China Compares Nancy Pelosi’s Taiwan Visit to George Floyd’s Death

China Compares Nancy Pelosi’s Taiwan Visit to George Floyd’s Death

At a press conference on Friday, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Hua Chunying bizarrely and offensively compared U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s Taiwan visit to the death of George Floyd, in a strained effort to paint the U.S. government as a murderously abusive “world policeman.”

The idea Hua struggled to convey, clumsily mixed from effluvium harvested by Chinese propagandists from left-wing American Twitter feeds, is that Team America’s World Police are brutal colonialists who seek to put developing nations like China in a stranglehold with hypocritical accusations of human rights violations.

This seems like an especially tough argument to sell when China is currently bullying tiny Taiwan with provocative military exercises, and just came off a week of threatening murder to stop an American politician from visiting the island, but nonetheless Hua gave it her best shot:

We are living in the 21st century. The world must never allow the US to see itself as a “world policeman” or an “international judge” and continue to treat other sovereign nations like George Floyd as if the US can just bully and strangle them at will. If China does nothing about the US’s relentless interference in our internal affairs and violation of our sovereignty or does not firmly resist the US’s reckless and irresponsible behavior, respect for sovereign and territorial integrity and other purposes of the UN Charter and basic norms in international relations will become nothing but words on paper. And the vast developing world which account for over 80% of the world’s population could well become the next target anytime. For this exact reason, already more than 160 countries have made their voice of justice heard. They reiterated their commitment to the one-China policy and expressed support for China’s efforts to firmly uphold its sovereignty and territorial integrity. This is a fight against hegemony, against interference and against secession.

China had historically been a victim of foreign aggression. Today, the US and several of its sidekicks still grossly interfere in our internal affairs and undermine our sovereignty and security from time to time. But China is not the China 120 years ago, and we refuse to be treated like Iraq, Syria, or Afghanistan. The Chinese people will never allow any foreign force to bully, oppress, or subjugate us. Anyone who would attempt to do so will find themselves on a collision course with a great wall of steel forged by over 1.4 billion Chinese people. The position of the Chinese government and people on the Taiwan question is consistent. To uphold the sovereignty and territorial integrity of China is the firm will of the 1.4 billion Chinese people. We hope that the US and its sidekicks who style themselves as democracies will be very clear about that. They need to take seriously and respect the core interests and the firm will of the Chinese people, who account for one fifth of the world’s population.

This came after several minutes of Hua hyperventilating about China’s solemn right to blockade peaceful Taiwan because Pelosi hurt its feelings. 

Shortly after delivering this twisted sermon about what a bully America is for objecting to China’s slave trade, Hua told a reporter that China has no compunctions about shooting ballistic missiles into Japan’s globally recognized Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) because China chooses not to recognize it. Beijing appears to be very particular about its own territorial claims but quite fuzzy about everyone else’s.

Source

Washington Post Falsely Claims George Floyd Was Shot

Washington Post Falsely Claims George Floyd Was Shot

Was it done deliberately to stir up trouble? Or are there just so many diversity hires at the Washington Post that accurate news reporting is now impossible?

Those are the questions people are asking after the Washington Post tweeted that George Floyd was “shot and killed in police custody”.

Washington Post - George Floyd

A court found that Floyd, whose death sparked riots across America, was killed by a policeman kneeling on his neck.

The policeman, Derek Chauvin, was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 22 years and six months in prison.

But if you believe the Washington Post, Floyd had been shot dead by police.

Will the Post use the third anniversary of Floyd’s death to report that he was mowed down by a sub-machine gun while ice-skating?

Error Undetected

The concern was not just that the tweet was wrong. How did something so wildly inaccurate get so far at the Post?

Was it an auto-correct thing?

Diligent journalist carefully types “George Floyd died after a police officer kneeled on his neck for more than 9 minutes” and it comes out as “George Floyd was shot and killed”.

If you believe that, you’ll believe anything you read in the Washington Post.

But the brazen factual error begs the question; if the Washington Post is so casual about reporting something 95% of people know to be wrong, what other falsehoods do they report as truths?

