RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://amgreatness.com/2020/06/10/familiar-names-that-may-appear-in-durham-indictments/

Barr talks the talk. But is he really willing to weather the media firestorm that will rise up to defend the politicized criminal system that has become the status quo?

Recently, Attorney General William Barr met with Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier in a surprisingly candid and wide-ranging interview during which he confirmed many of my observations about the FBI and Justice Department’s attempt to interfere with the 2016 election and the peaceful transfer of power from the Obama to the Trump Administrations.

Although Barr gamely blamed the slow-moving “wheels of justice” for the seeming lack of accountability for the many conspirators, we should not forget that the wheels of “injustice” moved rather quickly as the get-Trump forces leveraged the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act process and dubious criminal investigations to trump up charges against Roger Stone, Michael Flynn, and a Russian catering company that the Department of Justice attempted to prosecute for daring to criticize HIllary Clinton on the internet.

Barr suggested we will learn of criminal indictments before the assigned prosecutor, U.S. Attorney John Durham, issues a report on the Justice Department misconduct. The prosecutions will not reach former president Barack Obama or his vice president. But some of the names will be familiar. Barr declined to name names. For anyone following the Russian collusion hoax over the past three years, the list of possible defendants and people likely to be fired isn’t difficult to guess.

https://issuesinsights.com/2020/06/11/the-who-follies-redux/

The World Health Organization this week showed once again why the motto on its official seal should be, Aperto Ore, Pede Inserta, or in English: Open Mouth, Insert Foot.

On Monday, Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of the WHO’s emerging disease and zoonosis unit, said that transmission of COVID-19 from asymptomatic, infected patients to other persons was “very rare.” There was immediate and widespread pushback. For example, on Tuesday the Harvard Global Health Institute issued a statement, which said in part that “all of the best evidence suggests that people without symptoms can and do readily spread SARS-CoV2, the virus that causes COVID-19.”

Van Kerkove’s statement was a particularly embarrassing failure of scientific communication, one of WHO’s primary responsibilities, because governments and public health officials worldwide have instituted lockdowns and issued guidance to socially distance and wear face masks in an effort, in part, to stop asymptomatic spread.

The day after Van Kerkhove’s misstatement, WHO convened a news conference to walk back her comments, stressing that much remains unknown. But the comment from Monday had already gone viral (pardon the expression) and been seized upon by those who believe that people do not need to wear masks or observe social distancing precautions.

Calling the controversy “a misunderstanding,” Van Kerkhove clumsily tried to perform damage control. “I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that,” she said. “We do know that some people who are asymptomatic, or some people who do not have symptoms, can transmit the virus on.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/06/defund-cops-fund-crime-murders-250-la-daniel-greenfield/

Pro-crime policies work. They always do.

Engage in pro-crime policymaking and you will get more crime. But some lives just don’t matter.

The Los Angeles Police Department announced Tuesday that homicides in the city increased 250% over the previous week, and the number of people who were shot increased by 56% during the same period.

The increased numbers were recorded during the week of May 31-June 6, but officials also reported continued violence this week.

The violence is, predictably, gang related.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/06/california-seeks-empower-illiberal-identity-bruce-thornton/

The link between affirmative action and the current mayhem destroying our cities.

Under the cover of plague and riots, the California Legislature is proposing a November ballot measure that would undo Proposition 209, which in 1996 banned the use of race and sex in university admissions, hiring, and state agency contracts. If the measure passes, the state will return to the days of rank discrimination and mismatching minority applicants with universities, setting them up for failure.

Like the current riots, the restoration of affirmative action will empower illiberal identity politics and the victim-narratives they reflect.

Proponents of undoing 209, of course, trot out melodramas of devastated black and Latino applicants and their shattered dreams. In truth, ending affirmative action did not stop protected applicants from going to college. It stopped the flagship campuses Cal Berkeley and UCLA from skimming minority candidates who were not prepared for the greater rigor of those two universities. Now they attended less prestigious campuses like Riverside or Merced, for which they are better qualified based on their academic record and test scores––exactly what happens with Caucasians, who now comprise, by the way, only one-fifth of U.C. students. And despite the predictions of Armaggedon for minority students, their performance has improved since Prop 209, because they no longer are “mismatched” to universities, as Richard Sander and Stuart Taylor Jr. document in their 2012 book Mismatch. Minority graduation rates, grade-point averages, and majors in science or engineering all have increased after 209.