RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://thefederalist.com/2020/06/04/bill-de-blasio-is-a-cowardly-tyrant-fueling-new-yorks-demise/

In Bill de Blasio’s world, during a pandemic, rioters have a right to non-peaceable assembly, but law-abiding religious believers have no right to meet peacefully.

The grave injustice inflicted upon one person is now being compounded into a grave injustice for millions of New Yorkers.

It took decades to bring New York City back from the brink — facing crime, squalor, and bankruptcy — to the peace and prosperity that has marked it since Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s tenure. Today, Mayor Bill de Blasio seems intent on sending the city back to the bad old days, threatening to undo decades of progress while operating under the banner of “progressivism.”

The twin crises of the Chinese coronavirus and the present rioting and looting have created the perfect storm for the city’s demise. In response to the Wuhan virus, New York City committed willful economic suicide, and in response to the current lawlessness, NYC called for curfews it failed to impose, encouraging its descent into chaos.

While the crippling coronavirus shutdown can perhaps best be attributed to incompetence, there is no such excuse for permitting New York’s streets to become a war zone. The latter represents a failure of the most basic duty of our elected officials to protect our lives, liberty, and property.

The Mayor Has Failed His Most Basic Tasks

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/new-floyd-murder-charges-will-be-tough-to-prove-and-may-imperil-good-cops/

In a politically charged case, it is more important, not less, to get the charges right.

Prosecutors in Minnesota have filed an amended complaint against Derek Chauvin for the killing of George Floyd, adding a second-degree “felony murder” charge. This dangerously flawed theory could be used to portray any police restraint of a resistant suspect as criminal assault.

The amended complaint against Chauvin also re-alleges the two homicide charges originally filed last week: third-degree “depraved indifference” murder and second-degree manslaughter, both of which better fit the facts of the case while posing no risk of criminalizing the legitimate use of force by good cops.

Separately, the other three fired Minneapolis police officers involved in the killing have been charged, after a week of demands by the Floyd family, as well as intense anti-police rhetoric (and worse) by Black Lives Matter activists and protesters.

Tou Thao, J. Alexander Kueng, and Thomas Lane are charged with aiding and abetting both second-degree murder (the new charge against Chauvin) and manslaughter. Weirdly, under the circumstances, the three are not charged with the “depraved indifference” murder count; nor are they accused of committing manslaughter as principals — they are charged only as aiders and abettors, a theory that does not jibe with a negligence charge such as second-degree manslaughter (which is negligent homicide under Minnesota law).

COVID-19 has proved to be a crisis not only for public health but for public policy. As credentialed experts, media commentators, and elected officials have insisted that ordinary men and women heed “the science,” the statistical models cited by scientists to predict the spread of contagion and justify the lockdown of the national economy have proven to be far off-base.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York complained this week about the “guessing business” experts had presented to him dressed up as scientific fact: “All the early national experts [said]: Here’s my projection model. Here’s my projection model,” Cuomo said. “They were all wrong. They were all wrong.”

Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London, whose computer modeling of the coronavirus predicted up to 2.2 million U.S. deaths. He has since resigned.

A computer model produced by statisticians at Imperial College London had an outsized effect on government policy, predicting up to 2.2 million American deaths from the new coronavirus and as many as 9.6 million people requiring hospitalization. Instead, emergency rooms and hospital beds in all but the few hardest hit cities remained empty; rather than being overwhelmed by cases, many doctors and nurses found themselves out of work.

As the staggering social and economic costs of shutdown have become painfully clear, the failure of the models to accurately anticipate what would happen is raising questions about their use to justify life-altering public policies.

If computer models projecting the near-term future of an epidemic were so wrong, what does that mean for the far more complicated computer models predicting the far-off future of the entire planet?