And where is Joe Biden’s Disinformation Governance Board when it is needed?

Apology Absent

The Washington Post issued a hastily written non-correction when angry readers wondered aloud if the newspaper was deliberately trying to stir racial tensions by printing false narratives.

I have to say, this is one of the strangest explanations I’ve ever read.

It sounds like three linguistic specialists, a public relations firm, and a pack of lawyers came up with this bizarre statement. It glows that brightly.

Instead of saying ‘We wrongly reported that George Floyd was shot’, the Post simply said they had deleted a previous tweet ‘that included language that was changed after publish’.

Huh?

When did Kamala Harris start moonlighting at the Post?

At least the lie was grammatically correct. The explanation made no sense at all. It was certainly a weird way to say “we published fake news”.

It’s possible, of course, that what they were trying to say was ‘we mislead the public to try to advance an agenda’.

This is how respected publications go from “newspaper of record” to birdcage liner.

When you can’t get the most basic facts right about the biggest story in decades, you should probably pack up and cease to exist.

On the plus side, the Washington Post never hesitates to use its in-house fact checkers to make sure readers don’t believe anything it doesn’t want them to believe.

___

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.
Photo by Life Matters.

Thank the Source

Washington Post Falsely Claims George Floyd Was Shot

Washington Post Falsely Claims George Floyd Was Shot

Was it done deliberately to stir up trouble? Or are there just so many diversity hires at the Washington Post that accurate news reporting is now impossible?

Those are the questions people are asking after the Washington Post tweeted that George Floyd was “shot and killed in police custody”.

Washington Post - George Floyd

A court found that Floyd, whose death sparked riots across America, was killed by a policeman kneeling on his neck.

The policeman, Derek Chauvin, was convicted of second-degree murder and sentenced to 22 years and six months in prison.

But if you believe the Washington Post, Floyd had been shot dead by police.

Will the Post use the third anniversary of Floyd’s death to report that he was mowed down by a sub-machine gun while ice-skating?

Error Undetected

The concern was not just that the tweet was wrong. How did something so wildly inaccurate get so far at the Post?

Was it an auto-correct thing?

Diligent journalist carefully types “George Floyd died after a police officer kneeled on his neck for more than 9 minutes” and it comes out as “George Floyd was shot and killed”.

If you believe that, you’ll believe anything you read in the Washington Post.

But the brazen factual error begs the question; if the Washington Post is so casual about reporting something 95% of people know to be wrong, what other falsehoods do they report as truths?

And where is Joe Biden’s Disinformation Governance Board when it is needed?

Apology Absent

The Washington Post issued a hastily written non-correction when angry readers wondered aloud if the newspaper was deliberately trying to stir racial tensions by printing false narratives.

I have to say, this is one of the strangest explanations I’ve ever read.

It sounds like three linguistic specialists, a public relations firm, and a pack of lawyers came up with this bizarre statement. It glows that brightly.

Instead of saying ‘We wrongly reported that George Floyd was shot’, the Post simply said they had deleted a previous tweet ‘that included language that was changed after publish’.

Huh?

When did Kamala Harris start moonlighting at the Post?

At least the lie was grammatically correct. The explanation made no sense at all. It was certainly a weird way to say “we published fake news”.

It’s possible, of course, that what they were trying to say was ‘we mislead the public to try to advance an agenda’.

This is how respected publications go from “newspaper of record” to birdcage liner.

When you can’t get the most basic facts right about the biggest story in decades, you should probably pack up and cease to exist.

On the plus side, the Washington Post never hesitates to use its in-house fact checkers to make sure readers don’t believe anything it doesn’t want them to believe.

___

Originally published at The James Macpherson Report.
Subscribe to his Substack here for daily witty commentary.
Photo by Life Matters.

Thank the Source

Barack Obama Uses Texas Shooting to Memorialize George Floyd

Barack Obama Uses Texas Shooting to Memorialize George Floyd

Former President Barack Obama used the school shooting in Uvalde, Texas, to memorialize the death of George Floyd, even though the two tragedies have almost no relation.

