rubin's full interview with Niall Ferguson here.
Want more from Dave Rubin?
To enjoy more honest conversations, free speech, and big ideas with Dave Rubin, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.


theblaze--2020-07-09--'F***ing disaster': Ex-Eagles DE Chris Long blasts DeSean Jackson's posts, says 'it doesn't seem lik

'F***ing disaster': Ex-Eagles DE Chris Long blasts DeSean Jackson's posts, says 'it doesn't seem like it's in vogue to call out anti-Semitism'

' F***ing disaster ' : Ex-Eagles DE Chris Long blasts DeSean Jackson 's posts , says 'it does n't seem @ @ @ @ @ to call out anti-Semitism' Some have said criticizing DeSean Jackson takes the focus off Black @ @ @

Ex-Philadelphia Eagles' defensive end Chris Long has weighed in about current Eagle DeSean Jackson's anti-Semitic social media posts and called them a "f***ing disaster," the New York Post reported.
Jackson's now-deleted Instagram posts promoted Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan — a well-documented anti-Semite — and included quotes falsely attributed to Adolf Hitler. Jackson has since apologized, and he and his representatives reportedly reached out to a local rabbi to be educated about anti-Semitism:
What did Long have to say?
"I mean, quoting Hitler is bad business, but quoting fake Hitler quotes is like a cherry on top," Long said on his "Green Light" podcast, the paper noted. "I don't know if it'd be worse if he quoted a real one or the fake one. Needless to say, it's wrong … It seems like, and I don't know what it is, but it seems like we're not allowed to say, 'Hey, that's not good.' It's not good. It's wrong, and I'm sure I have Jewish listeners. I'm against anti-Semitism, and I didn't see, and I haven't seen, nearly enough people saying, 'Yeah, man, this was a misstep.'"
More from Long's podcast, via PhillyVoice:
"I can't speak for the many people in the media or on Twitter who kind of bite their tongue on this thing because when it comes to anti-Semitism, it's not in vogue to denounce it, or they have some geopolitical inclination or political inclination that complicates denouncing it. I think it's f***** up, unequivocally, and I try not paint faith or religion with a broad brush. I don't care what religion it is. I know it's in vogue to punch Nazis. We love doing memes about that. We all would say we would punch a Nazi. But it doesn't seem like it's in vogue to call out anti-Semitism."
Long — a social justice advocate for years — said he likes Jackson based on previous interactions but said it's up to the Jewish community to decide if it's going to accept that apology, the Post reported.
"Just like with Drew Brees, I don't get to decide when his apology or his learning process on this thing is complete," Long said, according to the Post. "All I know is that he talked bad about Jewish people, and somehow managed to use a fake Hitler quote doing it, and that is a f***ing disaster ..."
Where is pushback against Jackson's critics coming from?
Jackson's teammate Marquise Goodwin got defensive after saying he wished Jackson's critics were as interested in discussing the Black Lives Matter movement, the Post reported. Godwin said on Instagram "the Jewish community is mad at me" about his comments — but later softened his stance a bit.
Former NBA star Stephen Jackson apologized for defending DeSean Jackson's posts by using "the wrong words" (i.e., saying DeSean Jackson was "speaking the truth").
And while sports commentator and former NFL star Shannon Sharpe didn't excuse DeSean Jackson's posts, he said whites are treated with kid gloves in comparison:
Sharpe also said he spoke to Stephen Jackson about his DeSean Jackson defense and emphasized that Stephen Jackson and DeSean Jackson both were "wrong."


theblaze--2020-07-09--Police release graphic video of man shot at headquarters after he broke out of handcuffs and grabbed

Police release graphic video of man shot at headquarters after he broke out of handcuffs and grabbed an officer's gun

Police release graphic video of man shot at headquarters after he broke out of handcuffs and grabbed an officer 's @

The San Diego Police Department released a video on Thursday capturing the moment officers were forced to fire on a suspect who had broken out of his restraints and was able to get his hands on an officer's service weapon.
What are the details?
According to video obtained from the San Diego Police Department, "A 911 call came in from a downtown hotel about a man causing a disturbance. He had been pepper sprayed and held down by hotel security for threatening to stab hotel staff."
"San Diego Police responded and took the 25-year-old man into custody without incident," authorities added.
According to KFMB-TV, the suspect was identified as Keith Bergman.
"The man was evaluated for being under the influence and placed under arrest," police explained. "A search of his pockets revealed methamphetamine and five credit cards that did not belong to him. He was taken to police headquarters for processing."
At that time, however, Bergman was reportedly able to maneuver out of his handcuffs and smash through plexiglass.
"While sitting in the back of a patrol car in the sally port, he slipped one hand free from his handcuffs," authorities added. "He then broke through a plexiglass barrier, reached into the rear area of the car, and grabbed a backpack that contained an officer's backup handgun."
Security footage of the incident shows one of the San Diego Police officers hearing a commotion in the backseat of the vehicle, noticing that the suspect was free and had pulled out a handgun.
"[Officers] draw their service weapons and attempt to persuade him to drop the gun with no success," the statement continued.
Bergman reportedly begins threatening responding police officers with the firearm, prompting officers to converge on the vehicle.
He then reportedly fires at least one round from the back of the patrol car and officers respond in kind.
"After several minutes, the man reaches through the broken glass and opens the rear door," police explained. "He exits with the backpack and the handgun tucked in his waist. He tries and fails to open the rear hatch."
Bergman then reportedly attempts to open one of the front doors, but an officer fires three rounds and prevents him from doing so.
A K-9 officer was then deployed, and the suspect was once again taken into custody without further incident. He was transported to a local medical facility for treatment of non-life threatening injuries.
What else?
The department told the station, "The San Diego Police Department is committed to being open and transparent with the public."
In a Wednesday night release, the San Diego Police Department said:
The Internal Affairs Unit will conduct an investigation to determine if there were any policy violations, and the Shooting Review Board will evaluate the tactics used by the officers. The Community Review Board on Police Practices will conduct a review of the incident and provide any appropriate recommendations. The Federal Bureau of Investigations and the United States Attorney's Office will also be monitoring the investigation.
(Content warning: Rough language):


theblaze--2020-07-09--FLASHBACK: Obama administration shut down H1N1 testing, undercutting Biden's COVID-19 attacks on Tru

