Now We’ll See How the Snowflake Generation Handles the Barbarians By Rick Moran

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/05/29/now-well-see-how-the-snowflake-generation-handles-the-barbarians-n456612

“The torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans,” President John F. Kennedy said at his inaugural in 1961. Today, this generation is passing that torch to invite a new generation of barbarians to burn and loot and pillage, not serve and protect.

The modern urban mayor is epitomized by Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, who has chosen not to crack down on the barbarians torching his city, but encourages them to keep the flames hot because “The symbolism of a building cannot outweigh the importance of life.” That laughable, sophomoric statement isn’t going to save anyone or any structure.

That building is not a “symbol.” It has value to the person who owns it. And that’s the problem with Frey and the generation of snowflakes who are moving into positions of power and responsibility. Quite simply, they don’t believe in private property. In fact, they see private property as a genuine evil. So, of course, it doesn’t matter if you burn it. It’s not worth protecting.

We saw this same attitude in Baltimore in 2015 when Mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake expressed the notion that protesters should be given space to destroy.

Rioters Destroy Bar That Black Minneapolis Firefighter Bought with His Life Savings By Zachary Evans

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/rioters-destroy-bar-that-black-minneapolis-firefighter-bought-with-his-life-savings/

Rioters protesting the death of Minneapolis resident George Floyd, an African-American man who died after being arrested and pinned to the ground by officer Derek Chauvin, destroyed a bar owned by a black former firefighter Wednesday night.

Korboi Balla had invested his life savings in the bar and was planning to open it before the coronavirus pandemic caused mass business closures. Balla then moved the opening date to June 1, when Minnesota plans to lift restrictions on restaurants, but the bar has since been wracked and looted in the riots, CBS first reported.

CBS was filming a segment at the bar when looters entered through the back of the establishment to try to steal Balla’s safe.

“I don’t know what we’re going to do,” Balla said in an interview. “It hurts, man. It’s not fair, it’s not right. We’ve been working so hard for this place. It’s not just for me, it’s for my family.”

Balla’s wife Tywanna said that the bar was not insured.

Media This Is Easy: Don’t Excuse, Defend, or Encourage Rioters By Kyle Smith

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/this-is-easy-dont-excuse-defend-or-encourage-rioters/

The Left’s privileged commentators don’t have to worry about losing their homes or businesses.

Why do they keep doing it? Decade after decade, generation after generation, progressives keep making the same, elemental mistake: They downplay, excuse, and in extreme cases even encourage urban rioters.

We’ve been down this road before, and it’s a straight stretch of highway with no twists whatsoever. It would take a moral moron to get lost on it, and yet somehow progressives keep managing to do so. This isn’t hard. The people of Minneapolis are right to be angry about the savage death of George Floyd, but rioting will not bring him back or honor his memory, and the riots will make everything even worse. The Democrats and the media should be shouting as loudly as they can: Stop what you’re doing, you’re hurting your cause.

The person closest to Floyd — the deceased man’s girlfriend, Courteney Ross — made exactly this point: “Waking up this morning to see Minneapolis on fire would be something that would devastate” Floyd, Ross told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune. “He loved the city. He came here [from Houston] and stayed here for the people and the opportunities.” She added that people should “know that I understand their frustration” but “I want people to protest in a peaceful way.”

Yet all over the media, progressives are in effect rubbishing these wishes. They support the riots, starting by downplaying the nightmare in Minneapolis as a series of mere “protests” (no, those are what Martin Luther King Jr. engineered — and they worked). Once you’ve reconceived destruction as mere expression, you’ve mentally prepared yourself to take the side of the destroyers.

Amy Klobuchar Takes a Big Hit By John McCormack

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/amy-klobuchar-takes-a-big-hit/

The former prosecutor faces scrutiny over decisions not to prosecute police officers in Minneapolis.

As Minneapolis burned this week, so too did Amy Klobuchar’s prospects of becoming Joe Biden’s running mate.

Just six weeks ago, Klobuchar looked like the frontrunner in the 2020 Democratic veepstakes, but the Minnesota senator happens to be the former top prosecutor in Hennepin County, home to Minneapolis, and she is facing an increasing amount of scrutiny over her record of not prosecuting several police officers facing allegations of excessive force.

“Amy Klobuchar didn’t prosecute officer at center of George Floyd’s death after previous conduct complaints,” reads the headline at The Week. The police officer seen kneeling on Floyd’s neck was involved in the killing of another suspect who allegedly pulled a gun. The final decision not to prosecute was made after Klobuchar left the job, but as the Washington Post reported in March, Klobuchar “declined to bring charges in more than two dozen cases in which people were killed in encounters with police.”