Indeed, Wednesday, May 25, marks the two-year anniversary of George Floyd’s murder at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer, but instead of just commemorating the day on its own, the former president tied the horrific massacre in Texas, which left 19 children and two teachers dead, to Floyd’s memory.

“As we grieve the children of Uvalde today, we should take time to recognize that two years have passed since the murder of George Floyd under the knee of a police officer,” the former president tweeted. “His killing stays with us all to this day, especially those who loved him.”

“In the aftermath of his murder, a new generation of activists rose up to channel their anguish into organized action, launching a movement to raise awareness of systemic racism and the need for criminal justice and police reform,” he added.

The president then plugged the My Brother’s Keeper Alliance and its “Reimagining Policing Pledge.”

While few, except maybe the pro-Chauvin hardliners, would begrudge anyone for commemorating George Floyd on the anniversary of his death, the former president’s decision to tie it in with a current and raw national tragedy sparked significant backlash.

In line with most mainstream Democrats, the former president also used Tuesday’s horrific massacre to push gun control.

“Michelle and I grieve with the families in Uvalde, who are experiencing pain no one should have to bear,” the former president said, adding:

We’re also angry for them. Nearly ten years after Sandy Hook—and ten days after Buffalo—our country is paralyzed, not by fear, but by a gun lobby and a political party that have shown no willingness to act in any way that might help prevent these tragedies. It’s long past time for action, any kind of action. And it’s another tragedy—a quieter but no less tragic one—for families to wait another day.

Source

Report: Newsrooms Warn Journalists to Keep Abortion Views Private

Report: Newsrooms Warn Journalists to Keep Abortion Views Private

It appears that newsroom managers have warned reporters against voicing their personal views on abortion as the Supreme Court potentially stands on the cusp of overturning Roe v. Wade.

According to a recent Vanity Fair report, certain news outlets have taken a markedly different tone than the one they employed during the Black Lives Matter protests over the death of George Floyd. For instance, during the height of the protests/riots of 2020, Axios chief executive Jim VandeHei told employees in a company-wide memo that they were encouraged to exercise their “rights to free speech, press, and protest.” In recent days, however, the company has been singing a different tune to its employees. Earlier this week, a memo circulated among the Axios staff urged journalists to keep their opinions secret.

“Abortion is a human rights issue that has become a highly politicized topic, with very specific policies being debated in Washington and in most states,” wrote VandeHei. “So it seems impossible to march—or tweet opinions—and not be perceived as picking a political side in public.”

VandeHei warned that such activism “could undermine our trusted journalism.”

An Axios spokesperson told Vanity Fair said that the policy stands in line with the company’s mission statement.

“We have been consistent and clear since Axios’s inception: we want our company focused on reporting and fact-based news, not opinion. We know this is hard for staff when they feel their values or identity are under attack, but this is our shared mission,” said the spokesperson.

Reporters with the Associated Press and NPR were also issued a similar memo, according to Poynter.

Journalists have since taken to Twitter to voice their discontent.

“As we speak, journalists who expressed their anger and distress on Twitter over their bodily autonomy and rights being taken away are now getting reprimanded for it,” said Jess Joho of Mashable. “Please, explain to me: exactly whose version of ‘objectivitie truth’ are we supposed to stick to here?”

Though the New York Times has issued no memo on the matter, the outlet directed Vanity Fair to its ethical journalism guidelines, which says staff members “may not march or rally in support of public causes or movements” or do things such as “sign ads taking a position on public issues” that may “reasonably raise doubts about their ability or The Times’s ability to function as neutral observers in covering the news.”

Only Rolling Stone (not exactly a bastion of objectivity) told employees that they were welcome to share their beliefs on the issue.

“Unlike so many other newsrooms, you don’t have to stifle your beliefs around here. This is a place where we can champion our convictions, where we can be our fullest selves,” Rolling Stone top editor Noah Shachtman told staff in a Slack message last Tuesday.

