Here are your future Judges, Police Officers and oth­er pub­lic offi­cials, here are your pri­vate sec­tor offi­cials.
Welcome to America 2018.

In the pho­to, near­ly all of the 63 boys appear to make the Sieg Heil salute before their junior prom in the spring at Baraboo High School. Lori Mueller, of the Baraboo School District, said Monday via Twitter that the dis­trict will pur­sue all avail­able options, includ­ing legal action, in response to the pho­to. The school dis­trict and local author­i­ties con­tin­ue to inves­ti­gate, speak­ing with the stu­dents and fam­i­lies involved to deter­mine how and why this was tak­en. Baraboo is a town of about 12,000 res­i­dents that is about 115 miles (185 kilo­me­ters) north­west of Milwaukee. Mueller says the pho­to does­n’t reflect the dis­tric­t’s val­ues and that admin­is­tra­tors will pur­sue appro­pri­ate action. Mueller said the pho­to appears to have been tak­en last spring and was­n’t on school grounds. The Auschwitz Memorial in Poland released a state­ment Monday empha­siz­ing that the pho­to is one of the rea­sons chil­dren must con­tin­ue to be taught about the bru­tal­i­ty of what the Nazis did. http://​cute​nails​de​signs​.net/​2​0​1​8​/​1​1​/​1​3​/​w​i​s​c​o​n​s​i​n​-​s​t​u​d​e​n​t​s​-​t​h​r​o​w​-​u​p​-​s​i​g​-​h​e​i​l​-​i​n​-​p​r​o​m​-​p​h​o​t​o​.​h​tml

This is Mississippi Republican US Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, mak­ing a flip ref­er­ence to a “pub­lic hang­ing” is incens­ing vot­ers in a spe­cial elec­tion runoff, draw­ing atten­tion to the state’s his­to­ry of lynch­ing and boost­ing Democrats’ hope of pulling off a stun­ner in the Deep South. Republican Cindy Hyde-Smith is fac­ing for­mer con­gress­man and for­mer U.S. agri­cul­ture sec­re­tary Mike Espy, a black Democrat, in a runoff Nov. 27. She was cap­tured on video prais­ing a sup­port­er by declar­ing, “If he invit­ed me to a pub­lic hang­ing, I’d be on the front row.” After the video was made pub­lic Sunday, Hyde-Smith said her remark Nov. 2 at a cam­paign event in Tupelo was “an exag­ger­at­ed expres­sion of regard” for a friend who invit­ed her to speak. “Any attempt to turn this into a neg­a­tive con­no­ta­tion is ridicu­lous,” she said.spy on Monday called the remark “dis­ap­point­ing and harm­ful.” “It rein­forces stereo­types that we’ve been try­ing to get away from for decades, stereo­types that con­tin­ue to harm our econ­o­my and cost us jobs,” he told MSNBC’s, Chris Matthews. At a news con­fer­ence Monday with Republican Gov. Phil Bryant by her side, a stone-faced Hyde-Smith refused to answer ques­tions about the hang­ing remark. “I put out a state­ment yes­ter­day, and that’s all I’m going to say about it,” she said. https://​www​.brownsville​herald​.com/​n​e​w​s​/​e​l​e​c​t​i​o​n​s​/​m​i​s​s​i​s​s​i​p​p​i​-​u​s​-​s​e​n​a​t​o​r​-​w​o​n​-​t​-​d​i​s​c​u​s​s​-​p​u​b​l​i​c​-​h​a​n​g​i​n​g​-​r​e​m​a​r​k​/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​_​d​1​f​b​0​e​8​0​-​2​3​0​f​-​5​6​a​2​-​8​f​0​9​-​8​2​7​3​d​2​e​7​1​a​6​7​.​h​tml 

Black Republicanism is a real apho­rism, how­ev­er, in some ways, it seems as log­i­cal as walk­ing in an East-Westerly direc­tion, such is the inher­ent con­tra­dic­tion of it.

The strug­gle to under­stand the idea of Blacks align­ing them­selves with the Republican par­ty or sup­port­ing the par­ty’s agen­da is a real phe­nom­e­non. Nevertheless, it also begs the ques­tion why have some Blacks in oth­er parts of the world still see the Republican par­ty as an enti­ty wor­thy of their sup­port?

If some­one was to ask me what is it that most black peo­ple who sup­port the Republican par­ty have missed?.….…. I would read­i­ly respond that they missed the fact that the two polit­i­cal par­ties switched roles in the ear­ly 1960’s.
Conversely, If I was asked what is it which caus­es any black per­son to still sup­port the Republican Party, I would read­i­ly opine that the eman­ci­pa­tion procla­ma­tion signed by the then Republican pres­i­dent Abraham Lincoln still have some star­ry-eyed about the par­ty to this very day.

The Emancipation Proclamation of January 1, 1863, may be looked at in its most sim­plis­tic form a‑la the unde­ni­able fact that 3.5 mil­lion enslaved African Americans in the des­ig­nat­ed areas of the South were moved from slave to a sense of pseu­do-free­dom.
Or we can scratch the sur­face and look at some hard facts as it relates to the mythol­o­gy sur­round­ing Lincoln’s valian­cy in sign­ing the Emancipation Proclamation. After three(3) years of a bloody civ­il war, Lincoln des­per­ate­ly need­ed bod­ies to fight his war.

The Emancipation Proclamation was lim­it­ed in many ways. It applied only to states that had seced­ed from the United States, leav­ing slav­ery untouched in the loy­al bor­der states. It also express­ly exempt­ed parts of the Confederacy (the Southern seces­sion­ist states) that had already come under Northern con­trol. Most impor­tant, the free­dom it promised depend­ed upon Union (United States) mil­i­tary vic­to­ry. Source[archives.gov]

Although the Emancipation Proclamation did not end slav­ery in the nation, it cap­tured the hearts and imag­i­na­tion of mil­lions of Americans and fun­da­men­tal­ly trans­formed the char­ac­ter of the war. After January 1, 1863, every advance of fed­er­al troops expand­ed the domain of free­dom. Moreover, the Proclamation announced the accep­tance of black men into the Union Army and Navy, enabling the lib­er­at­ed to become lib­er­a­tors. By the end of the war, almost 200,000 black sol­diers and sailors had fought for the Union and freedom.

According to [ Dr. Terry L. Jones of thep​iney​woods​.com] Lincoln became known as “The Great Emancipator,” but in real­i­ty, the Emancipation Proclamation’s promise of free­dom inten­tion­al­ly exclud­ed some 800,000 slaves-many of whom lived in Louisiana as well.
Some his­to­ri­ans have argued that Lincoln hat­ed Slavery, how­ev­er, in a pub­lic let­ter to the New York Tribune pub­lished just a month before he issued the Preliminary Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln declared “My para­mount objec­tive in this strug­gle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slav­ery. If I could save the Union with­out free­ing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by free­ing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by free­ing some and leav­ing oth­ers alone I would also do that.”
Yea, the Great Emancipator had no deep burn­ing desire in his gut to erad­i­cate the scourge of slav­ery, for him what­ev­er he would do about it had to jus­ti­fy his own end.

Emancipation, how­ev­er, was a com­pli­cat­ed mat­ter because most Northerners were fight­ing to restore the Union and had no inter­est in free­ing the slaves. To win the war, it was absolute­ly vital that Lincoln keep the slave-hold­ing Border States on his side, not to men­tion the thou­sands of slave-own­ing Southerners who had opposed seces­sion and were pro­vid­ing impor­tant sup­port to the Union.

Lincoln knew that if he attempt­ed to free all of the slaves, loy­al slave own­ers in Missouri, Kentucky, Maryland, and Delaware, and in the Union-con­trolled areas of the Confederacy, might well join the Rebels to pro­tect their valu­able slave prop­er­ty. To pre­vent that from hap­pen­ing, the Emancipation Proclamation care­ful­ly avoid­ed free­ing the slaves held by most Unionists.


Lincoln real­ized that slav­ery helped the Confederacy wage its war for inde­pen­dence. Slaves per­formed most of the labor in the South con­struct­ing Rebel mil­i­tary for­ti­fi­ca­tions, work­ing in muni­tions fac­to­ries, and har­vest­ing the food that fed the Confederate army. Every slave who worked in such a man­ner freed up a white man to serve in the army. Source [ Dr. Terry L. Jones]

Probably, the most impor­tant issue of the conun­drum Lincoln faced was the need to adopt­ing eman­ci­pa­tion as an offi­cial war goal also would make it less like­ly that the anti-slav­ery Europeans would inter­vene on the side of the Confederacy.
Lincoln was sin­gu­lar­ly focused on main­tain­ing the Union. If the French entered the war to pro­tect their ter­ri­to­ry of Louisana America as we know it today may well have been only a dream.

The cal­cu­lat­ed nature of the procla­ma­tion was not lost on peo­ple at the time, accord­ing to Professor Jones, one British news­pa­per not­ed, “The prin­ci­ple assert­ed is not that a human being can­not just­ly own anoth­er, but that he can­not own him unless he is loy­al to the United States.“


Even so, the {eman­ci­pa­tion procla­ma­tion} meant that the enslaved African-America pop­u­la­tion toil­ing end­less­ly in degrad­ing servi­tude could have some­thing to look for­ward to, a start­ing point on what would become a seem­ing­ly end­less sojourn to self-auton­o­my and cit­i­zen­ship.
Little did they know that even though the eman­ci­pa­tion procla­ma­tion would to some degree, remove the lit­er­al chains from their ankles, dark forces were already hard at work cre­at­ing an equal­ly brutish sys­tem known as [Jim Crow], which all but made the new­ly lib­er­at­ed blacks slaves again to the very mas­ters from whom they were just freed.

Like two trav­el­ers cross­ing paths in the dark the Republican par­ty which for what its worth, was the par­ty of eman­ci­pa­tion became the polit­i­cal par­ty to which white men ran after President Lyndon B. Johnson signed into law the his­toric Civil Rights Act in a nation­al­ly tele­vised cer­e­mo­ny at the White House.
The Democratic Party was now the par­ty that looked out for the rights of blacks and whites were piss­ing mad.
For the aver­age white man, the negro had no right they should respect.