Assume for the sake of argument that the facts in each case vindicate Klobuchar’s decision not to prosecute. Can Biden really pick her if she’s seen as turning a blind eye to police brutality, even if that view is unfair?

David Wasserman of the Cook Political Report goes so far as to say that “Amy Klobuchar is off the list now” to be Biden’s running mate. It’s not clear her odds are nil, but they have taken a huge hit.

Who benefits? Kamala Harris is the odds-on favorite on the betting and prediction websites, but the firestorm in Minnesota threatens to engulf her VP prospects as well.

The End of Hong Kong?

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/05/the-end-of-hong-kong/

The 1997 handover of Hong Kong from Britain to the People’s Republic of China marked the end of Western colonial rule in the region. Optimistic Western policy hands hoped that the final mending of the “unequal treaties,” as they were called by the Chinese Communist Party, would initiate Beijing’s integration into the rules-based world order.

Recent events in Hong Kong put paid to this hope.

The days of China’s “peaceful rise,” when the CCP steadfastly denied its hegemonic ambitions, are long gone. In light of China’s clampdown on Hong Kong, the transfer of the autonomous region now appears to have entailed swapping one imperial government for another. As if to remove any doubt, China’s National People’s Congress bypassed the Hong Kong Legislative Council this week and imposed a new national-security law. The law, which bans all “seditious activity,” effectively nullifies the Hong Kong Basic Law according to which the territory is guaranteed autonomy from the Mainland until 2047.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo responded appropriately in announcing that, under the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act passed last year, Washington would no longer consider Hong Kong independent of China. The White House will reconsider the privileges and immunities granted to the autonomous region, including its preferential trade status, visa exemptions, and flexible foreign-exchange regime.

Critics argue that the measures will cause undue economic harm to the region. Hong Kong’s economy will suffer, but the millions of Hong Kongers who have taken to the streets in protest have demonstrated in no uncertain terms that they value freedom over GDP growth. Indeed, the rule of law is what allowed Hong Kong to build a thriving economy in the first place. The short-term harms from reduced trade and investment pale in comparison to the disaster of Mainland dominance of Hong Kong. Worse, allowing China to violate the 1984 Sino–British Joint Declaration, registered at the U.N., will send a signal that the U.S. is unwilling to stand by a basic element of the international order.

Run the Numbers, Survey the Folly Peter L. Swan

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2020/05/run-the-numbers-survey-the-folly/

As of May 22, Australia had suffered 7,088 cases of COVID-19 and 102 people who died with the virus, the majority were males between 70 and 89. A sizeable proportion of those admitted to hospitals’ intensive care unitss were suffering from comorbidity issues such as cardiac disease and diabetes. Australia’s Chief Medical Officer (CMO) has told a Senate Inquiry that the Australian government’s actions in locking down the economy saved 14,000 lives.

In the meantime, Camilla Stoltenberg, director of Norway’s public health agency, has confessed:

Our assessment now, and I find that there is a broad consensus in relation to the reopening, was that one could probably achieve the same effect – and avoid part of the unfortunate repercussions – by not closing. But, instead, staying open with precautions to stop the spread.

The cost to the Australian economy of the global pandemic could be as high as one thousand billion dollars with an additional direct cost to the taxpayer of $260 billion this year alone. It will be a while before our Prime Minister and the premiers admit the lockdown was entirely unnecessary and unjustified.

Rampant alarmism

With the support of 289 or more top economists, four economists, Edmond, Hamilton, Holden and Preston (2020) deny “that there is a trade-off between the public health and economic aspects of the crisis.” I answered this here. Two of the four, Richard Holden and Bruce Preston estimate that without lockdowns and similar interventions, but presumably with voluntary social distancing, 90 per cent of our population of 25.5 million would have resulted in 225,000 deaths, based on an assumed fatality rate of 1 per cent, and yielding an incredible rate of 882 deaths per 100,000 residents.

The claimed deaths saved are higher than argued by Australia’s CMO by a factor of 16 times. The same methodology yields nearly three million COVID deaths in the U.S. and seventy million deaths globally. But is this simply fanciful alarmism and fearmongering designed to frighten all Australians into acceptance of continuing lockdowns and restrictions on normal life, or is it an astute economic analysis?

The Delusional Premises of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez byEdward Ring

https://amgreatness.com/2020/05/21/the-delusional-premises-of-alexandria-ocasio-cortez/

Welcome to yet another example of the nexus between climate change alarmism and a socialist redistribution agenda fueled by racial resentment. That may be old news to those of us paying attention, but thanks to birdbrained stooges like U.S. Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) the blatant race-baiting rhetoric is being turned up a notch.