 “Of course, we have to maintain the highest standards of accuracy and authenticity in our reporting; we can’t take shortcuts, or substitute opinions for facts. But this is a multi-pronged offensive against our rights and we need to be frank with our readers about what’s at stake—no euphemisms, no sugar-coating,” he added.

Source

New Mayor Brings Old Anti-Crime Methods Back to Liberal City

New Mayor Brings Old Anti-Crime Methods Back to Liberal City
Mayor

New York City has a new mayor and he doesn’t like “broken windows” any more than Rudy Giuliani did. Everybody knows the Big Apple “is in the midst of a staggering crime wave.” Concerned citizens are really happy to see Rudy’s anti-crime units back on the street. They were re-branded as “anti-gun units” to appease liberals but the job is the same.

Mayor Adams gets aggressive

Violent crime numbers for things like murder, rape, robbery and assault skyrocketed in New York City under Bill de Blasio’s liberal Democrat administration. The new mayor, Eric Adams, was elected in a clear referendum to clean up the crime.

He quickly reinstated special NYPD units to patrol city streets and subways, calling them Anti-gun units to make them more palatable to progressives. They’re after the gangsters holding and using illegal guns, not average Second Amendment supporting citizens.

Its come to the point where “New York is a city under siege,” Judicial Watch describes. “Every day brings a new horror story.

Criminals go in and out of the revolving door system with ease, while justice never seems to get done. Police are getting ambushed on a regular basis. Mayor Adams is doing something about it.

Back when Rudy Giuliani was mayor in charge of the city, he implemented a “Broken Windows” theory of policing. The phrase is meant as “a metaphor for urban decline.” When a building’s broken window isn’t repaired, it “soon leads to the other windows being broken and more disorderly conduct.

As Giuliani’s police commissioner William Bratton and George Kelling, the father of Broken Windows theory write, “a neighborhood where minor offenses go unchallenged soon becomes a breeding ground for more serious criminal activity and, ultimately, violence.

Decriminalizing crime

For years, liberal progressives have been decriminalizing crimes one by one. Then they defunded the police out of existence. Citizens not yet ready to try do it yourself justice elected Mayor Adams, begging him to put a stop to “public urination, public drinking, littering, and subway turnstile jumping.” De Blasio had legalized all those things.

Now shoplifting is being decriminalized in liberal jurisdictions, too. Along with incidents of harassment, menacing and petty theft. Not to mention the looting and actual breaking of windows as fallout from those justice for George Floyd peaceful protests.

Mayor Adams had a solution. A “refreshed version of the successful but controversial NYPD anti-crime unit, which was disbanded in 2020.” Each six-member team “will aggressively tackle gun crime in New York.

Around 170 are on the street already, “focusing on high crime areas.” Adams wants to get bail laws back on track and “crackdown on transit crime with an increased police presence in the subways.

The first of Mayor Adams’ new units made “a first arrest just two hours into the first patrol — an alleged member of the Bloods crime gang with a loaded 9mm handgun.

By the end of the very first week, the units “had arrested thirty more suspects and taken ten illegal guns off the streets.” Someone needs to mail them some donuts.

Source

Faced With The Horrific Results Of Their Ideas, Leftists Are Backpedaling With All Their Might

Faced With The Horrific Results Of Their Ideas, Leftists Are Backpedaling With All Their Might
homeless

It would appear that leftists don’t actually like a lot of the radical policies they have been advocating for since the beginning of the lockdowns and the death of George Floyd in spring 2020. From homelessness to crime to Covid policies, the left is backtracking on much of its platform in the face of disastrous results and frustration from rank-and-file liberals. Recent developments in our nation’s capital provide some of the most dramatic examples. 

Cities across the country are taking a more aggressive stance on homeless encampments in response to residents’ complaints, including Washington, D.C. An early February poll conducted by The Washington Post found that three-fourths of Washingtonians support the district’s plan to clear the camps of homeless persons that now proliferate across the city.

