Perspectives; Thoughts; Comments; Opinions; Discussions

Posts tagged ‘Ann Coulter’

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Here Are the Nutcases Who Believe in ‘Replacement’


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 18, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/05/18/here-are-the-nutcases-who-believe-in-replacement—p–n2607478/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Here Are the Nutcases Who Believe in 'Replacement'

Source: AP Photo/Moises Castillo

The “Great Replacement Theory” (GRT) has taken the media by storm! It seems that the white racist who shot up a grocery store full of black people last weekend cited GRT in his 180-page “manifesto.”

First of all, journalists need to understand that GRT is only a theory taught in advanced law school seminars. It is not something designed for indoctrination of mass audiences of young people.

So what is GRT? The New York Times describes it thus:

“[T]he notion that Western elites, sometimes manipulated by Jews, want to ‘replace’ and disempower white Americans.” (You want a conspiracy theory about a secretive cabal of Jews? Check out the Times’ series of articles on “neoconservatives” back in the early 2000s.)

But then — just as every argument about abortion suddenly becomes an argument about contraception — a few paragraphs later, the crackpot theory jumps from a Jewish cabal replacing whites with blacks … to the idea that Democrats are using immigration “for electoral gains.”

Wow, that is nuts! Where’d anybody get that idea?

Oh yeah — from liberals.

Here’s Democratic consultant Patrick Reddy in 1998:

“The 1965 Immigration Reform Act promoted by President Kennedy, drafted by Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and pushed through the Senate by Ted Kennedy has resulted in a wave of immigration from the Third World that should shift the nation in a more liberal direction within a generation. It will go down as the Kennedy family’s greatest gift to the Democratic Party.”

(Well, sure, if you want to totally overlook skirt-chasing and pill-popping.)

Then in 2002, Democrats Ruy Teixeira and John Judis wrote “The Emerging Democratic Majority,” arguing that demographic changes, mostly by immigration, were putting Democrats on a glide path to an insuperable majority. After Obama’s reelection in 2012, Teixeira crowed in The Atlantic (which was then a magazine that people read, as opposed to a billionaire widow’s charity) that “ten years farther down this road,” Obama lost the white vote outright, but won the election with the minority vote — African-Americans (93-6), Hispanics (71-27) and Asian-Americans (73-26).

A year later, the National Journal’s Ron Brownstein began touting the “Coalition of the Ascendant,” gloating that Democrats didn’t need blue-collar whites anymore. Woo hoo! Obama “lost more than three-fifths of noncollege whites and whites older than 45.” But who cares? He crushed with “minorities (a combined 80%).”

“Adios, Reagan Democrats,” he says gleefully.

Democratic pollster Stanley Greenberg’s 2019 book, “RIP GOP,” explains the coming death of the Republican Party as a result of … sucking up to Wall Street? Pushing pointless wars? Endlessly cutting taxes? NO! The GOP’s demise would come from the fact that “our country is hurtling toward a New America that is ever more racially and culturally diverse … more immigrant and foreign born.”

And these were the genteel, nonthreatening descriptions of how immigration was consigning white voters to the Aztec graveyard of history.

On MSNBC, they’re constantly sneering about “old white men” and celebrating the “browning of America.” A group called Battleground Texas boasts about flipping that deep red state to the Democrats — simply by getting more Hispanics to vote. Blogs are giddily titled, “The Irrelevant South” (“the traditional white South — socially and economically conservative — is no longer relevant in national politics”). MSNBC’s Joy Ann Reid tweets that she is “giddy” watching “all the bitter old white guys” as Ketanji Brown Jackson “makes history.”

This week, the media’s leading expert on the crazies who believe in replacement theory is Tim Wise, popping up on both MSNBC and CNN to psychoanalyze the white “racists.” He’s been quoted, cited or praised dozens of times in The New York Times. This isn’t some fringe character, despite appearances.

In 2010, Wise wrote an “Open Letter to the White Right” that began:

“For all y’all rich folks, enjoy that champagne, or whatever fancy ass Scotch you drink.

“And for y’all a bit lower on the economic scale, enjoy your Pabst Blue Ribbon, or whatever shitty ass beer you favor …

“Because your time is limited.

“Real damned limited.”

Guess why! Wise explained:

“It is math.”

Wait, isn’t math racist? But moving on …

“Because you’re on the endangered list.

“And unlike, say, the bald eagle or some exotic species of muskrat, you are not worth saving.

“In 40 years or so, maybe fewer, there won’t be any more white people around who actually remember that Leave It to Beaver …”

Have you ever noticed how obsessed liberals are with “Leave It to Beaver”?

“It’s OK. Because in about 40 years, half the country will be black or brown. And there is nothing you can do about it.

“Nothing, Senor Tancredo.”

After several more paragraphs of mocking white people, Wise ended with this stirring conclusion:

“We just have to be patient.

“And wait for you to pass into that good night, first politically, and then, well …

“Do you hear it?

“The sound of your empire dying? Your nation, as you knew it, ending, permanently?

“Because I do, and the sound of its demise is beautiful.”

To Wise, the best way to kill the antisemitic trope of Jewish elites waging war against whites is to be a Jewish elite waging war against whites.

I don’t know about the Jewish cabal version of GRT, but as for liberals using immigration to bring in more Democratic voters, as Maya Angelou said, “When people show you who they are, believe them.”

Speaking of theories involving Jewish cabals …

The New York Times on neoconservatives, Aug. 4, 2003:

“For the past few weeks, U.S. President George W. Bush has been surrounded by a secretive circle of advisers and public relations experts, giving rise to all kinds of conspiracy theories and debates. It’s been said that the group’s idol is German Jewish philosopher Leo Strauss.”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Dems Speak Out on Roe! Release the COVID Variants!


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 11, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/05/11/dems-speak-out-on-roe-release-the-covid-variants—p–n2607103/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Dems Speak Out on Roe! Release the COVID Variants!

Source: AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

I guess Democrats realized that having feminist harpies fan out across the airwaves to shriek about the vital importance of aborting babies wasn’t helping, because we all woke up Monday morning to …

A NEW SURGE OF CORONAVIRUS!

Maybe that will distract the dingbats. They probably all think they have “long-haul COVID.”

In response to the Supreme Court’s leaked draft opinion returning abortion to the states, Hillary Clinton said: “Any American who says, ‘Look, I’m not a woman, this doesn’t affect me. I’m not Black, that doesn’t affect me. I’m not gay, that doesn’t affect me’ — once you allow this kind of extreme power to take hold, you have no idea who they will come for next.”

On the other hand …

1) Women themselves don’t seem to view abortion as a “women’s rights” issue — in fact, a lot of polls show women more opposed to abortion than men. Nobody’s wondering, for example, how Justice Amy Coney Barrett voted.

2) The “extreme power” Hillary’s talking about is: Letting people vote.

3) Idea! Maybe wait for what comes next to talk about what comes next.

Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., tweeted: “The Republicans won’t stop with banning abortion. They want to ban interracial marriage. Do you want to save that? Well, then you should probably vote.”

Yes — doubtless in an opinion written by Clarence Thomas.

Always on top of things, President Joe Biden’s response to the abortion opinion was to talk about … gay kids being thrown out of school. “What happens,” the advanced dementia patient asked, “if you have states change the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children?”

Wha …?

Why does every liberal argument about allowing Americans to vote on abortion immediately veer off into apocalyptic warnings about something else entirely? I’m beginning to suspect abortion is not as beloved as liberals claim it is. As Biden wrote in his 2007 book, “Promises to Keep”: “If we tried to make this a referendum on abortion rights … we’d lose.”

And yet, we keep being hectored about the runaway popularity of Roe v. Wade. Apparently, poll respondents just don’t want feminists to yell at them. Yes, absolutely, Roe is great. I don’t hate women, please leave me alone.

According to The New York Times — and I don’t think they’re exaggerating the opposition to abortion — two-thirds of Americans oppose abortion after the first trimester. That’s 12 weeks. The Mississippi abortion law that’s going to turn women into birthing machines bans abortion after 15 weeks.

Also inadvertently admitted in the Times: What percentage of abortions do you think take place after the first trimester? Answer: 8%.

That’s what the termagants are shrieking about? The 8% of abortions opposed by a substantial majority of Americans? No wonder they keep changing the subject to black people.

The winner of the most clinically insane response to the draft opinion is Amanda Taub of The New York Times. She explained that opposition to abortion is a sneaky way of opposing … women in the workforce? Contraception? Secularists?

Nope. Desegregation!

Taub begins with the counterfactual proposition that evangelicals don’t really care about abortion. (Because, c’mon, who would care about that?)

Her evidence: “It is hard to imagine now, but at the time Roe v. Wade was decided, in 1973, abortion was not a major issue for the American right, or even for evangelical Christians. …”

Hmmm, why might that be? Maybe it’s because, until Roe, abortion was a crime in almost every state in the Union. Three-quarters of the states banned abortion at every stage of pregnancy. All this is admitted in the Roe opinion itself.

As Justice Samuel Alito’s draft puts it:

“Until the latter part of the 20th century, there was no support in American law for a constitutional right to obtain an abortion. Zero. None. No state constitutional provision had recognized such a right. Until a few years before Roe was handed down, no federal or state court had recognized such a right.”

Hey, Amanda! It is hard to imagine, but matricide isn’t a major issue for the American right, either. On the other hand, if the Supreme Court suddenly discovers a “constitutional right” to kill your mother, I would expect that to change

But the sleuth Taub presses on:

“The shift [to pro-life] was not spurred by abortion itself, but by desegregation. After the Supreme Court ordered schools in the South to desegregate, many white parents pulled their children from public schools and sent them to all-white private schools … the I.R.S. revoked those schools’ tax-exempt status, provoking widespread anger among white evangelical Christians and catalyzing their new role as a powerful conservative force in American politics.”

I’m sure the creation of private religious academies had nothing to do with the court banning prayer in the public schools, then banning prohibitions on teaching Darwinism and sex ed. Why would Christians care about any of that?

By the way, where did this champion of desegregation go to high school? ANSWER: Amanda Taub went to a university “lab” school that is only 5% black in a town that is 18% black.

The gigantic hypocrite concludes: “Publicly opposing desegregation was not really socially acceptable or palatable to a broader coalition. But opposing abortion was.”

Whereas the Taubs relied on admissions testing and grades to ensure their daughter went to a segregated school.

Democratic Party: Get these lunatics away from the media!

But how? We don’t have anything —

Any new variants out there?

Guess what, America? CORONAVIRUS IS BACK!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Alito Will Save Lives, Not Biden


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 04, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/05/04/alito-will-save-lives-not-biden—p–n2606784/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, WhatDidYouSay.org.

Alito Will Save Lives, Not Biden

Source: AP Photo/Andrew Harnik

When the draft Supreme Court opinion overruling “Roe v. Wade” leaked on Monday, my first thought was: WHY COULDN’T THEY WAIT UNTIL NEXT YEAR? (“Roe” is in quotes because Planned Parenthood v. Casey already overruled Roe, but “Roe” is still used to describe the nonexistent right to abortion.)

Yes, it’s human life we’re talking about. Millions of babies are killed in their mothers’ wombs each year — it’s a massacre. On the other hand, I thought, ending late-terms might end the midterms.

But then I read Justice Samuel Alito’s opinion and was intellectually offended all over again by the idea that one of our precious constitutional rights, enshrined in a founding document, is the right to kill an unborn baby. Anyone complaining about the decision should be required to cite the exact parts Alito got wrong. Be specific. And keep in mind, no important discussion of constitutional law has ever begun with the words, “My vagina …”

The Nation magazine’s Elie Mystal took a stab at it by completely misstating Alito’s argument, then saying, “the Founding Fathers were racist, misogynist jerkfaces.” (I was planning on writing a scholarly and nuanced treatise on the framers, but Mystal just stole my title!)

I also noticed that, outside of the media, no one seems especially bothered by the decision. Or to have noticed it. In groups of liberal women, apolitical women, black and Puerto Rican women, no one is talking about the case.

They’re probably right. The end of a court-managed “constitutional” right to abortion isn’t going to produce the Roemageddon Democrats are predicting.

More than half of the country already lives in states where abortion will always be legal, subsidized and sacralized. For those who don’t, Harvard should set up an abortion scholarship program. Instead of spending $100 million “investigating” slavery, the university could buy bus tickets for girls who need to go to another state for an abortion.

The Mississippi law being upheld in this case — contrary to everything I’ve heard on MSNBC — is shockingly reasonable.

It states:

“Except in a medical emergency or in the case of a severe fetal abnormality, a person shall not intentionally or knowingly perform or induce an abortion of an unborn human being if the probable gestational age of the unborn human being has been determined to be greater than fifteen (15) weeks.”

The Mississippi legislature provided a series of factual findings:

  • at eight weeks gestational age the “unborn human being begins to move in the womb”;
  • at nine weeks “all basic physiological functions are present”;
  • at 10 weeks “vital organs begin to function,” and “hair, fingernails, and toenails begin to form”;
  • at 11 weeks “an unborn human being’s diaphragm is developing,” and he or she “may move about freely in the womb;” and
  • at 12 weeks the “unborn human being” has “taken on the human form in all relevant respects.”

After 15 weeks, the legislature found, most abortions involve crushing and tearing the fetus apart.

Laws should always err on the side against the decision-maker, and the decision-maker on the length of gestation is going to be the abortionist. (Which is also why “rape” and “incest” exceptions swallow the whole law. By the way, whatever happened to the morning-after pill?)

So we’re really talking about four to five months.

That’s not enough time? Give me a break, you freaks. I don’t think voters are going to say, Ukraine, inflation, the border, crime, transgenders in kindergarten — OH MY GOD, I CAN ONLY GET AN ABORTION FOR FOUR MONTHS???

Some states will surely roll back the right to abortion more than 15 weeks. Oh well. The abortion ladies will have to travel to other states the same way gunners do now to practice their marksmanship, shoppers do to get plastic bags, or breathers do to take off their masks.

With a patchwork of laws, we’ll be able to see which regulations do best at reducing abortion, illegitimacy (which soared in lockstep with the legalization of abortion), venereal diseases, suicides and false claims of rape when women are pressured into having sex, undeterred by the risk of pregnancy. We’ll call it “federalism.”

Watching MSNBC’s reaction also reminded me that everybody hates the feminists. The ladies couldn’t even keep the “#MeToo” movement going. How long did that last? Fifteen minutes? And a lot of the cases were egregious. But a month later, transgenders were canceling J.K. Rowling and women’s sports.

Now they’re hysterically babbling about the court banning contraceptioninterracial marriages and requiring forced sterilizations. I guess they don’t think their arguments about the abortion ruling are particularly strong, so they have to warn about scary rulings to come.

Finally, President Joe Biden has put Vice President Kamala Harris in charge of the response to this decision. Previously, she was put in charge of the border, and then Ukraine. Any day now, we’ll find out she was in charge of the Challenger space shuttle.

Maybe I’m just in a cheery mood, what with the imminent conclusion to this hideous chapter in U.S history. Who knows? Let’s wait nine months and see.

I have only two absolutely definite predictions flowing from the leak of the abortion opinion:

1) Liberals are about to start claiming that black people not only are incapable of getting IDs to vote, but are also incapable of knowing that they’ve been pregnant for four months. (And then: NIGHTMARE! THEY’LL HAVE TO GET A BUS TO NEW YORK OR CALIFORNIA!)

2) As for the leaker, if the perp turns out to be a conservative who was trying to pressure Chief Justice John Roberts or Justice Neil Gorsuch, he will be ruined for life. If he turns out to be a clerk for one of the liberals, he will get a book contract and a regular spot on MSNBC.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Dem Nightmare: What if the War Ends Before November?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Mar 16, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/03/16/dem-nightmare-what-if-the-war-ends-before-november—p–n2604665/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Dem Nightmare: What if the War Ends Before November?

Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky

Great news for Joe Biden. After months of abysmal public approval numbers, President Biden’s favorability among registered voters has soared by 2 points to 45%! And all he had to do was bring us to the brink of World War III.

The media are thrilled with the possibility of nuclear war with Russia. Catastrophes are terrific for ratings, and flood-the-zone coverage of a war between two faraway countries that has almost zero effect on the lives of most Americans allows journalists to act like deep-think, geopolitical strategists (after having quickly looked up “Ukraine” on Wikipedia).

They dragged out the COVID panic porn for two straight years. By now, the only people still interested in pandemic updates are hysterical liberal women in Manhattan claiming to have “long-haul COVID.”

The national pastime has segued seamlessly from watching TV anchors cry on TV about the coronavirus to watching TV anchors cry on TV about the fate of Ukrainian children.

Of course, when American kids are murdered expressly as a result of our own government’s policies, the journalism protocol is: No crying, no coverage.

There will be no tears for the 5-year-old Florida girl killed in October when an illegal alien from Guatemala, Ernesto Lopez Morales, tanked up on six 32-ounce beers, then plowed into the little girl and her mother as he was driving to get more beer.

Nor for Texas teenager Adrienne Sophia Exum, killed instantly one Sunday afternoon in 2020 when Heriberto Fuerte-Padilla, an illegal alien from Mexico, smashed into the car she was driving, then fled the scene. There’s even some news: The Biden administration announced that Fuerte-Padilla will not be deported.

And there will be no weeping for the still-unidentified mother and daughter, aged 59 and 22, killed last December when a human smuggler (a “U.S. citizen,” aka “anchor baby”) carrying six illegals across the border into Texas, sped through a stop sign and T-boned the pair.

I’m sure it’s just a coincidence, but the media’s obsessive focus on Ukraine is terrific for the interests of the Democratic Party. Recall that, in his 2012 book, “Left Turn: How Liberal Media Bias Distorts the American Mind,” then-UCLA professor Tim Groseclose demonstrated that media bias alone costs Republicans about 8 to 10 percentage points in elections.

And that was 2012. One can only imagine what it is in post-Trump 2022. If only we could return to the junior varsity media bias of 2012!

Until the war in Ukraine, the Democrats were facing midterms after having spent the previous two years mandating masks and an endless series of vaccinations — even for the vaccinated or previously infected.

Democrats flung open the border to illegal alien murderers, drug dealers, gang members and welfare recipients.

Democratic district attorneys have turned city after city into feces-smeared murdertopias that make Charles Bronson’s “Death Wish” look like “The Sound of Music.”

These days, the left’s main casus belli is teaching little kids about anal sex, transgenders and the inherent evil of white people.

What could even Stalin’s media do with that record?

Option 1) Implement a collective mind wipe, perhaps through an electromagnetic pulse, to erase voters’ memory of everything that’s happened since Joe Biden was sworn in.

Option 2) WAR! (Someplace in the world that’s not here.)

What crisis at our border? We’re reporting on a WAR.

How can you talk about murder rates when CHILDREN ARE DYING IN UKRAINE?

What vaccine mandates? COVID is over. Now we’re talking about war!

Everything bad that’s happening is Putin’s fault! He’s like Hitler!

Talk about Russian collusion! Putin gave Trump Facebook ads; he’s giving Biden a military invasion.

By now, the media have whipped the public into such a frenzy over Ukraine that a majority of Americans want the U.S. to start shooting down Russian planes, starting World War III with nuclear armed power.

A small price to pay for Democratic dominance.

But much like American military interventions around the globe, things don’t always go as planned.

The Democrats’ media helpers might want to recall President George H.W. Bush’s 89% favorable rating in 1991 — the highest presidential job approval rating then on record, according to Gallup.

Those astronomical numbers came as a result of the conclusion of the Persian Gulf War, when we went to war with Saddam Hussein because he had invaded neighboring Kuwait — violating that nation’s sacred sovereignty! — and proceeded to commit unspeakable war crimes, including using poison gas. The first week of that war, Bush’s poll numbers shot from 64% to 82%.

Republicans had a lock on the next year’s presidential contest. No serious Democrats were willing to challenge him, and the party ended up with a horny hick from Arkansas as their nominee.

And then it all collapsed. By Election Day 1992, Bush’s public approval rating was down to a pathetic 34%. The h*rny hick won the election, and Bush became an embarrassing one-term president.

On the military side, at least the Middle East was finally at peace. We never heard a peep out of Hussein again. Wait — what happened?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Do These Black Lives Matter to L.A.’s Idiot D.A.?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Mar 09, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/03/09/do-these-black-lives-matter-to-las-idiot-da—p–n2604354/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Do These Black Lives Matter to L.A.'s Idiot D.A.?

Source: Bryan Chan/County of Los Angeles via AP

Hey, whatever happened to that story about Sandra Shells? She was the 70-year-old nurse killed by one of Los Angeles’ many “unhoused” individuals (drug-addicted psychopaths) while she waited for a bus at 5:15 in the morning in January, on her way to her job at the Los Angeles County-USC Medical Center.

A homeless guy, Kerry Bell, walked up to Shells and punched her in the face, knocking her to the ground and fracturing her skull. She died of her injuries three days later.

Her life mattered more even than, say, George Floyd’s — and I can prove it.

1) Shells was a hardworking nurse, remembered as “kind, compassionate and giving” and a favorite of patients.

2) There is no evidence that she’d ever committed a home invasion robbery on a woman in Texas, pistol-whipped the woman and put a gun to her abdomen.

3) She was not a meth addict.

4) She did not have a long rap sheet, including selling cocaine, selling crack and theft.

5) She was merely standing at a bus stop — not, for example, resisting arrest after passing a counterfeit bill and having the police called on her.

But no one even knows her name, much less runs around erecting sacramental altars to her. To the contrary, news about this vicious assault on a kindly nurse was purged from all media outlets approximately 10 minutes after it happened. The police haven’t even released her assailant’s mug shot. Only after extensive searching online can you find the arrest report for Bell. “Race: B.”

It doesn’t matter to me, but it does to some of you, so I’ll mention that the victim’s race was also “B.”

If you can’t remember Shells’ name, then please remember this name: George Gascon, the district attorney entirely responsible for the explosion of murders, stabbings and smash-and-grab robberies in Los Angeles. So many, in fact, that the sickening murder of an elderly nurse isn’t considered especially newsworthy.

There’s an effort underway to recall Gascon — a George Soros-sponsored D.A. Coincidentally, there’s also an effort to recall San Francisco’s Chesa Boudin, another George Soros-sponsored D.A. “George Soros-sponsored D.A.” is shorthand for “This man will empty the prisons of berserk savages to prey on you and your loved ones.”

Which happens to be the official policy of the Democratic Party. Pay no attention to the windbaggery of President Biden’s recent Oh My God, Midterms Are Coming speech — I mean, State of the Union address — where he said, “The answer is not to defund the police. The answer is to fund the police!” Has he met his vice president? Kamala Harris endorsed Gascon.

Gascon’s response to the bloodbath he’s unleashed on the City of Angels is to announce: “In many ways, we cannot prosecute our way out of social inequalities, income inequalities, the unhoused, the desperation that we have.”

What does the “in many ways” do in that sentence? I know English isn’t Gascon’s first language, but I can’t make heads or tails of the “in many ways.”

Nor, come to think of it, the rest of the sentence. Is it a prosecutor’s job to reduce “social” and “income” inequalities? How about inequalities in work ethic, mathematical skills, good looks, athletic ability, comedic talent and empathetic understanding?

While it’s nice that the Los Angeles D.A. has made the amazing discovery that people are different, if he thinks it’s his duty to make all people the same, he may have a misunderstood the job description of a D.A.

As for Gascon’s apparent goal of eliminating “the desperation that we have,” the main cause of “desperation” among Los Angelinos right now is George Gascon. If he really wants to do something about “the desperation,” he should resign.

Gascon is either very, very stupid or thinks the public is stupid, and his incomprehensible verbiage will persuade them that the last thing he should be doing is prosecuting criminals.

How’s this for desperation? The fabulously wealthy Clarence and Jacqueline Avant, a legendary music producer and his ex-model wife, felt they had to hire a private security guard for their $7 million Beverly Hills home. Late last year, they’d also voted with their neighbors to hire guards to patrol their pricey Trousdale Estates neighborhood.

Days before the neighborhood patrol began, Aariel Maynor, a felon on parole despite a long list of priors (assault, robbery and grand theft) snuck past the Avants’ private guard at the front door, smashed a sliding glass door in the back, and burst in on the very much awake Mrs. Avant, a night owl, as her husband slept in their bedroom.

Maynor promptly blew her away with an AR-15 rifle. Hearing the gunfire, the private guard rushed in and Maynor shot at him, too, missing. He fled, but was captured about an hour later, after accidentally shooting himself in the foot while burglarizing a house seven miles away.

Mrs. Avant’s life mattered — even more than some other celebrated lives you may have heard of.

My proof:

1) She was the “pillar of that family,” as a friend put it.

2) She was a generous donor to local causes, such as the Neighbors of Watts and the South Central Community Child Care Center.

3) She was not a meth addict or violent ex-con who’d put a gun to a woman’s stomach, or passed a counterfeit bill in Minneapolis, then resisted arrest.

4) For my liberal readers: Mrs. Avant was an African-American.

But far from a national rending of garments, as we saw in tribute to Saint George, the response to Mrs. Avant’s murder was this: The D.A. promptly sent out a fundraising letter, making a heartfelt plea on behalf of armed criminals like the sociopath who killed her.

Gascon’s letter urged the passage of a law that would end sentence enhancements for crimes committed with a firearm. Such “sentence enhancements,” Gascon claimed, “have never been shown to reduce the rate of crime, and excessive sentence enhancements can actually drive up re-offense.”

Really? Can I see the study? Pro-crime zealots just make this crap up. Studies show that imprisoning criminals actually INCREASES crime.

It’s bad enough to have dangerous psychos out on the street, threatening our lives because there’s something wrong with their brains. The least we can expect is that they aren’t D.A.s.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Stop Talking About Ukraine, Republicans!


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 23, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/02/23/stop-talking-about-ukraine-republicans—p–n2603708/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Stop Talking About Ukraine, Republicans!

Source: AP Photo/Andriy Dubchak

Amid the media’s 24/7 UKRAINE UPDATES, perhaps some enterprising journalist could write an article explaining how our esteem for that country’s borders benefits a single American — other than President Joe Biden.

Our own border has become a transmission belt for the third world, bringing in rapists, murderers, future welfare recipients and left-wing activists. The Democratic Party’s brilliant policy of defunding the police and emptying the prisons has, oddly enough, led to a breathtaking surge in violent crime. Our schools have been taken over by lunatics who teach white kids that they are evil — and probably transsexual. Inflation has hit a 40-year high.

U.S. media: Whither Ukraine?

Midterms must be coming!

In 2020, Democratic data scientist David Shor advised his party: “Talk about the issues [voters] are with us on, and try really hard not to talk about the issues where we disagree. Which, in practice, means not talking about immigration.” (Emphasis mine.) After the election, he said that the main way the media’s COVID hysteria hurt Donald Trump was by preventing anyone from “talking about Hunter Biden or immigration.”

Evidently, the only issue where voters don’t vehemently disagree with Democrats this year is the precise border of a country they’d never given a moment’s thought to until five minutes ago.

What Republicans should be doing: talking about the issues Democrats are trying to avoid.

What Republicans are doing: talking about Ukraine.

Whenever you see any media talking about Ukraine, your Pavlovian response should be, Oh, I see. They don’t want me to think about immigration or crime.

It’s not only the Democrats drawing benefits from the media’s sudden Ukraine obsession. There’s also the military-industrial complex.

President Dwight Eisenhower led Allied troops in World War II, but in his farewell address from the White House, he warned of the “unwarranted influence” on the government by “the military-industrial complex.” In the 60 years since, these bloodsuckers have been bleeding our country dry, solely to make themselves rich.

As Americans discovered to their dismay when the pandemic hit, we can’t make our own masks, pharmaceuticals or aspirin. We can’t make our own computer chips, razors, bicycles, toys, sneakers, Levi’s jeans and on and on and on. But boy, do we make weapons! In our ruling class’s ideal country, there will be nothing but defense contractors, Black Lives Matter activists and Latin American gardeners.

Just five companies receive the lion’s share of taxpayer money for “defense” weaponry. In 2020, the U.S taxpayer doled out $75 billion to Lockheed Martin, $28 billion to Raytheon, $22 billion to General Dynamics, $22 billion to Boeing and $20 billion to Northrop Grumman. Since 2001, these five companies alone have cost the taxpayer $2.1 trillion.

To put this in perspective, the annual budget of the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development is a little more than $50 billion. (And we should zero-out that whole budget, too.) During the COVID pandemic, when the government ordered people not to work, the entire supplemental food budget was about $70 billion.

Ronald Reagan’s victory in the Cold War should have been a sad day at Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing. Instead, it was the beginning of endless paydays. Today, the American taxpayer spends more on “defense” than during the Reagan buildup that crushed the USSR; more than during the Vietnam War, more even than the War on Terror after 9/11.

Worse, we’ve added a “think-tank industrial complex” — an army of useless, camera-ready blowhards to explain why our incessant meddling around the globe is always in America’s “vital national security interest.”

Why does NATO still exist? This alliance was the West’s response to Soviet aggression during the Cold War. Once the USSR collapsed (thanks to Reagan) and the Warsaw Pact disbanded, that should have been the end of it. Instead, we keep adding countries to the alliance — with a requirement of admission being that they buy their weapons from American defense contractors.

Everyone acknowledges that Vladimir Putin’s main concern is that Ukraine will be asked to join NATO. How about, as a compromise, the U.S. will pull out of NATO? (Another of Trump’s broken promises.)

Nope! Can’t shut down this utterly anachronistic organization, requiring America to defend the likes of Latvia, should some other pipsqueak nation violate its precious borders. (Why isn’t Latvia down in Texas right now, defending our borders?)

Far from unwinding NATO, our country’s leaders are constantly trying to expand it, thus increasing the odds that Americans will be forced to go to war over some other country’s sacred sovereignty. Pointless wars are the lifeblood of defense contractors! We pay the price and defense contractors get the money.

(Ike should be on Mount Rushmore for his “military-industrial complex” speech.)

This year, the worshipful reverence for Ukraine’s borders has the added bonus of blocking Americans from thinking about immigration and crime. Republicans ought to be talking their heads off about the unprecedented crisis at our border, Afghan “refugees” raping little kids in our country, illegal aliens hauling meth and fentanyl into our country, rampant shoplifting, carjacking and assaults destroying neighborhoods in our country.

Luckily, the GOP is too smart to fall for the media’s latest subject-changer.

Oh, wait —

@newtgingrich: “The Biden Administration talks and Putin acts. This is such a clear replay of Chamberlain trying to deal with Hitler that it is more than a little frightening. Putin is pushing day by day and has no fear of NATO because he has no fear of the United States or its President.”

GOP 2022 Contract With America: “Putin’s like Hitler.”


Stop Talking About Ukraine, Republicans!

Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 23, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/02/23/stop-talking-about-ukraine-republicans—p–n2603708/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Stop Talking About Ukraine, Republicans!

Source: AP Photo/Andriy Dubchak

Amid the media’s 24/7 UKRAINE UPDATES, perhaps some enterprising journalist could write an article explaining how our esteem for that country’s borders benefits a single American — other than President Joe Biden.

Our own border has become a transmission belt for the third world, bringing in rapists, murderers, future welfare recipients and left-wing activists. The Democratic Party’s brilliant policy of defunding the police and emptying the prisons has, oddly enough, led to a breathtaking surge in violent crime. Our schools have been taken over by lunatics who teach white kids that they are evil — and probably transsexual. Inflation has hit a 40-year high.

U.S. media: Whither Ukraine?

Midterms must be coming!

In 2020, Democratic data scientist David Shor advised his party: “Talk about the issues [voters] are with us on, and try really hard not to talk about the issues where we disagree. Which, in practice, means not talking about immigration.” (Emphasis mine.) After the election, he said that the main way the media’s COVID hysteria hurt Donald Trump was by preventing anyone from “talking about Hunter Biden or immigration.”

Evidently, the only issue where voters don’t vehemently disagree with Democrats this year is the precise border of a country they’d never given a moment’s thought to until five minutes ago.