FLASHBACK: Obama administration shut down H1N1 testing, undercutting Biden's COVID-19 attacks on Trump

During the 2009 swine flu pandemic , the CDC stopped counting H1N1 cases and abruptly advised states to stop testing @

Joe Biden continues to attack President Donald Trump over his response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
"Donald Trump forgot about COVID-19, but COVID-19 didn't forget about us," Biden tweeted in June. "The President couldn't wish away the virus in April, he couldn't tweet it away in May, and he can't ignore it away in June."
"Remember back in March ... we talked about the need to act like we were at war with the virus," Biden said of Trump in late June. "He called himself a wartime president ... What happened? Now, it's almost July, and it seems like our wartime president has surrendered, waved ... the white flag and left the battlefield."
A few weeks ago, Biden told Trump to "speed up the testing."
"The crisis in Arizona is the direct result of Donald Trump's failure to lead and his desire to 'slow the testing down,' and Americans are suffering the consequences," Biden said on Wednesday.
However, back in 2009 during the swine flu pandemic, the Obama administration instructed states to shut down testing for H1N1 and stop counting cases of the deadly respiratory disease.
In October 2009, CBS News released the findings from a three-month-long investigation into how the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention were reporting H1N1 cases during the swine flu pandemic.
"In late July, the CDC abruptly advised states to stop testing for H1N1 flu, and stopped counting individual cases," CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson wrote. "The rationale given for the CDC guidance to forego testing and tracking individual cases was: why waste resources testing for H1N1 flu when the government has already confirmed there's an epidemic?"
"Some public health officials privately disagreed with the decision to stop testing and counting, telling CBS News that continued tracking of this new and possibly changing virus was important because H1N1 has a different epidemiology, affects younger people more than seasonal flu and has been shown to have a higher case fatality rate than other flu virus strains," the report said.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website confirms the CBS News report.
"Individual case counts were kept early during the 2009 H1N1 outbreak when the 2009 H1N1 virus first emerged," the CDC website reads. "As the outbreak expanded and became more widespread, individual case counts become increasingly impractical and not representative of the true extent of the outbreak."
"This is because only a small proportion of persons with respiratory illness are actually tested and confirmed for influenza (including 2009 H1N1) so the true benefit of keeping track of these numbers is questionable," the CDC stated. "In addition, the extensive spread of 2009 H1N1 flu within the United States made it extremely resource-intensive for states to count individual cases. On July 24, 2009, CDC discontinued reporting of individual cases of 2009 H1N1, but continued to track hospitalizations and deaths."
"As 2009 H1N1 cases continued to occur through the spring and summer, the task of counting cases became increasingly difficult," according to the CDC. "On May 12, 2009, CDC transitioned from reporting individual confirmed and probable cases of 2009 H1N1 influenza to reporting aggregate counts of 2009 H1N1 lab confirmed and probable cases, hospitalizations and deaths with the launch of an aggregate reporting web site. Once the numbers of cases increased beyond the point where counting of individual cases was practical, on July 23, 2009, CDC reported the number of 2009 cases for the last time."
The directive to stop testing and counting H1N1 cases was issued three months after then-President Barack Obama officially declared the H1N1 influenza virus a public health emergency and three months before the administration declared it a national emergency on Oct. 24, 2009. H1N1 was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on June 11, 2009.
Attkisson filed a formal Freedom of Information and requested to know why the CDC ordered states to stop testing for H1N1. Two months later, she received a letter from the CDC Freedom of Information office.
"The letter is to inform me that my request for 'expedited' treatment of my FOI request has been denied because CDC has determined the request is 'not a matter of widespread and exceptional media and public interest,'" Attkisson wrote.
"First, it seems ill advised to allow the responding agency (which often doesn't want the info released) to determine whether an issue is of media and public interest and, therefore, subject to expedited treatment," she continued. "Further, the CDC may be the only agency on the planet to argue that testing and counting of swine flu cases is "not of widespread and exceptional media and public interest."
Ron Klain, who served as Biden's chief of staff in 2009 and Obama's Ebola czar in 2014, seemingly pointed out how the country dodged a bullet during the swine flu outbreak because of luck.
"It is purely a fortuity that this isn't one of the great mass casualty events in American history. It had nothing to do with us doing anything right. It just had to do with luck," Klain said last year at a biosecurity summit. "If anyone thinks that this can't happen again, they don't have to go back to 1918, they just have to go back to 2009, 2010 and imagine a virus with a different lethality, and you can just do the math on that."
Klain, who is currently an advisor to the Biden campaign, has since backtracked on his comments, specifying that he was only talking about the challenges in producing enough H1N1 vaccine for the public demand.
In late July 2009, the Obama administration promised there would be enough H1N1 vaccine to immunize 160 million Americans at the beginning of the flu season, but ended up with just 28 million.
The CDC estimates that in the U.S., there were nearly 61 million cases of swine flu, 274,304 hospitalizations, and 12,469 deaths between April 12, 2009, and April 10, 2010. H1N1 has a mortality rate of .02%, which is far less deadly than coronavirus.