That the American Civil Liberties Union and even some D.C. council members oppose Mayor Muriel E. Bowser’s cleanups have not stopped their enforcement. Bowser has quite a mandate for this: the number of city residents who want these camps cleared does not substantially change based on respondents’ race, and is above 70 percent for white, black, Hispanic, and Asian residents.

That the district is pursuing this policy with substantial local support is a bit ironic, given that so many prominent leftist organizations, local leftist leaders, and Democratic politicians have been trying for more than a year to protect these encampments. This included Ann Marie Staudenmaier, wife of Maryland gubernatorial candidate Tom Perez, who last year advocated for homeless camps in the district to be permitted and protected. “Don’t evict them from the only place that they have to call home,” she urged.

Perhaps it has something to do with how large numbers of homeless persons affect the cleanliness, security, and attraction of neighborhoods. A separate recent WaPo article cited residents who noted homeless persons in the camp have harassed them. One D.C. resident said downtown is “not pleasant” and that the ubiquity of the encampments threatens the security of local residents.

Although many on the left would likely grimace to say it, national trends on curbing these camps indicate a significant percentage of the rest of America feels the same way.

Refunding the Police

Mayors of America’s largest cities, once responsive to calls to defund the police, have done a dramatic reversal in response to local frustration with higher crime rates. Now “refund the police” has become the cry of many liberal residents.

In D.C., residents’ opinions on crime and police have experienced this shift, given increased crime and murder rates in the city since 2020. According to a recent WaPo poll, a sizable majority (59 percent) now agree that increasing the number of police officers patrolling communities would reduce the amount of violent crime in D.C.

“The share of Washingtonians who say they are not safe from crime has risen to 30 percent this year from 22 percent in November 2019 and is the highest in more than two decades of Post polls,” reports the WaPo.

This is quite a change from the “defund the police” initiatives city residents — and various activist groups — so loudly endorsed after the death of George Floyd. The D.C. government in 2020 supported measures in June 2022 to cut $15 million from the police department budget. At the time, the police chief warned this could lead to the loss of hundreds of officers and that underfunding training and equipment might result in officers using more excessive force.

Thankfully, D.C. is not alone in wanting to refund the police. As NBC reported in February, Democratic politicians are calling the “defund the police” movement “dead” and mayors in San Francisco, New York, and Chicago are “moving to increase police budgets and end ‘the reign of criminals.’”

Surrendering to Pandemic Fatigue

Democratic states are also ending many Covid restrictions in the face of rising complaints from their constituents. Consider D.C. Mayor Bowser’s mid-February announcement that she would lift the city’s vaccine requirement for businesses and “dial back” the city’s indoor mask rules. This announcement followed a number of states — including many governed by Democrats — that have also eased their restrictions as polls come back showing their rising unpopularity. Now D.C.’s party scene is “returning to normal,” reports the WaPo, even though coronavirus case counts in and around Washington remain “high.”

This is a remarkable and speedy shift, especially considering D.C. had some of the most strict Covid restrictions in the country. Perhaps the District’s dramatic about-face has something to do with widespread annoyance with pandemic restrictions, even among liberal voters. Perhaps it results from the rising tide of Democratic politicians listening to their constituencies despite “public health guidance” claiming the country is moving too fast in loosening the rules. 

Perhaps all of these changes also relate to the fact that the District of Columbia is no longer experiencing the population boom and gentrification that have defined the last couple of decades. The capital’s population declined by 2.9 percent from 2020 to 2021, according to the Census Bureau. Living in an increasingly dangerous, filthy nanny-city is apparently not that appealing, even to the District’s majority leftist population. This has been part of a broader national trend as people across the nation in 2021 left Democratic-run states.

Mugged by Reality

To borrow a phrase from the late Irving Kristol, D.C. residents (and liberals across the country) have been mugged by reality — and in some cases actually mugged. Perhaps living in a lefty utopia where the homeless camp wherever they like, undisturbed by a defunded police force, with fickle and irrational health-related restrictions isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be.