What Republicans should be doing: talking about the issues Democrats are trying to avoid.

What Republicans are doing: talking about Ukraine.

Whenever you see any media talking about Ukraine, your Pavlovian response should be, Oh, I see. They don’t want me to think about immigration or crime.

It’s not only the Democrats drawing benefits from the media’s sudden Ukraine obsession. There’s also the military-industrial complex.

President Dwight Eisenhower led Allied troops in World War II, but in his farewell address from the White House, he warned of the “unwarranted influence” on the government by “the military-industrial complex.” In the 60 years since, these bloodsuckers have been bleeding our country dry, solely to make themselves rich.

As Americans discovered to their dismay when the pandemic hit, we can’t make our own masks, pharmaceuticals or aspirin. We can’t make our own computer chips, razors, bicycles, toys, sneakers, Levi’s jeans and on and on and on. But boy, do we make weapons! In our ruling class’s ideal country, there will be nothing but defense contractors, Black Lives Matter activists and Latin American gardeners.

Just five companies receive the lion’s share of taxpayer money for “defense” weaponry. In 2020, the U.S taxpayer doled out $75 billion to Lockheed Martin, $28 billion to Raytheon, $22 billion to General Dynamics, $22 billion to Boeing and $20 billion to Northrop Grumman. Since 2001, these five companies alone have cost the taxpayer $2.1 trillion.

To put this in perspective, the annual budget of the State Department and U.S. Agency for International Development is a little more than $50 billion. (And we should zero-out that whole budget, too.) During the COVID pandemic, when the government ordered people not to work, the entire supplemental food budget was about $70 billion.

Ronald Reagan’s victory in the Cold War should have been a sad day at Lockheed Martin, Raytheon and Boeing. Instead, it was the beginning of endless paydays. Today, the American taxpayer spends more on “defense” than during the Reagan buildup that crushed the USSR; more than during the Vietnam War, more even than the War on Terror after 9/11.

Worse, we’ve added a “think-tank industrial complex” — an army of useless, camera-ready blowhards to explain why our incessant meddling around the globe is always in America’s “vital national security interest.”

Why does NATO still exist? This alliance was the West’s response to Soviet aggression during the Cold War. Once the USSR collapsed (thanks to Reagan) and the Warsaw Pact disbanded, that should have been the end of it. Instead, we keep adding countries to the alliance — with a requirement of admission being that they buy their weapons from American defense contractors.

Everyone acknowledges that Vladimir Putin’s main concern is that Ukraine will be asked to join NATO. How about, as a compromise, the U.S. will pull out of NATO? (Another of Trump’s broken promises.)

Nope! Can’t shut down this utterly anachronistic organization, requiring America to defend the likes of Latvia, should some other pipsqueak nation violate its precious borders. (Why isn’t Latvia down in Texas right now, defending our borders?)

Far from unwinding NATO, our country’s leaders are constantly trying to expand it, thus increasing the odds that Americans will be forced to go to war over some other country’s sacred sovereignty. Pointless wars are the lifeblood of defense contractors! We pay the price and defense contractors get the money.

(Ike should be on Mount Rushmore for his “military-industrial complex” speech.)

This year, the worshipful reverence for Ukraine’s borders has the added bonus of blocking Americans from thinking about immigration and crime. Republicans ought to be talking their heads off about the unprecedented crisis at our border, Afghan “refugees” raping little kids in our country, illegal aliens hauling meth and fentanyl into our country, rampant shoplifting, carjacking and assaults destroying neighborhoods in our country.

Luckily, the GOP is too smart to fall for the media’s latest subject-changer.

Oh, wait —

@newtgingrich: “The Biden Administration talks and Putin acts. This is such a clear replay of Chamberlain trying to deal with Hitler that it is more than a little frightening. Putin is pushing day by day and has no fear of NATO because he has no fear of the United States or its President.”

GOP 2022 Contract With America: “Putin’s like Hitler.”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Have At ‘Em, Antifa! The New Free Speech


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 16, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/02/16/have-at-em-antifa-the-new-free-speech—p–n2603402/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Have At 'Em, Antifa! The New Free Speech

Source: AP Photo/Gillian Flaccus

In 2017, as fear and loathing of Donald Trump seized the nation, a U.S. mayor got a four-star resort to cancel a conservative conference by threatening to withdraw police and fire protection.

With all the media blubbering about “attempts to DESTROY our democracy” and violations of “constitutional norms,” it’s remarkable that this Howitzer blast to the First Amendment has received barely any attention, much less the front-page coverage it deserves, not even from the conservative press.

The banned conference, you see, was about immigration.

Wow, our elites really don’t want Americans thinking about immigration! (Remember, kids: It’s a right-wing conspiracy theory — and racist, to boot! — to think that liberals are using mass immigration to change the country.)

The sponsor of the conference was VDARE, a long-standing immigration website espousing ideas that are basically identical to Trump’s 2016 immigration promises — both before he made them and after he broke them. The main difference is that the arguments on VDARE are expressed in proper English, and the writers actually believe what they say.

As the 2016 election demonstrated, these ideas are quite popular with a certain segment of voters. Not everyone, just enough to elect a president no one thought could ever be elected, who was loathed by the media, and who was outspent 2-to-1.

Named for Virginia Dare, the first European born on U.S soil, VDARE promotes the novel idea that U.S. immigration policy should benefit Americans. (Obviously, that includes white, Hispanic, Asian and black Americans — whom, by the way, mass immigration hurts the most.) Naturally, therefore, it has been designated a “white supremacist” website by the country’s largest hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Four months after VDARE signed a contract to hold its annual conference at the Cheyenne Mountain Resort in Colorado Springs, the local mayor, John Suthers — nominee for the Liz Cheney Profiles in Courage Award! — issued a public announcement accusing VDARE of engaging in “hate speech” and urging the resort to cancel (OK, whatever), but also vowing to deny “any support or resources to this event” if the resort honored the contract.

Hey Antifa, in case anybody’s interested — if you firebomb this conference, we won’t be sending any firetrucks. And if you want to attack the attendees, there won’t be any police showing up to stop you.

The next day, the resort canceled the contract and, per the agreement, paid a kill fee. VDARE sued the mayor, alleging a violation of its First Amendment rights.

Here’s the frightening part: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit (one Obama judge and two G.W. Bush judges; one dissent) found for the mayor on the grounds that it’s possible that the resort canceled NOT because the mayor announced that there would be no police or fire protection, but because of … CHARLOTTESVILLE!

Which VDARE had nothing to do with. (Again, VDARE is an immigration website, not a street protest organization.)

If the Supreme Court does not agree to take up this case and brutally slap down the 10th Circuit, “free speech” will be officially limited to speech acceptable to Antifa, working hand-in-hand with liberal mayors and governors.

I have long maintained that the left never truly cared about free speech. They merely pretended to in order to protect the people they actually supported: communists and pornographers. That was the sort of “speech” that used to get banned.

But today, the speech that gets banned includes statements like: There are only two genders; Maybe we shouldn’t defund the police; Affirmative action is unjust; Masks don’t work — No they work! No, they don’t work! Also, apparently, speech asserting that mass immigration has not been an unalloyed good for our country, contributing to our prosperity, cohesiveness and happiness.

One of Justice William Brennan’s hallowed quotes is: “[T]he government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable.” Those stirring words were in defense of flag-burning. And here’s a famous one from Justice William O. Douglas: “Restriction of free thought and free speech is the most dangerous of all subversions. It is the one un-American act that could most easily defeat us.” That was about communists.

But ever since conservative speech became the target of censors, liberals adore governmental suppression of speech. (The one, lone exception that proves the rule: Nadine Strossen, former president of the ACLU and author of “HATE: Why We Should Resist It With Free Speech, Not Censorship.”)

As the 10th Circuit explained, conservative speakers should have no expectation of police and fire protection. Specifically, the majority opinion declared: “What VDARE wanted, it had no right to demand — municipal resources to monitor a private entity’s private event.” (Monitor? How about “That the city not refuse to send police officers and firetrucks”?)

So I guess we can forget that sonorous horse crap about the First Amendment protecting ideas that “society finds … offensive or disagreeable.” The left’s new model is a public-private partnership to prohibit speech unacceptable to Joy Ann Reid.

Henceforth, blue states and cities will be free to shut down conservative speakers, MAGA meetings, Daughters of the American Revolution gatherings or anti-mask protests. Some jackass mayor will claim that the conservatives are threatening to engage in “hate speech” and deny them police and fire protection (then sit back and wait for the accolades from the media).

With midterms approaching, conservatives are feeling giddy. Everything the left holds dear — open borders, “racial equity,” Defund the Police, critical race theory — is toxic to voters. Woo hoo! We’re winning!

Not so fast, patriots. While you fist-pump, liberals are busy institutionalizing the censorship of conservatives throughout the nation. You want to talk about “institutional bias”? How about the systemic bias against any ideas unacceptable to progressives being baked into American society?

If the Supreme Court fails to overturn the outrageous opinion in VDARE Foundation v. City of Colorado Springs, free speech’s gravestone will read: “Bedrock principle of a nation; 1791-2022.”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: DeSantis Shocker: It’s Not OK to Hate Whites


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 26, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/01/26/desantis-shocker-its-not-ok-to-hate-whites—p–n2602426/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.com.

DeSantis Shocker: It's Not OK to Hate Whites

Source: AP Photo/Phelan M. Ebenhack

Gov. Ron DeSantis is pushing a bill through the Florida legislature to put a stop to the modern pedagogy of making little girls cry because they’re white. The bill, called “Stop the Wrongs to Our Kids and Employees Act (WOKE),” prohibits classroom instruction that contradicts these concepts:

“No race is inherently superior to another race”;

“An individual, by virtue of his or her race or sex, does not bear responsibility for actions committed in the past by other members of the same race or sex”;

“An individual should not be made to feel discomfort, guilt, anguish, or any other form of psychological distress on account of his or her race.”

The left has been having a sneer-fest over the proposed law, howling that it protects “white people” from feeling “uncomfortable.” SNOWFLAKES!

E.g.:

“A bill pushed by Republican Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis that would prohibit public schools and private businesses from making white people feel ‘discomfort’ when they teach students or train employees about discrimination in the nation’s past …” — The Associated Press (emphasis added)

“The right likes to talk so much about, you know, snowflakes. It seems like they may be raising snowflakes because if they think people are going to be uncomfortable by the actual facts — facts are uncomfortable.” — CNN’s Don Lemon

“Ron DeSantis and his GOP allies are pushing a bill … that would prohibit public schools [from making] white people squirm. Those poor, wittle babies.

“Their feelings are hurting. Some poor, wittle white people are uncomfortable about the hundreds of years of racism and hate that built this nation.” — Laura Washington, Chicago Sun-Times

(Saving the best for last …)

“[H]e’s trying to make it illegal, Governor Ron DeSantis, to teach history that would make white people uncomfortable. Does that law include saying you can’t make black people feel uncomfortable or indigenous people? The history of indigenous and African Americans could make one uncomfortable? Is that illegal too, or is it just white people?” — MSNBC’s Joy Ann Reid

To know the answer to Joy Ann’s question, you’d have to actually read the bill. Or an article about the bill. Or commentary on an article about the bill. Joy Ann Reid: highly literate and well-informed Harvard graduate. But, duh: A bill prohibiting the teaching of race hatred will primarily prevent the teaching of white hatred for the simple reason that it’s the only race we’re allowed to hate. Not merely allowed to hate, but taught to hate, encouraged to hate, paid to hate.

We’re now entering the sixth decade of open, widespread, official discrimination against white people on the basis of their race. Even the Asians suing Harvard dare not stress the humungous advantage given to blacks and Hispanics. No, their beef is about white applicants getting preferential treatment over Asians.

This is odd, to say the least. According to the plaintiffs’ own expert witness, an Asian with a 25% chance of admission to Harvard would increase his chances to 36% if he were white — but to 77% if Hispanic, and to 95% if black. Asians sure have assimilated to our culture!

Everybody’s copacetic with the idea that universities discriminate against white people — in abject defiance of the clear language of our civil rights laws. They have done so, loud and proud, at least since 1973, when Allan Bakke was rejected from the University of California, Davis, School of Medicine, because he was white. In fact, no one under the age of 50 has ever lived in an America where universities and other elite institutions have not discriminated against whites. Three generations of hating whites are enough.

School districts around the country teach white children that they were born racist and assign books like, Not My Idea: A Book About Whiteness,” that portrays “whiteness” as a contract with Satan.

So yes, a race-neutral law that prohibits teaching race hatred will, in practice, prohibit teaching hatred of whites because that’s the only race-hate that’s taught.

Liberals jeer at whites who object to this constant disparagement, calling them “poor, wittle babies.” Does the left have any self-awareness at all?

6-year-old girl is a total pussy if she can’t take a little abuse for being white — at a school her parents are paying for. But our entire country has been turned upside down for the past half-century to prevent any other race from experiencing a fleeting moment of discomfort.

Historic Confederate statues are torn down and melted; newspapers refuse to identify the race of criminals — or even show photos of the arrestees; the Oscars will not consider a movie for Best Picture that does not have 30% non-whites. Otherwise, black people might feel uncomfortable.

Professor Amy Wax of the University of Pennsylvania Law School is routinely threatened with suspension or firing from her tenured position for stating facts about black students’ performance. Her remarks make black people feel uncomfortable.

Hey, where’s the rush to review Charles Murray’s recent book “Facing Reality” about black crime and I.Q.? Nope, might make black people uncomfortable.

A few years ago, Kansas City officials were advised not to impose a curfew in response to the violent mobs of black teenagers descending on a shopping plaza because, as the black mayor said, it would “make a lot of black kids angry.” His remark inspired the title of Colin Flaherty’s book about black crime, “Don’t Make the Black Kids Angry” — a book that is currently banned from Amazon. It might make black people uncomfortable.

Anti-whiteness books are flooding the grade schools, but you aren’t allowed to spend your own money to purchase books on Amazon that make some people “uncomfortable.” Not only Flaherty’s book, but:

— Ryan Anderson’s “When Harry Became Sally: Responding to the Transgender Moment” — might make transgenders uncomfortable.

— Jared Taylor’s “If We Do Nothing,” as well as two books he contributed to: “Race Against Time” and “Face to Face With Race” — might make black people uncomfortable.

— The Kindle edition of the widely praised 1973 dystopian novel by French author Jean Raspail, “Camp of the Saints” — might make third worlders uncomfortable.

— David Cole’s rollicking autobiography, “Republican Party Animal” — makes Debra Messing uncomfortable.

The FBI allowed the 9/11 attack to happen by blowing off an Arizona agent’s warning that a lot of Arabs were enrolled in flight school. Three thousand Americans had to die because noticing Arabs in flight school might make some people uncomfortable.

Last week, a Muslim terrorist, Malik Faisal Akram, seized a Texas synagogue and held four hostages for 10 hours. The media universally identified Akram as: “British man.” He didn’t even call himself “British”! A week later, the Anti-Defamation League’s Jonathan Greenblatt went on MSNBC and tried to suggest “Republicans” were responsible for the attack. The truth might make Muslims uncomfortable.

A virus that originated in China cannot be called anything with “China” in the name. That might make Asians uncomfortable.

Before we go, here’s another “actual fact,” as Don Lemon put it, and “facts are uncomfortable” (especially for the black Harvard grad on MSNBC who can’t read a bill): By Harvard’s own admission, nearly 60% of the black students it admits are there only because they are black.

It’s so great that liberals have finally turned against snowflakes so we can discuss “actual facts” again!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Message in the Polls: Trump’s Done


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 19, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/01/19/the-message-in-the-polls-trumps-done—p–n2602080

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org/

The Message in the Polls: Trump's Done

Source: AP Photo/Ross D. Franklin

Our media are obsessed with Donald Trump, but Trump’s obsessed with Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida. For months now, Trump’s been playing the aging silent film star Norma Desmond in “Sunset Boulevard” to DeSantis’ younger, prettier Betty Schaefer.

Amid the hourly, annoying group emails to Trump’s list — “YOU are one of my TOP supporters!” — there was one from Roger Stone on Nov. 2, 2021, denouncing DeSantis.

The insults sounded a lot like what Trump used to say about Stone: “Ron’s own piss-poor campaign …,” “without really delivering on his Trump-like rhetoric …,” “Governor DeSantis has failed …” and so on.

The title of this diatribe was: “WILL RON DESANTIS TAKE THE PLEDGE?” Can you guess what “the pledge” is? That is correct: not to challenge Trump for president in 2024.

Only because it was “from” Stone, a smart guy who sadly prostrated himself on the altar of Trump, did I open it. Then, I shook my head and deleted it.

Evidently, others on the Trump email list responded with more rancor.

One week later, Stone sent out a follow-up email frantically backpedaling, noting that “many” recipients of his recent email were “surprised” by his attacks on DeSantis. The crow-eating letter ended by pleading with Stone’s critics to “Please take a moment to read what I have actually said …”

That must’ve been some blowback!

No one wants Trump. He’s fading faster than Sarah Palin did — and she was second place on a losing presidential ticket. In case you don’t remember, for three years following that loss, Palin was packing stadiums with tens of thousands of Trump-like fans.

But by 2011, even she — a far smarter politician than Trump who did not spend her time whining about the last election, wallowing in self-pity or endorsing candidates because they once said something nice about her golf course — had faded. She was fun, but Republicans were starting to think seriously about the 2012 presidential election.

Trump is already two years ahead of Palin’s fade-out schedule. After his petulant endorsements this year deliver loss after loss in midterm elections that ought to be a blowout landslide for the GOP, he’ll be as popular as former Missouri Rep. Todd Akin.

As many Republicans will bitterly recall, Trump has already lost two Senate seats for Republicans in the 2021 Georgia runoffs. So far this year, he’s on track to lose — at least — another Senate race in Georgia, as well as the governor’s mansion.

Sure, thousands of people show up to his heavily advertised rallies, but they’re all the exact same people. His die-hard fans — or, as he calls them, “future Trump University students” — are like Deadheads, following him from venue to venue, dressing up in wild costumes and listening to the same songs.

Some conservatives who would never again vote for Trump wear MAGA hats, but that’s just an identity badge, like liberals wearing masks. Trump happens to be the last Republican president, and the media lose their minds over him. Wearing a “Trump” hat is the most efficient way to say, “Screw you, media.”

This is why the media’s neurotic fixation on Trump is baffling to normal people. TV hosts keep telling us that Trump is wildly popular — the 2024 nomination is his for the asking! — but facts on the ground suggest otherwise.

It turns out the media are using a sleight of hand to claim that Trump is popular with Republicans.

Nate Silver’s respected website fivethirtyeight recently announced: “Republicans remain loyal to Trump even after Jan. 6 attack,” citing a poll that shows Trump’s approval among Republicans at nearly 80%.

But there’s a lot more to the story. The poll allows readers to view Trump’s approval not only among all voters (-14%) but among specific subgroups of all voters: men, women, Blacks, Hispanics and whites, as well as any combination of these demographic subgroups. And get this: Trump doesn’t have as much as 25% net approval among any subgroup — other than “Republicans.”

Females have a negative 24% net favorable opinion of Trump. OK, fine, women don’t like him. Show me “men.” Men have a negative 3% net favorable opinion of Trump. That’s pretty much a full set. Who’s left?

I tried whites — the base of the Republican Party (and the demographic that decides every election, despite the unshakable beliefs of GOP donors). Whites have a meager 4% net favorable opinion of Trump.

We’re running out of demographics that might like Trump.

Maybe it was that massive Hispanic vote for Trump that I’ve been hearing so much about! Hispanics: negative 44% net favorable for Trump. Blacks? Negative 85% net favorable.

White men? Fourteen percent net favorable opinion of Trump. (That’s not even going to win you Alabama, Republicans.)

Non-college graduates? Negative 12% net favorable.

How about non-college-educated white men? The beating heart of the Trump base is only 23% net favorable toward Trump.

So how is it possible that 77% of “Republicans” — net — have a favorable opinion of Trump? There’s no other subgroup of the electorate that has even a third of that.

The only explanation is that an awful lot of Republicans are now calling themselves “Independents.”

Huh. Why might that be?

Maybe it’s because, day in, day out, the media tell us that the GOP is “the Party of Trump”! Apparently, this has led a lot of Republicans to conclude that they must not be Republicans, after all. (At least, among the Republicans contacted by these pollsters. I assume they didn’t have any respondents in Florida, where “Republican” has a much more favorable connotation.)

Thanks to the media’s lies, the only people calling themselves “Republicans” these days are the Trump die-hards. In other words, the blockbuster conclusion of this poll is: Trump die-hards like Trump!

Yes — and they’re the only ones who do. While Trump fanatics are indeed fanatical, everyone else is sick and tired of his nonsense.

Give voters a populist conservative who’s not a conman and a liar and they’ll be “Republicans” again. No wonder Trump hates DeSantis.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Great Epstein Cover-Up, Part 2


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 12, 2022

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2022/01/12/the-great-epstein-coverup-part-2—p–n2601773/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, WhatDidYouSay.org.

The Great Epstein Cover-Up, Part 2

Source: AP Photo/Palm Beach Sheriff’s Office, File

Last week, we reviewed our ruling class’s strange lack of interest in Jeffrey Epstein’s child molestation ring, in which so many of them played a part. The media cover-up is second only to the government cover-up, with prosecutors delivering loss after loss in cases they’ve been forced to bring (by the police and the public) against the child molester.

This week, we’ll look at the government’s long record of zealously trying NOT to unravel the case.

Barry Krischer was the first prosecutor to let Epstein off for child molestation. The local police presented then-Palm Beach state attorney Krischer with bales of evidence. They had affidavits from dozens of witnesses: girls abused by the pederast, the women who recruited them, the butler who cleaned up sex toys after the “massages,” as well as records of Epstein’s molestation appointments, one delayed because of a victim’s “soccer practice.”

Pretty much everything we know today about Epstein’s sex ring was unearthed by the Palm Beach Police back in 2005 and handed to Krischer on a silver platter.

Five underage girls had given police sworn statements that Epstein had sexually abused them, backed by 17 other witnesses, but when Krischer brought the case to the grand jury, weirdly, he allowed only one of the girls to testify — and then attacked her on the stand! (Epstein’s attorneys had helpfully provided Krischer’s office with the girl’s posts on MySpace, where she talked about boys and drinking, the little harlot.)

According to an extensive review by The Palm Beach Post, most of Krischer’s 2,800-page investigative file on the case consists of dirt against the teens — and against the police — given to him by Epstein’s lawyers. (Thanks, Epstein attorneys! Do we owe you anything?)

The grand jurors, who’d been meticulously kept in the dark by Krischer, ended up voting only for a single charge of “solicitation of prostitution” against Epstein in 2006. He pleaded guilty and was sentenced to five years’ probation. No jail time, no record as a sex offender — no criminal record whatsoever.

According to Nexis, only one newspaper, The Palm Beach Post, reported at the time — or ever — that Palm Beach prosecutor Krischer gave Epstein probation for his years of child abuse.

Epstein’s friends claimed he was the victim of a crusade by Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter, whom they called a “born-again nutcase.” Apparently, anyone who thinks prison is appropriate for the mastermind of a massive child sex ring has gotta be “born-again.” (How does he feel about teenage girls talking about boys and drinking?) In fact, there’s no evidence that Reiter is even a Christian — other than the fact that he’s never won an award from the ADL.

(In 2018, the Anti-Defamation League gave a “Jurisprudence Award” to … Barry Krischer! The award praised him for “exemplifying the principles upon which the Anti-Defamation League was founded.” Hey, Jonathan Greenblatt, was Harvey Weinstein out of town?)

At that point, the enraged Palm Beach chief of police took his evidence to a completely separate law enforcement agency — the federal government, even though these were mostly state crimes. U.S. attorney Alex Acosta proceeded to make a deal with Epstein — with Krischer essentially operating as Epstein’s defense counsel — resulting in a plea only slightly tougher than Krischer’s pat on the head.

According to journalist Vicky Ward, Acosta later defended this sweetheart deal to the Trump transition team, explaining: “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence‘ and to leave it alone.”

Most recently, the U.S. attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York brought a gentle prosecution against Epstein’s pimp and fellow child molester, Ghislaine Maxwell. Federal prosecutors called a mere four girls who claimed to have been recruited and/or abused by Maxwell. They could have put dozens of her victims on the stand.

Most notably, the Southern District did not call the star witness, Virginia Giuffre, who has openly named the rich and powerful men she says these creeps forced her to have sex with, including Prince Andrew, former Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz, former New Mexico governor and presidential candidate Bill Richardson, former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, French model scout Jean-Luc Brunel, and the hedge fund billionaire Glenn Dubin, among others.

(Times of London, Jan. 9, 2022: “Alan Dershowitz asked Donald Trump to grant Ghislaine Maxwell a preemptive pardon.”)

Immediately after the Southern District accidentally won five guilty verdicts against Maxwell, the prosecutors quietly revealed that, weeks earlier, they’d dismissed all charges against the prison guards who failed to check on Epstein for more than eight hours the night he allegedly committed suicide — despite an explicit directive that they check on him every 30 minutes.

Not to brag but …

July 25, 2019, 1:05 a.m.: @AnnCoulter Dear Bureau of Prisons: Please get Jeffrey Epstein to a super Max prison pronto, or the people who want him dead will make sure we never know the truth. ACT NOW!

Aug. 10, 2019: Epstein found dead in his cell.

The feds not only did not move Epstein to a super-maximum security prison as some observers recommended, but they also did this:

— The day before Epstein died, he was taken off suicide watch.

— Against orders, his cellmate transferred elsewhere, leaving Epstein completely alone in his cell.

— All the cameras on Epstein’s floor were mysteriously broken.

— Even the footage of his earlier suicide attempt had been mistakenly erased and the backup footage destroyed “as a result of technical errors,” according to assistant U.S. attorneys Jason Swergold and Maurene Comey.

How many times can they use the “we’re completely incompetent” defense? (Hey, does anybody know if this case implicates rich people?)

Maxwell’s brother soon announced to the press — and to anyone else who might be interested! — that his sister was no snitch. She wouldn’t rat out any of Epstein’s fellow child molesters in exchange for a lighter sentence.

Maxwell is facing up to 65 years in prison, and her brother has just admitted she can name names. Hello? SDNY? Any thoughts about applying some pressure?

Unfortunately, these are the same prosecutors who just did everything in their power to blow the case against her. My prediction of their next conversation with Maxwell: This is our last offer: 30 hours of community service — and we’re not kidding! OK, 20 hours. Damn — you’re one tough negotiator.

Most strange, the ink wasn’t dry on the guilty verdicts before one of the jurors ran to the press and announced that he’d lied on his juror questionnaire. Although he’d denied ever having been sexually molested, he had been! Not only that, but — hoo boy — did his experience with sex abuse sway the jurors during deliberations!

The defense immediately moved for a mistrial and the chatty juror moved to a villa in the south of France he’s just inherited from an unknown relative. OK, the second part isn’t true (that I know of), but are you kidding me??

Are prosecutors even investigating any contact between Maxwell’s representatives and the jurors? Will he be tried for perjury?

However this ends, once it’s over, we’ll never hear about Epstein again — unlike, say, Jan. 6, which we will never stop hearing about. If America got to vote, which story do you think they would find more interesting?

Which story is more important? Doesn’t the public have a right to know how big Epstein’s sex/blackmail club was, who among America’s ruling elite were compromised, and to what end?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Daunte Wright NYT Readers Don’t Know


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 22, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/12/22/the-daunte-wright-nyt-readers-dont-know—p–n2600991/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

The Daunte Wright NYT Readers Don't Know

Source: AP Photo/Mary Altaffer

They’re doing it again. The New York Times is aggressively hiding relevant facts on a matter of public interest simply in order to promote the narrative of black victimhood.

OK, we didn’t get away with it last time, but we probably will this time. Let’s try!

Daunte Wright is the half-black man fatally shot by a police officer in Minnesota earlier this year. According to Nexis, he has appeared in well over 100 articles in the Times. But one thing Times readers will never be told is that Wright was facing criminal charges for trying to choke a woman to death while robbing her at gunpoint. They will also never hear about the lawsuit accusing Wright and an accomplice of shooting a guy during a carjacking.

In a bold departure from customary practice, the Times did make two passing references to another lawsuit claiming Wright shot a guy in the head, permanently disabling him, but in both cases, quickly added: “The lawsuit offers no direct evidence tying Mr. Wright to the shooting.”

And those are just the crimes he’s accused of committing lately, during the brief year and a half since he turned 18 and was no longer treated as a juvenile.

When it comes to Wright’s legal problems, the Times didn’t even pull its usual trick of putting all the interesting information in paragraph 20. These grisly allegations, as set forth in police reports and lawsuits, have been completely, 100% censored from the Newspaper of Record.

This isn’t a genteel refusal to “put the victim on trial.” Wright’s short but exciting criminal record is highly relevant to the convulsions this country has been going through since George Floyd’s death at the hands of the police in 2020 — convulsions painstakingly fostered by the Times.

Contrary to the media’s black victimhood narrative, there’s a very good reason Wright was in a position to be confronted by the police and in a way that most people are not.

In addition to allegedly committing a slew of gun crimes before the age of 20 (based on only one year and six months of public records), Wright was stopped for driving with expired license plate tags. He didn’t have car insurance. He also didn’t have a driver’s license. (And yes, white people are busted for these infractions all the time.)

When the officers ran his name, they discovered that Wright was driving on a suspended license, there was a restraining order against him, and a bench warrant for his arrest on a weapons charge. They had no choice: They had to arrest him. But as one officer began to handcuff him, Wright resisted, jumped back in his car and was about to flee — along with an officer trapped in the passenger window, trying to get control of the gears.

That’s when Wright got shot.

In other words, this case isn’t exactly a primo example of “Driving While Black.” That’s why The New York Times hides all the pertinent facts.

For example, last week, the Times finally — glancingly — mentioned Wright’s lack of a driver’s license and insurance. (That’s if you don’t count a recent article about how Minnesota laws adversely affect minorities — “even regulations about driver’s licenses and renewal of tags.”)

On the other hand, the Times has run 16 articles about Wright’s … air freshener! (E.g.: “How a Common Air Freshener Can Result in a High-Stakes Traffic Stop”). That 16 more than all its articles on Hunter Biden’s laptop!

What is the Times talking about? It seems that, immediately after the shooting, Wright’s mother told the media that he’d been stopped merely for having an air freshener hanging from his rearview mirror — AND NOW HE WAS DEAD!

That’s completely untrue, but it’s the story the Times is going with. No new information will be allowed to penetrate the paper’s BLM cocoon.

Times reporters must have heard about the armed robbery/choking incident, because they’ve repeatedly quoted Wright’s accomplice in the crime, Emajay Driver. On April 13Nov. 30Dec. 8 and Dec. 17 the Times ran some version of this quote:

“‘He loved to make people laugh,’ said Emajay Driver, a friend of Mr. Wright. ‘He was just great to be around. There was never a dull moment.'”

And that’s all we get from Mr. Driver.

New York Times: Say, we saw that police report about you and Daunte nearly choking a woman to death while committing an armed robbery. So naturally, we have to ask: Do you by any chance have any heartwarming stories about him?

Somewhat more important than Daunte’s love of laughter are the details of that incident, given at length in America’s Greatest Newspaper, the U.K.’s Daily Mail.

On Dec. 1, 2019, Wright and Driver crashed at the apartment of a 20-year-old woman they’d been partying with. The next morning, the woman’s roommate went out to get $820 in rent money, handed it to her, then left for work.

Just before the attack, Wright locked himself in the victim’s bathroom for a noticeably long time in order to make videos of himself with a gun, and to empty a bottle of hand sanitizer onto his gun. (Daunte, with his simple, trusting nature, apparently believed an urban legend that sanitizer “blocks” fingerprints.)

Minutes later, as the three of them were exiting the apartment, Wright suddenly blocked the door, pointed the gun at the woman’s head, saying, “Give me the f-ing money. I know you have it.” (Me to The New York Times: Give us the f-ing facts. We know you have them.)