President Lyndon Johnson has been rumored to have said “We have lost the South for a gen­er­a­tion,” Johnson told an aide after he signed the 1964 Civil Rights Act. 
Dr. Steven J. Allen of cap​i​tal​re​search​.org push­es back against the asser­tion that Johnson ever made those com­ments.
Allen’s argu­ments are root­ed in the con­cept that if LBJ had made those com­ments, he would have been wrong. The Goldwater surge in the South„ he argues fad­ed quick­ly. With a hand­ful of excep­tions, Republican gains in the region in 1964 van­ished by 1966. Decades passed with Democrats still in firm con­trol of the South. 
In seek­ing to label those with whom he dis­agrees, like the Reverend Al Sharpton whom he tar­nish­es pejo­ra­tive­ly a ‘racist preach­er”, Allen for­got that President Johnson could have made the state­ment and be wrong, could have made the state­ment and be right even­tu­al­ly, and that there was no mutu­al exclu­siv­i­ty between com­pet­ing events.

Dr. Steven J. Allen, in seek­ing to estab­lish that the state­ment attrib­uted to President Johnson was a myth, inher­ent­ly failed to speak to the irrefutable fact that for decades after the sign­ing of the civ­il rights act, to the present day, the entire south has been a bas­tion of Republicanism.
An almost impen­e­tra­ble gar­ri­son which has hard­ly seen a Democrat car­ry a south­ern state, out­side Florida except for Carter who won his home state of Georgia, Bill Clinton who car­ried Arkansas and Al Gore win­ning Tennessee.

The laugh­able truth being ignored by Allen is that, whether Johnson said “we lost the south for gen­er­a­tions” or not is man­i­fest­ly unim­por­tant.
The Democratic par­ty even­tu­al­ly lost the south and parts beyond even­tu­al­ly. As a con­sol­i­da­tion of pur­pose devel­oped to re-lit­i­gate, if not retool for a new war under the mantra the south will rise again.

It prob­a­bly makes more sense to lay out the gross atroc­i­ties which the Republican Party has vis­it­ed on peo­ple of col­or since the par­ty took over the per­se­cu­tion of black peo­ple from the south­ern Democrats.
 Voter sup­pres­sion. Police bru­tal­i­ty. Blatant Racism and the list goes on and on. However, no Republican ini­tia­tive has been more detri­men­tal to African-Americans than the Nixon so-called war on drugs, con­tin­ued through Ford, Reagan and Bush.
In the peri­od since the war on drugs was launched the American prison pop­u­la­tion has sky­rock­et­ed to over two mil­lion. Many of those caught in the drag­net have been low-lev­el non­vi­o­lent drug offend­ers who just hap­pen to be black.

Even as Republican poli­cies have packed the pris­ons with non­vi­o­lent drug offend­ers, and result­ed in the depor­ta­tion of count­less oth­ers, state leg­is­la­tures con­trolled by Republicans have passed laws that make it impos­si­ble for offend­ers who have done time in prison to vote after they have paid their debt to soci­ety.
This has ren­dered a huge seg­ment of the male black pop­u­la­tion not just felons but made them unem­ploy­able and with­out the abil­i­ty to chose their lead­ers.
In many cas­es, they are denied basic ben­e­fits such as food stamps for the rest of their lives, that includes preg­nant women, peo­ple in drug treat­ment or recov­ery, and peo­ple suf­fer­ing from HIV/​AIDS sim­ply because they were once caught with drugs.
These racist dra­con­ian poli­cies ensure the recidi­vism of blacks and ensure that pris­ons remain filled with black bodies.

Speaking to this in her best sell­ing book [the new Jim Crow] Lawyer, Activist and Author Michelle Alexander said;” If shack­ling for­mer pris­on­ers with a life­time of debt and autho­riz­ing dis­crim­i­na­tion against them in employ­ment, hous­ing, edu­ca­tion, and pub­lic ben­e­fits is not enough to send the mes­sage that they are not want­ed and not even con­sid­ered full cit­i­zens, then strip­ping vot­ing rights from those labeled crim­i­nals sure­ly gets the point across.”

I will prob­a­bly not change a sin­gle mind of the black peo­ple who vote Republican.
That was not my inten­tion, what I set out to do in this piece was to estab­lish a fac­tu­al foun­da­tion that puts to rest the friv­o­lous argu­ments around black peo­ple’s sup­port for a polit­i­cal par­ty which lit­er­al­ly hates them and has sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly worked toward their destruc­tion.
Black Republicanism is an oxy­moron that only makes sense if you are trav­el­ing in an east-west­er­ly direction.

Patriot Prayer’s leader is half-Japanese. Black and brown faces march with the Proud Boys. Is the future of hate multicultural?

PORTLAND, Oregon — Outfitted in a flak jack­et and fight­ing gloves, Enrique Tarrio was one of dozens of black, Latino, and Asian men who marched along­side white suprema­cists in Portland on Aug. 4.

Tarrio, who iden­ti­fies as Afro-Cuban, is pres­i­dent of the Miami chap­ter of the Proud Boys, who call them­selves “Western chau­vin­ists,” and “reg­u­lar­ly spout white-nation­al­ist memes and main­tain affil­i­a­tions with known extrem­ists,” accord­ing to the Southern Poverty Law Center. Last month, pri­or to the Patriot Prayer ral­ly he attend­ed in Portland, Tarrio was pic­tured with oth­er far-right activists mak­ing a hand sign that start­ed as a hoax but has become an in-joke. Last year, Tarrio said trav­eled to Charlottesville, Virginia, for the Unite the Rightral­ly that end­ed with a neo-Nazi alleged­ly killing an anti-fas­cist pro­test­er. (The Proud Boys said any mem­bers who went to the event were kicked out.)

Patriot Prayer + Proud Boys in Vancouver night b4 Aug 4 Portland ral­ly many fear will end in vio­lence. Tusitala “Tiny” Toese and oth­ers make an appar­ent “White Power” hand ges­ture. T‑shirts read, “Pinochet Did Nothing Wrong.”

“A lot of these young guys, espe­cial­ly from the soft­ware world, who are being sucked into white nation­al­ism, start out being worked up about Ayn Rand in high school.”— David Neiwert 

Tarrio and oth­er peo­ple of col­or at the far-right ral­lies claim insti­tu­tion­al racism no longer exists in America. In their view, blacks are to blame for any lin­ger­ing inequal­i­ty because they are depen­dent on wel­fare, lack strong lead­er­ship, and believe Democrats who tell them “You’re always going to be broke. You’re not going to make it in soci­ety because of insti­tu­tion­al racism,” as one mixed-race man put it.

If racism doesn’t exist, I ask Tarrio, how would he explain the dis­pro­por­tion­ate killing of young black men by police? “Hip-hop cul­ture,” he says. It “glo­ri­fies that lifestyle… of sell­ing drugs, shoot­ing up.” Because of that, “Obviously you’re going to have high­er crime rates. Obviously you’re going to have more police pres­ence and more con­fronta­tions.” (Police kill black males aged 15 to 34 at nine times the rate of the gen­er­al population.)

Elysa Sanchez, who is black and Puerto Rican, attend­ed the “Liberty or Death Rally Against Left-Wing Violence” in Seattle on Aug. 18, join­ing about 20 mili­ti­a­men open-car­ry­ing hand­guns and semi-auto­mat­ic rifles.

Sanchez says, “If black peo­ple are com­mit­ting more mur­ders, more rob­beries, more thefts, more vio­lent crime, that’s why you would see more black men hav­ing encoun­ters with the police.”

Also in Seattle, Franky Price, who said he is “black and white,”wore a T‑shirt read­ing, “It’s okay to be white.” Read more here: https://​www​.thedai​ly​beast​.com/​w​h​y​-​y​o​u​n​g​-​m​e​n​-​o​f​-​c​o​l​o​r​-​a​r​e​-​j​o​i​n​i​n​g​-​w​h​i​t​e​-​s​u​p​r​e​m​a​c​i​s​t​-​g​r​o​ups

It took them a while to do it and one has to won­der why? Even, when the evi­dence is glar­ing, there are hes­i­ta­tions to treat attacks on Black Americans as hate crimes?
That “it”, is rec­og­niz­ing that the brazen mur­der of two elder­ly black peo­ple in a Kentucky super­mar­ket was a hate crime.
As the Nation grieves the dead­liest attack on Jews in America’s his­to­ry, a case in which a right-wing hate mon­ger mas­sa­cred peo­ple sole­ly on the basis of their faith, the mur­der of two inno­cent African-Americans in a Kentucky Kroger gets shoved to the side.


‘Whites Don’t Shoot Whites,’ Said Alleged Kroger Shooter  Gregory Alan Bush when con­front­ed by an armed white man. The man did not shoot at him and so he hus­tled away before being tak­en alive by police.
You ever noticed how lit­er­al­ly all of these mur­der­ous losers always have three names, think about it? 

Now the evi­dence was always there that this was a racial­ly moti­vat­ed shoot­ing, he killed two black peo­ple and no one else. He tried enter­ing an African-American church before opt­ing for the Kroger super­mar­ket. And then he told a white man who might have nailed his sor­ry ass, that “whites do not kill whites.” Obviously, his the­o­ry had some res­o­nance with his white con­tem­po­rary as well as with the police, he was not killed by that man and he was cer­tain­ly tak­en alive by the police.

Bush report­ed­ly has a black ex-wife who said in court records that he called her a “nig­ger bitch.” [Lie with Dogs you rise with flees](sorry Bud).
The larg­er take­away which gen­er­al­ly gets lost in the shuf­fle is the skillset of police depart­ments across the coun­try.
They have the incred­i­ble abil­i­ty to take the most despi­ca­ble white mur­der­ers into cus­tody with­out harm­ing them.
I’m actu­al­ly sur­prised they did not take him to Burger King and got him a super­sized whop­per with extra fries and a large Frosty.


Yet two cow­ards wear­ing police uni­forms in the state of Florida could­n’t restrain a 14-year-old black girl with­out pum­melling her kid­neys in order to arrest her for the very seri­ous crime of talk­ing back at police.
These are the Gestapo tac­tics play­ing out across the coun­try, yet vio­lent white right-wing extrem­ist kill who they hate and are almost always tak­en into cus­tody alive.