Democrat D.C. residents, like the rest of Americans, don’t actually like their public spaces overrun by homeless persons, their neighborhoods suffering increased violent crime rates, or their cities stuck in a cycle of never-ending draconian public safety regulations.

What this all means is that, thankfully, certain activist narratives that threatened all Americans have lost considerable steam. It also means these policies are likely political liabilities in upcoming elections. Perhaps it also shows there are certain things that all Americans can still agree on.


Casey Chalk is a senior contributor at The Federalist and an editor and columnist at The New Oxford Review. He has a bachelor’s in history and master’s in teaching from the University of Virginia and a master’s in theology from Christendom College. He is the author of The Persecuted: True Stories of Courageous Christians Living Their Faith in Muslim Lands.

Source

Let’s Talk About Mekhi Speed, Amir Locke’s ‘Violent’ Cousin Who Is Directly Related To Locke’s Death

Let’s Talk About Mekhi Speed, Amir Locke’s ‘Violent’ Cousin Who Is Directly Related To Locke’s Death

The Washington Post has so far run three pieces in its opinion pages this month on the “wrongful” death of “innocent” Amir Locke, a 22-year-old black man. But not a single one of them references the name Mekhi Speed, Locke’s 17-year-old cousin.

That’s strange. Given that Speed is directly related to Locke’s fatal run-in with police, you’d think the people at the Post might find him worth mentioning, at least in passing.

A Hennepin County, Minn., judge last week unsealed search warrants related to the pre-dawn home raid that resulted in the shooting death of Locke. As authorities had stated, Locke isn’t named in the warrants that authorized the “no-knock” entry of three separate units in one apartment building.

Locked happened to be in one of those units, which building security said was accessible to Speed after he had asked for a key fob. Speed’s brother, Marlon, lived in that unit with his girlfriend and Mekhi had recently been inside, though he lived in one of the other apartments with his mother.

The police raid was conducted for the purpose of collecting evidence and potentially apprehending Speed, who was wanted for allegedly robbing, shooting, and killing 38-year-old Otis Elder in nearby St. Paul, Minn. A witness on the phone with Elder said he believed that Elder was in the process of a drug deal when he was shot.

Speed, who was already on probation for a separate shooting incident, was only one suspect wanted in relation to the killing of Elder. Another suspect wanted by authorities lived in the same apartment complex. According to police, both parties “have been actively involved in numerous crimes throughout the metro since at least November 2021, to include robberies, firearm incidents, and fleeing the police in a motor vehicle. A criminal history review of the known suspects in this homicide revealed that they have a history of violent crimes.”

In short order, everyone on scene the day of that deadly police raid seems to have been closely associated with a violent thief suspected of murder, as well as his accomplices. That doesn’t make them guilty, but it certainly raises questions about the circumstances that some writers at The Washington Post aren’t interested in exploring.

Police body camera footage from the raid shows cops using a key to unlock the entrance door of the unit where Locke was sleeping on a couch in the living area. Within 10 seconds, police descended on Locke, who emerges from underneath a blanket with a gun, before fatally shooting him three times.

Contrary to the padlock-shut media narrative that Amir Locke was a completely innocent casualty of a racially tinged police raid gone wrong, we actually have no idea yet if he was implicated in the homicide or any other one of Speed’s wrongdoings. It’s true that Locke wasn’t named in the search warrants, but that only relates to the Minneapolis police department’s search of the apartment complex.

The investigation is actually being conducted by Saint Paul. A spokesman for the city’s police confirmed with me Tuesday that that probe is ongoing and that all of its findings haven’t yet been made public, including in what capacity, if any, Locke was involved.

Will it turn out that Locke had nothing to do with Speed and was ultimately the innocent victim of a cosmic screw-up by law enforcement? Maybe! Is it possible, instead, that Locke knew exactly what he was getting into when he chose to stay at the home of his cousin, whose brother was wanted for murder? We don’t know.

The problem is that some people at The Washington Post, married to a fake narrative about police hunting down black people, are pretending they already do.


Source

error

Please help truthPeep spread the word :)