She refused, asking “Are you serious?” Wright barked, “We’re not playing around,” and grabbed her by the neck, choking her, as she dropped to her knees, with the gun in his other hand still pointed at her head. “You look into his eyes,” the victim later said, “and it’s so evil.”

Next, he tried ripping her shirt open to get the money, perhaps having seen her hiding it in her bra earlier. She screamed, and Wright began choking her again. (As Wright’s accomplice so poignantly said, there was never a dull moment with this guy.)

Finally, Wright and Driver ran off, hopping into a white Cadillac that was waiting for them.

They were arrested five days later. Driver pleaded guilty to first-degree aggravated robbery, his second felony conviction. He was facing 20 years in prison, but only got probation, leading some to speculate that he’d made a deal to testify against Wright.

Again: The Times hasn’t printed a single detail of Wright’s give-me-the-f-ing-money robbery attempt. Or the lawsuit about the carjacking. In one of more than 100 articles, there were two brief mentions of his shooting a guy in the head.

As for the trial of Kim Potter, the officer who shot Wright, neither the prosecution nor defense disputes that it was a mistake, that she thought she was holding her Taser. Several officers, and the defense’s use-of-force expert, testified that Potter would have been fully justified in shooting Wright in order to protect the other officer from being dragged by the car.

But Wright “loved to make people laugh.” That’s all the Times wants you to know.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Fauci Who Cried Wolf


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 08, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/12/08/the-fauci-who-cried-wolf—p–n2600336/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org

Wow, the opposition press isn’t what it used to be!

In a Sunday interview with “The Sexiest Man Alive,” Anthony Fauci, CNN’s Jake Tapper played a clip of Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., criticizing Fauci for keeping the public in a state of raw panic over COVID.

Johnson: “Fauci did the exact same thing with AIDS. He overhyped it. He created all kinds of fear, saying it could affect the entire population, when it couldn’t. And he’s doing — he’s using the exact same playbook for COVID.”

At that point, the anchor is supposed to say something like, “Dr. Fauci?” and let him respond. But CNN apparently thinks Fauci is too delicate a flower to answer an attack all by his lonesome.

So, before turning it over to the interviewee, Tapper blathered: “Obviously, that’s a bizarre and false assertion. President George W. Bush gave you the Presidential Medal of Freedom because of your leadership in the AIDS crisis. But I did want to give you an opportunity to respond.” (I guess this is how you apply for Chris Cuomo’s job at CNN.)

At that point, Fauci merely had to join Tapper in sneering at the senator: “Jake, how do you respond to something as preposterous as that?”

Thank you, Dr. Fauci for that penetrating response. Next up on CNN …

Actually, Fauci then went on to use the Hillary Benghazi defense: HOW DARE YOU QUESTION ME WHEN PEOPLE DIED!!!

He said: “Overhyping AIDS? It’s killed over 750,000 Americans and 36 million people worldwide. How do you overhype that? Overhyping COVID? It’s already killed 780,000 Americans and over 5 million people worldwide. So, I don’t have any clue of what he’s talking about.”

That would have been a fantastic answer if Sen. Johnson had questioned whether anyone had ever died from AIDS or COVID. Unfortunately, he didn’t do that. Rather, he accused Fauci of overhyping the risk of COVID, terrifying everyone — as he did with AIDS — instead of concentrating protections on high-risk groups.

Overhyping car accidents? Cars have killed over 3.6 million Americans and multiple millions of people worldwide. How do you overhype that?

Yes, but you recommended that people drive blindfolded.

Long after it was clear that COVID was dangerous nearly exclusively for older people and the obese, Fauci lied, just as he once lied about AIDS being a risk for heterosexuals long after it became clear that it was almost entirely a problem for gay men and intravenous drug users.

Instead of devoting massive resources to shutting down bathhouses and shooting galleries to stop the spread of AIDS, and blanketing older Americans with protections in the case of COVID, Fauci repeatedly claimed that everyone was at risk.

This isn’t a matter of It’s a new virus! No one knew anything! I knew the high-risk groups back in March 2020. (bit.ly/3oBu8Et)

It seems that Fauci believes in “science” — except when he needs to terrify heterosexuals in the cause of destigmatizing gays, or frighten the entire population so as not to stigmatize the elderly and obese.

AIDS first appeared in 1981 in gay communities in New York, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Two years later, 72% of cases involved gay men, and 90% of the non-homosexual AIDS victims were intravenous drug users. Most of the rest were children born to AIDS-infected mothers or victims of AIDS-tainted blood transfusions.

This wasn’t a big secret. According to CDC, by June 1983, out of 1,552 AIDS victims, only 37 were not gay men, drug users, hemophiliacs or Haitians. Frontline doctors actually dealing with AIDS patients were assuring the public, “The average person has nothing to be concerned about,” as a New York cardiologist told The Associated Press. (Then, as now, you can trust your doctor; you can’t trust “public health authorities.”)

But Fauci was out there, alarming the entire population about the odds of contracting AIDS. In April 1983, he said: “As the months go by, we see more and more groups … AIDS is creeping out of well-defined epidemiological confines.”

A month later, he wrote: “The finding of AIDS in infants and children who are household contacts of patients with AIDS … has enormous implications with regard to ultimate transmissibility of this syndrome.” (This was based on a study of eight infants in Newark, New Jersey — who may or may not have had AIDS, in households with people who also may or may not have had AIDS. So it was a solid study.)

By 1985 — four years after AIDS first appeared — 73% of the cases were in gay men, 17% in intravenous drug users, 3% in Haitians, 2.2% in those who’d received blood, and 1% in sexual partners of AIDS patients. Less than 4% didn’t fit into one of these categories.

With zero cases of proven heterosexual transmission, in February 1985, Fauci said, “Am I worried about [heterosexual transmission]? Yes.”

By 1987, only 4% of AIDS cases could possibly be attributed to heterosexual contact — and half of those were in Africans and Haitians.

And yet, here was Fauci in March 1987, still babbling about the risk of AIDS to heterosexuals. Asked if AIDS could be transmitted to men by vaginal intercourse, he answered, “Absolutely.” He actually warned the public about French kissing: “[H]ealth officials have to presume that it is possible to transmit the virus by exchange of saliva in deep kissing.”

If some of these quotes sound familiar, I cited a few of them in that March 2020 column, at a time when “public health authorities,” cable news hosts and the president were demanding nationwide lockdowns.

Today, Fauci is doing the exact same thing with COVID, treating teenagers as if they face as much danger as people in their 70s, despite the latter having a 300 times greater chance of dying from COVID than those under 20. For young people who contract COVID, the chances of dying are less than the risk of dying from sunstroke over the course of their entire lives. Even for those in their 30s, the odds are about the same as their lifetime risk of dying by choking on food.

If he’s ever interviewed by a serious journalist, perhaps Fauci could explain why his idea of “science” is about avoiding stigmatizing certain groups, and not about saving lives.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Media Gone Wild (Over Trump!)


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 20, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/10/20/media-gone-wild-over-trump—p–n2597771/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Media Gone Wild (Over Trump!)

Source: AP Photo/Ben Gray

If you really, really miss Donald Trump, MSNBC may just be for you! Biden is cratering, fuel prices are skyrocketing (hey, anybody seen Greta Thunberg?), hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens are pouring across our border, and the murder rate keeps hitting historic highs. But the establishment media can’t stop talking about TRUMP.

So for my friends in the media, here are a few thoughts on your Trump obsession.

Rep. Liz Cheney, daughter of Dr. Evil, has become an unlikely hero among the Can’t-Get-Enough-Trump media — because she can’t stop talking about Trump either.

Cheney says:

— Jan. 6 was dumb (true: As David Cole says, “What was supposed to happen?”);

— Trump is hurting the GOP (true: He endorsed Stacey Abrams and says his voters won’t come out in 2022 and ’24 if Republicans don’t make the “Presidential Election Fraud of 2020” their No. 1 issue); and

— Trump is lying about the Arizona recount (also true).

But then she had to add: Oh, and now I’m for gay marriage! Isn’t Bush the greatest?

Is there a political party for people who think Jan. 6 was dumb, notice that we don’t have a wall, and can read an election report, but still say Bush is a male bimbo and pretty much everything liberals said about him was true?

“Trumpism Without Trump” is the winning formula. We’re keeping the policies, but getting rid of the 8-year-old.

The main lesson out of the Arizona election hand recount a few weeks ago isn’t about the election at all. It’s that media misinformation is a serious problem in a democracy.

We got some very confusing messaging on the results of the recount. First, there were headlines all over saying it resulted in Biden winning again. I didn’t really care one way or another, except then Trump started going around claiming that the hand recount clearly showed … HE WON!

It’s a simple yes-or-no question: Did Trump win Arizona or didn’t he?

This turned out to be an epistemological puzzle. You see, both sides are gigantic liars, so whom to believe?

In this instance, the media were telling the truth, because the truth favored them, and Trump was lying, because it didn’t favor him.

But thanks, media, for so debasing yourselves with idiotic lies over the past five years — e.g., Russian collusion, the “Access Hollywood” tape, Trump’s remarks on Charlottesville — that I had to look up a basic fact question for myself because I simply couldn’t trust you.

Trump lost Arizona. The hand recount was conducted by a hardcore conservative Christian, Doug Logan, famed for his integrity, and who was, therefore, viciously attacked by liberals. The recount was ordered up by Trump Republicans in the Arizona legislature. It was paid for by Trump supporters.

If you don’t believe Logan, right-wingers, you won’t believe anyone, except the guy who promised to build a wall; bring manufacturing home; and end anchor babies, the carried interest loophole and the war in Afghanistan — but didn’t do any of those things.

Logan’s hand recount of the ballots resulted in Biden receiving 99 more votes and Trump receiving 261 fewer votes. The report is here in black and white.

When Trump says, We have conclusively proven that we won, he’s just doing the salesman thing he always does, telling you that a used car is a fantastic deal, an amazing car, runs like a top!

But the transmission just fell out.

I’m telling you, it’s a humdinger!

Yeah, and we have a big, beautiful wall. Thousands and thousands of miles.

File this under: At Least He Was Thinking of Us, Briefly.

The New York Times reported this week:

Trump’s Pentagon Chief Quashed Idea to Send 250,000 Troops to the Border

“Top national security aides to former President Trump also talked him out of launching military raids against drug cartels inside Mexico.”

Typical Trump. He talks a good game, then one person raises an objection and he says, OK, I’ll just tell my supporters I wanted to do it.

Of course, the Times’ take is: Isn’t he awful? Yes, New York Times, because he didn’t do it. Not because he said he would.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Gray Lives Matter


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 15, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/09/15/gray-lives-matter—p–n2595963/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Gray Lives Matter

Source: AP Photo/Steve Helber

My ancestors were Presbyterian abolitionists who fought on the Union side, but I get really ticked off when imbeciles take a sledgehammer to my country’s history.

Last week, with self-satisfied glee, savages tore down the 14-foot statue of Robert E. Lee designed by the French sculptor Antonin Mercie and installed in 1890 on land deeded to the state — in return for a promise that the Commonwealth of Virginia “will hold said Statue and pedestal and Circle of ground perpetually sacred to the Monumental purpose to which they have been devoted and that she will faithfully guard it and affectionately protect it.”

But Virginia’s supreme court ruled that the state had a “free speech” right to violate the deed. On that theory, no contract can ever be enforced. I have a free speech right to say that I will NOT deliver 20 pounds of bananas!

It’s not just “Southerners” who revere Lee, as his Wikipedia page implies. Franklin Delano Roosevelt called Lee “one of our greatest American Christians and one of our greatest American gentlemen.” Dwight Eisenhower said Lee was “noble as a leader and as a man, and unsullied as I read the pages of our history.” Even Ulysses S. Grant called him “the acknowledged ablest general in the Confederate army.”

The son — not grandson — of a hero of the American Revolution, Lee graduated second in his class at West Point, then distinguished himself in the Mexican-American War. Lee’s reputation was so great that President Lincoln asked him to take command of the Union forces against the South. But Lee was a Virginian and felt compelled to take Virginia’s side, so he resigned from the U.S. Army.

(For my illiterate readers and anyone who gets his news from MSNBC: That makes Lee the opposite of a “traitor.” A traitor is someone who pretends to be on your side, while secretly working with the enemy, not someone who loudly announces, I quit. My friends and I are leaving.)

Among his accomplishments, there’s also the minor fact that Lee saved the country. Immediately after a bitter, bloody civil war, pitting brother against brother — four of Mary Lincoln’s five brothers fought for the Confederacy — the landscape littered with the dead, Lee ensured that the South would accept defeat.

When Lee surrendered at Appomattox, he was at the height of his powers, idolized throughout the South. The president of the Confederacy, Jefferson Davis, wanted to fight on, telling his officers, “I think we can whip the enemy yet, if our people will turn out.”

But Lee, not Davis, held the hearts of his countrymen. When one of Lee’s own officers urged him to lead a guerilla war against the North, Lee remonstrated, “as a Christian people, there is now but one course to pursue. We must accept the situation; these men must go home and plant a crop, and we must proceed to build up our country on a new basis.”

He could easily have pulled a Trump and told his supporters, We got screwed! Take to the hills! They would have followed. Hundreds of thousands more lives would have been lost. The country might never have recovered.

But Lee said no, it ends now.

In his biography of Grant, Ron Chernow says the Union general believed that “had Lee resisted surrender and encouraged his army to wage guerrilla warfare, it would have spawned infinite trouble. … Such was Lee’s unrivaled stature that his acceptance of defeat reconciled many diehard rebels to follow his example.”

Thanks to Lee, we became a functioning country again within about 15 years, instead of becoming Serbia, Afghanistan, Korea, Vietnam, Rwanda and on and on and on.

After Lee’s surrender, Union soldiers saluted their defeated foes. Erstwhile warring officers embraced one another. One Confederate officer said: “Great God, thought I to myself, how my heart swells out to such a magnanimous touch of humanity! Why do men fight who were born to be brothers?” When told of Lee’s surrender, Lincoln ordered the Union band to play “Dixie.” Years later, Grant spoke of his deep affection for Lee’s army, second only to that for his own men.

Never has a civil war ended with such love between the former enemies. That’s our history, our country, our war — North and South, black and white.

The vandalizing of American history has absolutely nothing to do with black people or slavery. Lots of historical figures had slaves. Not only American heroes like Washington and Jefferson, but Kamala Harris’ ancestors — according to her own father. Barack Obama is the only president who might be descended from slave traders, a particularly repellent group, inasmuch as Kenya was a major player in the slave trade.

How about these white saviors demand a box on their Ivy League admission forms: “If admitted to Harvard, would you be willing to give up your place to a black person?” That will NEVER happen. Instead, we get: I went out and courageously defaced a Confederate statue! Because some things are more important than my personal comfort.

No, the moving force behind this frenzied destruction of American history isn’t black people suddenly offended by monuments that have been around for a century; it’s pushy newcomers, bitter that their ancestors had nothing to do with the creation of this country. After other people’s ancestors carved a nation out of the wilderness, they just kind of showed up. Now they go around obliterating anything that reminds them that this country was up and running long before they got here.

America’s leading hate group, the Southern Poverty Law Center, titles its report on Confederate symbols “Whose Heritage? Public Symbols of the Confederacy.” Yes, exactly, it’s not their heritage, so it must be destroyed. My ancestors fought on the Union side, but they were involved, and it matters to me.

MSNBC’s smirking Chris Hayes can get weepy about some ancient Roman ruin, and Rachel Maddow about a building in Warsaw, but I care about my history. These savages are smashing and graffitiing my antiquities.

How would they like it if we took a sledgehammer to “Piss Christ”?

Ann Coulter Op-ed” 9/11


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 08, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/09/08/911—p–n2595560/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

9/11

Source: AP Photo/Richard Drew, File

In honor of the 20-year marker of the 9/11 attacks, I thought I’d run excerpts from a few of my post-9/11 columns.

One point I politely refrained from making 20 years ago: Why was the president of the United States reading “The Pet Goat” to a class of second-graders at the moment our nation was attacked?

I think the “Attack France” column (Dec. 20, 2001) holds up well, mostly because I’d rather be bringing in hundreds of thousands of Frenchmen right now than hundreds of thousands of Afghans. (Who knew the golden ticket to U.S. citizenship was being the country that hosted Osama bin Laden?)

But that column didn’t make the cut. In 2007, the magnificent Gallic made Nicolas Sarkozy the new president of France, and now we’re friends again.

Finally, for the sub-literate: After the defeat of Japan in World War II, Gen. Douglas MacArthur, leader of the occupation, put out a call to American Christians: “Send missionaries and Bibles!” Thousands of missionaries poured in. The same thing happened after the Korean War, with greater success than in Japan.

On this point, there was surprising unanimity. Even President Truman agreed with his nemesis MacArthur, who said: “[Democracy] will endure when it rests firmly on the Christian conception of the individual and society.”

Today, not even a Republican would say that. Good luck, America!

— “This Is War,” Sept. 12, 2001

[T]he nation has been invaded by a fanatical, murderous cult. And we welcome them. We are so good and so pure we would never engage in discriminatory racial or “religious” profiling. People who want our country destroyed live here, work for our airlines, and are submitted to the exact same airport shakedown as a lumberman from Idaho. This would be like having the Wehrmacht immigrate to America and work for our airlines during World War II. Except the Wehrmacht was not so bloodthirsty.

“All of our lives” don’t need to change, as they keep prattling on TV. Every single time there is a terrorist attack — or a plane crashes because of pilot error — Americans allow their rights to be contracted for no purpose whatsoever.

The airport kabuki theater of magnetometers, asinine questions about whether passengers “packed their own bags” … somehow allowed over a dozen armed hijackers to board four American planes almost simultaneously on Bloody Tuesday. Did those fabulous security procedures stop a single hijacker anyplace in America that day?

Airports scrupulously apply the same laughably ineffective airport harassment to Suzy Chapstick as to Muslim hijackers. It is preposterous to assume every passenger is a potential crazed homicidal maniac.

We know who the homicidal maniacs are. They are the ones cheering and dancing right now. We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren’t punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That’s war. And this is war.

— “Future Widows of America: Write Your Congressman,” Sept. 27, 2001

After the World Trade Center was bombed by Islamic fundamentalists in 1993, the country quickly chalked it up to a zany one-time attack and five minutes later decided we were all safe again. We weren’t. We aren’t now …

Congress has authority to pass a law tomorrow requiring aliens from suspect countries to leave. As far as the Constitution is concerned, aliens, which is to say non-citizens, are here at this country’s pleasure …

[T]he very nature of the enemy is that they have infiltrated this country and pass themselves off as law-abiding, peaceful immigrants. Their modus operandi is to smuggle mass murderers to our shores. But the country refuses to respond rationally. Rather, Congress is busily contemplating a series of “anti-terrorism” measures most notable for their utter irrelevance to the threat. …

Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del., has proposed that we take the aggressive step of asking aliens in the country to register periodically with the government so we know where they are. That’s already the law in Germany. Several of the hijackers in this attack lived in Hamburg, and they obediently complied.

The mastermind of the most vicious terrorist attack in the history of the world, Mohamed Atta, was in Florida on a “vocational status” visa — in order to attend flight school. Let’s say Atta had registered. Now what, Joe?

— “Build Them Back,” June 7, 2002

The reason liberals prefer a park to luminous skyscrapers [on the site of the World Trade Center] is that they are not angry. Liberals express sympathy for the victims, but they’re not angry. Instead of longing to crush and humiliate the enemy, they believe true patriotism consists of redoubled efforts to expand the welfare state.https://a7dc841daceec5d9069484a50746f032.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html#xpc=sf-gdn-exp-3&p=https%3A//townhall.com

Sen. Hillary Clinton proposed a school for the World Trade Center site and Sen. Charles Schumer, a park. Yeah, that’ll show ’em!

Meanwhile, the construction workers clearing away the rubble vowed they would work without pay to rebuild the World Trade Center. Of course, now that we have 14 cows, that shouldn’t be necessary. (In a genuinely touching story, a tiny cow-herding village in Kenya only recently got word of the attack on America and, this week, made a special present of 14 cows to the United States.)

The attack on the World Trade Center ripped America’s soul not only for the thousands of lives it snuffed out. Even if the towers had been empty, the destruction of those buildings would have been heart-wrenching. Skyscrapers are the hallmark of civilization, monuments to human brilliance and creativity. …

Mohamed Atta loathed skyscrapers. Newsweek reported that he viewed the emergence of tall buildings in Egypt as an odious surrender to Western values. The most fitting memorial to the victims of the World Trade Center attack is to build the most breathtaking skyscraper in the world on top of Mohamed Atta’s corpse.https://a7dc841daceec5d9069484a50746f032.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-38/html/container.html#xpc=sf-gdn-exp-4&p=https%3A//townhall.com

— “This Whistleblower They Like,” June 13, 2002

In their enthusiasm to bash the Bush administration for its handling of the war — which Democrats consider an annoying distraction from the real business of government, which is redistributing income — the left has embraced FBI agent Coleen Rowley as a modern Joan of Arc …

[T]he gravamen of Rowley’s 13-page memo is essentially that FBI headquarters botched the Zacarias Moussaoui case (the 20th hijacker) by refusing to racially profile Muslims. …

[Specifically] she condemned FBI brass for refusing to authorize a search warrant for Moussaoui based on the following information: 1) he refused to consent to a search of his computer; 2) he was in flight school; 3) he had overstayed his visa; and 4) he was a Muslim.

Let’s see, which of these factors constitutes probable cause?

— Refusal to consent to a search? It is your right to refuse. Any other rule would allow cops to bootstrap their way into a warrant. “Hi, Zacarias, may we search your computer? No? That’s suspicious! Grounds for a warrant!” I don’t think so.

— In flight school? NO.

— Overstayed visa? NO.

— Is a Muslim? NOT ALLOWED. …

I happen to agree with her, but liberals don’t. So how did Rowley become the left’s new Norma Rae? … FBI headquarters rebuffed Rowley’s callous insensitivity to Muslims and denied a warrant request to search Moussaoui’s computer — and thus failed to uncover the Sept. 11 plot.

The FBI allowed thousands of Americans to be slaughtered on the altar of political correctness. What more could liberals ask for?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Teaching Psycho Flintstones About Women’s Equality


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 25, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Teaching Psycho Flinstones About Women's Equality

Source: AP Photo/Khwaja Tawfiq Sediqi

The universal panning of President Biden’s decision to finally leave Afghanistan is the mirror image of the one time the media loved Trump. Remember that joyous occasion? It was when he bombed Syria two months after taking office. Here’s a sampling of the mash-notes to Trump for sending 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles to strike a country 6,000 miles away from us.

The New York Post: “A New Sheriff in Town: Trump’s Strike on Syria”

New York Daily News: “KICK IN THE ASSAD! U.S. blitzes Syria with missiles to avenge atrocity.”

The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof: “Trump Was Right to Strike Syria.”

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York: “[It was] the right thing to do.”

And of course, MSNBC’s Brian Williams famously soliloquized the attack on his TV show that night, saying: “We see these beautiful pictures at night from the decks of these two U.S. Navy vessels in the eastern Mediterranean,” adding “I am tempted to quote the great Leonard Cohen: ‘I am guided by the beauty of our weapons.'”

The very Europeans who are so testy right now about Biden’s decision to end a war, were thrilled with Trump for bombing a country that posed no conceivable threat to us. France, Italy, Israel and the U.K. all sent their hearty support!

That’s quite a contrast from the remarks this week from former prime minister Tony Blair about Biden’s ending a war: “tragic, dangerous and unnecessary.”

I was, and remain, more pro-Afghanistan war and Iraq war than Donald Rumsfeld, but not so we could hang out for 20 years and teach them to respect transgenders.

Unfortunately, once we’d accomplished everything that could possibly be accomplished in Afghanistan, the war became a joint venture of the neocons and the feminists. Instead of punishing anyone who’d had a pleasant countenance upon seeing the World Trade Center collapse, our new mission became: Bring gender studies and gay rights to a Stone Age culture!

Now the media has put Biden on notice: If one Afghan girl gets below B+ in women’s studies, we’re going back in!

How did Afghans become our special charity case? Why not Burkina Faso? Twelve-year-old girls are regularly married off to men 65 or 70 years old in that paragon of modern living. Also in Niger, Sudan, Tanzania, Zambia and any number of barbaric societies around the globe.

No one weeps for those little girls.

(It may not be favoritism: The prodigious amount of child rape around the world is barely mentioned by the various international organizations on women’s rights because the fanatics writing the reports see no meaningful difference between official, widespread child-rape and men disrespecting their wives’ professions.)

There are loads of primitive hellholes we could make our 51st state. We’ve picked Afghanistan because that’s the country that harbored Osama bin Laden. CONGRATULATIONS, AFGHANISTAN! YOU WON THE LOTTO!

Now, all of America is supposed to be torn up about what one warring tribe will do to another warring tribe, in a country that’s been at war, more or less, for centuries.

They like it that way! Afghanistan consists of a medieval tribal society resistant to change. That’s their raison d’etre. Even under the helpful tutelage of American troops, our dear Afghan allies would not stop raping little boys. Naturally, given our obsession with cultural diversity, U.S. servicemen who objected to the buggery were cashiered out of the military.

More than a year before the 9/11 attacks, an article in The New Yorker quoted Afghans boasting, “In the nineteenth century, we beat the British more than once. In the twentieth century, we beat the Russians. In the twenty-first, if we have to, we’ll beat the Americans!”

They just want to be left alone (something a lot of Americans dearly wish our leaders would let us do).

We’re hearing horror stories about women having to be covered when they leave their homes now that the Taliban is back in charge. Yeah, that’s Sharia law. According to a Pew poll a few years ago, 99% of Afghans — including women — say they want to live under Sharia law.

Afghans were totally down with women’s lib as long as we were bringing them cool stuff, like airplanes, buildings, toilets and electricity, which we did — or you did, taxpayer, to the tune of about a trillion dollars. Now we’ve left and they’ve happily gone back to their old ways.

In all other contexts, we sacralize ancient cultures. We blush to our toes recalling our ancestors’ earlier attempts at “civilizing” American Indians by bringing them clothes, schools and Christianity. Today, we exhort them: Be yourselves!

As long as we’re not forcing something icky on primitive cultures, like Christianity, but, rather, something healthy, like gender-feminism, well, then … “We don’t want to fight but by Jingo if we do, / We’ve got the ships, we’ve got the men, we’ve got the money too!”

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Joe vs. The Swamp


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 18, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org

Joe vs. The Swamp

Source: AP Photo/Susan Walsh

President Biden ended the war in Afghanistan earlier this week, fulfilling the broken promises of the last three presidents, whereupon both the liberal and conservative media rose up as one to shout: “NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!”

This is a blow to our national security! Al Qaeda is rising! A disaster! A catastrophe! Biden went against the advice of the “foreign policy establishment”!

And that was just Fox News.

MSNBC and CNN were even harsher, striking a new tone from networks that, heretofore, have found nothing to criticize about Joe Biden.

Under his masterful leadership, our nation’s murder rate has reached breathtaking heights. Despite being handed a miracle vaccine, Biden has made a mess of COVID, unfathomably returning us to masking and shutdowns, as if completely unaware: There’s a vaccine for that, Mr. President. The border is a calamity, with hundreds of thousands of foreign marauders entering our country every month — bringing exotic new COVID variants with them.

MSNBC and CNN: Isn’t he the greatest?

But end the endless war? Suddenly, liberals found a Biden policy worthy of attack.

Hourly, there are fresh wails about our precious “Afghan allies”! We must save the translators who “risked their lives to help us!” What will happen to women under the Taliban! Afghanistan could become a “training ground” for terrorists! What about the Afghan Gender Studies programs?

The voice of moderation, Gen. Barry McCaffrey told MSNBC’S Brian Williams — I quote: “There’s another good argument, we should have stayed there with 35,000 NATO forces for the next 50 years if required.”

Fifty years. You want to see the “Swamp”? It’s out in full force this week!

Former President Bush told the press he watched the withdrawal with “deep sadness” — then demanded that we bring as many Afghans here as possible.

Obama was unavailable for comment this week, as he was partying with Beyonce, but back in 2011, after killing Osama bin Laden, he announced that the troops would be home by Christmas.

President Trump, that weathervane of popular opinion, tweeted — one month before the election — quote: “BRING OUR SOLDIERS HOME.”

Now Biden has done it. It’s our country’s good fortune that our president is too senile to be outmaneuvered by the generals as Bush, Obama and Trump were.

At this rate, maybe he’ll build the wall. (Fox News hosts of the future: Walls don’t work! What about the Emma Lazarus poem!)

On Monday, Biden gave the best presidential address in recent memory — a full-throated, America-First statement of our interests. “I want to remind everyone,” he began, “how we got here and what America’s interests are in Afghanistan.”

That seemed to bring some conservatives back to reality. They must have overheard themselves talking and realized, Wait, I’m against permanent war! But they had to come up with some reason to be against Biden, so they temporized, Of course we want the war to end, we’re just upset at how he did it!

Oh, give it up, conservatives.

1) How smoothly did you expect the withdrawal of American troops from a country of warlords, brigands and pedophiles to go?

2) Our military brass, upstanding folks like Gen. Mark “I Want to Understand White Rage” Milley, may be incapable of creating the most minimal fighting force given $1 trillion and 20 years. On the other hand, they are fully equipped to create colossal fiascos — say, making the withdrawal as messy and embarrassing as possible, so that no one will ever try to end this war again.

But for maximum brain-deadery, nothing beats the liberal media’s incessant bleating about our moral obligation to Afghans who “risked their lives to help us!”

There seems to be some confusion about who was helping whom here. Our “Afghan allies” were not helping us. The Taliban weren’t in Iowa. We were helping them.

This is like demanding that firemen who’ve just rescued people from a burning building go back and make them dinner. These people stepped out of their windows onto a ladder, risking their lives to help YOU!

There’s no reason to bring any Afghans here — much less the 100,000 Biden’s talking about. (So is Trump! Hey, Trumpsters! Ready to move on from this big phony yet?)

We’ve already brought about 50,000 translators to the U.S. and, as Daniel Greenfield points out on Frontpage.com, the maximum number of troops we ever had in Afghanistan was 100,000. That’s one translator for every two troops.

Did every Afghan spend a week as an American translator?

With a war that’s lasted 20 years, it’s easy to forget, but our dear “Afghan allies” weren’t oodles of help. The war would have been over and Osama bin Laden dead by Christmas 2001 — except our “Afghan allies” were bribed by Al Qaeda to let bin Laden slip out the Tora Bora mountains and into Pakistan.

Remember? It was a big point in the 2004 election, raised by both John Kerry and John Edwards during the debates.

Sen. Kerry: “Osama bin Laden attacked us. … And when we had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora … we didn’t use the best-trained troops in the world to go kill the world’s No. 1 criminal and terrorist. [Bush] outsourced the job to Afghan warlords, who only a week earlier had been on the other side, fighting against us. … That’s the enemy that was allowed to walk out of those mountains.”

Here’s Bush’s response: “Of course I know Osama bin Laden attacked us.” That’s it. The end. If Kerry hadn’t been such a sissy-boy gigolo, he would have won that election.

At least bringing the Stone Age peasants here defeats one objection of the forever-war crowd. They claim that because of our withdrawal, Afghanistan will become a training ground for terrorists.

No worries on that count. With 100,000 “translators,” each of their four wives, 14 children and innumerable uncles and cousins all coming here, Al Qaeda’s next training ground will be America.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: DACA: Degenerate Arsonists? Come Aboard!


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Aug 11, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/08/11/daca-degenerate-arsonists-come-aboard—p–n2594006/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

DACA: Degenerate Arsonists? Come Aboard!

Source: AP Photo/Manuel Balce Ceneta

The New York Times recently ran an indignant article on the Department of Justice’s arrest of two fugitives in Mexico who were accused of involvement in a mostly peaceful arson during the #BLM protests in the Twin Cities last year. As the Times described it: “One night in the Twin Cities, shortly after the killing of George Floyd, someone set a fire in a Goodwill.”