And why not? If you’re a socialist, or a globalist, there is only upside to tagging nations of European heritage with guilt for the problems facing their “communities of color,” or the problems in the rest of the non-European world. It would be far too painful to consider the alternative explanation, which is that socialism, in all of its antecedents and derivatives, is the primary cause of the societal afflictions that plague “people of color” both in America and abroad.

Deconstructing Ocasio-Cortez’s convoluted logic isn’t hard intellectually, but the implications are hard indeed, at least for anyone who shares her delusional worldview.

Her arguments rest on three premises that build upon one another, and all of them are easily shattered by hard facts. Those premises are: 1) White racism is pervasive and explains income inequality; 2) climate change is an ongoing catastrophe that primarily harms “people of color”; 3) and socialism is the solution.

The pandemic pattern—how the illusion is built by Jon Rappoport

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2020/05/29/the-pandemic-pattern-how-the-illusio

This article is based on my study and investigation of so-called epidemics over the past 30 years.

In the case of COVID-19, I’ve written at least one piece covering, in detail, each main element of the illusion. Here, I’m laying out the pattern. It is the same for each fake epidemic.

ONE: A structure is in place to promote and launch the IDEA of an epidemic. World Health Organization, CDC, influential public health officials attached to governments around the world, etc.

TWO: There is a purported incident. An outbreak. The most obvious cause is intentionally overlooked. For example, horrendous air pollution, or the grotesque feces and urine pollution on a giant commercial pig factory-farm. Instead, the world is told a new virus has been found. Local researchers, if any, are augmented by researchers from CDC, WHO.

THREE: There is no air-tight chain of evidence explaining exactly how the purported new virus was discovered. From details released, there is no proof of discovery by convincing methods, no proper unified study of MANY supposed epidemic patients.

FOUR: But WHO/CDC tells the world this is an epidemic in the making, caused by the new virus. The promotion and propaganda/media apparatus moves into high gear. Ominous pronouncements.

The delusion called Fauci Jon Rappoport

https://nomorefakenews.com/

This one was too good to pass up.

In an interview with the National Geographic, Tony Fauci made comments about “alternative views” of the origin of the coronavirus.  But he was really talking about all unorthodox medical information:

“Anybody can claim to be an expert even when they have no idea what they’re talking about—and it’s very difficult for the general public to distinguish. So, make sure the study is coming from a reputable organization that generally gives you the truth—though even with some reputable organizations, you occasionally get an outlier who’s out there talking nonsense. If something is published in places like New England Journal of Medicine, Science, Nature, Cell, or JAMA—you know, generally that is quite well peer-reviewed because the editors and the editorial staff of those journals really take things very seriously.”

Right you are, Tony.

So, Tony, here is a very serious statement from a former editor of one of those “places,” the New England Journal of Medicine:

“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.” (Dr. Marcia Angell, NY Review of Books, January 15, 2009, “Drug Companies & Doctors: A Story of Corruption)

And here is another one, from the editor-in-chief of the prestigious journal, The Lancet, founded in 1823:

“The case against science is straightforward: much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness…”

Exposing the hoax by Andrew C. McCarthy

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/exposing-the-hoax

No need to build to a crescendo — let’s just say it: The Trump-Russia investigation was a politically driven fraud from beginning to end. It was opened on false pretenses, sustained by investigative abuses, and will undoubtedly end in recriminatory angst, which is what happens when the kind of accountability the victims demand does not, indeed cannot, come to pass.

Worst of all is the damage wrought, though even that isn’t fully understood. Obama administration officials exploited the awesome national security powers that we trust our government to use for counterintelligence operations that safeguard America from jihadists and other foreign hostiles. Because of the abuse, and the growing awareness that few of the abusers will be held to meaningful account, those powers have lost the solid constituency they had maintained in Congress for nearly two decades. Thus, this episode will prove to be a catastrophe for American national security.

Last August, I released Ball of Collusion. As a former longtime federal law enforcement official who is proud of that service, I had come reluctantly to the realization that the Trump-Russia escapade was less an investigation than a political narrative — hence the book’s subtitle, The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency. In fact, it would be more accurate to say I had been dragged to it, kicking and screaming. In the early days, friends of mine, both pro-Trump and Trump-skeptic, asked me if it was possible that the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice had brought an uncorroborated screed of innuendo (under the guise of campaign opposition research) to the secret federal tribunal that issues foreign-intelligence surveillance warrants, in order to monitor the Trump campaign. Confidently, I assured them that that was inconceivable.