As for African-American men whose only crimes is that they are occu­py­ing their black skins, it is quite com­mon to receive mul­ti­ple gun­shots to the back for sim­ply exist­ing.
In a very brief moment of time since Donald Trump has esca­lat­ed his war of words on the media and has declared pub­licly that he is a white Nationalist much has hap­pened.
Here are a few of the events which have occurred.

• September 26: Rep. Kia Morris resigns as the only black elect­ed offi­cial in Vermont after sus­tained racist threats and harassment.
  
• October 23: Georgia Republican guber­na­to­r­i­al nom­i­nee Brian Kemp (who also over­sees the governor’s elec­tion as Secretary of State) is caught on tape com­plain­ing that minori­ties might “Exercise their right to vote” in the governor’s race.
  
• October 23: President Donald Trump declares him­self a white nation­al­ist on nation­al tele­vi­sion dur­ing a ral­ly in Houston for his new best friend Senator Ted Cruz.
  
• October 24: Barack and Michelle Obama, Cory Booker, Eric Holder and Maxine Waters all receive pipe bombs in the mail from a racist Trump sup­port­er (do we need to real­ly spec­i­fy that any­more?) Cesar Sayoc who is cap­tured just days lat­er. Unharmed.
  
• October 24: 51-year-old, white male Gregory Bush goes on a shoot­ing spree in a Kentucky gro­cery store, killing two African Americans, alleged­ly spar­ing white peo­ple by declar­ing “Whites don’t shoot whites.” He planned on tar­get­ing a near­by black church had he not been appre­hend­ed. Alive of course.
  
• October 27: At least 11 peo­ple are killed in a Pittsburgh syn­a­gogue and Robert D. Bowers, 46, the man charged with the killings, is revealed to have anti­se­mit­ic views, report­ed­ly shout­ing them dur­ing the shooting.

Harriet Tubman was quot­ed as hav­ing said “I saved a thou­sand slaves and could have saved thou­sands more, if only they knew they were slaves’.


We know that not every Black per­son act or think the same way, we are all dif­fer­ent human beings but lordy.

While you were divert­ed by the rash of bombs sent to two pre­vi­ous Democratic pres­i­dents and their fam­i­lies, Vice President Joe Biden a mem­ber of Congress and oth­er promi­nent Trump crit­ics a white wing domes­tic ter­ror­ist walked into a Kroger in Kentucky and killed two African-Americans.

The main­stream media in the mean­time is heav­i­ly invest­ed in chas­ing the lat­est shiny object Trump throws them while this egre­gious inci­dent has gone on with­out any report­ing to date.

The Kroger where Gregory Bush killed two black people he didn’t know appears to have been his plan B, after a failed attempt to replicate Dylann Roof.

A 51-year-old man who killed two peo­ple at a Kentucky gro­cery and was sub­dued by a civil­ian who told him that “whites don’t shoot whites” had ear­li­er tried to enter a church with a pre­dom­i­nant­ly black con­gre­ga­tion, police con­firmed late Thursday.

Though chief of police Sam Rogers refused to “spec­u­late on motive at this time” dur­ing an after­noon news con­fer­ence in Jeffersontown, Kentucky, the killer’s failed attempt to enter the town’s First Baptist church was caught on video. Though the church wel­comes all com­ers, it “is head­ed by a black pas­tor and has a large African-American mem­ber­ship” accord­ing to the Associated Press.

Predominantly black con­gre­ga­tions of Baptists have been close­ly linked to strug­gles for social, legal, and eco­nom­ic equal­i­ty for African American peo­ple in the U.S. for cen­turies. As such, they have repeat­ed­ly become tar­gets for racist vio­lence — includ­ing the mas­sacre of nine parish­ioners at a famed A.M.E. church in Charleston, South Carolina, dur­ing a mid-week bible study meet­ing by white suprema­cist Dylann Roof in 2015.

Jeffersontown’s First Baptist holds reg­u­lar Wednesday night ser­vices, as well as week­ly bible study groups and choir prac­tices. The killer tried to enter the church in the mid-after­noon, how­ev­er, and would like­ly not have found it crowd­ed had he been able to gain entry.

Rogers’ pro­fes­sion­al reluc­tance to spec­u­late on what moti­vat­ed Gregory Bush to kill two peo­ple in the large Louisville sub­urb on Wednesday is under­stand­able, but one detail from the son of the man who con­front­ed and sub­dued Bush before police had arrived sheds sub­stan­tial light on the killer’s brainwaves.

“He said, ‘Don’t shoot me, I won’t shoot you.’ He’s like, ‘Whites don’t kill whites,’” Steve Zinninger, son of the man who con­front­ed Bush out­side the store, told local WAVE‑3 News, explain­ing how his father had got­ten Bush to stop shoot­ing. Police seemed to con­tra­dict some details of Zinninger’s account, say­ing that the licensed firearm own­er who con­front­ed Bush had exchanged gun­fire with the man. They did not com­ment on the report­ed racial sol­i­dar­i­ty expressed between the two in the park­ing lot. 00:13 /​00:14SKIP AD

Both peo­ple Bush killed — a man inside the store, and a woman he pur­sued out of the store — were black.

Maurice Stallard, 69, was at the store buy­ing poster board for his grand­son, who the Courier-Journal reports was stand­ing next to him when he was killed. Friends described Stallard “as a warm, easy-going man who always greet­ed peo­ple with a hug” and “as a hard-work­ing fam­i­ly man,” the paper wrote.

Vickie Lee Jones, 67, lived a mile or so from the store and was in the park­ing lot when Bush shot and killed her. Family mem­bers told the Courier-Journal that Jones, a wid­ow since 2010, “had moved to Jeffersontown to be safe” and described her as “one of the sweet­est peo­ple you could know.”

Years before he attacked the two strangers — calm­ly hol­ster­ing his gun to walk out of the store between the two killings, accord­ing to local reports — Bush had showed signs of insta­bil­i­ty and vio­lence, fam­i­ly mem­bers told the Associated Press. He had attacked his elder­ly par­ents in 2009 and threat­ened his ex-wife dur­ing a court hear­ing the same year, the wire ser­vice report­ed.

Like Roof before him, Bush was brought in by police alive and unharmed. He has been charged with two counts of mur­der and sev­er­al less­er crimes relat­ed to dis­charg­ing a firearm in pub­lic.
https://​thinkprogress​.org/​r​a​c​i​s​t​-​s​h​o​o​t​e​r​-​b​l​a​c​k​-​c​h​u​r​c​h​-​k​e​n​t​u​c​k​y​-​4​4​d​1​c​b​5​9​3​a​75/

By Michael Harriot

This sto­ry is ridiculous.

This sto­ry is so ridicu­lous it will not dis­cuss library col­o­niza­tion, the trou­bling trend of peo­ple plan­ning book heists by con­ning their way into school facil­i­ties under the pre­tense of study­ing. The offend­ing par­ty in this tale does not require the req­ui­site nick­name. She shall not be called Laura the Librarian or Becky the Book Bouncer. We shall call ber Brittany McNerlin (or maybe “Brittni” with a heart over the i), because that is her name.

However, this sto­ry begs one question:

What’s the pur­pose of police?

Is their pur­pose to pro­tect and serve? Or are cops tools that can be weaponized at the behest of our white broth­ers and sis­ters who believe the world exists only to serve their desires, and there­fore, law enforce­ment is lit­tle more than a Caucasian cus­tomer com­plaint hotline?

This sto­ry begins on Oct. 10 when Juán-Pabló Gonźalez, a black stu­dent at the Catholic University of America, decid­ed he want­ed to study at the university’s law library. Gonźalez had been cor­rect­ly informed that as a Master of Library and Information Sciences stu­dent, he had access to the law library. He had stud­ied in the facil­i­ty on numer­ous occa­sions before and had no trou­ble in the past.

Although he was sup­posed to swipe his stu­dent iden­ti­fi­ca­tion card to gain entry, Gonźalez told The Root his ID nev­er worked at the building.

“I had just been ring­ing the buzzer, wait­ing for them to buzz me in and then show­ing them my ID to prove I was a library infor­ma­tion sci­ence stu­dent,” Gonźalez said. “And I was able to get in with­out any issues.”

But on this day, Gonźalez noticed the door was propped open when he arrived. Per his usu­al rou­tine, Gonzalez showed his ID and announced to McNerlin he would be study­ing in the law library.

“She was pret­ty rude,” Gonźalez recount­ed. “She said: ‘The law library is for law library stu­dents.’ So I told her that I real­ized that, but that we’d been giv­en per­mis­sion to use the library.”

When Gonźalez told her that he had spo­ken to the librar­i­an at the facil­i­ty, but couldn’t recall the name, McNerlin informed him he couldn’t come in; nei­ther would she offer a name to jog his memory.

“I tried to explain to her that, because we have a law librar­i­an pro­gram, we had access to the facil­i­ty,” Gonźalez said.

After a brief back and forth, the woman allowed Gonźalez o go study and told him she would leave a note say­ing she had benev­o­lent­ly grant­ed a black man access to the library with­out his free­dom papers.

“Because the entire trans­ac­tion was so neg­a­tive, I went back and said, ‘Can I have your supervisor’s infor­ma­tion?’ I didn’t say any­thing else,” Gonźalez said, to which she refused. “I said: ‘I’m ask­ing for the infor­ma­tion of the man­ag­ing librar­i­an of this facil­i­ty and you’re refus­ing? On what basis? Just because you don’t like the way I’m asking?’”

After McNerlin refused Gonźalez sec­ond request, she final­ly “snatched” a busi­ness card from the desk with the librarian’s information.

“I asked some more ques­tions about why she took so long to give me the infor­ma­tion … She said I was being argu­men­ta­tive and that she didn’t like my tone,” Gonźalez said, to which he replied: “I didn’t ask for your per­son­al opin­ion. I just asked for infor­ma­tion about this facil­i­ty so that I can use it.”

So McNerlin called the police.

When she informed Gonźalez she was alert­ing the author­i­ties, he asked her: “On what basis? Because you don’t like the ques­tions I’m asking?”

From there, Gonźalez began record­ing the inci­dent. The six-minute video shows that McNerlin does not appear to be in any immi­nent dan­ger and Gonźalez does not raise his voice above a calm half-whis­per. When the clip begins, McNerlin is on the phone telling the Catholic University Department of Public Safety about “an argu­men­ta­tive stu­dent,” which I didn’t even know was a legal­ly pun­ish­able offense.

That must make me a career crim­i­nal, then.

When Gonźalez specif­i­cal­ly asked McNerlin why their back-and-forth war­rant­ed a police call, she replied: “I’ve answered your ques­tions. You didn’t appre­ci­ate my answers …” She admits she has done this at least one oth­er time in a sit­u­a­tion “very sim­i­lar to this.”

Gonźalez offered to let the whole thing go if McNerlin called off the cops, ask­ing: “May I go into the library and you can­cel your call to the police?”

McNerlin wasn’t hav­ing it.

The most reveal­ing part of the video was when the when the Catholic University police offi­cers arrived. One would expect McNerlin to con­coct a har­row­ing sto­ry about how she felt threat­ened and how Gonźalez burst into the library and demand­ed that he stay.

Nah, bruh. She told them exact­ly what happened.

Summoning all of the aggriev­ed-white vic­tim­iza­tion her voice could muster, McNerlin calm­ly explained, with a straight face no less, that she called the police because Gonzalez ques­tioned her, made state­ments about the col­or of his skin, was “becom­ing argu­men­ta­tive,” and she “did not appre­ci­ate it.”

That was it. That was her entire expla­na­tion of why she called the police.

Gonźalez reports that at least sev­en offi­cers arrived before he was forced to leave. He explained to The Root that he filed a com­plaint against Mcnerlin, which the school said only war­rant­ed “addi­tion­al training.”

Gonźalez also met with human resource offi­cials from Catholic University who he says dis­missed his sto­ry until he showed them video evidence.

If you think Gonźalez was not in any immi­nent dan­ger, you should be remind­ed of Sam Dubose, who was shot and killed by University of Cincinnati Police offi­cer Ray Tensing in 2015.

Or maybe you’ve heard of Jason Washington, the Navy vet who was shot nine McNerlinMcNerlintimes by Portland State University offi­cers James Dewey and Shawn McKenzie way back in 2018.

Although they might look harm­less, Catholic University describes its police force this way:

Campus spe­cial police offi­cers are appoint­ed by the chief of police of the Metropolitan Police Department under the pro­vi­sions of the D.C. Official Code to pro­tect the cam­pus prop­er­ty of an aca­d­e­m­ic insti­tu­tion of high­er edu­ca­tion… Campus spe­cial police offi­cers have full police author­i­ty, includ­ing arrest pow­er, on the premis­es they are assigned to pro­tect or out­side of the premis­es in fresh pur­suit for offens­es com­mit­ted on the premises …

Persons arrest­ed by cam­pus spe­cial police offi­cers are trans­port­ed to a facil­i­ty of the Metropolitan Police Department for processing.

Gonźalez says he has encoun­tered pre­vi­ous inci­dents of racism as a stu­dent at Catholic, includ­ing notes with the n‑word being slipped under his dor­mi­to­ry room door and being ques­tioned by cam­pus police after some­one report­ed­ly called the cops on “two sus­pi­cious black males” stand­ing out­side their dorm.

“I’m not going to accept the racism that’s on this cam­pus. I’m not going to be qui­et, and I’m going to chal­lenge it,” he said.

Watch the entire inci­dent below:

In 15 days America goes to the polls to choose a new Congress. At stake are Governor-ships and elect­ed offices down the line to dog-catch­er.
The num­ber one issue fac­ing African-Americans, Native ‑Americans and oth­er peo­ple of col­or today dur­ing this cru­cial time are the road­blocks to vot­ing placed in their way by Republicans.

The Supreme Court in 2013 struck down parts of the Voting Rights Act. A 2016 report from the civ­il rights coali­tion Leadership Conference on CHR found local offi­cials had shut­tered 868 polling places in the 3 years after the rul­ing.
Since the rul­ing, a flood­gate of vot­er sup­pres­sion activ­i­ty has been unleashed almost sole­ly in states and munic­i­pal­i­ties with large African-American, Native ‑American and Latino communities.

In Georgia, the sit­ting sec­re­tary of state Brian Kemp is on the bal­lot as the GOP can­di­date for gov­er­nor against the Democrats Stacy Abrams a black woman who would become the nation’s first black female gov­er­nor.
That prospect may have to wait as Hillary Clinton found out, get­ting more than three mil­lion votes than your oppo­nent does not mean you have won.

In his role as ref­er­ee, and as Candidate, Brian Kemp has report­ed­ly purged more almost a mil­lion peo­ple from the state’s vot­ing rolls.
This purge for sim­ple things like infre­quent vot­ing, and what is called “exact match a law Kemp and his Republican friends cre­at­ed demands gives them the right to remove or at least pre­vent peo­ple from vot­ing for a sim­ple miss­ing hyphen in a name, or a mis­spelled name.

The most basic right of a cit­i­zen in a democ­ra­cy is the right to vote. Without this right, peo­ple can be eas­i­ly ignored and even abused by their gov­ern­ment. This, in fact, is what hap­pened to African-American cit­i­zens liv­ing in the South fol­low­ing Civil War Reconstruction. Despite the 14^th and 15^th Amendments guar­an­tee­ing the civ­il rights of black Americans, their right to vote was sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly tak­en away by white suprema­cist state gov­ern­ments.
So said: http://​www​.crf​-usa​.org

African-Americans have always faced hur­dles when try­ing to vote, this nation has a sor­did lega­cy of oppres­sion and sup­pres­sion.

In 1890, Mississippi held a con­ven­tion to write a new state con­sti­tu­tion to replace the one in force since Reconstruction. The white lead­ers of the con­ven­tion were clear about their inten­tions. “We came here to exclude the Negro,” declared the con­ven­tion pres­i­dent. Because of the 15^th Amendment, they could not ban blacks from vot­ing. Instead, they wrote into the state con­sti­tu­tion a num­ber of vot­er restric­tions mak­ing it dif­fi­cult for most blacks to reg­is­ter to vote. 

The imped­i­ments placed in the way of blacks are lurid and dis­grace­ful. Doctoral the­ses are writ­ten on the details of those tac­tics from being required to guess the num­ber of jel­ly-beans in a jar to violence.

Violence

In 1873, a gang of whites in Colfax, Louisiana mur­dered more than 100 blacks who were assem­bled to defend Republican office­hold­ers — this was, of course, back when Republicans had some sense. Federal pros­e­cu­tors indict­ed three of them, but the U.S. Supreme Court dis­missed the indict­ments in U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
Source: 
The Geography Of Race In The U.S.

Literacy Tests

Perhaps the first lit­er­a­cy test aimed at keep­ing blacks away from the bal­lot box was South Carolina’s noto­ri­ous “eight-box” bal­lot, adopt­ed in 1882. The test, as explained in “The Shaping of Southern Politics: Suffrage Restriction and the Establishment of the One-Party South” by J. Morgan Kousser and “The Law of Democracy,” by Samual Issacharoff, Pamela Karlan and Richard Pildeswent as follows:

Voters had to put bal­lots for sep­a­rate offices in sep­a­rate box­es. A bal­lot for the governor’s race put in the box for the sen­ate seat would be thrown out. The order of the box­es was con­tin­u­ous­ly shuf­fled, so that lit­er­ate peo­ple could not assist illit­er­ate vot­ers by arrang­ing their bal­lots in the prop­er order. The adop­tion of the secret bal­lot con­sti­tut­ed anoth­er implic­it lit­er­a­cy test, since it pro­hib­it­ed any­one from assist­ing an illit­er­ate vot­er in cast­ing his vote. In 1890, Southern states began to adopt explic­it lit­er­a­cy tests to dis­en­fran­chise vot­ers. This had a large dif­fer­en­tial racial impact, since 40 – 60% of blacks were illit­er­ate, com­pared to 8 – 18% of whites. Poor, illit­er­ate whites opposed the tests, real­iz­ing that they too would be dis­en­fran­chised.
Source:
 The Geography Of Race In The U.S.

Poll Taxes

If you didn’t have mon­ey, you didn’t have a vote:

Georgia ini­ti­at­ed the poll tax in 1871, and made it cumu­la­tive in 1877 (requir­ing cit­i­zens to pay all back tax­es before being per­mit­ted to vote). Every for­mer Confederate state fol­lowed its lead by 1904. Although these tax­es of $1-$2 per year may seem small, it was beyond the reach of many poor black and white share­crop­pers, who rarely dealt in cash. The Georgia poll tax prob­a­bly reduced over­all turnout by 16 – 28%, and black turnout in half (Kousser, The Shaping of Southern Politics, 67 – 8). The pur­pose of the tax was plain­ly to dis­en­fran­chise, not to col­lect rev­enue, since no state brought pros­e­cu­tions against any indi­vid­ual for fail­ure to pay the tax.



Source: The Geography Of Race In The U.S.


Sources: Voting Rights: The Poll Tax, Marion Butts Collection, Dallas Public Library and The Geography Of Race In The U.S.

Ridiculous Registration Practices

Even if blacks could read or had mon­ey, racist reg­is­tra­tion prac­tices were cre­at­ed to make their efforts to vote mis­er­able:
Southern states made reg­is­tra­tion dif­fi­cult, by requir­ing fre­quent re-reg­is­tra­tion, long terms of res­i­dence in a dis­trict, reg­is­tra­tion at incon­ve­nient times (e.g., plant­i­ng sea­son), pro­vi­sion of infor­ma­tion unavail­able to many blacks (e.g. street address­es, when black neigh­bor­hoods lacked street names and num­bers), and so forth. When blacks man­aged to qual­i­fy for the vote even under these mea­sures, reg­is­trars would use their dis­cre­tion to deny them the vote any­way. Alabama’s con­sti­tu­tion of 1901 was explic­it­ly designed to dis­en­fran­chise blacks by such restric­tive and fraud­u­lent means. Despite this, Jackson Giles, a black jan­i­tor, qual­i­fied for the vote under Alabama’s con­sti­tu­tion. He brought suit against Alabama on behalf of him­self and 75,000 sim­i­lar­ly qual­i­fied blacks who had been arbi­trar­i­ly denied the right to reg­is­ter. The Supreme Court reject­ed his claim in Giles v. Harris, 189 U.S. 475 (1903).