Why would law enforcement authorities be so obsessed with such a minor offense? “To fellow protesters,” the Times explained, “it’s part of an extreme crackdown on those who most fervently demonstrated against America’s criminal justice system.”

A former FBI agent, Michael German — now working for the anti-police Brennan Center for Justice — confirmed that former Attorney General William Barr’s Department of Justice had pursued BLM protesters “very aggressively,” adding, “It wouldn’t surprise me that this case would have been a high-priority one.” (Do any FBI agents support law enforcement?)

Luckily, that’s changed under President Biden!

Whereas the Times was upset that the perps were caught, my takeaway from the story was: HECKUVA JOB, IMMIGRATION AUTHORITIES!

It seems our arsonist heroes are Jose Angel Felan Jr., a Mexican immigrant with multiple felony convictions, and his accomplice, Mena Dyaha Yousif, an Iraqi generously taken in by this country as a child because of a war in her own country. (Of course, our government won’t just come out and tell us when criminals are immigrants, but the Felan family’s specialization in transporting illegal aliens across the border is a pretty good hint.)

Although the Times wasn’t overly prolix about the arsons, Felan didn’t just light up a Goodwill store. He also started blazes at a school for disadvantaged youth and an Asian-owned black hair products store — establishments that practically scream “White Supremacy Power Structure”!

Jin Lim, owner of the black hair products store, described the effect of the “fervent” protests on his business: “Completely destroyed.” Insurance covered only 60% of the property damage.

But who cares about Lim? Certainly no one at the Times.

Inexplicably, U.S. law enforcement refused to let bygones be bygones, and tracked the fire-bugs to Mexico, finally arresting them in February.

Felan’s criminal record (slipped in around paragraph 2,000 of the Times article) includes “a drug possession charge when he was 18 that led to an almost seven-year prison sentence …”

Hold it right there! Seven years for a first offense, at the tender age of 18? That’s not a run-of-the-mill drug case.

He also went to prison for, among other things, “transporting undocumented immigrants near the Mexican border.” Perhaps someday, those “undocumented immigrants” will also fervently protest racial injustice by setting fire to businesses in minority neighborhoods!

To quote the motto of the school Felan torched: “Unity Through Diversity!”

After fleeing from Minnesota to Texas, our model immigrants were assisted in their getaway by Felan’s family. According to law enforcement, Felan’s mother switched cars with the perps, allowing them to evade authorities. Then his brother, also previously convicted of transporting illegals, helped get them across the border to Mexico.

Again: Bang-up job, U.S. immigration authorities! Of all 158 million people who want to immigrate to the U.S., you guys let in an entire family of criminals.

But it was not the failure of our immigration system that got the Times’ goat. Nor the culprits’ wanton destruction of a poor neighborhood or flight from justice. It was that facial recognition technology might, in theory, have led to the fugitives’ capture.

That was the whole point of this 3,200-word article: The arrest of criminal immigrants in Mexico “exposed a growing system of global surveillance.”

By “global surveillance,” the Times means “cameras.” It’s one thing to have cameras recording cops 24/7, but when cameras are used to catch criminals, well, gentlemen, we’re looking at a civil rights case.

Except it turns out, no cameras were used to catch these Dreamers. It was a tip to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that led to their capture, for which the AFT paid out a $20,000 reward.

But high-tech cameras might have helped nab the accused felons — and isn’t that just awful? You don’t have to take the Times’ word for it! Adam Schwartz, attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said: “It’s very upsetting.”

In the Times’ ideal world, we bring other countries’ criminals here, they commit felonies with abandon, and as long as they make it out of the country without getting caught, they’re home free!

In my ideal world, we stop bringing other countries’ criminals here.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Vaccine Karens


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 28, 2021 5:24 PM

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/28/the-vaccine-karens—p–n2593262/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org.

The Vaccine Karens

Source: AP Photo/Marta Lavandier

If I weren’t already staunchly pro-vaccination, the vaccine zealots would turn me against the COVID shot. The proof that they’re practicing religion and not science is their refusal to acknowledge the great heaping hunks of immunity a person gets from natural infection.

Obviously, you don’t want to contract COVID just to get all that boffo immunity, but lots of people have already been infected, so why can’t we count them the same as vaccinated?

The current research — and that’s all we have for the vaccines, too — indicates that natural immunity is not as good as vaccine immunity — it’s better! Study after study keeps finding that the previously infected have stronger, broader and longer-lasting immunity than people who’ve received the vaccine.

When the vaccinated, with their pipsqueak immunity, stop browbeating the already-infected, I’ll believe this is something other than a cult.

Why is the only proof of virtue — I mean, “Trusting the Science(TM) — a vaccination card and not a positive COVID test? Why don’t sports teams, concert halls and foreign countries accept proof of prior infection the same way they accept proof of vaccination?

Nope. Your prior infection is no good here! We are accepting ONLY vaccination cards.

Whatever that impulse is based on, it’s not “science.”

Despite earlier reports showing that antibodies declined rapidly after infection, in May of this year, scientists at the Washington University School of Medicine in St Louis, Missouri, released a study showing that “robust” antibodies were still present at least 11 months after infection. (France accepts proof of prior infection not older than six months. If they trust the science, they’ll soon be accepting prior infection for a year.)

Then in June, the Cleveland Clinic produced a gigantic, perfectly controlled study finding that people who’d already had COVID received no benefit from vaccination.

The clinic had tested its 52,238 employees throughout 2020. At one point or another, 2,579 tested positive. By mid-December, 46% of the recovered COVID patients had taken the vaccine, but more than half (54%) had not.

Five months later, none of the previously infected had been re-infected — including the 1,359 who did not take the vaccine. (Among clinic employees who were vaccinated, but not previously infected, 15 got COVID.)

The authors concluded: “Our study … provid[es] direct evidence that vaccination does not add protection to those who were previously infected.”

Great news, right?

NO! This was terrible news for the vaccination Karens! Their position is: Everyone must get the vaccine. Even if you live alone on a mountaintop and eat leaves and beetles to survive, even if you’re a burbling infant, even if you’ve had COVID, YOU MUST GET THE VACCINATION!

In short order, the Cleveland Clinic was bullied into submission. The authors of the report issued what sounded like a retraction, but, on closer examination, was just a lot of airy nonsense.

E.g.: “This is still a new virus and more research is needed. …”

Duh. Same for the studies showing how fantastic the COVID vaccines are.

“It is important to keep in mind that this study was conducted in a population that was younger and healthier than the general population. …”

This study SUCKS. It only applies to the entire working-age population of the U.S.!

“In addition, we do not know how long the immune system will protect itself against re-infection after COVID-19. …”

Ditto for the vaccine.

“It is safe to receive the COVID-19 vaccine even if you have previously tested positive …”

Presumably, it’s also “safe” to use Gwyneth Paltrow’s healing crystals if you have previously tested positive. The question is: Do you need to?

” … and we recommend all those who are eligible receive it.”

Perhaps, someday, there will be a study establishing that the previously infected should get the vaccine, but your study didn’t, Cleveland Clinic. Everyone knows you’re only telling the previously infected to get vaccinated so the loons will leave you alone.

Just this week, a study out of the Emory University Vaccine Center, led by “world renowned immunologist” (as he is known) Rafi Ahmed, found “durable and broad immune memory after SARS-CoV-2 infection.” And get this: The researchers also found that a natural COVID infection protects against a range of other coronaviruses, too.

What’s so impressive about these studies is that they are going against the woke mob. After a year of seeing scientists and scientific journals irredeemably corrupted, any study that won’t be cited in Teen Vogue carries extra credibility. Worse, the results support Sen. Rand Paul! Nobody’s going to lie about that.

This isn’t just a matter of policy not catching up to the science. The vaccine Karens positively disdain the previously infected. Instead of being treated like the superhumans that they are, recovered COVID patients are scorned, treated like smokers or AIDS victims. (No, sorry — the latter were revered as “angels.”) We’re simultaneously told that COVID is WILDLY contagious and … it’s your own damn fault for not wearing a mask, socially distancing or getting a vaccine.

The dismissal of people who’ve developed their own antibodies springs from the same totalitarian mindset of gun control activists: You cannot protect yourself! Your body cannot protect you! Only the government can protect you. Or, as Mussolini said: “Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State.”

This abject refusal to acknowledge the existence of natural immunity proves that the vaccine Karens don’t care about the health of their fellow human beings. They just want to boss us around.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: What’s Dumber Than CRT? CNN


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 21, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/21/whats-dumber-than-crt-cnn—p–n2592908/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

What's Dumber Than CRT? CNN

Source: AP Photo/Ron Harris

As we discussed last week, “critical race theory” is a subtle philosophical construct where the answer to everything is: THAT’S RACIST! Teachers hawking this glop are being defended by their journalist allies, who sneer that CRT critics are too stupid to understand the nuances of the theory. The Aristotelian ideal of this sneer was Elle Reeve‘s “special report” for CNN — pre-taped to eliminate any danger of Elle being contradicted by someone smarter, such as a 10-year-old.

CNN’s Brianna Keilar introduced the segment by asking her: “Do these vocal opponents of critical race theory actually understand fully what it is?”

(That’s what’s known as a “rhetorical question,” kids!)

Elle: “No.” [Bored] “And why should they? It’s an academic theory taught mostly at the grad student level. But what they think it means is teaching white kids that all white people are bad and racist. And so, of course they’re afraid of that.”

They’re afraid!!! Wait — remind me: Who’s banning books, again? Who’s flipping out about “microaggressions”? Who’s demanding that Big Tech censor people? Who’s demanding “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” from speech they don’t like?

Parents aren’t “afraid”; they’re incensed. They’re paying the salaries of people who spend all day telling their kids that America is racist. (Elle didn’t give that explanation. Perhaps it frightens her.)

The “vocal opponents” of CRT who “don’t actually understand fully what it is” seem to be mostly billionaire investment bankers — at least judging by the articles in the Daily Mail. Elle’s conclusion: A “theory” that consists of going around shouting “RACISM!” is too complex for those guys to understand.

The format of Elle’s pre-taped report consisted of her interviewing opponents of CRT … then nailing them with her brilliant comebacks! Except even with CNN doing the editing, the CRT opponents sounded perfectly reasonable, while Elle’s comebacks kept revealing her yawning stupidity.

Early in Elle’s report, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is shown saying, “Critical race theory says America’s fundamentally racist.” What a dope!

About 60 seconds later, Elle deferentially asks a hijab-wearing high school teacher to explain CRT. The teacher exclaims: “Race and racism is literally the building blocks of this country!” (Were I the editor of Elle’s piece, I think I would have cut that part of her answer.)

Next, Elle talks to a parent fighting CRT, who says: “Don’t force on our kids a particular worldview. Taking a wide brush and painting this country as structurally racist, it’s insane … it’s a lie.”

To this, Elle patronizingly informs the parent that America’s racism “isn’t distant history.” Her evidence of contemporary racism? “In the ’90s, the crime bill gave much more severe sentencing to crack cocaine versus powder cocaine simply because black people were perceived as doing crack cocaine and white people weren’t …”

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS? The reason crack penalties were so severe is because the Congressional Black Caucus demanded it. (And as long as I’m correcting Elle’s false facts, the crack penalties were passed in 1986 and 1988, not “in the 1990s.”)

Black churches, black leaders and black members of Congress were enraged by what the crack epidemic was doing to their neighborhoods. A 1986 New York Times article reported on “all-night vigils” held by the leaders of 60 black churches, who called the crack epidemic “a new form of genocide.” Urban League President John Jacob railed against communities “held hostage by crack dealers,” saying “drugs kill more blacks than the (Ku Klux) Klan ever did.” Running for president in 1988, Jesse Jackson spoke of the scourge of crack cocaine and told a cheering crowd, “When I become president, the drug pusher is in trouble.”

White supremacists — right, Elle?

This has been patiently explained roughly 1 million times. But why bother knowing stuff when smug arrogance is good enough for CNN?

Elle’s next big “gotcha” was even more embarrassing, if that is possible. She rolled out the old chestnut about blacks being considered “three-fifths” of a human being in our Constitution. Yes, she really did that.

Here’s her exchange with a college Republican:

COLLEGE REPUBLICAN: To paint the country as an inherently racist country from its founding I think is dangerous.

REEVE: The three-fifths compromise is written into the Constitution in which slaves are counted as three-fifths of a person.

SCORE!

How can you be in journalism and have no idea what the three-fifths clause means? No research is involved, Elle! Just read it.

The three-fifths clause means exactly the opposite of what Elle thinks it means. This was not a general statement on the slaves’ humanity: It was about congressional apportionment. The slave states wanted to count slaves as full “persons” in order to increase the number of their representatives in Congress.

If you adored slavery, you’d want the Constitution to count each slave as a full person — as 20 people! The slaves still couldn’t vote, but their slave masters would get more votes in Congress. It’s the same idea behind California’s demand that illegal aliens be counted when determining that state’s congressional apportionment.

I can’t even believe there’s anyone in America who needed that explained again. (Next time, I’ll just say: Get a home-schooler to explain it to you, Elle.)

It must have been embarrassing for everyone at CNN to watch this bimbo misstating well-known facts in a network “special report” that was supposed to show what cretins CRT critics are.

So how did the CNN hosts react? They were gobsmacked by the genius of Elle’s report!

JOHN BERMAN: That was so great.

KEILAR: Right?

BERMAN: I mean, that was just so great, and just the way the questions are asked. Just by asking simple questions you revealed so much. I mean, that was just fantastic.

ELLE: Thank you.

My idea of hell is being condescended to by an idiot, forever and ever, with no respite. In other words, watching CNN.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Critical Race Theory Is a Complex — Oh, Who Are We Kidding?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 14, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/14/critical-race-theory-is-a-complex–oh-who-are-we-kidding—p–n2592557/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

Critical Race Theory Is a Complex -- Oh, Who Are We Kidding?

Source: AP Photo/Mary Altaffer, File

One of the unintended consequences of teachers using COVID to refuse to do their jobs in 2020 is that their students suddenly had to take classes remotely — within earshot of Dad. A mother at a fancy New York City private school told me that the wokeness curriculum was nothing new, but mothers never made a fuss about it. Then the fathers overheard their kids’ remote classes — and all hell broke loose.

Now that the teachers’ anti-white agenda has been exposed (thank you, fathers of America!), the left is spinning a series of increasingly hilarious defenses of “critical race theory,” which is just a more boring version of the left’s usual hatred of Western civilization.

Their current position is that they simply can’t discuss CRT with you because it’s too complex and can only be understood by high-level graduate students after years of study.

Paul Begala on CNN: “It’s a graduate-level construct.”

CNN’s Anderson Cooper: “It started in the ’70s, as I understand, in sort of academic circles, law schools.”

“Dr.” Ibram Kendi — who is a “doctor” in the same sense that Jill Biden is — explaining his position on CRT:

“I’m not a legal scholar. So I wasn’t trained on critical race theory. I’m a historian. … Critical race theory is taught in law schools. I didn’t attend law school, which is where critical race theory is taught.”

Oh, cut the crap. The “theory” is: Everything is based on racism.

The preposterous conceit that CRT rises above the level of a child yelling “THAT’S RACIST!” has the advantage of allowing liberals to refuse to debate it.

Here’s MSNBC’s Joy Reid dismissing Christopher Rufo, a Manhattan Institute scholar, brought on her show putatively to debate CRT: “Are you like an expert in race or racial history? Are you a lawyer? Are you a legal scholar? Is that part of your background?”

How else could Rufo possibly understand a “theory” that says:

America is racist!

Criminal law is racist!

Policing is racist!

Arrests are racist!

Incarceration is racist!

Standardized tests are racist!

Mortgages are racist!

Oh my gosh, how am I ever going to master this complex theory? I thought the quantum field theory of subatomic particle forces was tough, but THIS? I guess I’ll be hitting the books tonight.

CRT is like the Monty Python sketch, “Anne Elk’s Theory on Brontosauruses“:

Anne Elk: “My theory, that belongs to me, is as follows … (throat clearing) This is how it goes … (clears throat) The next thing I’m going to say is my theory. (clears throat) Ready?”

Presenter: (whimpers)

Anne Elk: “My Theory, by A. Elk (Miss). This theory goes as follows and begins now …

“All brontosauruses are thin at one end; much, much thicker in the middle and then thin again at the far end. That is my theory, it is mine and belongs to me, and I own it and what it is, too.”

Presenter: “That’s it, is it?”

CRT advocates talk in hushed tones about where the “theory” was “invented,” like they’re describing the apple falling on Newton’s head.

In fact, CRT grew out of black student protests in the 1970s, forcing universities to hire more black professors. That’s literally how the father of critical race theory, Derrick Bell, got his job. Black students protested the lack of black professors, so Bell was given a professorship at Harvard Law School.

How’d you like to be hired by the (then) premier university in the world, not based on the excellence of your scholarship, but because of students threatening to burn the campus down? Instead of being embarrassed and hoping no one ever asked how he got his job, Bell rationalized his hiring by accusing Harvard of … well, I’d tell you, but it’s too complex for you to understand. On the other hand, I don’t know how else to convey the intricacies of this deeply intellectual theorem, except to just state it:

Bell accused Harvard of … RACISM!

And thus a new academic discipline was born. (I guess all the new hires had to teach something.)

The idea that our country is steeped in white supremacy is laughable. Most of what built this country had nothing to do with race — conquering the West, the invention of electricity, the telephone, the automobile, airplanes and steamboats, bringing drinking water to Manhattan, smashing the Nazi war machine and on and on and on.

I’m sorry, Black America, but all this was happening with or without you.

Yes, slavery was an abomination, the worst thing that ever happened within the borders of the United States. But there are whole vast areas of the American economy that didn’t have anything to do with slavery.

In fact and to the contrary, the slave economy had turned the South into a backwater. If the South had won the Civil War, not only would slavery have continued, but half the country would have had a primitive third world economy.

No need to feel bad about it. The main players in America’s explosive growth weren’t women, immigrants, Hispanics or Asians, either. Somehow we got over it. On the plus side, we get to live in the best country in the world.

Jealousy and obsessive self-regard are not the stuff of an intellectual movement. The daily denunciation of white men is more akin to the tantrum of a 4-year-old.

Which, by the way, is exactly how liberals think of black Americans. If there were an international symbol for liberals, it would be one adult patting another on the head. Otherwise, liberals would just come out and say: CRT’s not a theory! It isn’t complex, it isn’t interesting, and it isn’t true. (Also: We think you’re capable of getting a voter ID.) Instead, liberals coo to the CRT devotees, It IS your birthday every day!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: NYT: Why Are All These Racist Losers So Angry?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jul 07, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/07/07/nyt-why-are-all-these-racist-losers-so-angry—p–n2592192/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

NYT: Why Are All These Racist Losers So Angry?

Source: AP Photo/Richard Drew

Today we’ll talk about how to write the classic New York Times column, using Thomas Edsall’s recent “Trumpism Without Borders” as our example. It must have taken him about 40 minutes to write it.

Edsall blames the populist movements sweeping the globe on the same ills that “led to a right-wing takeover of the federal government by Donald Trump.” To wit: “anti-immigrant fervor, political tribalism, racism, ethnic tension, authoritarianism and inequality.” Fascism awaits us unless we keep importing low-skilled immigrants and shipping jobs abroad!

For someone worried about the erosion of “democratic norms,” maybe Edsall shouldn’t be referring to the outcome of a free and fair U.S. presidential election as a “right-wing takeover of the federal government.” We had an election, pal.

But ever since the 2016 election, there’s been a frisson of viciousness to the elites’ usual contempt for ordinary Americans. Never mind that Trump ended up betraying his voters. The establishment is appalled that the issues he ran on were popular. Five years later, they still sputter in rage, unable to comprehend why Jeb or Hillary didn’t end up in the White House.

To explain this calamity, Edsall rolls out all the Timesian cliches about losers being upset about losing. He calls this the “ubiquity of loss,” as if we’re talking about a natural phenomenon, like beach erosion.

Trump voters, he says, are people who are angry about:

— their inability to achieve “a standard of living as high as that of their parents,”

— “the decline of the gender pay gap … and other types of loss relative to women,” and

— losing “employment and earnings to China and other countries.”

Edsall acts as if these things are immutable laws of physics. Actually, they result from the deliberate policy choices of our ruling class to benefit some Americans to the detriment of others.

Specific policy decisions were made to import an endless stream of low-skilled workers. Employers got boatloads of cheap labor, while ordinary Americans saw their wages plummet.

Oh, and if we’re pretending to care about “democratic norms,” Americans have voted for less immigration over and over and over again. If anyone in the establishment gives a crap about “democratic norms,” then why do they keep foisting more immigration on us?

Specific policy decisions were made to explicitly discriminate against white men in order to give jobs to women, simply because they were women.

I give you Kamala Harris (Biden’s one job requirement for his VP: must be a woman of color); every police chief in the nation (save a couple of black men); and Kara Hultgreen (who died when she crashed a $38 million F-14 after being continuously promoted despite repeated training failures, because the Navy wanted a female fighter pilot).

What crybabies! These guys resent losing jobs because of abject discrimination against them. Koo-koo! Koo-koo!

Specific policy decisions were made to gut our country’s manufacturing base. Globalist bankers got rich, and the working class got the shaft.

The destruction of American manufacturing wasn’t, as Edsall claims, a consequence of “trade.” (Who’s buying our stuff?) International agreements forcing Americans to compete with dollar-an-hour third worlders were a gift to Big Business and Wall Street. They get a larger share of a much smaller pie. Sure, our country overall will make $30, instead of $100. But the 1 percent will get $29 instead of $20!

We don’t need Thomas Edsall to psychoanalyze Trump voters in order to understand what happened in 2016. We were at DEFCON 1 as a nation. (And thanks to Trump’s betrayal, we still are.)

After 20 years, people began to notice: The elites really do hate us. They really are going to ship our jobs abroad. They really are going to replace us with cheap foreign labor. They really are going to let in hordes of illegals. They really are going to bail out Wall Street and preserve their sleazy tax loopholes.

Faced with a choice between the toxic left and country club Republicans, when a complete psychotic came down the escalator, people thought, He might just mean it! (That was a miscalculation.)

The elites screw over ordinary Americans, then to salve their consciences, they call the poor saps “racists.” They get to maintain a system that benefits only them — and at the same time feel morally superior to the people whose lives they’ve ruined. It’s win-win all around!

Americans don’t care about “the gender pay gap,” climate change or international institutions. They deserve what’s coming to them!

Love,

The New York Times

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Dems: Don’t Defund the Police. Break Them!


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 30, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/30/dems-dont-defund-the-police-break-them—p–n2591860/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

Dems: Don't Defund the Police. Break Them!

Source: AP Photo/Jeff Roberson

In the left’s ongoing war on the police, their plan to strip cops of qualified immunity is among the most preposterous. The sole objective is to jam up cops and make them more passive.

Qualified immunity means a police officer can’t be sued for violating someone’s constitutional rights unless those rights are “clearly established.” Officers can still be fired. They can still be disciplined. And they can still be criminally prosecuted. They just can’t be sued by every lowlife they arrest.

Liberals act as if qualified immunity is some extra-special benefit bestowed only on police, unheard of in any other line of work. Michigan’s power-mad Attorney General Dana Nessel says, “We’re not asking that police officers even be held to a higher standard than other professions, just to the same standard as other professions.”

How about you, Dana? Can you be sued?

No, but that’s different.

Indeed, the Michigan attorney general doesn’t have mere “qualified immunity” from civil suits: She has absolute immunity. Unlike police officers, even if Nessel violates clearly established constitutional rights, she cannot be sued.

If Nessel is so hot to hold police “just to the same standard as other professions,” how about holding them to the standard she’s held to? Why does she get bonus immunity?

If anything, it should be the reverse. Who’s more likely to be up-to-date on “clearly established” law? A state attorney general who went to law school and sits around all day, thinking deep legal thoughts — or a beat cop?

In fact, throughout the criminal justice system, it’s always the lawyers who get “absolute immunity” — judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys. Only the guys on the street, having to make split-second decisions while battling lunatics, can ever be sued for violating someone’s constitutional rights.

Liberals aren’t harping about qualified immunity for police because they believe all government employees should be subject to civil rights lawsuits. This is a laser-focused attack on cops. If they can’t defund them, liberals at least want the police broken as a force. They remember how Rudy Giuliani cleaned up New York City in the ’90s and think: NEVER AGAIN.

As long as they brought it up, if anyone deserves to be stripped of immunity, it’s prosecutors. They went to law school. They allegedly represent “the people.” They’ve got enormous power and, lately, they are the greatest threat to the public’s liberty and safety.

How about allowing San Francisco business owners to sue the laughably unqualified, George Soros-sponsored DA, Chesa Boudin? Instead of prosecuting crime — technically, his job — he decided not to prosecute crime. As night follows day — or crime follows Soros DAs — local stores were emptied of their inventory by carefree shoplifters carting away loot in laundry bags and shopping carts.

Same with the other Soros-backed DAs in Philadelphia, Los Angeles and elsewhere.

How about allowing Harvey Weinstein’s #MeToo victims to sue New York District Attorney Cyrus Vance? Back in 2015, after heroic policemen staged a sting on the Hollywood mogul, obtaining an audiotape of Weinstein virtually confessing to sexual assault, Vance refused to prosecute. (On the other hand, he did get a sizable campaign contribution from Weinstein’s lawyer!)

Vance’s corrupt decision to let Weinstein skate allowed the corpulent beast to continue his predations for another few years. He’d be molesting aspiring starlets to this day if it weren’t for Ronan Farrow’s expose.

How about judges who let criminals go free, enabling their subsequent violence — with no accountability to victims?

In the 1990s, a Carter-appointed judge imposed a prison cap on Philadelphia. Within an 18-month period, released prisoners had been re-arrested for 79 murders, 90 rapes, 701 burglaries, 959 robberies, 1,113 assaults, 2,215 drug offenses and 2,748 thefts, according to a study by professor John Dilulio, then at Princeton.

People’s lives were destroyed because of Judge Norma Shapiro. But could the victims sue? Nope! As a judge, Shapiro had absolute immunity from lawsuits over the inevitable consequences of her rulings.

And why stop at the justice system? All government employees have some form of immunity. What about social workers who allow kids under their care to be chained to radiators, starved, burned or beaten to death?

Remember James Holmes, who shot up a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado? A couple of months before his massacre, he was rambling on about his homicidal fantasies to a social worker and a state psychiatrist. They did nothing to warn the public, though the psychiatrist was terrified enough of Holmes to make sure his university access card was deactivated, so he couldn’t get at her.

Weeks later, Holmes opened fire in the movie theater, killing 12 and wounding 58.

These state employees had ample time to cogitate on Holmes’ threats. Compare that to a police officer, making a life-or-death decision in subduing a complete stranger.

Ironically, if cops were stripped of their qualified immunity, an officer who got rough with Holmes while arresting him after his mass murder could be sued — but the psychiatrist and social worker who’d listened as Holmes revealed his homicidal urges before his mass murder could not be.

How about teachers? Forget suing them — liberals want teachers who molest kids to be unfireable.

New York City famously warehoused pervert teachers in “rubber rooms.” They couldn’t be around students (on account of having sexually assaulted them), but they also couldn’t be fired. One teacher collected $1.7 million by showing up to “work” in the rubber room for 20 years, his annual salary soaring to $131,881 for doing nothing.

Rather than eliminating the limited immunity accorded police officers, we should be making other government employees play by the same rules as cops: qualified immunity — and the possibility of being fired. As AG Nessel would say, just like other professions.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Don’t Stop at Juneteenth!


Ann Coulter

Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 23, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/23/dont-stop-at-juneteenth—p–n2591486/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Don't Stop at Juneteenth!

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Happy Juneteenth! I hope you all had a lovely week celebrating the nation’s newest federal holiday, which commemorates the end of slavery throughout the Confederacy.

How could you not? The media was chock-a-block with commentators telling us what a fantastic, transformative event for our nation this was. But the media ignored the best part of all!

What Juneteenth commemorates is not technically the abolition of slavery, but the notification thereof to a particular group of slaves.

Although President Lincoln officially ended slavery with the Emancipation Proclamation on Jan. 1, 1863, it wasn’t until two years later, on June 19, 1865, that the slaves of Galveston, Texas, got the news, when Maj. Gen. Gordon Granger rode into town and issued a series of proclamations announcing that the hideous institution had been abolished and, henceforth, slaves would be considered hired labor.

This takes Juneteenth to a whole new level. Think of all the new federal holidays we could create using Juneteenth as our template! (Anyone who’s dealt with the federal government knows that those workers well deserve another paid day off.) We just need horsemen to ride around the country, correcting the errors of those who falsely believe something bad about America.

Thus, for example, next month we should have some bright young fellow gallop up to a BLM rally, Gen. Granger-style, dismount and announce:

I come with good news! Systemic racism no longer exists! It was done away with by the 1964 Civil Rights Act and parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act! Any victims of racism today can demand remedies in federal court!

And with a hardy “Hi-De-Ho,” our hero would ride off to the next BLM rally, as the march participants disband and hold a celebratory brunch. The date would be remembered each year as the Julyteenth holiday.

Then in August, we’ll send men on horseback to MSNBC with this proclamation:

Trump isn’t going to run for president again! Republicans aren’t afraid of him! They don’t kiss his ring half as much as Democrats kiss Al Sharpton’s ring and parts posterior. As soon as you guys denounce Sharpton, they’ll denounce Trump. Please calm down.

It’s not the fault of MSNBC that they operate on this glaring misconception. Not unlike the slaves, they’ve been kept in the dark, fed lies by people in whom they placed their trust: reporters. The day they learn the truth should live forever in history as Augusteenth — and, of course, federal workers would get that day off, too.

Next, we’ll need some volunteers to saddle up and head over to The New York Times building to proclaim:

Good news, New York Times! Your repeated claim that 1 in 5 women will be the victim of rape is FALSE!

First, my friends, all “in their lifetimes” statistics are a scam. They make any crime sound rampant. More than 8 out of 10 Americans will be the victim of a violent crime “in their lifetimes,” and 9.9 of 10 will be a victim of personal theft “in their lifetimes.”

Second: Even by this ridiculous measure, it’s not “1 in 5.” According to an extensive study by Obama’s Department of Justice examining 18 years of data, 1 in 10 women will be raped “in their lifetimes.” About 2 in 10 will be robbed and 4 in 10 will be injured during a robbery.

Third: The annual rate of rape victimization isn’t close to “1 in 5.” Instead, it’s 1.75 per thousand raped each year.

Fourth: This is including rapes that never happened, but are threatened or attempted.

Isn’t that terrific news, New York Times? Instead of 1 in 5 women succumbing to the awful crime of rape this year, fewer than 1.75 per thousand will be!

Let’s call this holiday Septemberteenth, to commemorate the joyful day Times reporters realized they are not living in a dystopian world of sexual predators. Cheers will erupt! (Some from federal workers.)

In October, our ersatz Gen. Granger and his trusty steed will ride south to the Capitol and proclaim:

I come bearing good news: No one’s vote is being “suppressed”! It’s a bait and switch! Last year’s preposterous voting rules were instituted because of COVID-19! Remember? They told us: IT’S A WORLDWIDE PANDEMIC! WE MUST ALLOW UNIVERSAL EARLY VOTING, NO IDENTIFICATION AND MAIL-IN BALLOTS! DO YOU WANT PEOPLE TO DIE? We can go back to pre-pandemic voting rules without fear of returning to the dark days of Jim Crow! Now, if some of you would be kind enough to give my trusty steed some water?

The late-breaking discovery that Republicans aren’t “suppressing the vote” might be called Octoberteenth.

The slaves of Galveston were understandably ecstatic to be freed of the yoke of slavery — as no doubt will be the misinformed BLM protesters, New York Times reporters and other recipients of our horsemen’s good news. Think of their unbridled joy to be free of these false notions about America! They will shout to the heavens, giving thanks to the bounty of this land, their joy surpassed only by that of federal workers.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The John Lewis Act Is the Dems’ Path to Permanent Power


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 16, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/16/the-john-lewis-act-is-the-dems-path-to-permanent-power—p–n2591101/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com., and WhatDidYouSay.org..

The John Lewis Act Is the Dems' Path to Permanent Power

Source: AP Photo/Chuck Burton, File

The official position of Fox News is that the Democrats’ John Lewis vote-stealing bill is “narrower” than the Democrats’ “For the People” vote-stealing bill. (This will be an exhibit in my museum titled, “Stupid People Can Never Help Your Cause.”)

Yes, it’s “narrower” in the sense of being 1 MILLION times worse. The John Lewis bill will do everything the “For the People” bill does — and so much more! They just don’t tell us what, exactly. The language of the bill is full of anodyne, uplifting language about equal voting participation — but the details will be turned over to left-wing zealots at the Department of Justice, suddenly empowered to enforce voting rules so insane that no elected official would dare vote for them.

Inasmuch as nearly every congressional Democrat is fine with the provisions in the “For the People” bill — which are ludicrous — imagine how much worse the “You Can’t Blame Me” bill is.

It will be faceless bureaucrats at the Department of Justice who give meaning to the happy words in the John Lewis bill. Federal government employees — i.e., the people actually making the rules — cannot be voted out of office. (Or fired — this is government work.) Indeed, these are people who could never be elected to any office on account of their repellent political views and, often, repellent physical appearance.

This is how Democrats impose fascistic rules on the citizenry without ever having to cast a dangerous vote: They write laws with vague statements of high principle, then dump the actual rule-making onto a government agency, where refugees from the ACLU issue edicts outlawing private property, due process, free speech and honest elections.

Recall:

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who ordered a nice Idaho couple to halt work on their home because it was allegedly on a protected wetland (in the middle of a subdivision with many other homes). That was environmentalist wackos at the EPA.

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who required universities to deny basic due process rights to students accused of rape. That was feminist loons at the Department of Education.

— It wasn’t elected members of Congress who directed Obama’s IRS to target groups with “tea party” or “patriots” in their names. That was liberal ideologue Lois Lerner and other civil service functionaries.

The lunatics at these agencies look like Reason Personified compared to the DOJ’s voting rights attorneys.

In 2013, author Charlotte Allen described one fair-minded DOJ staffer, whose job it was to rewrite state voting laws:

“On the morning of January 21, [2013] just before President Obama’s second inauguration, Rep. Paul Ryan … was roundly booed by the gathered crowd as he left the Capitol to attend the ceremonies …. Within minutes Daniel J. Freeman, a young career trial lawyer with the Voting Section of the U.S. Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division … took credit in a Facebook post for instigating the anti-Ryan derision.”

1. Paul Ryan? Pencil-necked, open borders, Never-Trump Paul Ryan? That’s the guy who got Freeman so riled up?

2. The obnoxious Freeman is no longer a young career trial lawyer at the DOJ. Now he’s a senior career trial lawyer at the DOJ.

Among the innovations dreamed up by fanatics like Freeman, Arizona was informed it could not ask for identification from people delivering more than 10 early ballots. Nothing fishy about that!

Arizona’s voting laws were subject to federal oversight because of its well-known history as a slave state and avid practitioner of Jim Crow. (I may have to check my notes on that.)

Actually, Arizona was bossed around by liberal activists at the DOJ for 40 years because back in 1972, it didn’t have bilingual ballots. Those weren’t instituted until 1974. They may as well have donned white hoods and burned crosses!

Oddly, Mississippi’s election laws were also subject to approval by the DOJ — despite the fact that blacks already voted at far higher rates than whites in that state. By contrast, Massachusetts did not require oversight of its voting laws, although in that fancy liberal state, black people voted at far lower rates than whites.

It’s almost as if only red states have their voting laws nitpicked by left-wing lawyers in Washington. I wonder if that would help Democrats win presidential elections?

Ironically, meaning totally predictably, the original 1965 Voting Rights Act was necessary because Democrats were trying to prevent black people from voting. Today, Democrats are using these new “voting rights” bills to ensure that 110% of black people vote, even if they are convicted felons, don’t live in the state, didn’t actually fill out a ballot or are dead.

It wasn’t until 2013 that the Supreme Court mercifully overturned key portions of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. (Citing the overwhelming Senate vote for the wonderfully named Voting Rights Act, Justice Antonin Scalia remarked at oral argument: “This is not the kind of a question you can leave to Congress.”)

While it’s great that ideologues like Dan Freeman had their wings clipped by the Court, the previous 40 years of their harassment tells you what they want to do. The John Lewis voting rights bill will put them back in the saddle!

States will be ordered to keep dead voters on the rolls, give violent felons the right to vote and jettison any voter I.D. requirements. (Interestingly, even after all the media demagoguery, black people still overwhelmingly support voter I.D. laws.)

There’s no disincentive to government lawyers pursuing frivolous cases to the end of the Earth. Even if they eventually lose, they don’t have to worry about court costs or legal fees. They don’t pay ’em. You do.

The “For the People” voting rights bill is the floor of what these petty bureaucrats will require. Those are the bare-minimum “voting rights” that will be imposed on the states by the DOJ. That’s the level of absurdity Democrats are willing to vote for in plain sight. What great ideas does Dan Freeman have that even Democrats couldn’t endorse on the record?

What is the voting “rights” equivalent of the EPA’s relentless persecution of homeowners, the Duke lacrosse case or the IRS’s abuse of power? Because that’s what the John Lewis voting rights bill will deliver.


Voting Rights: It’s ‘Racist’ Not to Let Democrats Cheat

Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 09, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/09/voting-rights-its-racist-not-to-let-democrats-cheat—p–n2590760/

Voting Rights: It's 'Racist' Not to Let Democrats Cheat

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

Why aren’t Republicans screaming from the rooftops about the Democrats’ plans to change voting rules to give themselves an advantage? Their sleazy election bills, HR 1, the “For the People Act,” and HR 4, the “John Lewis Voting Rights Advancement Act,” are intended to help Democrats win majorities in both houses of Congress, at which point they will ignore Republicans entirely, end the filibuster, and pass everything in AOC’s Dream Journal — amnesty, gun control, a wealth tax, and a rainbows and unicorns energy bill.

So it’s kind of important for Republicans to kill these bills in the crib. It shouldn’t be hard. All they have to do is tell people what’s in them.

Are Republicans counting on Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., to save them? The GOP defeated Hillary Care in the 1990s far more decisively … then it came roaring back a few years later as Obamacare.

Currently, Manchin opposes the For the People bill, but supports the even more execrable John Lewis bill. Both will completely rewrite state election laws to favor Democrats, but at least For the People will be done by Congress. The John Lewis bill will give unelected bureaucrats at the Justice Department vast power to impose voting rules on the states. Based on previous such exercises of unaccountable power, 10-year-olds will soon have the right to vote. (See Title IX.)

Unless Republicans agree to ludicrous voting rules that give Democrats a partisan advantage, they’re racist. That’s the full argument. Republicans are trying to “suppress the vote” of black and brown people! John Lewis risked his life for the right to vote!

If that’s why Republicans don’t want to talk about these bills, they better get used to it. They’re going to be called “racist” a lot more if that’s all it takes to stifle the opposition.

Of course, Democrats’ own voters respond to John Lewis’ touching story by saying, Good for him, but — when is the election again? Tuesday? Yeah, that’s not going to be convenient for me.

And that’s the nub of the problem. The Democrats have a lot of what we call “unmotivated voters.” Risk their lives to vote? They won’t risk missing a couple hours of TV.

These are people who don’t pay attention to the news (that’s why they’re Democrats); don’t speak English (that’s why they’re Democrats); or don’t have a fully developed pre-frontal cortex because they’re under the age of 26 (that’s why they’re Democrats). And so on.

Consequently, Democrats have to mobilize armies of volunteers to carry their voters on gurneys to the polls on Election Day.

Wouldn’t it be easier if they had a few months to get their voters to the polls? What if their voters didn’t have to show up at all?

Why, yes! That would be much easier.

This is why the For the People bill mandates universal mail-in voting. Asking people to show up to vote is a dirty trick to “rig our democracy,” according to the left-wing group Indivisible. Litter the countryside with mail-in ballots months before an election — or you’re a Nazi.

In fact, apart from a worldwide pandemic, there’s no reason for mail-in voting. Studies show it increases voter turnout only modestly. But mail-in voting sure presents a lot of opportunities for fraud! It’s almost like Democrats consider that a feature, not a bug.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Election Data and Science Lab cited two main avenues for mail-in ballot fraud:

— “First, the ballot is cast outside the public eye, and thus the opportunities for coercion and voter impersonation are greater.”

In other words, instead of filling out a secret ballot in the presence of election officials, you will be out and about, at home, at the office, at the ballpark with your ballot, able to prove to others how you voted — to impress them, or perhaps because you’re being paid or threatened. And that’s assuming it’s you holding the ballot.

— “Second, the transmission path for [mail-in] ballots is not as secure as traditional in-person ballots. These concerns relate both to ballots being intercepted and ballots being requested without the voter’s permission.”

Not to worry! The Democrats deal with the possibility of imposters requesting mail-in ballots by … prohibiting the states from requesting voter I.D.

Huh, that’s odd. If you wanted to ensure that only eligible voters are voting, wouldn’t you want to — oh wait, I see.

Liberals will not rest until convicted felons — a key Democratic constituency — are fully participating members of our democracy. Or at least have ballots that can be filled out for them.

Unfortunately, some of our more unenlightened states believe that a person who has been convicted of violating society’s laws should be denied the right to choose who writes them. The For the People bill fixes that by forcing states to give felons the right to vote.

Speaking of felons, the For the People Act requires states to automatically register people to vote whenever they provide information to state agencies, such as the Department of Motor Vehicles, public universities, and, off the top of my head, state welfare bureaucracies, unemployment offices and prison facilities.

That’s a lot of ballots for Democratic volunteers to mine!

In 1994, in response to the stalking and murder of actress Rebecca Schaeffer by a crazed fan who got her address through the California Department of Motor Vehicles, Congress passed the Driver’s Privacy Protection Act, prohibiting state DMVs from releasing personal information to the public. One of the main sponsors was Sen. Barbara Boxer, who recited case after case of women stalked, harassed, raped and killed by men who had tracked their victims with information provided by the DMV.

With the automatic voter registration in the For the People bill, federal law would require states to release that information. Simply by getting a driver’s license or unemployment benefits, your name, address and phone number would be available to your stalker through the voting rolls. (Also to bill collectors, parole officers, process servers, etc.) Voter registration lists are publicly available for electioneering purposes.

The Democrats’ “voting rights” bill is a stalkers’ delight. But at least no one will have his vote “suppressed” by having to engage in the monstrously difficult task of registering to vote or showing up on Election Day. Your choice, America: A few pesky stalkers kill their victims, or Democrats call you “racist.”

AnnCoulter Op-ed” Why Is Ancestry.com Protecting White Serial Killers?


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Jun 02, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/06/02/why-is-ancestrycom-protecting-white-serial-killers—p–n2590390

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org.

Why Is Ancestry.com Protecting White Serial Killers?

Source: AP Photo/Rich Pedroncelli, File

This week, The New York Times reported on new laws in Maryland and Montana that restrict law enforcement’s use of genealogy databases to catch serial killers. (Maryland I can understand, but Montana? Has someone kidnapped Gov. Greg Gianforte?)

Some of the largest DNA databases — Ancestry, 23andMe and Helix — already refuse to share their databases with the police without a court order.

I’m sorry, but why? What is their argument? Ancestry doesn’t want to lose the business of skittish serial killers?

Everyone agrees that these pro-criminal rules were a direct response to the “controversy” of law enforcement catching the Golden State Killer in 2018.

Yes, it’s apparently controversial that the monster who terrorized California for decades, killing at least 13 people and raping dozens of women, was finally captured — with 100% accuracy — thanks to brilliant detective work and the miracle of DNA.

Sheriff’s investigator Paul Holes and FBI lawyer Steve Kramer created a fake profile on GEDmatch using DNA from a rape kit of one of the Golden State Killer’s victims. This produced distant relatives of the rapist, allowing them to build a family tree, leading to Joseph James DeAngelo, then living in a Sacramento suburb. Officers began surveilling DeAngelo, collected his DNA from a car door and discarded tissue and — bingo! — it matched the Golden State Killer’s semen sample.

My entire life I’ve had to listen to liberals wail about all the “innocent” people on death row. (There is no credible evidence that any innocent person has been executed in this country since at least 1945.) They pretended to be against murder, just deeply horrified by the idea that we might execute “the wrong man.”

Now we have the technology to make identifications that are infallible — and liberals say we can’t use it because of their concern about maintaining the serial killer’s privacy.

As put by The Hill — since you won’t believe me otherwise:

“Questions intensified after law enforcement officials in California used an ancestry database to help identify the Golden State Killer, a serial killer and rapist who eluded authorities for decades.”

Yeah, that sucks. The white ex-cop — catch that, #BLM? — who tortured and raped women while their partners were forced to listen in the next room, then made obscene phone calls to his victims, was finally captured after a 40-year search, whereupon: “Questions intensified.”

WHAT “QUESTIONS”? My only questions are:

1) When are the triumphant awards dinners?; and

2) Will #BLM be taking the side of a white cop in this one case?

The Hill continued:

“Following the controversy [of catching a serial killer — for liberals, that’s controversial], the largest ancestry companies said they wouldn’t allow police to access their databases without a warrant.”

What on earth, Ancestry? It’s more important that the ACLU likes you than that a majority of Americans do?

How about taking a poll of your members? Should we allow law enforcement to submit DNA into our database to solve rapes and murders without the necessity of obtaining a court order first?

“Yes” would be a 90% winner, and the other 10% would be ACLU types suddenly signing up just to vote. Even criminals would say, Yeah, for a killer, sure, that’s fine. Only a few law professors and, of course, the Times’ Charles Blow, would be against it, which is formidable competition, but I still think we can win this baby!

The objections to allowing police access to genealogical websites consist of vague invocations of “privacy.” University of Maryland law professor Natalie Ram [Email her] for example, told the Times that law enforcement’s use of genealogical databases was “chilling, concerning and privacy-invasive.”

Many people find serial killers breaking into their homes, tying them up and raping them to be “chilling, concerning and privacy-invasive,” so we seem to be at an impasse.

As with the Golden State Killer, the majority of criminals captured through these databases are going to be white. (Good news for “Forensic Files”!) Don’t be fooled by Ancestry’s woke television ads: The vast majority of their members are white. Israeli researchers estimate that public genealogy databases can now identify 60% of all people of European descent.

Is Ancestry trying to protect white killers? They’re OK with innocent black men being arrested, while the actual white murderers remain hidden in their database? Have we finally found the beating heart of white supremacy in America?

Or are they just sniveling cowards? Let me guess: Some small group of fanatics wrote a bunch of letters to Ancestry and law enforcement didn’t.

OK, let’s add up the letters … 28 from law professors who oppose allowing law enforcement to use our databases, and no letters in support.

[Ancestry wets pants.]

Law enforcement officers wouldn’t be scrolling through personal genetic information. Indeed, they can’t view information about specific individuals at all. They submit a DNA profile and, if there’s a match to a criminal, an alarm goes off. Nothing comes back unless there’s a hit.

There’s an easy solution to any privacy concerns. If you don’t want the police finding you through a genealogical database, don’t leave your DNA at a crime scene.

But some jackass Democratic lobbyist formed the Coalition for Genetic Data Protection and bullied Ancestry, 23andMe and Helix into withholding their databases from law enforcement without a warrant, adding a pointless obstacle to bringing killers to justice.

Steve Haro [Email him], executive director of the coalition: Hey, congratulate me! I just hamstrung the police in their ability to catch the provably guilty!

If Democrats really gave a crap about privacy, how about a “coalition” to prevent businesses from selling our names and addresses to third parties? How about prohibiting Google, Facebook and Apple from spying on us? Can we start there, rather than blocking law enforcement from using genealogical websites to catch criminals with 100%, absolute, dead-on accuracy?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: ‘Florida Woman’ Saner Than Media


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 26, 2021 4:15 PM

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/05/26/florida-woman-saner-than-media—p–n2590056

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, and WhatDidYouSay.org

l'Florida Woman' Saner Than Media

Source: AP Photo/Gerald HerbertTrending

Last week, we discussed Rebekah Jones, the crazy lady who wrote a 342-page telenovela about her ex-lover, Garrett Sweeterman, then went on to fame and fortune by claiming Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was faking his state’s spectacularly low COVID numbers.

Before the media turned Jones into their next Erin Brockovich, they might have done 10 seconds of Googling to find out that Jones’ past includes stalkingbattery on a police officer, repeated incarcerations, an institutionalization, an ankle monitor, a restraining order and court-ordered medication. And that’s long before the DeSantis administration hired her as a web designer.

These infractions are contained not only in police reports and court filings, but in her prolix manifesto about her ex-lover that she herself posted all over the internet. Jones seems to think it’s a point in her favor that during Florida State University’s investigation of her obsessive behavior toward her former student, “Garrett didn’t even bother bringing any evidence — no copies of texts or calls … I brought more than 200 pages worth.”

That sounds normal.

Even after multiple demands that she stay away from Sweeterman, the still-married Jones writes:

Did you know that I would have given anything, truly anything to make things right between us?

Did it matter to you at all that I loved you?

Did it, Garrett?

If the genders were reversed, Jones’ obsession with a former student would be a movie on “Lifetime: TV for Women.”

Instead, she attacked DeSantis and became Forbes magazine’s “Technology Person of the Year,” Fortune magazine’s “40-Under-40” in health care, and cable news’s go-to source for dirt on the DeSantis administration.

No TV personality lavished more attention on Jones than MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell, featuring her on his show on Dec. 8, Dec. 9, Dec. 16 and Dec. 22, 2020. As is common at MSNBC, O’Donnell jumped on the horse and rode off into the sunset without a map, directions or a compass.

In the first of his blockbuster reports, O’Donnell used a law enforcement raid on Jones’ home for one of his anti-police screeds, informing viewers that they were about to see a video of “outrageous conduct by American police officers” — and I have this hot MILF on my show to talk about it. If she wants, I’ll take her on my sailboat.

The MSNBC host scoffed at the basis for the raid, saying: “They were going after the person who sent what they considered, I suppose, some criminally dangerous text.” Ho ho ho. Jones — or at least her lawyer — knows damn well that the charge is serious, which is why, to this day, she stoutly denies sending the text.

According to the search warrant affidavit, six months after Jones was fired by the Florida Department of Health, she hacked into the state’s medical emergency notification system from her home computer, obtained the private information of thousands of people, and sent out a mass text, pleading: “it’s time to speak up before another 17,000 people are dead. You know this is wrong,” and so on. She signed the deranged missive as if it were an official communique from Florida Department of Health.

Comcast determined that the text came from Jones’ Tallahassee home. Perhaps in addition to cuckolding him, she plans to pin the hacking felony on her husband. (Then she could run off with Garrett!)

On the day of the raid, as infinitely patient law enforcement officers banged on Jones’ front door for 22 minutes, she was inside, setting up a video camera. Donations to her GoFundMe page must have been flagging.

O’Donnell introduced her video, saying: “What you’re about to see is almost as bad as American policing gets.”

What we see is Jones (finally) opening the door and exiting the house. An officer enters, unholsters his gun, and calls out for anyone else in the house to come downstairs. In other words, standard operating procedure for executing a search warrant.

Although no one is pointing a gun at anyone, Jones can be heard in the background screaming, “He just pointed a gun at my children!”

This is classic hysterical woman behavior.

YOU’RE HURTING ME! STOP HITTING ME!

I’m not touching you. I’m 7 feet away.

But O’Donnell and the rest of the media repeatedly played Jones’ video while informing viewers that it showed something it plainly did not: officers “pointing” guns at Jones and her children.

“The only thing that could have made this worse,” O’Donnell said, “is if one of those recklessly aimed guns killed someone in that house. If one of those guns aimed at Rebekah Jones’ children fired.”

O’Donnell on the Zapruder film: As you can see in frame 187, President Kennedy is firing at Lee Harvey Oswald from the convertible.

Jones is like the white woman captured on video in Central Park, calling 911 on a black male birdwatcher. As he calmly speaks to her from 20 yards away, she shrieks to the dispatcher, “An African American man… [is] threatening myself and my dog.”

O’Donnell voiceover: The only thing that could have made this worse is if the birdwatcher had killed the woman.

My voiceover for the entire American media: As you can see, they are liars.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Only in Florida: Crazed Woman Stalks Governor


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 19, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/05/19/only-in-florida-crazed-woman-stalks-governor—p–n2589734/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Only in Florida: Crazed Woman Stalks Governor

Source: AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee

In another Very Florida story, a woman with a colorful criminal history has spent the last year collecting media accolades and a half-million dollars in donations by accusing the Republican governor of Florida, Ron DeSantis, of fudging the state’s COVID numbers.

Rebekah Jones, website designer (not “scientist,” as the media insistently claim), falsely accused DeSantis of doing what Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York actually was doing with the COVID numbers. From the extensive media coverage, I figured maybe the DeSantis administration was taking advantage of gray areas to make the state’s record look as good as possible. Not as bad as what Cuomo was doing, but something.

Nope! This whole story was the fantasy of a crazed stalker, as explained in detail by Christina Pushaw in Human Events and Charles Cook in National Review.

I forgot my own admonition that you can’t believe anything the media say.

The canonization of Rebekah Jones is only the latest example of the press latching onto any lunatic who attacks a Republican. Remember Bill Burkett? (CBS’s deranged source for the fake Bush Air National Guard story.) Jamie Leigh Jones? (Falsely claimed she was gang-raped in Iraq by Halliburton employees.) How about media star and Democratic presidential hopeful Michael Avenatti? (He was going to vanquish Donald Trump and Brett Kavanaugh with Stormy Daniels and Julie Swetnick, until his criminal past caught up with him.)

Hey, whatever happened to Haven Monahan?

Contrary to Jones’ allegations, she could not have been asked to falsify Florida COVID numbers, for the simple reason that she didn’t generate the numbers. She designed and updated the state’s website using data given to her by actual epidemiologists, but had no role in the collection of the information and no earthly idea what it should be.

On the other hand, she did:

— expose people’s private information;

— block a colleague from accessing the site;

— use the Florida emergency notification system to send out a deranged message pushing her personal conspiracy theory — something she staunchly denies despite overwhelming forensic evidence; and

— defame an accomplished black woman scientist as “the most corrupt, lying, incompetent and ignorant person that could be ever be (sic) put in charge.” (In this one instance, the media decided to give a pass to someone insulting a black person.)

As is probably true of many esteemed scientists, Jones had an illegitimate child in her junior year of college and, in 2016, as a graduate student at Louisiana State University, was charged with two counts of battery on a police officer.

But it wasn’t until she got to Florida that Jones really hit her stride. In 2017, then in her late 20s and an instructor at Florida State University, the married Jones had an affair with a student, Garrett Sweeterman.

She then penned a graphic 342-page essay on their relationship — written while she was married to the world’s most tolerant husband. Hello, honey! I’m home. I’ll be in the study for the next two hours working on that Penthouse Letter about my extramarital affair.

Jones has claimed that Sweeterman is the father of her 2-year-old child, but two days before he was to provide his DNA, her paternity suit against him was dismissed. (Only the hard-hearted would suggest she is a loon trying to entrap the kid into marriage because she prefers him to her husband.)

The manifesto reads like something a nitwit 13-year-old girl would write, giving a play-by-play description of their sexual encounters, followed by Sweeterman’s repeated attempts to break up with her, which she calls his “mind games.” Anyone reading her manifesto can see that her great love affair was nothing but a booty call for him.

In short order, Jones was stalking Sweeterman, destroying his property and posting naked photos of him online — as well as sending revenge porn to his mother and employer. Despite Sweeterman’s restraining order against her, in addition to a court order directing her to stay away from campus, Jones would show up unannounced at his classes, just to “talk.” (They always just want to “talk.”)

In Jones’ own telling, by October 2017, Sweeterman was repeatedly texting her things like, “I can’t see you … I don’t feel right about any of it. … YOU’RE MARRIED. You have a family.”

His mother blocked Jones’ texts. His sister replied to one of her texts, saying, “I don’t know who the f– you are or what the f– you want but you better stay the f- away from my family. Delete my number and delete my families number you f-ing bitch.”

After all this, Jones showed up at one of Sweeterman’s classes and they screamed at each other; then she drove to his house that night, he came out and they screamed at each other again. Sweeterman walked away from her and got in his car, saying, “I’m leaving.” She hopped into the passenger seat. He went back inside. His roommates came out and told her to leave.

Still sitting in his car, Jones asks herself: “Was I supposed to leave? Was that the end of our conversation? Was that the end of us?”

Jones’ ongoing hysterics resulted in criminal charges against her for vandalizing Sweeterman’s car, robbery and stalking. She was fired by the university, jailed at least three times and committed to a mental institution.

This is the “scientist” who was lionized by, among others, CNNMSNBCNPRThe Guardian and Cosmopolitan.

The smearing of DeSantis would be outrageous even if Jones were a rational human with an impeccable past, but she is not. DeSantis steered Florida through the pandemic with 30% fewer COVID deaths than New York, despite having a larger population and a lot more old people.

But journalists couldn’t be bothered to bring up Cuomo’s killing old people and cooking the books because they were too busy talking about his lats. Instead, our watchdog media attacked the governor with the best record on COVID, who was being stalked by a crazy woman.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: I Will Not Be Scienced!


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: May 12, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/05/12/i-will-not-be-scienced—p–n2589343/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com, AND WhatDidYouSay.org

I Will Not Be Scienced!

Source: AP Photo/Alex BrandonTrending

After a year of being browbeaten by “the scientists” not to wear a mask, to wear a mask, to wear double masks, to get vaccinated and still wear a mask, our analytic overlords are still no closer to determining the tiny little issue of where this virus came from.

Recently, the widely respected science writer Nicholas Wade published an article in Medium pushing the idea that — contrary to what “the scientists” assured us — COVID-19 might have come from the Wuhan virology lab, not the wet markets.

According to Wade, the virologists attacking the lab theory were claiming scientific certainty for something unknowable, and at least one of them has a gigantic conflict of interest. Even at a time when “TRUST THE SCIENCE!” has become a liberal mating call, I’m shocked at the deceptions of these guys.

Wade cites two groups as leading the attack on the lab theory.

Kristian G. Andersen, [Tweet him] a professor of immunology and microbiology at the Scripps Research Institute in California, was the lead author of a paper published in Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020, claiming: “Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.”

Talk about influential — not only did The New York Times cite Andersen, but I did!

Now, a year later, Wade says, “Dr. Andersen and his colleagues were assuring their readers of something they could not know.” While Andersen claimed that two of the virus’s characteristics couldn’t be made in a lab, Wade describes exactly how they could be.

The second group of experts denouncing the lab theory was led by Peter Daszak, [Tweet him] the president of the EcoHealth Alliance of New York. Daszak got two dozen other scientists to sign a letter to The Lancet that portentously declared: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.” Scientists, the letter said, “overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.”

Well! No uncertainty there!

But Wade notes that Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance had helped fund the Wuhan lab.

I have a problem when a guy with a financial and reputational stake in a lab organizes a group of scientists to say, It’s absolutely not from the lab!!! Daszak’s letter concluded with what only the deeply cynical might suggest was a lie: “We declare no competing interests.”

In response to the obvious question, “Why didn’t any other scientists speak up?” Wade says: “Perhaps because in today’s universities speech can be very costly. Careers can be destroyed for stepping out of line. Any virologist who challenges the community’s declared view risks having his next grant application turned down by the panel of fellow virologists that advises the government grant distribution agency.”

If we could give them a truth serum, I wonder what these experts would say about transgendersIQ, the COVID shutdowns and any number of pressing social issues we’re all supposed to shut up about because of “science.”

And of course there was the fact that Trump had floated the lab theory. Before a liberal will answer any question, he needs to know:

1) Has Trump ever offered an opinion on this?

2) What is the 180-degree opposite position?

Wade claims to have no preference for one theory over another — he’s just laying out the facts! But it’s pretty clear that he is coming down on the side of the lab theory.

He doesn’t mention that 27 of the original 41 Chinese people who contracted COVID-19 had been to the Wuhan wet market, known the world over for its delectable porcupine anus and snake innards. Several other carriers were family members of those infected there. By contrast, no one from the Wuhan lab appears to have been infected.

No, Wade’s argument is a purely scientific one. Not my bailiwick. But I can see when experts disagree, and, oh my gosh, do they disagree!

One of Wade’s main points is that COVID-19 is the only coronavirus with a furin cleavage site. (You don’t need to know what it is — substitute the words “chocolate bunny.”) “So,” Wade concludes, “it’s hard to explain how the [COVID] virus picked up its furin cleavage site naturally.”

Last month, the World Health Organization released a major report on the origin of the coronavirus, so I checked to see what its scientists said about this “furin cleavage.” They say COVID-19’s “furin cleavage” is, in fact, like that in another bat coronavirus, RmYN02, “providing evidence that such insertion events occur naturally in animals.”

I can’t evaluate the science, but I can line up words, and those conclusions don’t match. In fact, they are direct opposites.

Like you, I’m inclined to believe Wade over the WHO, but that’s not the point. Do you see how absurd this is, trying to ascertain a scientific fact as if we’re assessing the credibility of witnesses in a sexual harassment case? Well, he lied about the lingerie, but she seems to have been stalking him …

We’re talking about SCIENCE, our new religion! Wear a mask — it’s “SCIENCE”! There’s no such thing as race — it’s “SCIENCE“! Global warming is incinerating our planet — it’s SCIENCE! The mere invocation of “SCIENCE” is used to slam the door on any argument.

This week on MSNBC, a host actually said, “There are no bad apples at the CDC.” Every hour of every day, I have to hear about the “bad apples” in policing. But at the CDC? Nope! They’re SCIENTISTS.

Whether the virus that destroyed the world economy and has already killed more than 3 million people came from a Chinese lab or a Chinese wet market, or a Chinese restaurant on the Upper West Side (unlikely), it’s China’s fault. What is mind-boggling about Wade’s article is the overweening and baseless pomposity of our high priests of SCIENCE.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Thanks, Derek Chauvin Jurors! You’re Safe Now. We Aren’t.


Commentary by Ann Coulter | Posted: Apr 21, 2021 | https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/04/21/thanks-jurors-youre-safe-now-we-arent—p–n2588347

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Thanks, Derek Chauvin Jurors! You’re Safe Now. We Aren’t.

Source: Court TV via AP, Pool

To watch the hours of celebratory fist-pumping from government officials and black activists after the guilty verdicts against police officer Derek Chauvin this week, you’d think Minnesota had just won the NCAA tournament. One man is dead and another will be spending up to 40 years in prison. How about Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison show a little dignity, with something like: “We had the trial; we’ve got a verdict; I’m not taking any questions”?

Nope! We got a one-hour spirit rally for the championship team. The key was teamwork. Our guys practiced every night — staying even after the gym had closed! We couldn’t have done it without the fans.

There wasn’t this much triumphalism when Ted Bundy was convicted! He murdered 30 women, escaped from jail twice, and killed again before finally being brought to trial. We didn’t have hours of gloating after they got the Green River Killer, and it took 20 years to catch him.

Maybe we’ve gotten less decorous in the past few decades. But how about celebrating the conviction of a gangbanger who killed an 8-year-old girl in a drive-by? Would the media be as giddy about that? Not likely. Wild celebrations are in order only for the railroading of a cop.

The prosecutors must feel great! All it took was threatening the jurors with riots and personal destruction to get the verdict they wanted. Real Ciceros, these guys.

Chauvin was forced to flee his home last year, which naturally had been vandalized, requiring constant police presence. Barricades have recently been erected around the home of officer Kim Potter, who accidentally shot escaping violent gun offender Daunte Wright last week.