Source: The Geography Of Race In The U.S.
Today’s tac­tics are a dras­ti­cal­ly dif­fer­ent, more sophis­ti­cat­ed but no less obvious.

Voter ID

Some states, like Wisconsin for exam­ple, are try­ing to pass laws that are requir­ing peo­ple to present birth cer­tifi­cates to cer­ti­fy their eli­gi­bil­i­ty to vote when they nev­er had to before. Take, for exam­ple, how this will hurt one senior cit­i­zen as report­ed by the Center for American Progress Action Fund:
For 63 years, Brokaw, Wisconsin native Ruthelle Frank went to the polls to vote. Though par­a­lyzed on her left side since birth, the 84-year-old “fiery woman” vot­ed in every elec­tion since 1948 and even got elect­ed her­self as a mem­ber of the Brokaw Village Board. But because of the state’s new vot­er ID law, 2012 will be the first year Frank can’t vote. Born after a dif­fi­cult birth at her home in 1927, Frank nev­er received an offi­cial birth cer­tifi­cate. Her moth­er record­ed it in her fam­i­ly Bible and Frank has a cer­ti­fi­ca­tion of bap­tism from a few months lat­er, along with a Social Security card, a Medicare state­ment, and a check­book. But with­out the offi­cial doc­u­ment, she can’t secure the state ID card that the new law requires to vote next year.
“It’s real­ly crazy,” she added. “I’ve got all this proof. You mean to tell me that I’m not a U.S. cit­i­zen?” But state offi­cials have informed Frank that, because the state Register of Deeds does have a record of her birth, they can issue her a new birth cer­tifi­cate — for a fee. And because of a spelling error, that fee may be as high as $200:
Though Frank nev­er had a birth cer­tifi­cate, the state Register of Deeds in Madison has a record of her birth. It can gen­er­ate a birth cer­tifi­cate for her — for a fee. Normally, the cost is $20.


Redistricting

Every ten years, coun­ty com­mis­sions, state House and Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives are redrawn based on pop­u­la­tion changes report­ed in the U.S. Census, the Detroit Free Press reports. The prob­lem with this is that GOP lead­ers see pop­u­la­tion growth in black and Latino com­mu­ni­ties that vote heav­i­ly for Democrats and want to spit these Democratic vot­ing bases. Take the state of Michigan for exam­ple, as report­ed by the Detroit Free Press:
Several groups rep­re­sent­ing African-American and Latino vot­ers have filed a law­suit chal­leng­ing the new maps that define the 110 dis­tricts for the state House of Representatives.


The state Legislative Black Caucus, the NAACP, UAW and the Latino Americans for Social and Economic Development, along with sev­er­al indi­vid­u­als filed suit in U.S. District Court in Detroit today. They’re ask­ing for a tem­po­rary restrain­ing order, halt­ing the new dis­tricts from tak­ing effect while a new map is drawn and approved.
“This is a coör­di­nat­ed assault on our vot­ing rights,” said Wendell Anthony, pres­i­dent of the NAACP Detroit branch.
The groups have two main com­plaints: the new map will force eight Detroit incum­bent leg­is­la­tors to run against each oth­er; and a dis­trict that now encom­pass­es most of the pri­mar­i­ly Latino pop­u­la­tion in south­west Detroit has been split into two dis­tricts.
The game is the same, but the tac­tics have changed.



As you con­tem­plate these points and try to make sense of it all, be remind­ed, how­ev­er, that the faith you may have had in the Supreme court may be unfound­ed or mis­placed. Much of what has tran­spired through­out America’s his­to­ry has hap­pened with the acqui­es­cence of the Supreme Court.
Much of the assault being waged on vot­ing rights by Republicans this cycle, is made pos­si­ble because the Supreme Court evis­cer­at­ed the vot­ing rights act. 
For no rea­son oth­er than it worked well.
In her dis­sent in Shelby County Vs Holder, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg argued, the court’s deci­sion is tan­ta­mount to throw­ing away one’s umbrel­la in a rain­storm because he isn’t get­ting wet.
Such was the absur­di­ty and bla­tant naked par­ti­san­ship by the Robert’s court.
That Justice Ginsberg’s dis­sent stands as a scathing reminder of what Republicans are doing to Democracy in America.





 

Previous elec­tion cycles have gen­er­at­ed excite­ment for some Americans, for oth­ers elec­tions are noth­ing spe­cial, just anoth­er cycle of polit­i­cal ads and lying pan­der­ing politi­cians mak­ing the rounds.
In this cycle, how­ev­er, there is pal­pa­ble fear and a sense of dread, even fore­bod­ing.
Never before in mod­ern his­to­ry has so much rid­den on a sin­gle elec­tion.
On Immigration. Women’s Rights. Civil Rights. Voting Rights. Decency. The rule of law. How we treat the poor­est and most vul­ner­a­ble. And even whether we will have a democ­ra­cy after November 6^th, 2018.


This cycle the unfor­tu­nate real­i­ty is that many peo­ple who are able to vote will sit at home and not vote.
What this means is that they will effec­tive­ly sur­ren­der their deci­sion mak­ing to oth­ers. Those [oth­ers] usu­al­ly do not share their inter­est or val­ues.
Not vot­ing means that one has sur­ren­dered his or her right to self-deter­mi­na­tion. Nevertheless, they are among the first to com­plain when the inter­est of those who vot­ed take prece­dence over theirs.
Others would like to vote but can­not, and for those two groups, the results of the com­ing elec­tions will be the most con­se­quen­tial.


The Election of Donald J Trump to the pres­i­den­cy of the United States may have come as a shock to many, for oth­ers who were able to read the tea-leaves, not so much.
The medi­a’s fas­ci­na­tion with a two-bit con artiste and it’s inces­sant flir­ta­tions with him gave him the foun­da­tion and to a cer­tain degree, the legit­i­ma­cy he need­ed to enter politics.

The polit­i­cal class too was caught by sur­prise. One by one he dec­i­mat­ed them in 2016 until only he was left stand­ing.
Even then, the com­plic­it media con­tin­ued to give him wall-to-wall cov­er­age which enabled him to run his un-pres­i­den­tial cam­paign on a shoe­string bud­get and pull of the great­est polit­i­cal upset in our life­time.
Whether he did it all through is own devices or the Russians helped is almost imma­te­r­i­al at this point.
He has the keys to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and that’s what counts.

Trump nev­er hid the fact that he hat­ed Muslims. He talked about insti­tut­ing a Muslim ban if he was elect­ed.
He nev­er hid his hatred for Immigrants, he railed inces­sant­ly about what he called chain migra­tion and the visa lot­tery. Strawmen he cre­at­ed with­out a sin­gle iota knowl­edge how those pro­grams work. 
Like the absolute dunce he is, he spoke about the [visa lot­tery] and explains how the names of bad actors from oth­er coun­tries are placed in a bowl and win­ners drawn.

In his infan­tile mind, that is the only way he rec­on­ciles the idea of a [lot­tery], not the com­plex process in which peo­ple apply to the American Government and pay astro­nom­i­cal fees, whether they are suc­cess­ful or not and the American Government decides who comes in and who does­n’t. 


He nev­er hid his dis­dain for Mexicans. On the day he launched his cam­paign he glid­ed down that tacky gild­ed ele­va­tor berat­ing Mexicans as rapists, mur­der­ers, and drug deal­ers.
He nev­er hid his utter dis­re­spect for women, when con­front­ed by the FOX pro­pa­gan­da oper­a­tive Megan Kelly about his dis­re­spect for women he flip­pant­ly said he was dis­re­spect­ful only to Rosie Odonell.
The next day he went on to talk about how Megan Kelly had blood com­ing from parts of her body in the most dis­gust­ing man­ner. 


He would lat­er be exposed in his own words, at his most dis­gust­ing­ly misog­y­nis­tic self, on the Hollywood access bus, telling Billy Bush how he delights in grab­bing women by the pussy.[sic]Trump nev­er hid his dis­dain for African Americans he asked Black Americans what did they have to lose, he told them how their lives were mis­er­able as they were get­ting mur­dered dai­ly, and their schools and their neigh­bor­hoods were shit­ty.

He nev­er both­ered to avail him­self to the real­i­ty that not all black peo­ple lived in depressed com­mu­ni­ties, are poor, or une­d­u­cat­ed.
He did not hide his desire to enact tax cuts for the rich, he said he want­ed to pass tax cuts and he want­ed to repeal the Affordable Care Act.
On issue, after issue, Donald Trump told the nation his inten­tions, on the envi­ron­ment, on allow­ing the Dakota pipeline to pro­ceed he placed crit­i­cal water sources at risk all for the sake of oil derived from dirty tar sands which America does not even have exclu­sive rights to pur­chase.

Even as he dis­re­spects Native Americans by derid­ing them and plac­ing their inter­est and exis­tence in per­il, he has in the oval office, a por­trait of Andrew Jackson, the pres­i­dent who may have sin­gle-hand­ed­ly done the most harm to native Americans.

Trump is moti­vat­ed by hatred of Obama and his poli­cies but prob­a­bly, even more so, Donald Trump is moti­vat­ed by greed and the desire to acquire wealth.
His shal­low world­view has been shaped by priv­i­lege and enti­tle­ment, his poli­cies, where they may exist, are nar­row fly by night ideas he culls from oth­ers. Simply put, Trump lacks the intel­lect or the capac­i­ty to think through or artic­u­late a point of view out­side his nar­row, rapa­cious self-interest.

The cost of Donald Trump’s elec­tion to the Presidency of the United States has been vast­ly con­se­quen­tial in ways that I can­not begin to artic­u­late here, the dam­age will be gar­gan­tu­an far and wide out­side the United States.
The American Presidency always had some neg­a­tive con­se­quences for the rest of the world, even when a sit­ting pres­i­dent means well. It is the nature of the beast, big pow­er­ful coun­tries look after their inter­est and some­times those inter­est does not exact­ly line up with the inter­est of small­er less pow­er­ful ones.
Donald Trump’s pres­i­den­cy will leave deep cav­ernous fis­sures which will chal­lenge our plan­et’s resilience, lit­er­al­ly and fig­u­ra­tive­ly, far into the future.

As hor­rif­ic as Donald Trump is the Republican par­ty is equal­ly despi­ca­ble. The acts of vio­lence and vot­er sup­pres­sion are only a small part of the rot which has start­ed to take root across the coun­try.
In New York City, mem­bers of a right-wing white Supremacist bunch of thugs con­verged around and beat up a group of 3 men who were protest­ing their pres­ence.
New York City Police stood around and did noth­ing. Yes, New Yor City. 

In Texas, a field oper­a­tive to a Democratic can­di­date who went to a coun­ty office to deliv­er a let­ter on behalf of the can­di­date was ques­tioned about his par­ty affil­i­a­tion and prompt­ly arrest­ed once he revealed he was deliv­er­ing the let­ter on behalf of his boss a Democrat who was on the phone with him and heard the entire chill­ing encounter.

In Georgia, the Republican sec­re­tary of state Brian Kemp who is run­ning against Stacy Abrams an African American woman has lit­er­al­ly removed hun­dreds of thou­sands of vot­ers from the rolls for infre­quent vot­ing and has held count­less oth­er reg­is­tra­tions on the flim­sy excuse that names may miss a hyphen or a name may have been incor­rect­ly spelled. 
Needless to say, the vast major­i­ty of the names were removed from Gwinnett County, a pre­dom­i­nant­ly African-American county.

In this case, the Republican Kemp is allowed to play ref­er­ee in a game in which he is engaged. As such he gets to remove from the vot­er rolls, the peo­ple he knows would be vot­ing for his oppo­nent.
And just in case you for­got we are talk­ing about America a place where some pub­lic offi­cials and many cit­i­zens do not mind throw­ing around the term banana-repub­lic as a pejo­ra­tive in describ­ing oth­er coun­tries.
Republicans have tried to steal elec­tions and stop peo­ple from vot­ing from as a far back as the 1960’s when the Party was tak­en over by white men who ran from the Democratic par­ty after Lyndon Johnson signed the civ­il rights and vot­ing rights acts.

The vot­ing rights act served in some way to quell the onslaught of attacks against African American’s right to vote until the Republican Supreme Court decid­ed in a 5 – 4 deci­sion in Shelby VS Holder, that the law worked too well, as a result, it was no longer nec­es­sary.
In a crush­ing dis­sent Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg wrote:

1. “The sad irony of today’s deci­sion lies in its utter fail­ure to grasp why the [Voting Rights Act] has proven effec­tive … Throwing out pre­clear­ance when it has worked and is con­tin­u­ing to work to stop dis­crim­i­na­to­ry changes is like throw­ing away your umbrel­la in a rain­storm because you are not get­ting wet.”

2. “When con­fronting the most con­sti­tu­tion­al­ly invid­i­ous form of dis­crim­i­na­tion, and the most fun­da­men­tal right in our demo­c­ra­t­ic sys­tem, Congress’ pow­er to act is at its height.”

3. “Congress approached the 2006 reau­tho­riza­tion of the VRA with great care and seri­ous­ness. The same can­not be said of the Court’s opin­ion today. The Court makes no gen­uine attempt to engage with the mas­sive leg­isla­tive record that Congress assem­bled. Instead, it relies on increas­es in vot­er reg­is­tra­tion and turnout as if that were the whole sto­ry. See supra, at 18 – 19. Without even iden­ti­fy­ing a stan­dard of review, the Court dis­mis­sive­ly brush­es off argu­ments based on “data from the record,” and declines to enter the “debat[e about] what [the] record shows”…One would expect more from an opin­ion strik­ing at the heart of the Nation’s sig­nal piece of civ­il-rights legislation.”

4. “Just as build­ings in California have a greater need to be earthquake­ proofed, places where there is a greater racial polar­iza­tion in vot­ing have a greater need for pro­phy­lac­tic mea­sures to pre­vent pur­pose­ful race dis­crim­i­na­tion.
»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»

The events I out­lined here does not begin to scratch the sur­face, no arti­cle, or book can ful­ly begin to explain the lev­el of crim­i­nal­i­ty and dys­func­tion which has come to the fore since Donald Trump moved into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
There is no telling where this will end, nev­er­the­less, those who can vote bet­ter get up and go vote come November 6^th.
The right to vote may very well be on the bal­lot this cycle and I do not mean just for black peo­ple.


Even a mas­sive turnout will not guar­an­tee a Democratic vic­to­ry, thanks to ger­ry­man­dered dis­tricts which all but guar­an­tees Republican wins.
This was made pos­si­ble because Democratic vot­ers seem to believe all they have to do is vote in pres­i­den­tial elec­tions.
Older Republican white peo­ple vote, so even in Blue Democratic states, it is not out of the ordi­nary to see state and coun­ty leg­is­la­tures dom­i­nat­ed by Republicans.
That is the way house dis­tricts get sliced and diced by Republicans to ensure they stay in office and enact their rev­o­lu­tion­ary racist ideas.
The choice is clear vote and change some of the tox­i­c­i­ty. 
Stay­ing home?
Do not complain.

He has defend­ed the Three-Fifths Compromise around slav­ery and said ISIS may be recruit­ing from Black Lives Matter.

By Amanda Terkel

The morn­ing after Florida’s pri­maries, Rep. Ron DeSantis ― the state’s new­ly cho­sen GOP can­di­date for gov­er­nor ― went on nation­al tele­vi­sion and used a racist dog-whis­tle to com­ment on his opponent.

“The last thing we need to do is to mon­key this up by try­ing to embrace a social­ist agen­da with huge tax increas­es and bank­rupt­ing the state,” DeSantis said of his Democratic chal­lenger, Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum, who is black. 

The com­ment shouldn’t have been that sur­pris­ing. DeSantis tried to be the most pro-Trump can­di­date in the GOP pri­ma­ry, even run­ning an ad about how he teach­es his kids to love every­thing about Donald Trump, and the pres­i­dent has used plen­ty of his own racist dog-whis­tles. 

But beyond his embrace of the pres­i­dent, DeSantis has made a name for him­self by pro­mot­ing con­spir­a­cy the­o­ries that are trum­pet­ed by the rad­i­cal right and play into racial stereo­types. On four occa­sions, he has spo­ken at con­fer­ences orga­nized by a con­ser­v­a­tive activist who has tout­ed white Americans’ role in free­ing black peo­ple from slav­ery and said that “the country’s only seri­ous race war” is against white people.

“Liberal media are doing every­thing that can to help Andrew Gillum win this race and that includes writ­ing sto­ries that elic­it racial­ly charged fears and emo­tions. We not only reject your sto­ry­line, we con­demn your entire nar­ra­tive,” said Stephen Lawson, DeSantis’ com­mu­ni­ca­tions director.

Here are some oth­er con­spir­a­cies DeSantis has embraced:

ISIS may recruit from Black Lives Matter protests. 

In 2016, DeSantis agreed with Fox Business host Neil Cavuto that he was wor­ried the ter­ror­ist group ISIS could be recruit­ing from Black Lives Matter protests. 

“I do wor­ry about it, in the sense that reach­ing out to them doesn’t even have to involve bro­ker­ing a meet­ing between some ter­ror­ist recruiter and some­body who’s dis­af­fect­ed,” DeSantis said on Sept. 22, 2016. “It could sim­ply be expos­ing peo­ple to dif­fer­ent pro­pa­gan­da that you see on the inter­net, on social media sites. … So it’s def­i­nite­ly a prob­lem, and ISIS I think has proven them­selves to be pret­ty sophis­ti­cat­ed at cap­i­tal­iz­ing on some peo­ple who have some under­ly­ing issues.”

The Founding Fathers weren’t racist. 

In 2011, DeSantis wrote a book called Dreams From Our Founding Fathers: First Principles in the Age of Obama. In it, he excus­es­the Three-Fifths Compromise, which count­ed a black per­son as only three-fifths of a whole per­son to deter­mine con­gres­sion­al representation.

DeSantis defends the Founding Fathers for agree­ing to the com­pro­mise because “count­ing slaves as less than a full per­son for pur­pos­es of rep­re­sen­ta­tion ben­e­fit­ted anti-slav­ery states.” 

Allowing slaves to be count­ed as three-fifths of a white per­son gave slave states extra rep­re­sen­ta­tion with­out hav­ing to actu­al­ly allow black peo­ple to vote. 

Islamophobic conspiracy groups have merit.

Over the years, DeSantis has pro­mot­ed him­self with the help of fig­ures who ped­dle Islamophobic rhetoric and poli­cies. In 2014, he did an inter­view on Frank Gaffney’s radio pro­gram. Gaffney found­ed the Center for Security Policy, which the Southern Poverty Law Center char­ac­ter­izes as “a con­spir­a­cy-ori­ent­ed mouth­piece for the grow­ing anti-Muslim move­ment in the United States.” In 2017, DeSantis spoke at the annu­al con­fer­ence of ACT for America, anoth­er group that push­es anti-Muslim con­spir­a­cy theories. 

DeSantis has also pushed to des­ig­nate the Muslim Brotherhood a ter­ror­ist group, an idea the Trump admin­is­tra­tion sup­ports and peo­ple like Gaffney champion.

As Shadi Hamid at the Brookings Institution has not­ed, “There is quite lit­er­al­ly not a sin­gle American expert on the Muslim Brotherhood who sup­ports des­ig­na­tion. Moreover, there is no plau­si­ble argu­ment to be made for label­ing the group a ter­ror­ist orga­ni­za­tion, at least accord­ing to the rel­e­vant legal cri­te­ria, as Will McCants and Benjamin Wittes lay out. They sum it up quite well: des­ig­na­tion ‘would be illegal.”

American values are declining in the “age of Obama.”

In 2008, con­ser­v­a­tives seized on a clip of a black woman named Peggy Joseph say­ing that if then-pres­i­den­tial can­di­date Barack Obama won, “I won’t have to wor­ry about putting gas in my car. I won’t have to wor­ry about pay­ing my mort­gage. You know, if I help him, he’s going to help me.” 

There’s noth­ing remark­able about Joseph’s com­ments. People always vote for politi­cians because they believe they will make the coun­try ― and often, their own per­son­al lives ― bet­ter. Certain can­di­dates may have poli­cies that could put more mon­ey in their pock­ets or lead to bet­ter representation.

But DeSantis talked about Joseph ― and Obama’s cam­paign ― as if they were rad­i­cal depar­tures from “the prin­ci­ples that the coun­try was found­ed on.”

In a 2011 speech, he said that with the Founding Fathers, “you think of things like, ‘Give me lib­er­ty or give me death’” and “I only regret that I have but one life to lose for my country.”

But, he added, in the “age of Obama … you have peo­ple like that woman who vot­ed for Obama, who said since Obama was pres­i­dent, she wouldn’t have to wor­ry about putting gas in her car or pay­ing her mortgage.”

The right wing has long tried to claim that Obama secret­ly sup­ports com­mu­nism ― an un-American val­ue, of course. In his 2011 book, DeSantis gives cre­dence to some of these the­o­ries. He writes that Obama had a “men­tor­ship” with “Frank Marshall Davis, an African-American com­mu­nist writer with bit­ter­ly anti-American views.” 

“He cer­tain­ly would not have dis­cussed Davis in Dreams From My Father had Davis’ coun­cil failed to make an impact on him,” DeSantis wrote.

The Washington Post looked at Davis and his rela­tion­ship with Obama, and wrote that Davis “was indeed asso­ci­at­ed with the Communist Party” but was not a “hard-core Communist who spied for Soviet lead­ers. He was crit­i­cal of American soci­ety, but not America as a country.”

DeSantis, in his book, also implied that Obama’s moth­er was a com­mu­nist. He notes that one of her high school teach­ers said she would ask ques­tions around the Cold War like “What’s so good about cap­i­tal­ism? What’s wrong with com­mu­nism? What’s good about com­mu­nism?” He also cit­ed the fact that one of her class­mates referred to her as a “fel­low trav­el­er,” which is some­times used to describe some­one who is com­mu­nist. There’s no proof Obama’s moth­er was a com­mu­nist either. sto­ry orig­i­nat­ed here: https://​www​.huff​in​g​ton​post​.com/​e​n​t​r​y​/​r​o​n​-​d​e​s​a​n​t​i​s​-​r​a​c​i​s​t​-​i​s​l​a​m​o​p​h​o​b​i​c​-​c​o​n​s​p​i​r​a​c​y​-​t​h​e​o​r​i​e​s​_​u​s​_​5​b​c​4​c​a​8​0​e​4​b​0​1​a​0​1​d​6​8​d​4​daa

If you have ever donned the uni­form of a police offi­cer, a real offi­cer who enlist­ed for the right rea­sons because you want­ed to pro­tect and serve, you under­stand full well that what American police are doing to peo­ple in minor­i­ty com­mu­ni­ties is not polic­ing. If the stan­dard prin­ci­ples are to serve and pro­tect, to save lives and pro­tect prop­er­ty, then there is no way that any rea­son­able per­son can pre­tend that what we see hap­pen­ing on video after video is rep­re­sen­ta­tive of what we expect from police offi­cers. When the same laws which are sup­posed to pro­tect cit­i­zens and police alike are stretched to the lim­its and dis­tort­ed to jus­ti­fy unjust police use of dead­ly force, while at the same time, the reverse of those same prin­ci­ples is used to con­demn cer­tain seg­ments of the soci­ety, the sys­tem is bro­ken. Any grainy black-and-white video may be used to con­demn a black man of any crime in any court. Nevertheless, a crys­tal clear high, def­i­n­i­tion col­or video of police offi­cers com­mit­ting cap­i­tal mur­der, even after stat­ing clear­ly that ‑that was their intent, we are told that we can­not believe what we have seen with our own eyes and heard with our own ears.

Many years ago, a friend with whom I went to the Jamaica Police Academy asked me how come I could be so crit­i­cal of police offi­cers. I asked him to take a look at what is hap­pen­ing to American polic­ing and tell me whether that was what he did as a police offi­cer in Jamaica.
His cheek dropped to his chest, and that was the end of that con­ver­sa­tion. Those who tell you there are only a few bad apples; you must call *BS * to them. Where are the good offi­cers, sworn to uphold the law with­out fear or favor, who are step­ping for­ward to say, “here is what happened”?
During my time of ser­vice, I received some push­back and unfa­vor­able com­ments from a few co-work­ers who accused me of pre­fer­ring civil­ians over them.
My response then was, if doing the right thing, not allow­ing the bru­tal assault of inno­cent peo­ple, is [prefer­ng civillians][sic], then count me in. How is it sus­tain­able when the pub­lic who pays police offi­cers salaries are ter­ri­fied of police killing them when­ev­er they come across police offi­cers? In many instances, cops dress and behave like sol­diers on a bat­tle­field but are less care­ful, and less account­able than sol­diers con­strained by the rules of mod­ern-day war­fare and the Geneva Convention. Prosecutors, Judges, and Juries stretch the bound­aries of the law in order to pro­tect errant cops; this, in turn, results in a metas­ta­siz­ing effect, breed­ing more abuse of cit­i­zens’ rights in the process.

https://​youtu​.be/​P​D​W​3​2​-​F​0​p1M

The whole con­cept of police as peace offi­cers has been cast aside in America, replaced with a mil­i­taris­tic macho-man men­tal­i­ty that is char­ac­ter­ized by the itchy trig­ger fin­ger. With the female cops doing their lev­el best to demon­strate that they have the same lev­el of balls or more as their male coun­ter­parts. This gen­er­al­ly ends in the death of unarmed men of col­or. Their only crime, is the col­or of their skin.
Rather minor infrac­tions which ought to be ignored, or worse, result in a mild warn­ings are dealt with by using heav­i­ly armed mil­i­ta­rized police. These inter­ac­tions usu­al­ly cul­mi­nate in the use of lethal force on peo­ple of col­or after the police them­selves mas­sive­ly esca­late events. Terrence Crutcher was gunned down by wannabe tough guy cop Betty Shelby who mur­dered him. Mister Crutcher was gunned down and struck with tasers despite hav­ing his hands in the air, not hav­ing any weapon on him, nor in his vehi­cle. (Even if mis­ter Crutcher had a weapon on him or in his vehi­cle, he could not have been law­ful­ly or legal­ly exe­cut­ed because he had his hands in the air.)
Despite this Betty, Shelby was charged and exon­er­at­ed because a black man had no rights a white woman, much less a cop, had to respect, not even the right to life.

Betty Shelby was acquit­ted by a cor­rupt Tulsa, Oklahoma, jury on May 17^th, 2017. Despite hav­ing his hands up, hav­ing no weapon, and walk­ing away from police, Betty Shelby gunned Terrence Crutcher down in cold blood.
She told the court. “I did every­thing I could to stop this,” she added. “Crutcher’s death is his fault.”
Betty Shelby is a free woman, free to live her life.
Terrence Crutcher is still dead? So too are all of the oth­er count­less black men and women who had their lives tak­en by unac­count­able cops who know that the sys­tem will not hold them accountable.
So too has...ALTON STERLING

So too has PHILANDO CASTILLE

So too, has count­less others.….…..

Sharecropping is a type of farm­ing in which fam­i­lies rent small plots of land from a landown­er in return for a por­tion of their crop, to be giv­en to the landown­er at the end of each year. Different types of share­crop­ping have been prac­ticed world­wide for cen­turies, but in the rur­al South, it was typ­i­cal­ly prac­ticed by for­mer slaves. With the south­ern econ­o­my in dis­ar­ray after the abo­li­tion of slav­ery and the dev­as­ta­tion of the Civil War, con­flict arose dur­ing the Reconstruction era between many white landown­ers attempt­ing to reestab­lish a labor force and freed blacks seek­ing eco­nom­ic inde­pen­dence and autonomy.

Forty Acres and a Mule

During the final months of the Civil War, tens of thou­sands of freed slaves left their plan­ta­tions to fol­low General William T. Sherman‘s vic­to­ri­ous Union Army troops across Georgia and the Carolinas.

In January 1865, in an effort to address the issues caused by this grow­ing num­ber of refugees, Sherman issued Special Field Order Number 15, a tem­po­rary plan grant­i­ng each freed fam­i­ly 40 acres of land on the islands and the coastal region of Georgia. The Union Army also donat­ed some of its mules, unneed­ed for bat­tle pur­pos­es, to the for­mer slaves.

When the war end­ed three months lat­er, many freed African Americans saw the “40 acres and a mule” pol­i­cy as proof that they would final­ly be able to work their own land after years of servi­tude. Owning land was the key to eco­nom­ic inde­pen­dence and autonomy.

There is a dia­bol­i­cal unholy alliance in America between the forces which pur­port to be law-enforce­ment and local media houses.
It is dia­bol­i­cal because for as long as America has decid­ed that black peo­ple were less than human and there­fore unwor­thy of respect and dig­ni­ty, there has been a sys­tem­at­ic attempt to dimin­ish the val­ue of black life.

There is no rea­son to believe that 26-year-old Botham Shem Jean, a col­lege grad­u­ate who was gain­ful­ly employed, does not have a crim­i­nal record(as if that dimin­ish­es the val­ue of life), leads wor­ship ser­vice at his church would have been insu­lat­ed from vicious slaugh­ter by American Police.

Dallas PD Officer Amber Guyger first said she showed up to #BothamJean’s apart­ment and the door was shut and locked. 

Then she said it was shut but unlocked. 

Now she says it was actu­al­ly wide open. 

Here a res­i­dent of the same build­ing shows that is IMPOSSIBLE. 

She lies. pic​.twit​ter​.com/​p​9​B​E​R​u​M​ocV

— Shaun King (@shaunking) September 11, 2018

Understandably, once they killed him they had to demo­nize him and that is where the media cam­paign comes in.
Dallas Police which is sup­posed to be inves­ti­gat­ing the mur­der of Jean has been engaged in obtain­ing war­rants to search the home of mis­ter Jean.
Yes, you guessed right, after they were in his home and need­ed to cob­ble togeth­er an ali­bi for their mur­der­ous col­league Amber Guygher.

We are learn­ing that a judge has attached his/​her sig­na­ture to those war­rants and we have the results of what the Dallas Police have report­ed­ly found and on queue is being report­ed by FOX.

- Following the shoot­ing death of Botham Jean by the hands of Dallas Police Officer Amber Guyger, mul­ti­ple search war­rants were exe­cut­ed at Jean’s apart­ment as part of the investigation.

One of the war­rants became a pub­lic record Thursday after­noon when it was returned to the judge who signed it. It was short­ly after Jean’s funer­al had end­ed. It list­ed sev­er­al items found in Jean’s apart­ment, includ­ing a small amount of marijuana.

There have been sev­er­al war­rants signed by judges and exe­cut­ed in this case aside from the arrest war­rant for Guyger and the search war­rant signed September 7 that were returned to the court on Thursday. The oth­ers are still sealed and not accessible.

The search war­rant exe­cut­ed in Jean’s apart­ment at South Side Flats specif­i­cal­ly sought fired car­tridge cas­ings, fired pro­jec­tiles, firearms, bal­lis­tic vests, keys, evi­dence of blood, video sur­veil­lance sys­tems, and con­tra­band such as nar­cotics and oth­er items used in crim­i­nal offenses.

The inven­to­ry return yielded:
2 fired car­tridge casings
1 lap­top computer
1 black back­pack with police equip­ment and paperwork
1 insu­lat­ed lunch box
1 black bal­lis­tic vest with “police” markings
10.4 grams of mar­i­jua­na in ziplock bags
1 met­al mar­i­jua­na grinder
2 RFID keys
2 used pack­ages of med­ical aid

The doc­u­ment does not say where any of the items were locat­ed in the apart­ment or who the items belong to.

The Jean fam­i­ly’s legal team was unaware of the doc­u­ment when it was first released. Regardless of whose mar­i­jua­na it was, the attor­neys say it does­n’t matter.

“I think it’s unfor­tu­nate that law enforce­ment begin to imme­di­ate­ly crim­i­nal­ize the vic­tim — in this case, some­one who was clear­ly was the vic­tim that has absolute­ly no bear­ing on the fact that he was shot in his home,” said Lee Merritt, attor­ney for Jean’s fam­i­ly. “I would love to see more infor­ma­tion com­ing out about the war­rants exe­cut­ed on the home of the shoot­er who lived just below him. I haven’t seen any of those. And par­tic­u­lar­ly for it to be on this day the day that we remem­ber and cel­e­brate him… to see the com­mon assas­si­na­tion attempt on the vic­tim that we often see in law enforce­ment involved shootings.”

“It does­n’t change the sto­ry,” said Daryl Washington, attor­ney for the Jean fam­i­ly. “She claimed that she went into a place she thought was her apart­ment. She did­n’t claim she had gone some­where because she thought there was some sort of crim­i­nal activity.”

“I know because of how he lived his life it won’t stain his rep­u­ta­tion because he lived his life so vir­tu­ous­ly,” Merritt added. “But it’s unfor­tu­nate law enforce­ment has tak­en this turn.”

Attorney Pete Schulte, who is not con­nect­ed to the case, says the defense will like­ly bring it up in tri­al if the mar­i­jua­na turns out to be his.

“I’m not say­ing Mr. Jean is a bad guy because he had some mar­i­jua­na in his apart­ment,” Schulte said. “But it could help add some expla­na­tion to this crazy case. It just adds anoth­er lay­er of complexity.”

Schulte says it’s com­mon prac­tice for detec­tives inves­ti­gat­ing a case to cast a wide net when seek­ing a search warrant.

The request for the war­rant does list a wide range of items — from blood evi­dence and keys, to video sur­veil­lance sys­tems and “any con­tra­band, such as nar­cotics, and oth­er items that may have been used in crim­i­nal offenses.”

Other attor­neys not asso­ci­at­ed with the case say that spe­cif­ic lan­guage may have been used for items that were in plain sight.

“They do a broad spec­trum of what they’re look­ing for when they get these search war­rants,” Schulte said. “Now tox­i­col­o­gy is impor­tant, both with Officer Guyger and Mr. Jean, because it could explain how this case hap­pened. How things went south so quickly.”

By law, a war­rant must be exe­cut­ed with­in 72 hours of when it was issued. As far as the tim­ing of the return to the court, near­ly a week later?

“There’s noth­ing nefar­i­ous about it. I think it just got done,” Schulte said. “They’ve got to get it to the court, and it got to the court today.”

Jean’s legal team disagrees.

“This is noth­ing but a dis­gust­ing attempt to assas­si­nate the char­ac­ter of a won­der­ful young man,” said Ben Crump, attor­ney for the Jean family.

There have been sev­er­al war­rants signed by judges and exe­cut­ed in the case so we could learn of addi­tion­al items retrieved. It’s unclear if those requests includ­ed any war­rants to search Officer Guyger’s apart­ment as well.

Guyger did con­sent to a blood draw the night of the shoot­ing. Toxicology reports for both her and Jean are still pending.

As the fam­i­ly of Botham Shem Jean grieves and hon­or his life with a funer­al ser­vice, a dia­bol­i­cal plan is set in motion by Dallas author­i­ties to deliv­er a coup de grâce to the mur­dered man.
The plan, as was to be expect­ed from past instances where police mur­der peo­ple of col­or, is designed to com­mit the sec­ond mur­der of Botham Shem Jean through char­ac­ter assassination.

Remembering #BothamJean: Funeral ser­vices for the man shot and killed by a Dallas police offi­cer are under­way. MORE… https://t.co/VBPcNjJkb7

— WFAA (@wfaa) September 13, 2018

The accused friend­ly police report above was writ­ten by the inves­ti­gat­ing offi­cer US Marshall David L Armstrong which seems more like a defen­dant sup­port­ing state­ment, than an affi­davit intend­ed to bring to jus­tice a guilty defendant.

In the wake of the dead­ly Parkland shoot­ing, more armed police offi­cers are being sta­tioned in schools. But what hap­pens when they’re the ones per­pe­trat­ing violence?
By Rebecca Klein

Jalijah Jones, 16, pos­es for a por­trait at his home in Kalamazoo, Michigan, on July 22, 2018. In December 2017, Jones was Tasered at school by a police offi­cer while already being restrained by four school secu­ri­ty guards fol­low­ing an alter­ca­tion with anoth­er stu­dent. At the time, Jones was 15 years old and weighed about 120 pounds. The oth­er stu­dent walked away.

CASEY SYKES FOR HUFFPOST

CASEY SYKES FOR HUFFPOST

CASEY SYKES FOR HUFFPOST

What kind of human being enjoys his life yet is deter­mined that oth­ers should be as mis­er­able and down­trod­den as pos­si­ble and is cool with that?
What am I talk­ing about? Glad you asked.
I have thought a lot about race rela­tions across the globe and pri­mar­i­ly in the United States, I have always thought how bet­ter the world would be with­out this arti­fi­cial prob­lem cre­at­ed out of igno­rance and per­pet­u­at­ed by human beings on others.

Which brings me to to the issue of NFL Quarterback Colin Kaepernick and some of his col­leagues kneel­ing dur­ing the play­ing of the nation­al anthem before games.
I don’t want to delve too deeply into the whole ques­tion of whether they have every right as Americans to do as they please as is their God-giv­en and Constitutional right to protest.

I won’t spend time talk­ing about the whole issue of bring­ing the mil­i­tary into foot­ball games and pre­tend­ing that some­how NFL games are the holy grail of patri­o­tism where the mil­i­tary should be worshiped.
Last time I looked, every last man and woman who goes over­seas to fight in the mil­i­tary does so of their own voli­tion and for their own reasons.

There are no con­sti­tu­tion­al built-ins which pre­vent any American from protest­ing dur­ing the play­ing of the nation­al anthem. In fact, every American is guar­an­teed the right to protest, Those rights are enshrined in the first amend­ment to the con­sti­tu­tion, so why are some peo­ple pre­tend­ing that they are guardians of patriotism?
What gives white peo­ple the right to deter­mine what and where oth­ers they oppress may protest. When they say “they are dis­re­spect­ing our flag and anthem”, who made them mas­ters, who gave them own­er­ship rights not endued onto others?
Does the coun­try belong to the protest­ing ath­letes as much as it belongs to them, many of whom came and saw black peo­ple here?

Since the play­ers have the right under the con­sti­tu­tion to protest as they please, I will not spend my time writ­ing about igno­rant moron­ic peo­ple’s retard­ed views.
And so Nike’s deci­sion to use Colin Kaepernick as the face of its lat­est adver­tis­ing cam­paign has met with back­lash from the usu­al igno­rant back­wa­ter mongrels.
You know them, the same ones who believe the world was cre­at­ed for and with them in mind as rulers over every­one else.
Some took to burn­ing their Nike shoes, cut­ting the Nike logo out of socks and sports­wear as a sign of protest against Nike.
Yea these are the descen­dants of book burn­ers, these idiots would do well with pick­ing one up and learn­ing to read.

I’m sure Nike expect­ed this non­sense response, after all, they are used to these bot­tom feed­ing idiots.
But now Ford motor com­pa­ny has thrown their sup­port behind the kneel­ing ath­letes. Oh shit, let me see how many ford cars are going to be burned.
I recall the sto­ry told of a very rich man who went to a church and he was giv­ing a talk to the con­gre­ga­tion about how great God was.
He told how he got his first dol­lar as a lit­tle boy. He explained that he was pre­pared to invest it, but then some mis­sion­ar­ies turned up at his doorsteps.
Torn between invest­ing his dol­lar and sow­ing into God’s work, he chose to do the latter.

As he told the sto­ry of how God blessed his life from then on, a lit­tle old lady sit­ting in the front pew chimed in ” do it again”, “do it again”.
Unsure of what the old lady was refer­ring to, the speak­er asked, “do what”?
She stood up and said, “you said you did it before and he blessed you, give every­thing you have and he will bless you again, so do it again”.
That was the end of that talk… it’s easy to give a dol­lar and brag about it but not so easy to give mil­lions in faith­ful obedience.

You ide­al­is­tic bigshots burned your Nike gar­ments and shoes, now show your patri­o­tism and burn your prized Ford trucks and cars.
You bas­tions of patri­o­tism, you defend­ers of the sacred ideals, you who believe that the rights of minori­ties should be sub­ject­ed to your whims and dic­tates, those of you who think you have the right to decide the rights of oth­ers, burn your Ford cars now.

Since you believe that peo­ple protest­ing race sol­diers killing inno­cent unarmed peo­ple is unpa­tri­ot­ic, go ahead and burn your Ford F‑150’s now.
Either burn them or shut the fuck up you, inbred morons!
Better yet, make sure you are in them before you set them ablaze. The world will be a bet­ter place if you just do it.