The day before Chauvin’s case went to the jury, a defense witness — a witness! — had his former home in California vandalized with pigs’ blood and a pig’s head. So I’m sure the jurors reached their verdict purely based on the evidence, after a careful weighing of both sides in the Anglo-Saxon tradition.

We’re told that this is only the beginning, big changes are in the air. Does that mean every case against a cop will come with threats of mob violence?

Here’s one big change in policing that will come out of the Chauvin trial: No longer will police use the least amount of force on vulnerable individuals, like George Floyd. From here on out, the safety of the perp will take a back seat to avoiding unflattering cellphone videos. A key point brought out at trial was this: As soon as Chauvin arrived on the scene, he would have been within his rights to use a Taser or stun gun on Floyd. The prosecution’s use-of-force experts agreed! Chauvin employed a less aggressive restraint that looked worse to bystanders. Big mistake.

By now, surely, all law enforcement officers realize that their one overriding concern must always be the optics, not the reality. Unlike other public servants, police have to do their jobs while under the watchful eye of cellphone cameras. What matters is how things appear to idiot onlookers.

Heart disease is rampant in the African American community. Combine that with drug use and behavioral problems — and there are a lot more George Floyds out there waiting to happen. According to the medical examiner, it was the stress of being restrained — combined with Floyd’s heart condition and massive amount of fentanyl in his system — that killed him. If lying on the ground was too much stress on Floyd’s heart, how about 50,000 volts of electricity? Again, according to the state’s use-of-force experts, that would have been A-OK.

Got a resisting arrestee? Zap him with the stun gun and heave him in the back of the police van. Whatever happens after that, at least you won’t have a chubby EMT screaming at you and taking videos.

True, Floyd stood a better chance of going on living by NOT being zapped with a stun gun. On the other hand, Chauvin stood a better chance of staying out of prison if he’d just gotten Floyd in the police van, pronto.

Nice work, Minnesota!

The other big change coming down the pike is that we are headed back to the 1960s in terms of crime. Already, 2020 marked the largest year-to-year increase in murders in the history of the country. In Minneapolis alone, the murder rate doubled. Get ready for a lot more violent crime, emboldened criminals and less aggressive police. To the unwitting citizens of Minnesota who will soon have their lives snuffed out, just remember: The jurors were worried about their own personal security. It was your life or theirs, and they decided the better part of valor was to sacrifice yours.

Their motto: I regret that I have only dozens of other people’s lives to give for my virtue.

Ann Coulter OP-ED: Derek Chauvin, Human Sacrifice


Ann Coulter

Commentary by Ann Coulter |Posted: Mar 31, 2021

Read more at https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2021/03/31/derek-chauvin-human-sacrifice—p–n2587224/

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Derek Chauvin, Human Sacrifice

Source: AP Photo/Craig Mitchelldyer  

In modern America, we periodically offer up white men as human sacrifices to the PC gods. Among our benefactions: Jake Gardner, Kyle Rittenhouse, Darren Wilson, the Duke lacrosse players, University of Virginia fraternity members, Stacey Koon and Mark Fuhrman.

The rest of us just keep our heads down and pray we won’t be next.

At least the Duke and UVA human offerings were sufficiently upper-crust to have a few journalists and lawyers defending them. But policemen, bar owners, military veterans and a Midwest teenager? Definitely not our crowd, darling.

Currently, Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin is on trial for killing George Floyd by kneeling on his neck, as it appeared in cellphone videos. You may remember something about this: It’s why America had to burn in 2020.

But the chief medical examiner’s report establishes that, however else Floyd died, it wasn’t from Chauvin’s knee. Oopsie! I guess it wasn’t absolutely essential that our country go through eight months of lootingriots and mostly peaceful arsons.

In lieu of citing some B.S. media “fact check,” I shall quote directly from the autopsy report by the Hennepin County Chief Medical Examiner, Andrew Baker:

“No life-threatening injuries identified —

“A. No facial, oral mucosal, or conjunctival petechiae

“B. No injuries of anterior muscles of neck or laryngeal structures

“C. No scalp soft tissue, skull, or brain injuries

“D. No chest wall soft tissue injuries, rib fractures (other than a single rib fracture from CPR), vertebral column injuries, or visceral injuries

“E. Incision and subcutaneous dissection of posterior and lateral neck, shoulders, back, flanks, and buttocks negative for occult trauma”

In short: No bloodshot eyes and no trauma to any part of Floyd’s neck.

And yet, day after day, prosecutors, witnesses and the media tell us that Chauvin “squeezed the life out of” Floyd. The medical evidence establishes that whatever else caused his death, it was NOT asphyxiation.

That’s the entire case against Officer Chauvin! But the howling mob isn’t giving up its holy religious observance because of one dork in a lab coat. The sun might not rise! The city of Minneapolis could be wiped out! Wait — that might actually happen.

The medical examiner also found that Floyd had enough fentanyl in his system — I don’t want to say “to kill a horse,” because that would be a cliche. But it would be enough to bump off an entire team of Budweiser Clydesdales. In technical medical jargon:

“A. Blood drug and novel psychoactive substances screens:

“1. Fentanyl 11 ng/mL”

That’s just the first few words of the “Toxicology” section. Also listed are norfentanyl, 4-ANPP, methamphetamine, cannabinoids, amphetamines, morphine and so on.

But the 11 nanograms per milliliter of fentanyl is rather important, inasmuch as the chief medical examiner called this “a fatal level of fentanyl under normal circumstances,” saying, “deaths have been certified with levels of 3.”

Three. But George Floyd went up to 11.

Naturally, Baker was quick to add, “I am not saying this killed him.” Please don’t throw me to the woke gods! Leave me to my test tubes! (And you thought lawyers were craven.)

I have a feeling we’re about to see another example of the left not accepting science.

In addition to liberals refusing to accept the science of:

— DNA (the O.J. trial)

— AIDS (we’re still waiting for that big heterosexual outbreak!)

— Cancer clusters and breast implants (billions of dollars wasted and companies destroyed because of the left’s adherence to junk science)

— I.Q. (just watch the reaction to my mentioning this hate-science) …

… we can now add “pharmacology”!

You mean to say that just by sticking a syringe in someone’s arm you can tell if he’s been taking drugs? That’s a lot of mumbo-jumbo, just like the moon landing.

This trial is a total sham, but the entire power of the state, the media, the left-wing shock troops and the country’s finest legal talent is being deployed against Derek Chauvin.

In addition to Minnesota’s top prosecutor, the state has hired Neal Katyal, former solicitor general of the United States — an unheard-of maneuver in a case that doesn’t involve some highly technical specialty, like antitrust. A slew of lawyers are working pro bono for the prosecutor — also unheard of. The state has unlimited resources to pursue Chauvin.

Against this, Chauvin has one lone defense attorney, Eric “Atticus Finch” Nelson. The Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association’s legal defense fund will put up to $1 million toward his defense, and Nelson can talk to the other rotating attorneys whom the fund employs. But unless they’re working pro bono, too, $1 million runs out pretty fast.

The legal mismatch in the O.J. Simpson case wasn’t this one-sided.

In the middle of jury selection, the city of Minneapolis announced an eye-popping civil settlement of $27 million with the family of George Floyd. Liberals are still denouncing Richard Nixon for a 1970 speech in which he inadvertently described defendant Charles Manson as someone who was “guilty, directly or indirectly, of eight murders” — leading to demands for a mistrial.

What does a $27 million settlement with the family of the alleged victim say?

Black residents of Minneapolis are threatening to burn the place down if Chauvin isn’t convicted — and the only reason anyone thinks a jury could possibly return a guilty verdict is that they believe them.

In the darkest days of Jim Crow, the entire country never ganged up on a single individual like this.

Please, gods of wokeness, we ask that his human sacrifice be acceptable!

Throw another virgin into the volcano.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Asian Women Are Too Damn Hot!


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Mar 24, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Asian Women Are Too Damn Hot!

Source: Sanja Bucko/Warner Bros. Entertainment via AP

Does anyone else find it odd that so many Asian activists reacted to the mass murder of (mostly) Asian women last week by talking about how smoking hot they are?

I was at law school when I first noticed the phenomenon of liberal women pretending to be outraged as a cover for bragging. Average-to-ugly girls would work up feigned indignation about how a guy had “sexually harassed” them that day, then launch into a 20-minute retelling of some compliment they’d received. A man talked to me! I think he likes me … Let’s see, how do I work this into conversation for the rest of the week?

But it’s a peculiar reaction to mass murder.

Now that a white supremacist mass shooter (check that, turns out he was a radical Islamic Syrian refugee!) has committed a different mass murder in Boulder, Colorado, will we see hippies on TV, denouncing the assumption that Birkenstock-wearers are all sex gods?

No, of course not! Only liberals would think an appropriate response to an infamous crime is to talk about how sexually desirable they are. Liberalism makes everybody stupid.

Thus, for days after the fatal shooting of six Asians and two whites at massage-cum-sex spas in Atlanta, Asian activists and professors blanketed the airwaves to demand that white men STOP treating them like sex objects — whom they fantasize about, they want, they covet. Newspapers were chock-a-block with first-person accounts of Asian women being salivated over by white men.

Christine Liwag Dixon modestly began her tale of oppression for The Washington Post’s “The Lily”: “When I was 16, a boy I thought was my friend said, ‘I can’t figure you out. Asian girls are either smart or hot. But you’re both.'” She’s older and married now, but still cherishes this comment from high school.

Amid her recitation of other compliments she’d received over the course of a lifetime — some stupid, some vulgar, and some, I’d wager, completely fictional — Liwag Dixon remarked, “It no longer surprises me, but it still hurts.”

Well, naturally. Who wouldn’t be hurt to be called both smart AND hot?

Among the distressing compliments detailed by Liwag Dixon, she reports that she was often called “exotic.” (I will NOT link to the scene in “NewsRadio,” where Beth explains the meaning of words like “cute,” “beautiful” and “exotic.”

Professors of color were prepared with scholarly opinions about how tantalizing Asian women are. Elaine Kim, professor emeritus in Asian American studies at the University of California, Berkeley, told the Associated Press that the Atlanta shooter probably had “an addiction to fantasies about Asian women as sex objects.”

However that may be, these particular spas were known as fronts for prostitution, which may also have put the idea of sex in the shooter’s head.

Another Berkeley professor, Catherine Ceniza Choy (Ethnic Studies), conveyed that the shooting “echoes a long-running stereotype that Asian women are immoral and hypersexual.” Ellen Wu, a history professor at Indiana University, confirmed that “from the moment Asian women began to migrate to the U.S., they were targets of hypersexualization.”

It all had a familiar ring …

HEY! Anybody remember the Duke lacrosse rape hoax?

Before the gang rape of a black stripper was exposed as a complete fraud — though well after three white families had their pockets emptied and their names dragged through the mud — an enormous amount of the commentary centered on white men’s lascivious interest in black women. (So of course the gang rape had to be true!)

The Duke lacrosse case “fed the stereotype that black women are hypersexual and readily available,” as the Associated Press put it. The article quoted a number of black coeds on how white guys just can’t keep their hands off African American ladies:

“The young black women can almost finish each other’s stories.

“They go to a party, a concert, a nightclub. Twenty-somethings of all colors are flirting and dancing. And then it happens.

“Inevitably, a woman says, a white man asks her to dance erotically while he watches. Or he grabs her rear end. Or asks for sex, in graphic detail, without bothering to ask her name.”

A black Duke coed, Audrey Christopher, complained to the Durham Indy that “at one of the quad parties, it was me and another black female friend, and these white guys immediately told us how they liked hanging out with black girls because white girls are sheltered and we’re more free …”

Again, the professors of color weighed in. Rebecca Hall (Surprise! Also Berkeley) said of the Duke gang-rape charges, a “black woman is somebody who has excess sexuality … it’s excess sexuality that white men are entitled to.” Duke professor Mark Anthony Neal said: “The message that men get about black women is these are women that are available to them, that they have easy access and their sole purpose is to serve their pleasure.”

To the extent that their argument isn’t simply that black women are hot, hot, hot, but that white men feel entitled to pillage black bodies, that’s not borne out by the data. According to FBI crime statistics, approximately 15,000 to 30,000 white women are raped by black men every year, while, on average, zero black women are raped by white men. (The department uses “0” to denote fewer than 10 victims.)

Nor, of course, was the rapacious white male theory supported by the facts of the very case they were discussing.

We don’t have a lot of women mass shooters, so it’s hard to flip the script. But maybe, in the future, whenever a white man is falsely accused of rape (Steven Pagonesthe Duke lacrosse players, a fraternity at the University of Virginia) or murder (Darren WilsonJake Gardner, Staten Island police officers), white men should fan out across the airwaves to talk about how damn sexy they are.

Until then, I’m begging you, white men, please, for the love of God, STOP turning liberal women into your sexual fantasies!!!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Rule by Left-Wing Lunatics


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Mar 10, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

A governing principle of the Democratic Party is to ask, “Who is in the dock?” before deciding whether to enforce the law.

As we have seen throughout the last year of antifa/BLM riots, in blue states, it’s now legal to commit arson, attempted murder, assault on a law enforcement officer and destruction of property — provided the perp is antifa or antifa-friendly. Andy Ngo’s smash bestseller “Unmasked” gives chapter and verse on antifa’s shocking violence untouched by criminal penalty.

On the other hand, if you’re a conservative, don’t commit a misdemeanor in a blue state. Proud Boys, Capitol Hill protesters, police and other presumed Trump supporters are getting more prison time than actual murderers for minor infractions. Even a couple of personal injury lawyers (liberals) are being criminally prosecuted in St. Louis for brandishing guns at violent looters coming toward their home. The rioters, you see, were BLM protesters.

In all these cases, local Democratic officials gleefully announce that they are locking up “white supremacists.”

Prepare yourself for a lot of witch-trial hysteria in the upcoming trials of Derek Chauvin in Minneapolis and the Capitol Hill trespassers in Washington, D.C. We’ve already seen it with the Proud Boys in New York City.

In a nation of laws, a crime is a crime, and it shouldn’t matter whether it’s committed by Mother Teresa or Charles Manson, but, as long as they brought it up, OF COURSE THE PROUD BOYS AREN’T “WHITE SUPREMACISTS”!

The organization is a tongue-in-cheek men’s group, promoting masculinity and Western civilization in humorous ways. Most of what they tell members is healthy: Get out of your apartment, work out, get a girlfriend and don’t masturbate. Further aside that it annoys me to have to make: There are African Americans, American Indians, immigrants and loads of Mexicans in the Proud Boys. Pretty crappy membership drive for a “hate group.”

At least in the witch trials of the Middle Ages, you could prove you weren’t a witch by drowning after being tied up and heaved into a nearby body of water. Today, the “white supremacist” hex is indelible. The accusation is the proof. And once accused, stay out of the blue states, or you might end up in prison.

In 2018, the night before Proud Boys founder, Gavin McInnes, was scheduled to give a speech at the Metropolitan Republican Club on the Upper East Side of New York, antifa smashed the windows of the historic club with a brick, glued the lock, and spray-painted the anarchist “A” on the front door of the club’s townhouse, along with a threat that this destruction was “merely a beginning.” All that’s legal, too — provided it’s done by antifa.

The day of the speech, 80 masked antifa goons showed up at the club to attack attendees — women and children, young and old. But unfortunately for antifa, the event was being protected by the Proud Boys. McInnes’ speech went off without a hitch, and no attendees were injured at the event.

When it was over, New York police officers directed the Proud Boys to Park Avenue, and sent antifa in the opposite direction to Lexington. The Proud Boys followed orders, but a gang of six masked antifa circled around from Lexington over to Park to confront them, including, in antifa’s manly way, throwing a bottle of urine at them.

Two Proud Boys proceeded to kick six antifa butt.

The same thing happened a few blocks south. Again disobeying the police, another group of antifa cut over to Park Avenue to fight with the Proud Boys. They, too, received a solid ass-kicking.

So who was arrested? Ten Proud Boys and not one antifa. Oh darn. We couldn’t catch them. (Hey, NYPD! Send the Proud Boys next time.)

The police did manage to arrest three antifa thugs who followed one speech attendee leaving the event, punched him and stole his backpack. But it turns out that’s also legal in New York. The antifa were arrested for the violent attack … then immediately released with no charges.

The governor and attorney general of New York, the New York City mayor and a slew of council members rushed to social media to denounce the Proud Boys for “hate” and vow to prosecute them — for protecting Upper East Side Republicans who went to a speech. McInnes is funny, and if there’s one thing leftists cannot abide, it’s a sense of humor.

Gov. Andrew Cuomo tweeted: “Hate cannot and will not be tolerated in New York,” along with a brain-dead article from Buzzfeed News titled, “Members of a Far-Right Men’s Group Violently Beat Up Protesters and Weren’t Arrested. New York Police Won’t Say Why.” They’re WHITE, aren’t they? No? Well, they’re REPUBLICANS. Arrest them!

The prosecution had no victims and no evidence of injury. But two Proud Boys, John Kinsman and Max Hare, now sit in a New York state prison, sentenced to four years, after being convicted of attempted assault and attempted gang assault — for defending themselves from antifa, who showed up at conservative event, then disobeyed the police and stalked the Proud Boys. It wasn’t the Proud Boys disrupting an antifa event, and it wasn’t the Proud Boys defying the police to confront antifa.

Yes, you are correct: This was the same district attorney, Cyrus Vance, who allowed Harvey Weinstein and Jeffrey Epstein to rape and molest young girls in his jurisdiction for years and years. But those guys were major Democratic donors, so no harm, no foul.

A third Proud Boy was headed to trial along with Kinsman and Hare — until the prosecution noticed he was East Indian and his presence would have hurt the narrative that Proud Boys are “white supremacists.”

Just no one mention Kinsman’s black wife and children. (And thus Democrats deprived three more black children of a father during their formative years.)

Much of the testimony elicited by the prosecutor, Joshua Steinglass, concerned the defendants’ non-PC beliefs, e.g.: Kinsman’s support for guns, his opposition to antifa, and his attendance at a “fake news” protest outside CNN. Steinglass actually presented evidence of McInnes’ jokes from his comedy show. Inappropriate laughter in a blue state will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law!

What on earth does any of that have to do with whether Kinsman and Hare committed a crime at Park Avenue and 82nd on Oct. 12, 2018?

Nothing. In the blue states, there is no rule of law, only rule by left-wing lunatics.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: NYT: Was He Innocent? ANSWER: No.


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 17, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

NYT: Was He Innocent? ANSWER: No.

Source: AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews

Trending

Here is this week’s installment of “The New York Times is ALWAYS lying about criminals (and probably everything else).”

The Times desperately wants you to believe that there are actual cases of innocent people being put to death in America. Their current poster boy for the cause is Sedley Alley, executed in 2006. But the Criminal Lobby is hoping a post-mortem DNA test — on evidence that has nothing to do with his guilt or innocence — will allow them to howl that an INNOCENT man was executed!

I knew nothing about this case, but I knew the Times’ description of the facts was a lie. How did I know?

1) No jury would have convicted a man, much less sentenced him to death, much less had that sentence repeatedly upheld, on such a flimsy record; and

2) There is no credible evidence that a single innocent person has been put to death in this country for at least 75 years.

Here are the facts the about the Criminal Lobby’s latest baby seal.

On the night of July 11, 1985, two Marines from a naval base in Millington, Tennessee, reported a possible kidnapping after they heard a female jogger screaming, “Don’t touch me!” “Leave me alone!” They ran in her direction, but just as they got close, a station wagon peeled off the side of the road. A gate guard also reported seeing a station wagon, which he said was being driven by a man constraining a woman.

All three witnesses described the car as a late-model green or brown Ford or Mercury station wagon with wood paneling, Kentucky tags and a loud muffler.

Alley, who owned a dark green 1972 Mercury station wagon with wood paneling and a Kentucky license plate, was brought in for questioning at 1 a.m. that night. The Marines who’d reported the kidnapping identified Alley’s vehicle as the one they’d seen, both by sight and by the roar of the muffler.

But Alley and his wife gave a satisfactory explanation for their whereabouts and were released.

At 6 a.m. on July 12, the body of 19-year-old Marine Lance Cpl. Suzanne Collins was found in a nearby park. Alley was arrested and promptly confessed to murdering her — claiming it was an “accident.”

He told his wife, “Yes, I killed the gal at … Orgill Park.”

In his lengthy, tape-recorded confession, Alley tried to soft-pedal his barbaric crime, claiming he’d hit Collins with his car by accident, and only decided to savagely beat her to death because, as he was driving her to the hospital, she threatened to turn him into the police.

Alley then took investigators to the precise spot where he’d murdered Collins and even showed them the tree where he’d broken off the branch that he’d jammed inside of her.

At trial, Alley admitted he did it, but pleaded insanity. The jury didn’t buy it, convicted him and sentenced him to death.

Here is what the Times’ Emily Bazelon tells that paper’s clueless readers about Alley’s case:

     “[T]wo Marines … reported crossing paths with Lance Corporal Collins while she was running. They said that moments after they saw her, they dodged a brown station wagon with a blue license plate … [L]aw enforcement officers stopped Sedley Alley, then 29. He was driving a dark green station wagon with a blue plate.”

Times readers are led to believe that although witnesses said it was a BROWN station wagon, Tennessee yokels picked up a guy in a GREEN station wagon!

Except that’s not true. The BOLO alert (“be on the lookout”) put out by the Naval Investigation Service identified a “a brown or green Ford or Mercury station wagon with woodgrain on the sides.”

Bazelon:

     “When the investigators began interrogating him, Mr. Alley, who had been drinking, denied knowing anything about Lance Corporal Collins and asked for a lawyer. But 12 hours later, he signed a statement confessing to the murder.”

Times’ readers are supposed to think these backwoods Nazis interrogated Alley without a lawyer for 12 hours until he confessed!

In fact, the only reason he signed a statement “12 hours later” was that, after being questioned the night of the crime, he was sent home. Alley wasn’t arrested until after Collins’ body was discovered the next day, whereupon he quickly confessed.

Bazelon:

     “Mr. Alley’s admission, which he later said was false and coerced …”

Yes, “later” in the sense of “20 years later.” For two decades, Alley never denied he’d murdered Collins. He only recalled that his confession was “coerced” in 2004, when he was trying to delay the hangman’s noose.

Bazelon:

“But the location he gave for the collision didn’t line up with the witness accounts.”

There were no “witness accounts” for “the collision” for the simple reason that there was no collision. “My car hit her by accident” was Alley’s attempt to mitigate his barbarous crime.

You know what else, Emily? His car wasn’t seen driving in the direction of the hospital, either!

Somehow, his lies not matching the facts is supposed to be a point in Alley’s favor.

Bazelon:

     “[Alley’s confession] did not match the physical evidence. … He said he … stabbed her with a screwdriver and killed her with a tree branch. … And the autopsy report showed that Lance Corporal Collins was not hit by a car nor stabbed with a screwdriver.”

Again: There was no collision.

I’m not sure what Bazelon’s point is about the screwdriver and the tree branch, but here’s the evidence presented at trial:

“The pathologist, Dr. James Bell, testified that the cause of death was multiple injuries, [many] of which could have been fatal. … He testified that the injuries to the skull could have been inflicted by the rounded end of defendant’s screwdriver that was found near the scene … He identified the tree branch that was inserted into the victim’s body. It measured 31 inches in length and had been inserted into the body more than once, to a depth of twenty inches …”

Bazelon:

     “Tire tracks found at the crime scene didn’t match Mr. Alley’s car, shoe prints didn’t match his shoes, and a third witness who saw a man with a station wagon, close to where Lance Corporal Collins was killed, described someone who was several inches shorter than Mr. Alley, with a different hair color.”

Times readers are perfectly prepared to believe that a jury of toothless hicks looked at evidence overwhelmingly clearing Alley and convicted him anyway.

But that didn’t happen, because having seen the evidence for themselves, Alley and his lawyer decided his best course was to admit he did it and plead insanity. All this alleged evidence is post-hoc nonsense invented by defense lawyers that has not been admitted under the rules of evidence, has not been subjected to cross-examination, and would not prove his innocence.

Seventy-five years and counting with no credible evidence that a single innocent person has been put to death in America.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: My Nation-Unifying Impeachment Solution


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Feb 10, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

My Nation-Unifying Impeachment Solution

Source: AP Photo/Alex Brandon

Senate Republicans should offer to convict Donald Trump in return for Democrats agreeing to fund the wall. Trump is not going to run again anyway. In four years, he will be as viable a presidential candidate as Hillary was in 2020. You wouldn’t have guessed that, either, from all the gnashing of teeth about the MOST QUALIFIED WOMAN EVER TO SEEK THE PRESIDENCY immediately after she lost. 

The reason elected Republicans, Fox News, OAN, Newsmax and a hundred talk radio hosts are terrified of supporting conviction is that they don’t want to look like Mitt Romney and incur the wrath of the Trump base (whatever remains of it).

Trading conviction for a wall solves that. It will remind Trump loyalists that he betrayed them on his central campaign promise, and also will actually fulfill that promise.

Democrats, if they have half a brain, will leap at the offer. They are about to destroy Biden’s presidency by defining themselves — as The New York Times’ Frank Bruni put it — as “antonyms to Trump.” Trump was for a wall. Ipso facto, Democrats are for open borders.

Trump was lying, liberals! Even President Obama was for border security. Great socialist hope Bernie Sanders has denounced open borders as a gift to the Koch brothers.

They don’t care. Trump supporters wanted a wall, so we’re going to punish them by throwing open the border!

If Biden continues with his tsunami of open border executive orders: 1) COVID-19 cases will multiply, as untested, unvaccinated third-worlders pour in at breakneck speed; 2) Black and Hispanic unemployment will go through the roof; and 3) crime — already reaching mind-blowing proportions — will become as potent a political issue as it has ever been.

Good luck in 2022, Democrats!

But if Democrats were to trade wall funding for the holy grail of a Trump conviction, they could save Biden’s presidency, humiliate Trump, and explain to their nut base, We know, we know — walls don’t work — but we had to trade it to convict Trump! Aren’t you happy?

It’s win-win-win all around.

Sitting on a nation-unifying idea like that, I never should have tuned into the impeachment trial. I knew the Democrats would somehow manage to turn me against conviction. I’m still not pro-Trump — that’s a tall order. But could Democrats please ease up on the hysterical weeping?

The president is not supposed to be organizing protests at all, much less against his own vice president. Isn’t that enough? You don’t need to juice up the story, Democrats.

Impeachment manager Rep. Jamie Raskin:

“All around me, people were calling their wives and their husbands, their loved ones to say goodbye ….

“[My] kids, hiding under the desk, placing what they thought were their final texts and whispered phone calls to say their goodbyes. They thought they were going to die.”

Yes, being forced to listen to the Trump “shaman” gas on about organic food could have annihilated legions!

Trump is a selfish, ignorant child. But he is not responsible for the reactions of neurotic liberals.

It would be as if Raskin’s neighbor smashed into his parked car, then drove off. Raskin has a perfectly good case without having to wail, I WAS AFRAID HE WOULD COME TO MY HOUSE AND MURDER MY ENTIRE FAMILY!

Raskin’s most precious argument was this:

“Of all the terrible, brutal things I saw … watching someone use an American flagpole, the flag still on it, to spear and pummel one of our police officers ruthlessly, mercilessly, tortured by a pole with a flag on it that he was defending with his very life.”

First, give me a break, Democrats, pretending to give a crap about the American flag.

Second: “Tortured”?

Impeachment managers apparently used a thesaurus to write their speeches:

Siri, give me a synonym for “poke” or “strike.”

Siri: jab, punch, prod, thrust, wallop … TORTURE.

Really?

Yup, it’s right there in Roget’s!

Curiously, even the teary-eyed Raskin didn’t allege that Officer Brian Sicknick was killed by the protesters, a claim being made hourly on MSNBC.

Raskin: “People died that day. Officers ended up with head damage and brain damage. People’s eyes were gouged. One officer had a heart attack. One officer lost three fingers that day. Two officers have taken their own lives.”

Jeremy Bash, later that day on MSNBC: “They killed a cop, Nicole!”

If Officer Sicknick’s death truly resulted from injuries sustained at the hands of the mob, it would be the case in chief against the protesters. (We’re not counting heart attacks, much less suicides that occurred days, or weeks, later.) But no one in the media has been able to scare up a single eyewitness to the attack on Brian Sicknick?

Unlike defund-the-police liberals, I actually am heartbroken about the death of a Trump-supporting law enforcement officer.

But the media are lying about his death. First, they claimed he was hit on the head with a fire extinguisher. Then they said he was dragged into the crowd and beaten. All that is known for sure is that after Sicknick returned to headquarters, he collapsed and later died.

Last week, CNN nonchalantly inserted this into a story on Officer Sicknick: “Medical examiners did not find signs that the officer sustained any blunt force trauma, so investigators believe that early reports that he was fatally struck by a fire extinguisher are not true.”

There’s no hope for our media, who are irredeemable liars. But there’s still a chance for everyone else to come out a winner here! Trade conviction for a wall, Republicans.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Quadruple Murderer Is NYT’s Profile in Courage


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Jan 27, 2021 5:00 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Quadruple Murderer Is NYT’s Profile in Courage

Source: AP Photo/File

Having run out of international con women to promote or innocent biological weapons researchers to accuse, The New York Times’ Nicholas Kristof is banging on about a spectacularly guilty quadruple murderer who — according to Kristof — is very likely innocent.”

In this belief, he is opposed by more than a dozen courts, including the California Supreme Court, the infamous 9th Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court. Joining Kristof’s crusade are Kim Kardashian and the usual pro-criminal misfits. (At least Ivanka is no longer making criminal justice decisions for the White House!)

On June 4, 1983, a Chino Hills, California, couple and two children were hacked to death by a perpetrator using a hatchet, an ice pick and a hunting knife. Doug and Peggy Ryen, both 41 years old, had been chopped, slashed and stabbed 37 and 33 times, respectively. Their 10-year-old daughter, Jessica, had 46 wounds, and a visiting neighbor, 11-year-old Christopher Hughes, had 25. Some of the victim’s body parts had been fully amputated. The Ryens’ 8-year-old son, Josh, miraculously survived, despite a slit throat and hatchet blows to his head.

Christopher’s father discovered the nightmarish scene the next morning, when he came to pick up his son for church.

In 1985, a unanimous jury convicted Kevin Cooper, a violent rapist, career criminal and escaped mental patient, of the murders and sentenced him to death. His story illustrates why more prisoners on death row die of natural causes than execution.

One year before the Chino Hills slaughter, Cooper was released from a Pennsylvania prison, where he’d been serving time for a string of burglaries. In short order, Cooper violently kidnapped and raped an underage girl who’d interrupted him in the middle of yet another burglary, stabbing her in the eye with a screwdriver.

He was sent to a state psychiatric hospital, escaped and fled to Los Angeles, where he was soon convicted of two more burglaries and incarcerated in a men’s prison in Chino. Unaware of his criminal and psychiatric history, prison authorities mistakenly housed Cooper in a low-security wing. He escaped on June 2, 1983, and made his way to a furnished, unoccupied house just 50 yards from the Ryens’ home. There, he spent two days hiding out, watching the news about his escape, and calling friends, asking for money to get out of Chino.

On June 4, the night of the murders, Cooper fled to Mexico, checking into a hotel in Tijuana, about 130 miles south of Chino Hills, at 4:30 p.m. the next day. A few days after the murders, the Ryens’ stolen station wagon was found in a church parking lot in Long Beach, California. Cigarette butts in the car were identified as prison-issued Role-Rite tobacco and rolling papers, unique to the Chino prison. The butts also matched those found in Cooper’s hideaway house.

In Mexico, Cooper introduced himself to an American couple as “Angel Jackson,” and became a deckhand on their sailboat for a trip up the California coast. At a stop in Pelican Cove, near Santa Barbara, the three of them joined another couple for dinner on their sloop. Later that night, “Angel” returned to their hosts’ boat and raped the wife at knifepoint.

The rape victim and her husband called the police, and “Angel” was arrested. (He said the sex was consensual.) While at the sheriff’s office to give her statement, the wife noticed a “Wanted for Murder” poster with a picture of her rapist. “Angel Jackson” was identified as Kevin Cooper and sent back to San Bernardino to face charges for the Chino Hills massacre six weeks earlier.

Among the hundreds of pieces of evidence used to convict Cooper for the Ryen murders were:

— Shoe prints on a sheet in the Ryens’ master bedroom and on a spa cover outside the house. The prints, in Cooper’s shoe size, were made by a Pro-Ked Dude shoe — the shoes issued to Chino prison inmates and not available to the general public. They matched footprints in the unoccupied house where Cooper had been squatting for two days before the murders.

— A bloody hatchet found near the Ryens’ home that was identified by two of the absentee homeowners as having come from their house. The sheath to the hatchet was still in the bedroom where Cooper had slept for two nights.

— A drop of blood in the Ryens’ hallway that was consistent with Cooper’s rare blood type, establishing that the murderer was an African American.

— Luminol tests revealing a large quantity of blood in a shower where Cooper had been hiding.

Cooper’s groupies ignore all this evidence — and more! — and invent fanciful alternative theories of the crime. As always, they demand endless DNA testing.

Why not? DNA’s use for identification purposes wasn’t discovered until 1984. The first time DNA evidence was ever admitted in an American courtroom was in 1987. Consequently, if a single piece of evidence that was merely “consistent” with the defendant’s profile in the 1980s turns out not to match the defendant under more rigorous testing 40 years later, it’s a cheap Get Out of Jail Free card. And if the DNA matches? No harm, no foul.

So, in addition to nonstop frivolous appeals, Cooper’s advocates took up the cry for DNA testing, insisting that the DNA would prove him an innocent man, “framed” for murders he did not commit! Asked by CBS News if he would stop fighting and submit to his execution if the DNA was his, Cooper said, “That’s right. Because see, I say this with all the confidence in the world: I, Kevin Cooper, was never inside the home that I now know is the Ryen home.”

Guess whose DNA it was?

The California Department of Justice DNA Laboratory at Berkeley definitively established that Cooper’s DNA was in:

— a bloodstain inside the Ryen home;

— the cigarette butts found inside the Ryens’ stolen station wagon;

— a bloody T-shirt found near the Ryen home, which also contained Doug Ryen’s DNA.

And guess who hasn’t given up demanding more tests, more appeals and more investigations of their preposterous theories of the crime? Well, yes, obviously Kevin Cooper, the mass murderer himself, but also, Nick Kristof, the most easily fooled man in America.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.


Commentary by Ann CoulterAnn Coulter | Posted: Jan 06, 2021

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

The Election Is Over. Here’s the Truth About Trump.

Source: AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin

Now that the Georgia runoffs are over, let’s talk about Donald Trump.

When we really needed all hands on deck in Georgia, Trump was a wrecking ball. He went down to Georgia and insulted everyone, refusing to talk about anything but himself. Based on his rally speech this week, Trump apparently thinks he won the November election because there was a red wave for everyone except him. How else could all those Republicans win congressional seats on his “coattails,” while he lost?

There are other ways to interpret the election results, such as that Trump didn’t have any “coattails.” In Texas, for example, Trump won, but Sen. John Cornyn got more votes — the first time a Texas senator has bested a Republican president in a couple of decades.

Maybe Americans are terrified of the Democrats, but also sick of Trump.

From the moment the election was over, Democrats were single-mindedly focused on winning the Georgia runoffs. By contrast, Republicans indulged in their usual circular firing squads, while Trump kept the base distracted with his petulance about the November election. (Yes, the Democrats cheated. They always cheat. Maybe somebody should have done something about it before the election.)

With Republicans facing these two crucial runoffs, Trump was too narcissistic to care about anything but his personal issues, and he busily set landmine after landmine for the candidates. After Sens. Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue had triumphantly voted for the coronavirus relief bill, Trump began attacking it as a “disgrace” and ridiculing the paltry $600 individual payments.

Let’s see, who had negotiated this “disgrace” again? Trump’s own Treasury secretary, Steven Mnuchin. But Trump was too busy denouncing the November election to pay attention to the negotiations. For a week, Trump pretended he wasn’t going to sign the bill. In the end, he signed it, but waited so long to do so that instead of Georgia voters receiving their checks days before the runoff, they’ll be getting their checks sometime later this week.

Fantastic.

Then Trump launched vicious attacks on the (admittedly ridiculous) Georgia governor and secretary of state, blaming them for his loss in the state. Republicans needed every vote in this election, and surely there are some Georgians who prefer those guys to Trump. But Trump forced Loeffler and Perdue to choose between him and their own elected Republican leaders.

It also didn’t help that we’re in the middle of another COVID surge. You can’t blame Trump for the coronavirus, a gift from China to the entire world. Trump did better than most world leaders, especially with Operation Warp Speed. The usual problem with Trump is that he’s all talk, no action. He talked about the massive fraud that would ensue with mail-in ballots … but did nothing. He talked about “LAW & ORDER” as cities burned to the ground … but did nothing. He talked about the wall … but built only about dozen miles of it.

With COVID, it was the reverse. Trump did the right things, but wouldn’t shut up. Worst of all, he talked to Bob Woodward. To Woodward: I could curl your toes with some of the stories about this virus! See, I get these briefings every morning … An hour later to the public: It’s gonna be great. This will be over by Easter.

That’s not a strong leader rallying the country. It’s a con artist telling you to put all your money on a stock that’s about to tank. Worst of all, it shows you who he is that Trump so desperately wanted Woodward to like him and was stupid enough to think he could win him over. For all that, Trump had it all! He won the presidency by running on wildly popular issues that no other candidate would touch. He had devoted followers. For the first two years of his presidency, he had a Republican House and Senate.

     Oh grief that Earth’s best hopes rest all with Thee!

Trump could have been a massively popular president and won reelection comfortably, if only he’d kept faith with his voters. Even people who abhorred him would have had to say, I thought he was a coarse vulgarian, but he was right about China ripping us off, he was right about the border, and he was right about standing up to crazy woke culture.

The 2020 election should have been like Ronald Reagan’s 1984 reelection (49-state landslide). Like Trump, Reagan ran on popular issues left on the ground by other candidates — primarily his vow to destroy the Soviet Union and reignite the economy by slashing government. But — and here’s the big difference — Reagan kept his promises.

Not Trump! Instead — in the greatest bait-and-switch in American history — he promptly turned his presidency over to nimrods Jared and Ivanka, while he watched TV and tweeted. Suddenly, the populist hero was replaced with two idiots, who were all about being friends with the Kardashians and sucking up to Goldman Sachs.

Why don’t we have a wall? Why didn’t Trump impose a tax on remittances to make Mexico pay for it? Why are American workers still training their cheap labor replacements? Answer: Stephen Miller, Trump’s crucial immigration aide during the 2016 campaign, survived his first year in the White House only by convincing Ivanka he was working on “Women’s Issues.” He spent his remaining three years with his nose up Jared’s butt.

We knew about the hucksterism. There was no warning about the kids.

The Republican Party’s only hope is to become a populist party, but without a shallow, narcissistic ignoramus as its head. What is the point of being slavishly loyal to a person who is loyal to no one (except his numbskull kids)? Trump has sold out everyone who was ever faithful to him — Jeff Sessions, Kris Kobach, Chris Christie, Milo Yiannopoulos, Gavin McInnes, the Proud Boys, Corey Lewandowski, Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani, and, of course, his own voters. Half of the betrayed are still desperately seeking Trump’s favor by signing onto the futile “Stop the Steal” effort. Not good enough for the administration! But good enough to humiliate themselves in Trump’s final days in office. At the first Stop the Steal rally in Washington, Trump didn’t even show up. He went golfing.

Give up the cult of personality, Trumpsters, or at least find someone with a better personality.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Happy Kwanzaa! The Holiday Brought to You by the FBI


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 30, 2020 3:35 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Happy Kwanzaa! The Holiday Brought to You by the FBI

Source: Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Pool

Vice President-elect Kamala Harris recently tweeted:

“Our Kwanzaa celebrations are one of my favorite childhood memories. The whole family would gather around across multiple generations and we’d tell stories and light the candles. Whether you’re celebrating this year with those you live with or over Zoom, happy Kwanzaa!”

Post some pictures, Kamala! We’d love to see your Brahmin and Jamaican grandparents sitting around the Kwanzaa candles recalling celebrations way back when they were three or four years younger. (Would that The Washington Post’s “Fact Checker” would start counting Kamala’s lies!)

Kwanzaa, celebrated exclusively by white liberals, is a fake holiday invented in 1966 (when Kamala was 2 years old) by black radical/FBI stooge Ron Karenga — aka Dr. Maulana Karenga, founder of United Slaves, the violent nationalist rival to the Black Panthers. Liberals have become so mesmerized by multicultural gibberish that they have forgotten the real history of Kwanzaa and Karenga’s United Slaves.

In what was ultimately a foolish gambit, during the madness of the ’60s, the FBI encouraged the most extreme black nationalist organizations in order to discredit and split the left. The more preposterous the group, the better. (It’s the same function MSNBC serves today.)

By that criterion, Karenga’s United Slaves was perfect.

Despite modern perceptions that blend all the black activists of the ’60s, the Black Panthers did not hate whites. Although some of their most high-profile leaders were drug dealers and murderers, they did not seek armed revolution.

Those were the precepts of Karenga’s United Slaves. The United Slaves were proto-fascists, walking around in dashikis, gunning down Black Panthers and adopting invented “African” names. (I will not be shooting any Black Panthers this week because I am Kwanzaa-reform, and we are not that observant.)

It’s as if David Duke invented a holiday called “Anglika,” which he based on the philosophy of “Mein Kampf” — and clueless public school teachers began celebrating the made-up, racist holiday.

In the category of the-gentleman-doth-protest-too-much, back in the ’70s, Karenga was quick to criticize Nigerian newspapers that claimed that certain American black radicals were CIA operatives.

Now we know the truth: The FBI fueled the bloody rivalry between the Panthers and United Slaves. In the annals of the American ’60s, Karenga was the Father Gapon, stooge of the czarist police. Whether Karenga was a willing FBI dupe, or just a dupe, remains unclear. The left has forgotten the FBI’s tacit encouragement of this murderous black nationalist cult founded by the father of Kwanzaa.

In one barbarous outburst, Karenga’s United Slaves shot two Black Panthers to death on the UCLA campus: Al “Bunchy” Carter and John Huggins. Karenga himself served time, a useful stepping-stone for his current position as the chair of the Africana Studies Department at California State University at Long Beach.

(Speaking of which, the cheap labor lobby certainly was right about how the GOP could easily win over “natural conservative” Hispanics. Look at how California has swung decisively to the right since Hispanics became the largest ethnic group there! Good luck winning California now, Democrats!)

The esteemed Cal State professor Karenga’s invented holiday is a nutty blend of schmaltzy ’60s rhetoric, black racism and Marxism. The seven principles of Kwanzaa are the very same seven principles of the Symbionese Liberation Army, another invention of The Worst Generation.

In 1974, Patty Hearst, kidnap victim-cum-SLA revolutionary, famously posed next to the banner of her alleged captors, a seven-headed cobra. Each snakehead stood for one of the SLA’s revolutionary principles: Umoja, Kujichagulia, Ujima, Ujamaa, Nia, Kuumba and Imani. These are the exact same seven “principles” of Kwanzaa.

Kwanzaa praises collectivism in every possible area of life. It takes a village to raise a police snitch!

When Karenga was asked to distinguish Kawaida, the philosophy underlying Kwanzaa, from “classical Marxism,” he essentially said that, under Kawaida, we also hate whites. (And here’s something interesting: Kawaida, Kwanzaa and Kuumba are also the only three Kardashian sisters not to have their own shows on the E! network.)

While taking the “best of early Chinese and Cuban socialism” (Is that the mass murder or the seizure of private property?), Karenga said Kawaida practitioners believe one’s racial identity “determines life conditions, life chances and self-understanding.”

There’s an inclusive philosophy for you!

Sing to “Jingle Bells”:

Kwanzaa bells, dashikis sell

          Whitey has to pay;

          Burning, shooting, oh what fun

          On this made-up holiday!

Kwanzaa emerged not from Africa, but from the FBI’s COINTELPRO. It is a holiday celebrated exclusively by idiot white liberals. Black people celebrate Christmas.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Is There a Vaccine Against Pandering?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 23, 2020 4:48 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Is There a Vaccine Against Pandering?

Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky  

Trending

It now appears that the greatest threat to black Americans isn’t COVID, it’s being pandered to death.

As the distribution of vaccines got underway last week, the Centers for Disease Control was trying to ensure that black people would get the vaccine before the elderly (too white!), while the media were focused on rationalizing black people’s opposition to taking the vaccine at all.

— NPR’s “Weekend Edition”:

Scott Simon: “Help us understand why many black Americans may be skeptical of a vaccine.”

Liz Walker: “Well, Scott, you know, black people have been traumatized by a betrayal of the system forever for generations. … We have all now talked about the experiment that used people with syphilis in Tuskegee. We all know about Henrietta Lacks.”

— ABC’s “Good Morning America”:

Zachary Kiesch (voiceover): “From the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, where scientists deliberately infected men and withheld treatments, to Henrietta Lacks, a young black mother of five who, in 1951, unknowingly had cells taken from her that biomedical research led to breakthrough cancer treatment.”

— MSNBC’s “The Reidout”:

Joy Reid: “And then the other piece is, when it comes, particularly in our community, black people, they might be like, I don’t trust science, the science. We — Tuskegee experiments, etc. There’s just not a lot of trust. And it was developed during the Trump era.”

Yes, because black people have a long track record of trusting the government …

A New York Times/WCBS-TV poll found that 70% of African Americans believed that “the government deliberately makes sure that drugs are easily available in poor black neighborhoods to harm black people.”

A CNN/Essence poll found that 88% of African Americans think the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr. was part of a “larger plot.”

A survey of more than 1,000 black church members by the Southern Christian Leadership Conference showed that 35% believed that AIDS was a form of genocide, and another 30% were unsure.

Although vaccines are one of Western medicine’s greatest inventions, I think people should be free to refuse to take the COVID vaccine for any reason, such as, off the top of my head, they’re young and healthy.

But liberals don’t! Anti-vaxxers are one of the media’s most despised groups — provided they’re affluent white women.

When people like Jennifer Biel and Jenny McCarthy opposed mandatory vaccinations, they were universally reviled for hawking scientific nonsense. Los Angeles Times: “Jenny McCarthy: anti-vaxxer, public menace.” The New York Times headline: “When Did We Start Taking Famous People Seriously?” Even “Saturday Night Live” ridiculed McCarthy for her anti-vaccine stance.

But now that it’s African Americans who are reluctant to take the COVID vaccine, they’re treated like children. Who can blame them? It’s because of Tuskegee and Henrietta Lacks!

I know about Tuskegee, but what did the bad white doctors do to Henrietta Lacks? Answer: Johns Hopkins Medical School provided this poor black woman with the most advanced treatment available for her aggressive cervical cancer — gratis.

Her rapidly reproducing tumor cells were then studied around the globe, advancing cancer research by leaps and bounds. But apparently, it was a violation of Mrs. Lacks’ “black body” for her cancer cells to be used to benefit mankind. Maybe she wanted to display them on her mantle!

But the runaway winner for patronizing black people is … director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Dr. Anthony Fauci! This media darling recently announced: “So, the first thing you might want to say to my African American brothers and sisters is that the vaccine that you’re going to be taking was developed by an African American woman. And that is just a fact.”

Wha …? So far, we’ve got vaccines from Pfizer and Moderna, and soon may have one from AstraZeneca.

Pfizer’s CEO is a Greek businessman. The company has no black women in its executive leadership.

Moderna’s chief executive is Frenchman Stephane Bancel. The president of the company is the translucently white Dr. Stephen Hoge.

AstraZeneca hasn’t had its vaccine approved yet, but it’s a British-Swedish company, and the chief executive is Frenchman Pascal Soriot.

Each one of these companies had hundreds of people working on a vaccine, so who’s the “African American woman” who single-handedly “developed” it?

She’s a government bureaucrat with the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Kizzmekia Corbett. The NIH, you see, “worked with” Moderna during the vaccine approval process. Corbett made the invaluable contribution of accusing doctors of allowing black people to die of COVID, calling the pandemic a black “genocide” and condemning “systematic oppression” of black people. Among the oppressors was one … Anthony Fauci, whom she directed to “check” his “privilege.”

How could we ever have come up with a vaccine without her?

First, it was racist not to put black Americans at the head of the line for the vaccine. Once again, black people have to go to the back of the bus!

Then the CDC decided minorities would get it first, before the elderly. True, those over 70 make up the lion’s share of COVID deaths, but they’re mostly white, so screw them. Oh wait — black people are getting the vaccine first? You see! They’re using us as guinea pigs!

Just tell me when black people get the vaccine, so I’ll know what the explanation is.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Breonna Taylor: The True Story of a BLM Hero


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 16, 2020 4:05 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Breonna Taylor: The True Story of a BLM Hero

Source: AP Photo/Darron Cummings

Hey, guys, I found out the true facts in the Breonna Taylor case!

Remember the botched raid” (New York Times) on Breonna’s apartment in Louisville, Kentucky, last March, when police officers killed this innocent black woman as she slept peacefully in her bed?

Yes, apparently, without announcing themselves, the police smashed in the front door of the WRONG APARTMENT. Their warrant was for a man Breonna had dated eons ago and barely knew anymore, and whom they already had in custody! Assuming the police were home invaders, Breonna’s boyfriend pulled out a gun — again, police were at the WRONG APARTMENT — whereupon the officers opened fire, killing Breonna and wounding one of their own in friendly fire.

You probably won’t believe this, but it turns out, none of that is true.

Contrary to the repeated claim that the police “had the wrong address and the wrong person and the person was in custody” — as the Rev. Al Sharpton put it — the police were not at the wrong house at all.

It seems that Breonna Taylor was knee-deep in the criminal enterprise of her sometime-boyfriend, Jamarcus Glover, who was running a massive drug operation, selling crack cocaine and fentanyl to the citizens of Louisville.

The morning after Breonna was killed, for example, Jamarcus told his baby mama (on a police-recorded phone call): “This is what you got to understand, don’t take it wrong, but Bre been handling all my money, she been handling my money … She been handling sh*t for me and Cuz, it ain’t just me.”

He detailed the amounts when an unidentified male got on the line, saying, “Tell Cuz, Bre got down like $15 (grand), she had the $8 (grand) I gave her the other day and she picked up another $6 (grand).”

And yet, the media credulously claimed that Breonna barely knew Jamarcus, based on the family’s lawyer, Sam Aguiar, saying that they had broken up two years earlier and had only a passive friendship.”

In addition to “handling sh*t” for Jamarcus, Breonna had bailed Jamarcus out of jail, driven with him to a “trap house” (where the drugs were sold), and allowed him to use her address — the site of the raid — for his mail, phone bills, a bank account and jail bookings. All this in 2020.

Police GPS tracking showed that Jamarcus had been to Breonna’s apartment six times in January alone, and had called her from jail dozens of times since they had allegedly broken up.

Jan. 3, 2020:

Jamarcus: “Just be on standby so you can come get me. Love you.”

Breonna: “Love you, too.”

More significantly, police had photos of Jamarcus picking up USPS packages at Breonna’s apartment as recently as Jan. 16, 2020, then taking them directly to a trap house. The photos are available online. (If only our media had access to the internet!)

And of course, back in 2016, after Breonna had rented a car for Jamarcus, police showed up at her door because … dead body was found in the trunk. The murdered man turned out to be the brother of one of Jamarcus’ co-conspirators. Surely that gave Breonna an inkling that Jamarcus was not walking on the right side of the law.

These are a few of the reasons why, on March 13, Louisville police planned to execute four simultaneous no-knock search warrants on homes associated with Jamarcus’ drug operation: 2424 Elliott Avenue (the trap house, where vast amounts of crack cocaine, fentanyl pills and guns were found), 2425 Elliott Avenue, 2426 Elliott Avenue (the houses next door, used to hide guns and drugs), and 3003 Springfield Drive No. 4 (Breonna’s apartment).

Although all the warrants were written as “no-knock” to protect the officers and prevent the destruction of evidence, the police did knock and announce themselves at Breonna’s apartment. The officers say so, and at least one brave neighbor broke with “the community” to admit he heard the police announce themselves.

The media make the inane point that a dozen neighbors didn’t hear the police announce themselves. Even assuming they’re telling the truth, that proves: A dozen neighbors didn’t hear the police announce themselves. It doesn’t prove that the officers didn’t announce themselves. (This is why there are LSATs to get into law school.)

Even Breonna’s boyfriend says they knocked. You’re the bagwoman for a major crack cocaine operation, there’s loud banging on your door after midnight, and your reaction is: The last thing I imagined was that it could be the police!

Team Breonna makes a big point of the fact that the police found no drugs or money at her apartment. Yeah, that’s because they didn’t look.

The first officer through the door was shot by Breonna’s boyfriend — who eventually admitted he shot first — and the officers returned fire, hitting Breonna five times, one fatally. (All proved by federal ballistics reports.) In the commotion after the shootout, the officers never executed the search warrant.

That was confirmed by a police investigator to the grand jury — and also by Jamarcus, who said in jailhouse recordings that his money was still at Breonna’s house:

Jamarcus: “It was there, it was there, it was there … They didn’t do nothing though that’s the problem … [Breonna’s boyfriend] said ain’t none of that go on.”

[Unidentified man] to Jamarcus: “So they didn’t take none of the money?”

Jamarcus: “[Breonna’s boyfriend] said that none of that go on. He said Homicide came straight on the scene and they went to packaging Bre and they left.”

But how on earth did the officers hit Breonna, when she was sound asleep in the next room? She wasn’t. She was standing in the hallway right next to her boyfriend … who, again, was shooting at the police. He ducked, she didn’t.

As Jamarcus summarized what happened to Breonna in a jailhouse phone call: “that n@gga did this shit. At the end of the day, if I would have been at that house, Bre would be alive, bruh. I don’t shoot at no police.”

For this, Breonna’s family got $12 million from the city and the rest of us got endless nights of violent riots.

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Voter Fraud Never Happens! (Except in These 10,000 Cases)


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Dec 09, 2020 4:45 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Voter Fraud Never Happens! (Except in These 10,000 Cases)

Source: AP Photo/Ben Gray

The media have been lying about voter fraud for 20 years. The New York Times and The Washington Post will tell you: Let’s get something straight. There are only two cases of voter fraud in history and they were both Republicans.

NEVER? No voter fraud ever?

     Nope!

That’s your first clue they’re lying. Liberals don’t try to say partial-birth abortion never happens. They don’t say black men killing cops never happens. They don’t say immigrants ripping off government programs never happens. Only voter fraud NEVER HAPPENS.

I bet you couldn’t find EVEN ONE!

How about these?

— JOHN ASHCROFT, 2000

John Ashcroft absolutely had a Senate seat stolen from him in 2000 when a state judge ordered polls in heavily Democratic St. Louis to remain open for an extra three hours. Republicans didn’t even hear about it for another hour. Despite an appellate court striking down the ridiculously lawless order, St. Louis was given an extra 3 1/2 hours to kick out tens of thousands of additional votes. Ashcroft lost the election by 49,000 votes.

Twitter: This claim about election fraud is disputed.

— WASHINGTON STATE, 2004

A week after the 2004 Washington state gubernatorial election, Republican Dino Rossi was up by 3,492 votes against Democrat Christine Gregoire. Then Democratic King county began finding “misplaced” ballots, eventually producing more than 10,000 of them.

Hey, guys! I found another box of ballots under the sink!

So that’s another 800 votes for Gregoire.

     Oh wait — you’re not going to believe this …

You found more votes?

     Bingo! 600 votes for Gregoire.

An examination of the records later showed that about 1,800 more ballots had been cast than there were voters who had requested them.

Notwithstanding the miraculously appearing ballots, Rossi won the recount a few weeks later, but his lead was cut to 42 votes — easily within stealing distance. Democrat Christine Gregoire demanded a hand recount, and that put her ahead by 129 votes, whereupon she was promptly declared the winner.

Washington voters overwhelmingly believed the election had been stolen and wanted a revote. Democrats didn’t care. Nothing was ever done about the flagrant vote fraud. Washington now has 100 percent mail-in-ballots and no Republican has ever again won the governorship.

Twitter: This claim about election fraud is disputed.

— AL FRANKEN, 2008

In 2008, Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota won his 2008 reelection bid against challenger Al Franken by 725 votes. But for weeks after the election, Democratic precincts kept “discovering” new votes for Franken.

Day after day, votes were added to Franken’s column, while votes were taken away from Coleman. Random error would not continually benefit only one side.

On account of Franken’s charisma shield, Barack Obama, who was running for president that year, won hundreds of thousands more votes than Franken in the same election, on the same ticket, in the same state that year. But during the “corrections,” Franken was winning three times as many votes as Obama .

So the Democrats weren’t worried about believability.

Eventually, all these late-discovered ballots put Franken ahead by 312 votes, whereupon he was immediately certified the winner by the George Soros-backed Minnesota secretary of state.

A few years later, we found out that more than 1,000 felons, ineligible to vote, had cast votes in the 2008 Minnesota election. (To state the obvious, felons support Democrats by about 10-1.) There were 113 separate convictions for voter fraud in that election. That’s not easy: In Minnesota, a conviction for voter fraud requires proof that you broke the law knowingly.

More than 100 convictions for something that never happens, way, way back in the prehistoric days of 2008 — who could remember that?

Twitter: This claim about election fraud is disputed.

Facebook: Final results may be different from the initial vote counts, as ballot counting will continue for days or weeks after polls close.

     The Washington Post: There’s no evidence of even modest voter fraud.

     The New York Times: The Times Called Officials in Every State: No Evidence of Voter Fraud.

The Newspaper of (Broken) Record is also pushing the claim that that the real reason Republicans are questioning the vote in Milwaukee, Detroit and Philadelphia is … RACISM! So you know they have a good argument.

“All three … have large African-American populations. And in their respective states, they have long been targets of racialized charges of corruption.” — “The Cities Central to Fraud Conspiracy Theories Didn’t Cost Trump the Election,” The New York Times, Nov. 16, 2020

“As they try to somehow reverse Joe Biden’s victory, President Trump and his allies have targeted heavily Black cities, painting them as corrupt and trying to throw out huge numbers of votes.” — “Republicans Rewrite an Old Playbook on Disenfranchising Black Americans,” The New York Times, Nov. 22, 2020

“The essence of the [argument], after all, is that Trump won the election, or would have, if not for mass electoral fraud, all in swing states and only then in those cities with sizable Black populations, specifically Atlanta, Detroit, Milwaukee and Philadelphia.” — “It Started With ‘Birtherism,’” The New York Times, Nov. 26, 2020

It’s as if everyone who writes for the Times just graduated from college with honors in “Spotting Racism.” Republicans aren’t complaining about the vote in Camden, New Jersey, or Memphis, Tennessee. They’re talking about cities with Democratic political machines, which were founded by Irish criminals long before black people showed up in large numbers.

Democratic machines have been stealing elections since before the Civil War.

This year, liberals told us that Trump is LITERALLY HITLER and his defeat the single most important event of our lives — something you’ll tell your grandchildren about someday! But we’re supposed to believe they decided, this one time, they wouldn’t cheat?

These are the people who tell you voter fraud is a crazy conspiracy theory.

COPYRIGHT 2020 ANN COULTER

This Weeks Ann Coulter Op-ed: Have a Historically Accurate Thanksgiving!


Commentary by Ann Coulter  Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 25, 2020 2:30 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Have a Historically Accurate Thanksgiving!

Source: AP Photo/Stephan Savoia  

Trending

As every public school child knows, the first Thanksgiving took place in 1621, when our Pilgrim forefathers took a break from slaughtering Peaceful, Environmentally Friendly, Indigenous Peoples to invite them to dinner in order to infect them with smallpox, before embarking on their mission to fry the planet so that the world would end on Jan. 22, 2031. (Copyright: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez)

Consider this description of the Pilgrims’ treatment of the Indigenous peoples:

“They were the worst of conquerors. Inordinate pride, the lust of blood and dominion, were the mainsprings of their warfare; and their victories were strained with every excess of savage passion.”

Except that’s not a description of the Pilgrims’ treatment of Indigenous peoples. It’s a description of some Indigenous people’s treatment of other Indigenous peoples, written by the late Francis Parkman, Harvard professor and the world’s foremost Indian scholar.

The Wampanoag, who joined the Pilgrims at the first Thanksgiving, had a lot to celebrate. Contrary to Hollywood’s American-hating rendition of “Pocahontas,” in which the Indians feared the “White Demons,” the Wampanoag were thrilled with their well-armed white allies, who helped them repel the hated Iroquois and Narragansett.

The whole reason the Wampanoag were clustered so close to the coast where the Pilgrims encountered them was that the Iroquois had “pursued them with an inveterate enmity. Some (Wampanoag) paid yearly tribute to their tyrants, while others were still subject to their inroads, flying in terror at the sound of the Mohawk war-cry.”

Parkman describes a typical Iroquois celebration following one of their attacks on their fellow “Native Americans” (an absurd term, inasmuch as no Indians were “native” to America because there was no “America” until white Europeans got here and created it):

“(M)en, women and children, yelling like fiends let loose, swarmed out of the narrow portal, to visit upon the captives a foretaste of the deadlier torments in store for them … (W)ith brandished torch and firebrand, the frenzied multitude closed around their victim. The pen shrinks to write, the heart sickens to conceive, the fierceness of (the captive’s) agony … The work was done, the blackened trunk was flung to the dogs, and, with clamorous shouts and hootings, the murderers sought to drive away the spirit of their victim.”

The Iroquois “reckoned these barbarities among their most exquisite enjoyments.”

Here’s another charming Iroquois practice:

After killing “a sufficient number of captives,” Parkman says, the Iroquois “spared the lives of the remainder, and adopted them as members of their confederated tribes, separating wives from husbands, and children from parents, and distributing them among different villages, in order that old ties and associations might be more completely broken up.”

And for the feminists: The Iroquois humiliated conquered tribes by making the men take women’s names.

Because of the Iroquois’ barbaric attacks, by the time the Pilgrims arrived, “Northern New Hampshire, the whole of Vermont, and Western Massachusetts had no human tenants but the roving hunter or prowling warrior.”

Hollywood’s “White Demons” were “White Saviors” to the Wampanoag.

The Pilgrims also had much to be thankful for on that first Thanksgiving. Of the approximately 100 passengers on the Mayflower, only half survived the first winter, felled by scurvy, malnutrition and the bitter cold. And the ones who made it did so largely thanks to the friendly Wampanoag, who shared their food with the Europeans and taught them how to till the land.

The woke version of American Indians makes them just another victim group, like the transgenders. Their honor and bravery is drained from the PC stories. To better smear our country, Indians have to be made big, fat losers.

The truth told by Parkman shows the savagery and superstition, but also the courage and honor of American Indians. The Hurons, for example, “held it disgraceful to turn from the face of an enemy,” and even when being tortured alive, a Huron would raise his voice in “scorn and defiance.”

Doesn’t anyone wonder why we name our sports teams and military armaments after Indians? We don’t name them after weaklings or whiners. Americans love to boast of having Indian blood, real or imagined — and not just to score a professorship at Harvard like Elizabeth Warren.

Real Americans honor Indians and also honor the courageous European settlers who brought Christian civilization to a continent, a miraculous union that we celebrate on this wonderful holiday.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: The Democrats’ Guide to Losing Gracefully


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 11, 2020 2:15 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

The Democrats' Guide to Losing Gracefully

Source: AP Photo/Richard Drew  

Trending

Here are the times Democrats have conceded a presidential election with grace and dignity:

OK, now on to my column.

I hope someone is recording the media’s demands that Trump supporters ACCEPT THE RESULTS OF THE ELECTION! inasmuch as the Democrats refuse to accept the results of any presidential election they lose, unless it’s a landslide, and sometimes even then.

After George W. Bush won the 2000 election — despite the media depressing Bush turnout in Florida by calling the state for Gore when polls were still open in the conservative panhandle — Gore contested the election until Dec. 13, the day after the Supreme Court called off the endless recounts (in only certain Florida counties) demanded by Gore.

The night of the court’s ruling, Laurence Tribe, the Harvard law professor who’d argued one of Gore’s cases before the court, and Ed Rendell, general chairman of the Democratic National Committee, went on TV and said it was time for Gore to concede.

Both were immediately attacked by their fellow Democrats and forced to retract their statements. Gore’s deputy campaign manager, Mark Fabiani, for example, told The New York Times that Rendell “seems to be more interested in getting his mug on TV than in loyalty.”

The next day, Gore conceded, telling his supporters he had “congratulated him on becoming the 43rd president of the United States,” adding, “while I strongly disagree with the court’s decision, I accept it.”

But that still wasn’t the end of it! Weeks later, the Congressional Black Caucus tried to prevent congressional certification of the Electoral College for Bush, raising objection after objection on the House floor.

Over the course of the next year, the Florida ballots were painstakingly recounted by an independent investigative firm at a cost of nearly a million dollars, paid for by the same media outlets currently telling you to shut up and accept the results — including The New York Times, CNN, The Washington Post and the Associated Press, along with several others.

The year-long, million-dollar recount led to this shocking conclusion: Bush still won. As the Times put it, contrary to the claims of Gore partisans, “the United States Supreme Court did not award an election to Mr. Bush that otherwise would have been won by Mr. Gore.”

And yet, to this day, Democrats claim Bush was “selected, not elected,” as so wittily put by Hillary Clinton.

Hillary was still harping on Bush’s stolen election when she ran for president in the 2008 cycle. At a 2007 primary presidential debate, she delighted the Democratic audience by remarking, “Well, I think it is a problem that Bush was elected in 2000. (APPLAUSE) I actually thought somebody else was elected in that election, but … (APPLAUSE).”

At a subsequent primary debate in 2008, Hillary said that she and President Clinton had been making great progress “until, unfortunately, the Supreme Court handed the presidency to George Bush.”

In 2006, Michael Kinsley claimed in The New York Times that the 2000 election was “actually stolen.”

And so on.

When Bush was reelected in 2004, Democrats again refused to accept the results of the election, and again attempted to block Congress’ counting of electoral votes, this time with the connivance of Sen. Barbara Boxer.

Their smoking gun? The election results in Ohio didn’t match the exit polls! If that’s not enough proof for you, and I can’t imagine why it wouldn’t be, the voting machines were manufactured by Diebold, and Diebold’s CEO was a Bush supporter. Yes, apparently, the voting machines in Ohio were rigged to flip votes from Kerry to Bush.

This crackpot theory was pushed assiduously by Vanity Fair (Michael Shnayerson in the April 2004 issue, and Christopher Hitchens in the March 2005 issue), Rolling Stone magazine (Robert F. Kennedy Jr., June 15, 2006), and in books: John Conyers’ “What Went Wrong in Ohio” — introduction by Gore Vidal — and “Was the 2004 Presidential Election Stolen?” by Steven F. Freeman and Joel Bleifuss. (You’ll have to read it to find out!)

I haven’t even mentioned the craziest of the Democrat media complex’s attacks on the results of an election: Reagan’s 489-49 electoral landslide against Jimmy Carter in 1980. (Stay tuned!)

Election results, according to Democrats:

— 1960: Kennedy wins a razor-thin victory after a surprisingly high turnout of dead voters in Texas and Illinois — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1964: Landslide election for Lyndon Johnson — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1968: Nixon won with his racist (and mythical) “Southern strategy.”

— 1972: Nixon landslide — no provable cheating.

— 1976: Carter won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1980: Reagan won by traitorously colluding with Iran to prevent the release of American hostages before the election!

— 1984: Reagan landslide — no provable cheating.

— 1988: Bush 41 won in a landslide because of his racist Willie Horton ads.

— 1992: Clinton won with 43% of the vote — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 1996: Clinton won with 49% of the vote — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2000: Bush 43 was “selected, not elected” after the Supreme Court stole it for him.

— 2004: Bush won because of Diebold hacking the voting machines in Ohio.

— 2008: Obama won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2012: Obama won — FAIR ELECTION, CLEAN AS A WHISTLE!!

— 2016: Trump won after colluding with Russia to persuade them to purchase $200,000 in Facebook ads.

If that’s how we’re supposed to “accept the results of the election,” then WOW — game on!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: What Now?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Nov 04, 2020 5:33 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

What Now?

Source: AP Photo/Patrick Semansky)

Trending

This may be the strangest election in history in that there is no evidence that any sizable group of people want Biden for president.

It’s his fourth time running for that office. This year, Biden lost three primaries in a row, coming in fourth in the Iowa caucus, fifth in New Hampshire a distant second in Nevada. At the end of February, he had accumulated a paltry 14 delegates — compared to 45 for Bernie Sanders and 26 for Pete Buttigieg.

Then James Clyburn said, Vote for Biden and African Americans in South Carolina voted for Biden. (Although the black vote is NOT monolithic, they decided to make an exception this one time and vote monolithically.)

Democrats never looked back.

Biden has nothing going for him — no constituency, no fanatical supporters, just a career in politics that stretches back 50 years.

Bill Clinton had Southern Democrats and baby boomers. Gore had the global warming zealots. George Bush had conservative Christians and Texans. Even Hillary had fanatical supporters. Remember the PUMAs (Party Unity My A$$)? How about the weeping loons at the Javits Center on election night 2016?

Will anyone weep that Biden lost? No, they’ll weep because Trump won. Yes, much of Trump’s vote hated Hillary, but surely at least 70 percent of them actually supported Trump. Ninety-nine percent of Biden’s vote is: “I Hate Trump.”

How did Joe Biden become the nominee? Because he was the candidate most acceptable to black people. Why? Because he was Obama’s vice president. There’s a coalition built on rock.

Combine the empty suit from Delaware with Kamala Harris, who was polling at about two percent among Democrats before she dropped out of the primaries. Harris added nothing to the ticket — except Biden’s ridiculously narrow, self-imposed requirement that his vice president be a woman of color.

Unfortunately for him, there just aren’t a lot of massively impressive black women who are elected Democrats right now. Barbara Jordan is dead. Shirley Chisholm is dead. Either of them would have been chosen over Kamala.

When Harris’ campaign crashed and burned, I thought I’d embarrassed myself by predicting she would be the Democrats’ 2020 presidential nominee back in 2016 before I’d ever heard her speak — before she’d even won her Senate race.

But on this, I was right: She strokes all the media’s erogenous zones.

— She’s got the Hollywood glamour!

Why, I think she’s even better looking than Michelle Obama! Not as gorgeous as Beyonce, but beauty like THAT only happens once a century.

(Harris will be in a dozen Vogue fashion shoots.)

— She’s so cool!

She wears sneakers, and cited Tupac as the “best rapper alive.” (Wait, what? Oh, we didn’t know Tupac was murdered in Las Vegas 20 years ago, either.)

— She’s presentable in Hollywood and the Hamptons.

Poor Al Sharpton has been lurking around for 30 years, but Kamala is someone we can invite to our apartments.

Harris isn’t a huge hit with the Democratic base. She’s a hit with the people who make decisions for the party. My prediction is redeemed.

If voters had been forced to focus on Harris, Trump would’ve won in a landslide. But this election was entirely a referendum on Trump. It’s irrelevant who he’s running against. Maybe if they had dug up Hitler to run against him other issues would have come up, but even that’s not a sure thing.

Harris sent out a tweet the day before the election saying, “There’s a big difference between equality and equity,” along with a video demanding that “we all end up at the same place.”

Is anyone listening? She’s not saying everyone should have an equal opportunity, but that everyone should get the same stuff.

Hello? Suburban women? Harris wants to move poor people next door to you whether they can afford the house or not. It’s as if Harris was running a test: Do people even care what we’re running on?

Democrats could come out for vivisection of little children. No one cares! A significant share of the electorate was voting for Anyone But Trump.

The media had whipped enough of the population into such a blind Trump hatred that the Democrats’ vetting process for Biden was: “What’s your name? OK, you’ll do.”

What happens if this bland, place-holding figurehead is sworn in as president? Assume on Jan 20th, Trump’s gone. Now what?

The media can’t blame the next black man killed by cops on Trump and they can’t turn off the coronavirus panic. Does the virus suddenly go away because someone new is in the White House? The toughest job for the media is going to be coming up with an excuse to put Trump on the front page once he’s gone.

Have they thought about what happens next?

Ann Coulter Op-ed: ‘Ask Not What Your Country Is’: The Biden Inaugural Address


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 28, 2020 6:20 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

'Ask Not What Your Country Is': The Biden Inaugural Address

Source: AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster  

Trending

I’m not at liberty to reveal my sources, but I have obtained a draft of President Joe Biden’s inaugural address. (Trump, unfortunately, won’t be there to hear it. He will be holding a competing rally at RFK Stadium, also starting at 12 noon on Jan. 20.)

EXCLUSIVE CONTENT! MUST CREDIT COULTER!

Ladies and gentlemen, members of the fairer sex, the unfair sex, the transgenders, queers, what have you.

Women and gentlemen!

I’ve known women — my wife, my sister — no, that’s my wife! I mean my wife over here. The fat one.

I mean: The fact is, they switched on me!

Anyway, standing here today on the steps of the capitol of Wilmington — I should say, standing here today on the steps of the Capitol in the state of Washington, as we do every year, we have this peaceful transfer of power — I should say, every four years.

Which is a Big F—ing Deal! I used to say that to Barack all the time.

I see him out there! He’s the articulate, bright and clean one.

As I was coming over here on this brisk June day, I started thinking, why is it that Joe Biden is the first in his family ever to go to a university? My ancestors, Welsh coal miners, would come up after 12 hours underground and play cricket for hours. Were they not smart? Were they not strong, mate?

And so, as I look out at this wonderful crowd — what’s that from the fella in the back? You say I’m not Welsh and my father was a Chevrolet dealer in Wilmington?

Listen, you lying dog-faced pony soldier — I have a much higher I.Q. than you do! I went to law school on a full academic scholarship and ended up in the top half of my class. I got three degrees in college and was voted the “outstanding student” in the political science department.

What I mean to say is that it was a financial scholarship, I wasn’t voted the “outstanding student,” and I was only in the top half of the bottom 10 students.

No, I haven’t taken an I.Q. test. Why the hell would I take a test? Come on, man. That is like saying you — did you take a test whether you’re taking cocaine or not? What do you think? Are you a junkie?

Look, folks, kids today have advantages I didn’t have. Their parents play the radio, make sure they have the record player on at night. My parents couldn’t play the record player. They were in the mines.

And I remember my pop, a Chevrolet dealer in Wilmington, telling me in 1962, as I was going off to work at an African American swimming pool — we called them “African Americans” back then — and we saw two guys kissing each other. He said to me: “Joey, they love each other.”

I shouldn’t say it. I’m going to say something I probably shouldn’t say …

Anyway, today, I stand before you to announce my candidacy for president of the United States!

Wait — I won! That’s a Big F—ing Deal, as I used to say to Barack.

Oh look! Here’s the guy from Burisma! Good to see you, man! Look, the Biden administration will be monitoring Kiev prosecutors like you’ve never seen before. Clean government in Ukraine will be the No. 1 priority of my administration. When I’m president, this country won’t be cozying up to the totalitarian regimes of Poland and Hungary. It’s gonna stop with us.

I shouldn’t say it. I’m going to say something I probably shouldn’t say …

Anyway, on this crisp September day, I vow to you we’ll not only have a Green New Deal, but a Purple New Deal, a Yellow New Deal, a LBGTQXYZ New Deal — a whole rainbow of New Deals!

You have my word as a Biden, folks.

Anyway, as I stand here in the rotunda — I mean the steps of the Capitol — just as the great Democratic president Franklin Delano … uh, I should say, as FDR did — well, he wasn’t standing because he couldn’t stand.

And to all of you in wheelchairs, you don’t need to stand either! Oh, God love you! What am I talking about? I’ll tell you what, we’re making everybody else stand up, though. Let’s give the wheelchair-bound a big round of applause!

Look folks, as FDR said, we hold these truths to be self-evident … You bet and corn pop. Pop goes the weasel! And I’m your pop, as I always say to Hunter. I’m your pop, but I’m not a weasel, pal.

As we celebrate this peaceful transition — oh, I see Adam Schiff out in the crowd! As I always say, he reminds me of my son, Hunter.

Whoa — I almost forgot, let’s give a big hand to my vice president … Anita Hill!

What am I talking about? Anita ain’t black!

Everybody give a big hand to my vice president … Cardi B!

Oh sorry, buddy — my vice president, Al Sharpton!

But I promise you, Cardi and Anita and Al and Stacey and Jesse will all have positions in my Cabinet.

That’s cabinet, not cabin, folks. Harriet Beecher Stowe wrote “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” and, as she always said: “We hold these truths to be self-evident.” I know this because I got three degrees in college and was voted the “outstanding student” in the political science department.

I should say, I wasn’t actually voted the “outstanding student,” but it was an honor just to be nominated.

Anyway, I never served with John F. Kennedy — but he was no Dan Quayle! He said, “Ask your country to do things for you. Ask or not! The choice is yours.”

I’m pro-choice, although I’m personally opposed. But the important thing is, it’s your choice!

And so as I stand here today, asking for your vote — hold on! — you gave me your vote! That’s why I’m here, man!

This is a Big F—ing Deal, as I used to always say to Barack. Good night and God bless. Wear a mask!

Ann Coulter Op-ed: Stumper: Should Trump Mention His Most Popular Issue?


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 21, 2020 6:22 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Stumper: Should Trump Mention His Most Popular Issue?

Source: AP Photo/Elise Amendola

Trending

In 2015, Donald J. Trump decided he was going to run for president on popular ideas. This was a stunning, historic breakthrough in American politics. He made his announcement in a speech talking about Mexican rapists, pledging to deport illegal aliens and build a wall. And the rest is history.

I’m thinking he should try it again this Thursday night.

Recall that Trump’s famous escalator speech provided any number of possible campaign themes:

Bomb ISIS!

Take their oil!

Protect our veterans!

Bring our jobs home!

Repeal Common Core!

Repeal Obamacare!

Protect the Second Amendment!

Make China pay!

Concealed carry!

But that’s not what the crowds chanted. They certainly weren’t chanting “Reform Social Security!” or “Protect Ukraine’s national sovereignty!” No, the slogan that inspired a million T-shirts, chalk etchings, replicas and hashtags was: Build the wall!

Month after month, at every rally, whenever Trump mentioned the wall, the crowds went wild. It was Trump’s one surefire standing ovation, his “Free Bird” at a Lynyrd Skynyrd concert. Even before Trump would take the stage, his supporters would start the chant: “BUILD THE WALL!”

Before the 2016 Iowa caucuses, Daily Beast columnist Michael Moynihan tweeted: “Talked to lots of Trump supporters in Iowa. When I pointed out he wasn’t a conservative, all had same answer: ‘So? The wall!’”

Naturally, the media reacted as if Trump had called for gas chambers. But that just made him look like a brave truth-teller. The media furrowed their brows and explained that Trump was “riding a wave of anger against Washington.” He was appealing to “this very visceral, very angry populist working-class blue-collar worker.”

So it was furious boiling anger. On the other hand, if it was just trash talk the voters yearned for, why did New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie sink like a rock?

Political analysts kept droning on and on about Trump’s mysterious appeal, but in all their prolix analyses, I can’t find a single one saying, BOY, WERE WE WRONG ABOUT IMMIGRATION!

Even the so-called “Muslim ban” — vilified by the media — helped Trump. Why were we admitting people to our country who would turn around and shoot up the San Bernardino Inland Regional Center?

Back then, Trump’s attacks on the media were premised on policy — not their personal attacks on him. That’s why his supporters would never desert him, even as he was libeled from every media outlet every minute of every day.

The media claimed Trump’s popularity was just a cult of personality, but the one thing most voters weren’t wild about was his personality. Unfortunately, Trump may be the only person who actually believes the fake news on this. He seems to think that what drove him to a stunning upset victory in 2016 was that the public just adores the big lunk!

Rough estimate of topics in the typical Trump campaign speech, 2020:

40 minutes: Re-living 2016 election night

20 minutes: His experience with COVID — he’s better than ever!

15 minutes: Insults Biden, Kamala, the media

20 minutes: Brags about his crowd size and how his fans LOVE him (they never loved Reagan like this!)

0 minutes: Biden’s massively unpopular promise to amnesty illegal aliens and halt deportations on his “first day in office.”

Mass immigration is a huge boon for Democrats. It gives them lots of new voters. That’s immigrants’ primary skill: voting. We’ve become the country feared by John C. Calhoun, divided into people who work for a living and people who vote for a living.

Not only do Democrats need the votes, but their blind hatred of Everything Trump, means they are wedded to this ridiculously unpopular policy.

I have an idea! Why not make Biden talk about it?

New York magazine’s Andrew Sullivan (now on his own) and The New York Times’ Thomas Friedman and Frank Bruni — liberals all! — have begged the Democrats to drop the open borders nonsense. Even Mother Jones’ Kevin Drum wrote in astonishment last year that he couldn’t “see much daylight” between the Democrats’ ideas on immigration and “de facto open borders.”

Here’s Friedman, after watching a Democratic primary debate:

“I was shocked that so many were ready to decriminalize illegal entry into our country. I think people should have to ring the doorbell before they enter my house or my country.

“I was shocked at all those hands raised in support of providing comprehensive health coverage to undocumented immigrants. I think promises we’ve made to our fellow Americans should take priority, like to veterans in need of better health care.”

The media had a grand time calling Trump’s immigration policies “racist,” but unfortunately for them, Trump’s policies were popular with all kinds of voters. It wasn’t just “angry white men” who were losing their jobs and neighborhoods (and sometimes their lives) to immigrants. So were black people. So were Hispanics. So were teenagers. So were — well, to be fair, Asians were more likely to be the ones taking those jobs.

As Sullivan wrote: “[For Democrats, there are] no negatives to mass immigration at all, and no concern for existing American citizens’ interests in not having their wages suppressed through this competition.”

That’s probably why we don’t hear so much about Trump’s immigration policies being racist anymore. Now, it’s just the never-ending demand that Trump condemn “white supremacy.”

(Speaking of which, the debate this Thursday presents a golden opportunity to ask Trump the central question of this campaign. There’s a section on “Race,” and I think something along the lines of “Do you support white supremacy?” fits quite well under that rubric. Maybe — just maybe – we will finally get an answer to that question. Because let’s just admit it: If they don’t ask this time, they’re never gonna.)

If you want to know how Trump could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue in 2016 and not lose a single vote, look no further than his proposals on immigration.

It’s one thing to push an unpopular idea. The GOP does that all the time: the Trans-Pacific Partnership — how about the Iraq War?

How many people supported moving our embassy to Jerusalem? (Answer:36%.)

How many supported Bush’s plan to privatize Social Security? (Answer: 25%.)

How many supported Trump’s tax cuts? (Answer: 24%.)

How many thought immigration levels should be decreased or stay the same? (Answer: 75%.)

How many supported mass deportation of all illegal immigrants? (Answer: 54%.)

Trump’s genius was that he was pushing policies that were popular. Maybe he should try it again at this Thursday’s debate.

Ann Coulter OPED: Debate Tip: Remember to Ask About White Supremacy!


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Oct 07, 2020 5:47 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Debate Tip: Remember to Ask About White Supremacy!

Source: AP Photo/Gerry Broome

Trending

Unfortunately, this week’s vice presidential debate — occurring after this column goes out — is unlikely to be something you’d see in the Turkish parliament, like we had last week. But I expect one similarity: There will be ZERO questions about any major issues, like crime, immigration, globalism, the endless riots, our insane foreign policy or what Wall Street is doing.

More like: Our next question is about transgender adoption.

And of course, Vice President Mike Pence will be asked to “condemn” white supremacy. Redeeming America from the bogeyman of “white supremacy” is apparently the media’s main argument against Trump.

Earlier this summer on “The Late Show With Stephen Colbert,” the Democrats’ vice presidential candidate, Kamala Harris, cheered on the protests that have been creating havoc since May:

“They’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop, and this is a movement, I’m telling you. They’re not gonna stop, and everyone beware, because they’re not gonna stop. They’re not gonna stop before Election Day in November, and they’re not gonna stop after Election Day. Everyone should take note of that, on both levels, that they’re not going to let up — and they should not. And we should not.”

But Harris won’t be asked about that. According to USA Today’s fact check, she never said any such thing. The newspaper rated the claim that Harris supported the destructive protests — which, again, is on video — “PARTLY FALSE” on the grounds that Harris referred to “protests,” not “riots.”

Those were “peaceful protests”!

Why are we required to pretend the Black Lives Matter “protests” are lovely little afternoon teas, while the Antifa riots that inevitably follow are the problem? (If there is a problem at all, which there can’t be, because “Antifa” doesn’t exist, nor do “riots,” but if they do, it’s white supremacists doing them!)

I’m open to the argument that an organization is not responsible for the things people do in its name — but that’s not the media’s position. Even if it were true that the BLM “protests” were peaceful (and it’s not), then why do the media always hector Trump to denounce “white supremacists” on the grounds that they certainly regard him as their leader!?

Whenever and wherever Antifa riot, they spray-paint “BLM” on walls, chant BLM slogans, vilify the police and scream about “black lives.” Quite obviously, they think they’re committing vandalism, assault and arson to help BLM. At the very least, BLM is not doing much to police their sworn allies.

Even taking BLM “peaceful protests” on their own, they are not what most people regard as peaceful, like the anti-nuke protests in the 1980s, featuring singing, dancing, balloons and jugglers.

The basic, factory-issue BLM protest, with no bells and whistles, involves angry marchers screaming, “F–k the police!” “Fry like bacon!” “I know you got a gun, but so do I!” “Your mother’s umbilical cord should have wrapped around your neck and choked you just the way you choked George Floyd, you filthy animal.” (Floyd died of a heart attack, not strangulation). They nearly always include chants of the 100 percent proven lie about the shooting of Mike Brown, “Hands up! Don’t Shoot!” BLM protesters block traffic, stop cars and demand the drivers swear allegiance to BLM. They invade restaurants and shout in patrons’ faces. And let’s not forget the looting.

Most people consider that, at the very least, obnoxious.

But instead of asking either of the Democratic candidates about their enthusiasm for BLM and Antifa riots — I mean “protests” — the media insist on endlessly chewing over a worldwide threat that exists exclusively in their imaginations: WHITE SUPREMACY!

If you’d asked me before the presidential debate last week, ‘What if someone brings up the media’s ‘fine people, on both sides’ lie about Trump?’ I’d have said: ‘Nah, he clearly denounced ‘white supremacists’ in that very statement; no one would be that stupid’

Chris Wallace is! I thought he was stealing a 4-year-old, hacky idea from CNN’s Jake Tapper, but it turns out Wallace himself asked Trump this exact same question about condemning “white supremacy” during a primary debate in March 2016. Journalists are like 2-year-olds who won’t stop asking why the sky is blue or how high is “up.” (Or a similarly unanswerable question: Why on earth doesn’t Trump keep an MP3 file in his pocket of him saying, “… and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally”).

Inasmuch as the media are never going to stop demanding that Trump “condemn” white supremacy — and seeing as Trump refuses to just play the tape — how about turning it around and demanding that Biden denounce NAMBLA?

I am calling on my opponent to condemn NAMBLA right here and right now. Do you, Mr. Biden, admit that a grown man having anal sex with a 10-year-old is wrong? Will you tell your supporters this right now? Pederasts certainly think you support them. They vote for you, they don’t vote for me!

The question is more than legitimate: 1) Unlike “white supremacists,” the North American Man-Boy Love Association actually exists; and 2) while NAMBLA may not have officially endorsed Biden-Harris yet, we know they support him, as much as the media know “white supremacists” support Trump.

READ MORE AT https://townhall.com/

Ann Coulter OPED: Innocent Until Proven Trump Supporter


Commentary by Ann Coulter Ann Coulter | Posted: Sep 23, 2020 5:50 PM

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.

Innocent Until Proven Trump Supporter

Source: Leah Barkoukis

Trending

During a BLM “peaceful protest” in Omaha, Nebraska, on May 30 (over George Floyd’s dying of a heart attack while in police custody in Minneapolis), James Scurlock was peacefully protesting by breaking into an architecture firm — hoisting an office chair and hurling it into two computer monitors, then ripping a phone from a desk and throwing it against the wall, as his friend shattered another monitor — all of which was captured on video.

Nearby, Jake Gardner, an Iraq War veteran and Trump supporter, was keeping watch over the two bars he owned, The Hive and The Gatsby, aided by his 68-year-old father and a security guard. The peaceful protesters soon made their way to Jake’s bar, where they hurled a street sign through The Hive’s plate-glass window. He and his father rushed outside to prevent the peaceful protesters from storming his bar.

Scurlock’s friend, catching his wind after smashing computer monitors, knocked Gardner’s father to the ground. (It’s on tape.) Or as CNN’s Madeline Holcombe put it: “An unidentified man can be seen pushing Gardner’s father.” Gardner rushed to help his father, then backed away toward the bar, lifting his shirt to show the protesters he was armed, and telling them to move along. Again, it’s all on tape. Murmurings can be heard from the crowd: “That (expletive) got a gun” and “It’s not worth it (expletive) you stu–…”

At that point, peaceful protester Alayna Melendez leapt on Gardner from behind (not subscribers to the Marquess of Queensberry rules, these peaceful protesters), knocking him down and into the street, whereupon yet another peaceful protester jumped on top of Gardner, who fired two warning shots in the air, scattering his first two assailants. Again: all on tape.

Three seconds later, as Gardner was trying to get up, Scurlock jumped on him from behind and put him in a chokehold — which I believe is considered definitive proof of intentional murder when performed by a police officer. In videos, Gardner can be heard yelling, “Get off me! Get off me!”

With his right arm pinned, and Scurlock choking him, Gardner moved the gun to his left hand and shot over his shoulder, hitting Scurlock in the collarbone, killing him.

Or as The New York Times’ Azi Paybarah explained it: “Mr. Gardner got into a fight with one man, James Scurlock, 22. The two scuffled before Mr. Gardner fired a shot that killed him.” They “scuffled.” It brings to mind the Times headline from Nov. 24, 1963: “President Kennedy Dies in Dallas After Scuffle — Albeit at Great Distance — With Lee Harvey Oswald.”

Let’s be fair, though. Maybe Scurlock jumped Gardner, or maybe Gardner jumped Scurlock. Who knows? It’s not like there are 4 million videos of the incident.

Gardner was immediately taken into police custody for questioning and held until 11 p.m. the next night.

The Democratic district attorney, Don Kleine, his chief deputy Brenda Beadle, and all the homicide detectives spent 12 hours that weekend reconstructing the incident with multiple videos. Their unanimous conclusion? That Gardner shot Scurlock in self-defense.

Despite the delusional claims posted on “social media” that Gardner used the N-word — which, as we all know, is grounds for immediate execution by any black person — none of the videos substantiate that. To the contrary, Scurlock’s own friend denied that Gardner said anything racial at all. (Apparently, you can’t believe everything you read on the internet.)

At 22, Scurlock already had a rap sheet a mile long, including home invasion, assault and battery, domestic violence — and, of course, he was in the middle of a crime spree that very night. Methamphetamine and cocaine were found in his urine.

But “the community” erupted like COVID in April. Nebraska state Sen. Megan Hunt (bisexual, graduate of a now-defunct college) repeatedly called Gardner a “white supremacist.” Another Nebraska state senator, Kara Eastman (bisexual), called Gardner’s shooting of Spurlock a “cold-blooded murder.”

(Why do I mention their sexual orientations? A lot of the hate toward Gardner seems to come from the transgender community for saying on Facebook that transgenders would be restricted to the unisex bathrooms after a man in a dress attacked a female customer in the ladies’ room.)

Twitter was full of unattractive humans claiming that Gardner was a “white supremacist,” which were dutifully reprinted in local media, such as this one from @nostudavab (Twitter banner: “F*CK TRUMP”):

“Club owner Jake Gardner shot and killed a protestor in Omaha on video, yelling racial slurs. he is openly racist and homophobic. he murdered James Scurlock, he’s proud of it, and he’s not in jail.”

Protesters besieged Kleine’s neighborhood.

Kleine responded to the mob’s demand for “justice” by calling in a black prosecutor, Fred Franklin, to make damn sure the grand jury indicted Gardner — whom Kleine (the elected D.A.) had found to be innocent. As he was expected to do, Franklin produced a series of fanciful indictments, including for manslaughter and making a “terroristic threat.” (The “terroristic threat” was Gardner lifting his shirt to show the peaceful protesters that he was armed.)

The special prosecutor’s ALL NEW EVIDENCE THAT BLEW THE OTHER FACTS AWAY was this: The night of the BLM protest, Gardner had posted on Facebook: “Just when you think ‘what else could 2020 throw at me?’ Then you have to pull 48 hours of military style firewatch.”

WHY WAS THIS MAN NOT IMMEDIATELY ARRESTED?

Gardner’s landlord, Frank Vance, immediately evicted The Hive and The Gatsby, and sent an anguished apology letter to Scurlock’s family (“deepest sympathy … the pain and suffering … losing a child to unnecessary violence … apologize for this horrible incident … time to heal … very deepest condolences”).

Gardner was facing 95 years in prison for shooting a career criminal who was choking him, and now he had lost his source of income. So naturally his friends tried to set up a GoFundMe account to help pay for his legal defense.

GoFundMe’s response? They immediately and repeatedly took down the page, based on their clearly stated policy: We don’t like you.

Here’s a thought, GoFundMe: Guaranteeing a fair trial for an individual accused of a crime isn’t the same as defending the thing he’s accused of. That’s the whole point: Gardner wanted to prove that he was innocent. Nope! No fair trial, no fair press, no livelihood, no GoFundMe. No chance.

Meanwhile, the family of the convicted criminal who jumped Gardner has already raised more than a quarter-million dollars on GoFundMe. (Funeral expenses can be costly!)

Poor Jake Gardner didn’t stand a chance against the raging, hate-filled multitude. Even those sworn to uphold the law, like Kleine and Franklin, leapt in with the mob. And a corporation whose business it is to enable people to raise money for just causes such as getting a fair trial refused to do business with him, not unlike the Memphis Woolworth’s treatment of black people in 1960.

Sadly, President Trump never said a word about his polite, cheerful supporter being railroaded in Omaha. Gardner had attended Trump’s inauguration with such high hopes. He had well wishes even for the (can we say “insane”?) protesters he encountered there.

Last weekend, facing death threats and a kangaroo court, and with no means to mount a defense, Gardner killed himself, rather than be killed by the mob waiting for him back in Omaha.

This is the part of the column where I make a clarion call for action. How about civil suits against the monsters in the prosecutor’s office, against the criminal-supporting GoFundMe and the Facebook and Twitter defamation mobs! Maybe a department of justice investigation or FCC action against biased social media companies. Antitrust suits. Boycotts!

I’ve got nothing. The country has gone mad. I always figured the first armed civilian who ever fought back would put an end to the violence exploding all over the country — the violence that police and prosecutors can’t or won’t stop. “We have the guns,” conservatives like to say. In fact, it’s even worse now.

It’s official: You can’t protect yourself. Not even a blameless ex-Marine could defend himself from being choked to death. The D.A. will call in a “special” prosecutor to throw you to the wolves, and they’ll both be praised for railroading an innocent man in the Omaha World Herald, while the “elite” media defame you.

Tag Cloud

%d bloggers like this: