Democrats want to remove “Equality” from Justice

I bet you though the Justice System meant that all people, regardless of color or gender were treated equally.  Remember Ted Kennedy KILLED a woman in his car after an accident he abandoned her, did not try to get help and she died.  But Kyle Rittenhouse defended himself, as the videos clearly showed and the government went after him with lies, holding back information and smearing him.

“Lady Justice would be ashamed at the American double standard brought by the Democrats.  Stephen Bannon, a former advisor to President Trump, was recently indicted for Contempt of Congress, when he failed to show up for the Democrats’ political theater of a show.   While I personally believe all should abide by subpoenas for a hearing, there were no charges against Democrats such as Eric Holder, Janet Reno, or Lois Lerner, the last using the IRS to personally target conservative organizations.  Lady Justice has the blindfold on because if there is a standard for one, then there should be a standard for all.

For years, we heard of Trump-Russian collusion and wasted millions on the Mueller Investigation.  Now, it has been revealed through the Durham Investigation that Russian National, Igor Danchenko was indicted as a source of the origins of discredited conspiracy story of Trump-Russian collusion, along with others, including lawyer Michael Sussmann, who was tied to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Why isn’t Eric Holder in jail?  Why hasn’t Hillary been indicted for election fraud and corruption?  Equal Justice—not in America as long as Democrats make law enforcement an extension of their political campaigns.

Democrats want to remove “Equality” from Justice

Frank Aquila,  11/19/21 

Lady Justice is a symbol of a woman standing holding two scales in her hand while blindfolded.  This symbol is to reference being blinded to have no bias between a defendant or the plaintiff; but only to judge by the weight of evidence on the scales to determine one’s innocence or guilt.  Unfortunately, Democrats have tried to remove the blindfold of Lady Justice with media bias and persuasion to tip a judgment in their favor through racism, hatred, or political views.

In the Kyle Rittenhouse case, Biden, the Democrats, with their media lapdogs painted Rittenhouse as a “White Supremacist”.  I had to verify for myself, who did Rittenhouse kill in “self-defense”?  He shot three white men, part of Antifa, who were attacking him!!  He never even shot or killed anyone of color and even if he did, why do the Democrats and their media lapdogs use “White Supremacy”?  They do it to politically divide America to gander racism with emotions for their own political gain.  The irony is that Biden can call a 17 year old boy a “White Supremacist” with no proof while having his own history of relations with actual “White Supremacists”.  Biden actually did the eulogy for Robert “KKK” Byrd, the former Democrat Majority Leader of the U.S. Senate, who was not only a member of the KKK; but a Grand Kleagle, a recruiter for the KKK, and opposed every policy befitting Black America.  Biden referred to Byrd as his mentor and “dear friend”.

While Rittenhouse was subject to false and harmful claims by the Democrats and media, there was a disconnect between the truth and the narrative and defamation of their own prejudice they tried to present through Fake News calling him a “white supremacist”, “domestic terrorist” and a “murderer”.  In the end, a jury was fortunately not persuaded by the Democrat-media lies and instead saw the facts that this young 18 year old man, who could have been sent to prison for the rest of his life, did, in fact, use “self-defense” and therefore was found, “Not Guilty”

Lady Justice prevailed with Rittenhouse and also for another “Not Guilty” verdict that occurred on November 19, 2021 when a jury found Andrew “AJ” Coffee IV of Florida, “Not Guilty” of “self defense”.  Coffee didn’t fit the media’s profile because he is black and therefore, this story was ignored.

Everyday there is countless black on black murder across the country, especially in Chicago and other Democrat run cities.  The hypocrisy that no one will report on the many black on black murders; but to have a white boy like Rittenhouse, who shot and killed other white men in self-defense, is painted as a racist, white supremacist is unimaginable, except in the mind of racist Democrats and their Fact News media lapdogs.

Lady Justice would be ashamed at the American double standard brought by the Democrats.  Stephen Bannon, a former advisor to President Trump, was recently indicted for Contempt of Congress, when he failed to show up for the Democrats’ political theater of a show.   While I personally believe all should abide by subpoenas for a hearing, there were no charges against Democrats such as Eric Holder, Janet Reno, or Lois Lerner, the last using the IRS to personally target conservative organizations.  Lady Justice has the blindfold on because if there is a standard for one, then there should be a standard for all.

For years, we heard of Trump-Russian collusion and wasted millions on the Mueller Investigation.  Now, it has been revealed through the Durham Investigation that Russian National, Igor Danchenko was indicted as a source of the origins of discredited conspiracy story of Trump-Russian collusion, along with others, including lawyer Michael Sussmann, who was tied to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

The Democrats shamefully voted to impeach President Trump for Russian collusion, which the Durham Investigation has revealed to be a hoax supported by the Democrat Party and Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign that weaponized the FBI, DOJ, and other Washington agencies for their political ambitions. 

The Democrats with their media lapdogs will lie about a 17 year old boy who defended himself against a mob and lie about hoax against President Trump.  They sought charges only based on hate and a double standard. 

God help America if the day comes where Democrats remove the blindfold from Lady Justice to persuade her to remove equality and justice and to only sentence those the Democrats hate based on lies of their own persuasion rather than the evidence of facts.

Hillary Clinton, “It’s a good thing that someone with the temperament of Donald Trump is not in charge of the law in our country.”  Donald Trump, “Because you’d be in jail.”

Frank Aquila is president of the San Joaquin Stanislaus Conservative Patriots and author of the book, “Sarah Palin Out of Nowhere.  He can be emailed at [email protected]

Colman: MAKE KYLE RITTENHOUSE HEAD OF THE FBI

The FBI is now a worthless political operation based on bias, hate and politics—the law be damned.  If the leadership of the FBI does not like you—or you become a political threat to the Democrats, they will harass you, frame you and smear you.  It is now a Mafia like organization.  It can no longer be trusted in the world of law enforcement.

soft on crime.  Hoover died in office in May 1972.

America needs a real “mensch” to run the FBI.  So why not make Kyle Rittenhouse the head FBI person?  “Mensch” is a German or Yiddish word that can mean “a real man.”

On Fri., Nov. 19, 2021, Rittenhouse was acquitted, in a Wisconsin court, of several counts of murder.  The Wisconsin jury concluded that Rittenhouse was acting to defend himself.

But Rittenhouse needs to be careful—some socialist members of Congress, registered Democrat now want the FBI to investigate him. That would be like having Bernie Maddow in charge of the Treasury Department.

MAKE KYLE RITTENHOUSE HEAD OF THE FBI

By Richard Colman, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views,  11/24/21 

With all these murderous thugs roaming the streets of America, the nation needs a tough guy to run the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The FBI doesn’t need some soft-headed bureaucrat running the show.

Even the notorious J. Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI for 48 years, was too soft on crime.  Hoover died in office in May 1972.

America needs a real “mensch” to run the FBI.  So why not make Kyle Rittenhouse the head FBI person?  “Mensch” is a German or Yiddish word that can mean “a real man.”

On Fri., Nov. 19, 2021, Rittenhouse was acquitted, in a Wisconsin court, of several counts of murder.  The Wisconsin jury concluded that Rittenhouse was acting to defend himself.

During a civic disturbance in Wisconsin in August 2020, Rittenhouse killed two people and injured another.

There is too much looting and murder taking place in the United States.  No one is safe.

In Walnut Creek, California, on Sat., Nov. 20, 2021, about 25 cars — in a planned attack — surrounded Nordstrom’s department store and looted store of thousands of dollars of merchandise.  Most of the 80 suspects got away. 

Walnut Creek is an affluent suburb east of San Francisco.  Nordstrom’s carries expensive merchandise.

In other cities (like San Francisco, California, and Portland, Oregon), looters have been attacking drug stores and other retail establishments, stealing thousands of dollars of goods.

Rittenhouse, with his ability to fight crime, would make an excellent choice to head the FBI.

To help his sagging poll numbers, President Joe Biden should fire the current head of the FBI and install Rittenhouse as the replacement.

Failure of Biden to act will mean that crime pays.

Study finds rampant grade inflation is driving up graduation rates

A degree from UCLA, USC or Cal Poly today is worth about half of what it was a few years ago.  Government had decided, and even private colleges agreed, that giving a diploma was more important than earning a diploma.  To make sure more students “graduated” they lowered the standards.  Now we have kids with diploma’s from world class campuses that can not think for themselves, no understanding of history and believe that government is the road to prosperity, not hard work or creativity.

“The study’s authors say that government incentives may be partially to blame for grade inflation. They write, “As schools and departments face increased scrutiny and, in some cases, increased funding incentives, they may respond by increasing graduation rates. Changing standards of degree receipt is a low-cost way to increase graduation rates. And in fact, graduation rates increased sharply at public four-year schools and community colleges, which rely on tax dollars and can be affected by states’ performance-based funding rules.”

Campus Reform has covered how colleges and even individual academics have accelerated a decline in academic standards. In April, the University of Pittsburgh introduced a new “G” grade that allowed professors to give students a passing grade even if they had not turned in all required coursework. In 2019, Arizona State University associate dean Asao Inoue argued in his book that “Grading, because it requires a single, dominant standard, is a racist and White supremacist practice.” Last year, a gender studies professor at the University of California-Riverside announced that he canceled the course’s final exam and would give every student a 100 grade instead.

Yes, a diploma from UC Riverside is as valuable as a roll of Charmin toilet paper. 

Study finds rampant grade inflation is driving up graduation rates

graduation cap diploma isolated on a white background

The study found that grades and graduation rates have risen over time even when other markers of learning remained constant. Researchers wrote that government policies that reward colleges for higher graduation rates may be causing grade inflation.

Campus Reform,  11/20/21  

NNew study by researchers from Brigham Young University, the University of Illinois, and Stanford University found widespread grade inflation in higher education leading to higher graduation rates. Researchers found that, according to four data sources that date back as far as 1988, grade point averages and graduation rates have risen significantly compared to other measures of learning, such as test scores. 

Researchers examined data from longitudinal studies of students who were in eighth grade in 1988 and students who were in tenth grade in 2002. They found, “11 percent more first-year college students have a GPA above a 2.0 in the 2002 sample compared to the 1988 sample.” The researchers accounted for other possible factors that may have influenced the increase in average GPA, such as parents’ level of income and education, race, gender, and math scores, but found “none…change the effect of GPA substantively.” 

The researchers also examined data from nine large public universities between 1990 and 2000. They found that “entering one year later is associated with an increase of 0.019 in first-year GPA.” Even when controlling for demographic factors and other attributes that may be related to a person’s academic standing, such as which courses they took and their SAT score, researchers found that factors other than grade inflation only accounted for roughly a quarter of the increase in grades.

The study also examined data from a public liberal arts university, which the authors do not name. This college was chosen because, from 2001 to 2012, it “required the same core courses and nearly identical end-of-course exams.” Researchers found that, over time, exam scores stayed around the same, but grades rose, and so did the school’s graduation rate. 

The study’s authors say that government incentives may be partially to blame for grade inflation. They write, “As schools and departments face increased scrutiny and, in some cases, increased funding incentives, they may respond by increasing graduation rates. Changing standards of degree receipt is a low-cost way to increase graduation rates. And in fact, graduation rates increased sharply at public four-year schools and community colleges, which rely on tax dollars and can be affected by states’ performance-based funding rules.”

Campus Reform has covered how colleges and even individual academics have accelerated a decline in academic standards. In April, the University of Pittsburgh introduced a new “G” grade that allowed professors to give students a passing grade even if they had not turned in all required coursework. In 2019, Arizona State University associate dean Asao Inoue argued in his book that “Grading, because it requires a single, dominant standard, is a racist and White supremacist practice.” Last year, a gender studies professor at the University of California-Riverside announced that he canceled the course’s final exam and would give every student a 100 grade instead.

Such practices have also reached K-12 schools, such as in Oregon, where students are no longer required to demonstrate proficiency in reading and math in order to graduate from high school. 

Oakland Athletics putting feelers out for move to Las Vegas

Tesla and Toyota have left California.  Amgen is building a new manufacturing plant, in Ohio.  Charles Schwab has left California.  The Oakland Raiders have left California.  Now the Oakland A’s baseball team is looking to join the Raiders in Las Vegas.

“It’s no secret at this point that the Oakland Athletics have been eyeing a move to Las Vegas for the franchise as their attempts to come to an agreement on a new stadium deal in their current home have been unfruitful.

Things have clearly been progressing towards a move to Sin City for the A’s, so much so that it’s been reported that the organization is set to announce a group of finalists for locations that would host a new stadium in Las Vegas after the World Series concludes.

With all of these firms and hundreds more fleeing California, Sacramento Democrats still do not understand they are the cause of the loss of jobs, families and revenues.  The ball players will be happy—each will get a 13% pay raise by having the Team move from the highest taxed State in the nation to a State without income taxes—and significantly lower housing costs.

Oakland Athletics putting feelers out for move to Las Vegas

by Cody Williams, Fansided,  11/1/21  

The Oakland Athletics have made it known they’re willing to relocate the franchise and they’re now putting out feelers to fans in Las Vegas.

It’s no secret at this point that the Oakland Athletics have been eyeing a move to Las Vegas for the franchise as their attempts to come to an agreement on a new stadium deal in their current home have been unfruitful.

Things have clearly been progressing towards a move to Sin City for the A’s, so much so that it’s been reported that the organization is set to announce a group of finalists for locations that would host a new stadium in Las Vegas after the World Series concludes.

But if that wasn’t clear enough that the A’s could very seriously be leaving Oakland soon enough, the franchise recently sent out surveys to fans of the Las Vegas Aviators, the club’s Triple-A affiliate, to gauge interest about the Athletics moving to Las Vegas.

Moving the Oakland Athletics to Las Vegas seems increasingly likely.

Becoming the Oakland Athletics in 1968, the franchise has resided in the Bay Area for 53 years since. Thus, a move to Las Vegas would certainly be a blow to long-time fans.

What might be an even bigger twist of the knife, though, is Las Vegas being the seemingly preferred destination. After all, the Oakland Raiders left their home in the same city for Nevada several years ago. The A’s would only be adding to that feeling of abandonment.

In terms of Las Vegas itself, though, the Raiders and Las Vegas Golden Knights in the NHL have thrived in the relatively untapped pro sports market, so it makes sense as to why the Athletics would be considering this move, especially if they’re able to get the new stadium they so desire.

Wait what? FDA wants 55 years to process FOIA request over vaccine data

The data that created the failed vaccines between the U.S. and Europe over 46,000 people have died who were fully vaccinated.  It is the belief of many that number is a low ball, since government is looking increasingly bad on every aspect of the COVID issue.  There is proof the government is scared of you finding out the fraud, lobbying and big money for the drug companies behind the failed and dangerous vaccines.

“- Freedom of Information Act requests are rarely speedy, but when a group of scientists asked the federal government to share the data it relied upon in licensing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, the response went beyond typical bureaucratic foot-dragging.

As in 55 years beyond.

That’s how long the Food & Drug Administration in court papers this week proposes it should be given to review and release the trove of vaccine-related documents responsive to the request. If a federal judge in Texas agrees, plaintiffs Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency can expect to see the full record in 2076.

This is not about national security, or formula’s, corporate espionage.  The only reason you refuse to full release the vaccine data now—and want to wait 55 years, is that you are hiding something.  This is another reason to be skeptical about the vaccines.  Do not forget, they are not big on telling people about the heart and other problems caused by the drugs.  In most European nations Moderna is now BANNED for anybody under 30—that is how dangerous it is.

Wait what? FDA wants 55 years to process FOIA request over vaccine data

By Jenna Greene, Reuters, 11/18/21 

 (Reuters) – Freedom of Information Act requests are rarely speedy, but when a group of scientists asked the federal government to share the data it relied upon in licensing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine, the response went beyond typical bureaucratic foot-dragging.

As in 55 years beyond.

That’s how long the Food & Drug Administration in court papers this week proposes it should be given to review and release the trove of vaccine-related documents responsive to the request. If a federal judge in Texas agrees, plaintiffs Public Health and Medical Professionals for Transparency can expect to see the full record in 2076.

The 1967 FOIA law requires federal agencies to respond to information requests within 20 business days. However, the time it takes to actually get the documents “will vary depending on the complexity of the request and any backlog of requests already pending at the agency,” according to the government’s central FOIA website.

Justice Department lawyers representing the FDA note in court papers that the plaintiffs are seeking a huge amount of vaccine-related material – about 329,000 pages.

The plaintiffs, a group of more than 30 professors and scientists from universities including Yale, Harvard, UCLA and Brown, filed suit in September in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, seeking expedited access to the records. They say that releasing the information could help reassure vaccine skeptics that the shot is indeed “safe and effective and, thus, increase confidence in the Pfizer vaccine.”

But the FDA can’t simply turn the documents over wholesale. The records must be reviewed to redact “confidential business and trade secret information of Pfizer or BioNTech and personal privacy information of patients who participated in clinical trials,” wrote DOJ lawyers in a joint status report filed Monday.

The FDA proposes releasing 500 pages per month on a rolling basis, noting that the branch that would handle the review has only 10 employees and is currently processing about 400 other FOIA requests.

“By processing and making interim responses based on 500-page increments, FDA will be able to provide more pages to more requesters, thus avoiding a system where a few large requests monopolize finite processing resources and where fewer requesters’ requests are being fulfilled,” DOJ lawyers wrote, pointing to other court decisions where the 500-page-per-month schedule was upheld.

Civil division trial lawyer Courtney Enlow referred my request for further comment to the DOJ public affairs office, which did not respond.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers argue that their request should be top priority, and that the FDA should release all the material no later than March 3, 2022.

“This 108-day period is the same amount of time it took the FDA to review the responsive documents for the far more intricate task of licensing Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine,” wrote Aaron Siri of Siri & Glimstad in New York and John Howie of Howie Law in Dallas in court papers.

“The entire purpose of the FOIA is to assure government transparency,” they continued. “It is difficult to imagine a greater need for transparency than immediate disclosure of the documents relied upon by the FDA to license a product that is now being mandated to over 100 million Americans under penalty of losing their careers, their income, their military service status, and far worse.”

They also argue that Title 21, subchapter F of the FDA’s own regulations stipulates that the agency “is to make ‘immediately available’ all documents underlying licensure of a vaccine.”

Given the intense public interest in the vaccine, the plaintiffs’ lawyers say that the FDA “should have been preparing to release (the data) simultaneously with the licensure. Instead, it has done the opposite.”

Siri declined comment.

To meet the plaintiffs’ proposed FOIA deadline, the FDA would have to process a daunting 80,000 pages a month. But the plaintiffs note that the FDA has 18,000 employees and a budget of $6 billion and “has itself said that there is nothing more important than the licensure of this vaccine and being transparent about this vaccine.”

To be sure, most people — including many who sanctimoniously proclaim “I do my own research” — lack the expertise to evaluate the information.

But the plaintiffs, who also include overseas professors from the UK, Germany, Denmark, Australia and Canada, appear to be well-positioned to do so.

As Siri and Howe argue, “Reviewing this information will settle the ongoing public debate regarding the adequacy of the FDA’s review process.”

U.S. District Judge Mark Pittman has set a scheduling conference for December 14 in Fort Worth to consider the timeline for processing the documents.

Prosecutor who alleged retaliation from DA Gascón poised to get $800,000 settlement

LA DA does not care if he violates the rights of his employees.  When caught and large settlements are made, no a dime comes from his pocket.  Instead the taxpayers or insurance companies will pay for the settlements.

“The dispute arose after Doyle questioned Gascon’s order to drop charges against three anti-police protesters, all of whom had been charged with trying to derail a train by placing police barriers and other items on tracks near the Compton sheriff’s station on Nov. 15, Fox 11 Los Angeles reported.

The suspects had been charged with felony attempted train wrecking, a charge that could carry life without parole, as well as a lesser felony count of unlawful obstruction of a railroad track, which carries a two- to four-year sentence in county jail, according to the station.

On Dec. 8, just hours after Gascón was sworn in, Doyle said he got a phone call from Mario Trujillo, a close ally of Gascon who serves on his executive staff, instructing him to dismiss the charges, the station reported.”

You read that right.  The attempt to derail a rain according to the Soros created DA is no longer a criminal act.  What do you think?

Prosecutor who alleged retaliation from DA Gascón poised to get $800,000 settlement

Richard Doyle retired from the DA’s Office after he was deemed insubordinate for questioning a directive to drop charges against police protesters

By Scott Schwebke, Orange County Register, 11/19/21 

A former high-ranking prosecutor who alleges Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón retaliated against him for refusing to drop charges against three anti-police protesters accused of attempting to wreck a train in Compton is poised to receive an $800,000 settlement.

The Los Angeles County Claims Board agreed this week to recommend that the county Board of Supervisors issue the payout to Richard Doyle, a former head deputy district attorney in the Compton office who has since retired.

The Board of Supervisors is expected to vote on the recommendation next month.

Doyle could not be reached for comment Friday and his attorney, Alan Jackson, declined to discuss the terms of the settlement. The District Attorney’s Office did not comment.

Taxpayer forced to ‘foot the bill’

Eric Siddall, vice president of the Association of Deputy District Attorneys, which represents about 900 Los Angeles County prosecutors, said the pending settlement could have been avoided.

“Unfortunately, this is not the first time that the taxpayer has foot the bill for George Gascón’s retaliatory behavior,” he said. “San Francisco taxpayers paid $400,000 due to retaliation against a whistleblower concerned about Gascón violating federal law by carrying a gun on a plane. Now Los Angeles will pay $800,000 because of this case. How many more times will the taxpayers have to pay for Gascón’s calculated indiscretions?”

Doyle had a clean 34-year work history until December 2020, when Gascón — who had been in office for less than a week — deemed him insubordinate.

Refused to drop ‘viable prosecution’

The dispute arose after Doyle questioned Gascon’s order to drop charges against three anti-police protesters, all of whom had been charged with trying to derail a train by placing police barriers and other items on tracks near the Compton sheriff’s station on Nov. 15, Fox 11 Los Angeles reported.

The suspects had been charged with felony attempted train wrecking, a charge that could carry life without parole, as well as a lesser felony count of unlawful obstruction of a railroad track, which carries a two- to four-year sentence in county jail, according to the station.

On Dec. 8, just hours after Gascón was sworn in, Doyle said he got a phone call from Mario Trujillo, a close ally of Gascon who serves on his executive staff, instructing him to dismiss the charges, the station reported.

“I told him I’m not comfortable dismissing what I know to be a good case, a viable prosecution, without knowing the reason why, and he said, ‘Well, can you just dismiss it today and we’ll find out the reasons later?” Doyle told Fox 11. “And I said no.”

Trujillo dismissed the charges against the three defendants on behalf of Gascón.

Doyle told the television station that three weeks later he was transferred from the Compton office, where he supervised 66 people, to the smaller environmental crimes division, further from his home, where he managed a staff of nine.

Others allege retaliation

In addition to Doyle, two other deputy district attorneys allege similar retaliation by Gascon and are suing for lost wages and other unspecified damages.

Shawn Randolph, former head deputy for the Juvenile Division, said in a lawsuit filed in July that Gascón transferred her to a “dead end” post in the Parole Division in downtown Los Angeles after she complained he had abolished the ability of prosecutors to file certain crimes against juveniles governed under California’s “three-strikes” law.

Lesley Klein Sonnenberg, who served as second-in-command of the Family Violence Division for five years, alleges she was denied a promotion in January to acting head deputy after she complained about Gascón’s policies.

Sonneberg  was, against her wishes, transferred to the Consumer Protections Division in downtown Los Angeles in retaliation for her refusal to carry out Gascón’s directives, her suit states.

“The Consumer Protection Division is also a dead-end position for plaintiff since she had no experience in civil law or in the civil courts,” her lawsuit states. “Plaintiff was transferred into a position in which she was literally a duck out of water. After decades of learning criminal law and procedure, and close to retirement, plaintiff is now in a position that she does not fully understand and at which she will certainly not excel.”

UC Davis ‘defunding’ police, touts endorsement of group ‘grounded’ in Obama task force

Students at UC Davis will shortly have no campus police to protect the, report rapes, thefts and other crimes.  It will now be as open from crime as nearby San Fran. But they will have social workers.

“The University of California, Davis has announced plans to undergo a “defunding” of its police department and will eliminate three vacant officer positions.

According to a UC Davis press release, the university announced it will reallocate funding from the three eliminated officer positions to new positions. The university also said three other officer positions have been “repurposed.”

The new positions are a “public safety policy analyst in student affairs; an analyst position to support data, accreditation and transparency efforts within the police department; and a new position dedicated to the Health 34  initiative.”

Anybody think a public safety analyst is the same as a cop with a gun protecting students.  If the analyst sees a crime will they challenge the criminal with a matrix, a study or a white paper on crime?  UC Davis will soon become a case study in how to grow and train the criminal class.

California university ‘defunding’ police, touts endorsement of group ‘grounded’ in Obama task force

UC Davis announced a “defunding” of its campus police department and will eliminate three vacant officer positions

By Adam Sabes | Fox News, 11/20/21  

Fox News Flash top headlines are here. Check out what’s clicking on Foxnews.com.

The University of California, Davis has announced plans to undergo a “defunding” of its police department and will eliminate three vacant officer positions.

According to a UC Davis press release, the university announced it will reallocate funding from the three eliminated officer positions to new positions. The university also said three other officer positions have been “repurposed.”

The new positions are a “public safety policy analyst in student affairs; an analyst position to support data, accreditation and transparency efforts within the police department; and a new position dedicated to the Health 34  initiative.”

The Health 34 initiative is a new program that trains fire personnel in mental health response in preparation for being dispatched to certain calls.

Three uniformed police officers will also be “repurposed” to focus more on “outreach, education and providing support to the UC Davis community in a non-traditional way.”

The university is adopting the changes as part of its response to multiple campus safety reviews dating to an incident in November 2011 when campus police officers pepper-sprayed student protesters.

In the press release, the university also announced it has earned accreditation from the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators, which “is grounded in President Barack Obama’s Task Force on 21st-Century Policing.”

While UC Davis has never received law enforcement gear from the federal government’s Law Enforcement Support Office, the university nonetheless changed its procurement policy, eliminating any participation in the program.

During a protest on Thursday hosted by the University of California, Davis “CopsOffCampus” group, protesters displayed a sign outside of the police department stating, “We will outlive policing.” The sign included a cardboard cutout of a pig surrounded by smoke.

The group also tweeted, “looks like some folks had fun on Thursday” and attached images of multiple vandalized university signs. 

One UC Davis student, who asked to remain anonymous, told Fox News that defunding the police isn’t a good idea.

“There is no reason at all to decrease the number of officers,” the student said. “One of the most important features of campus includes the police-run SafeRide system, which helps students get home when they’re drunk or feeling unsafe walking alone at night. In general, due to the amount of partying that takes place in a college town, police have to be active to deal with cases of alcohol poisoning.”

Kiley: The Rule of Law’s Collapse

In California you are allowed to steal up to $950 and at best you might get a ticket—and you do not need to even show up in court—no arrest warrant will be issued.  Better, if you loot whole stores and use a bunch of people, you get more stolen and less police pushback.

“For 20 months we’ve fought to keep the spark of self-government alive. It’s starting to pay off. Monday’s rally against Newsom’s student mandate drew 2,500 people, and dozens more school districts have written letters or resolutions opposing it.

Even a Democrat legislator just agreed to introduce a bill to reinforce the personal belief exemption. Granted, the Legislature remains largely useless; a dozen members are currently hobnobbing with lobbyists in Maui on an all-expenses-paid junket.

For the past almost two years California has been run by a one man band, under the guise of Executive Orders—even the legislature is no longer needed.  First Newsom threw out the Constitution.  Now it is the brute force of government controlling our families, health care, education and safety. Like China, the law is what the government says it is and no right to protest.

The Rule of Law’s Collapse

Protesters jump on a street sign near a burning barricade during a demonstration against the death of George Floyd near the White House on May 31, 2020 in Washington, DC. – Thousands of National Guard troops patrolled major US cities after five consecutive nights of protests over racism and police brutality that boiled over into arson and looting, sending shock waves through the country. The death Monday of an unarmed black man, George Floyd, at the hands of police in Minneapolis ignited this latest wave of outrage in the US over law enforcement’s repeated use of lethal force against African Americans — this one like others before captured on cellphone video. (Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT / AFP) (Photo by ROBERTO SCHMIDT/AFP via Getty Images)

Assemblyman Kevin Kiley,  11/22/21 

Newsom’s Health Secretary, Dr. Ghaly, just admitted there are no metrics for ending the State of Emergency. He added that even if it does end, Newsom will keep mask and vaccine mandates in place. The rule of law is officially a thing of the past.

Newsom’s disdain for the rule of law was clear after yesterday’s Rittenhouse verdict. He immediately attacked the jury. Ordinary citizens reaching a decision based on evidence – the design of our Founders – goes against everything he stands for.

In our trial against Newsom, the rule of law was the theme of my opening statement:

From this comes the most basic form of freedom – freedom from the arbitrary dominion and control of another. It’s what gives life to the premise that we as citizens are not mere subjects of state power but authors of our own political destiny. It’s what makes possible the great American experiment of self-government.

For 20 months we’ve fought to keep the spark of self-government alive. It’s starting to pay off. Monday’s rally against Newsom’s student mandate drew 2,500 people, and dozens more school districts have written letters or resolutions opposing it.

Even a Democrat legislator just agreed to introduce a bill to reinforce the personal belief exemption. Granted, the Legislature remains largely useless; a dozen members are currently hobnobbing with lobbyists in Maui on an all-expenses-paid junket.

That’s why we’ve taken matters into our own hands. Last year our institutions fell apart, and this year has been a horrifying version of Groundhog’s Day. But we can now write a very different story: restoring the rule of law, renewing the meaning of We the People.

If the Vaccines Work, Why Aren’t They Working?

In Europe, the official EU agency has found over 30,000 deaths of people fully vaccinated.  In the United States, as of a few weeks ago, the CDC admits to over 16,000 deaths of those fully vaccinated.  As best can be told NO drug is allowed to be on the market with this level of failure.  Only because the politicians  want them and the drug companies have great lobbyists—whole social media censures and bans those that use government data to prove the vaccine is virtually worthless, are these drugs still allowed.

“In the movie Moneyball, Oakland Athletics general manager Billy Beane queries his team of scouts when discussing a prospective player, “If he’s a good hitter, why doesn’t he hit good?” The scouts all have solid explanations, at least in their minds, of why a prospect might be a good hitter, from the sound of the crack of the bat when they hit the ball to the player’s good looks.

These explain why the player should be a good hitter, but what if the numbers, from batting average to on-base percentage, tell a different story? The question Billy poses is obvious in its simplicity, good hitters should hit good. And if they don’t, then perhaps they are not really good hitters.

What if we ask the same question about COVID vaccines, rephrased as “If the vaccines work, why aren’t they working?”

Bring back common sense and facts.

If the Vaccines Work, Why Aren’t They Working?

By Brian C. Joondeph, M.D., American Thinker, 11/22/21 

In the movie Moneyball, Oakland Athletics general manager Billy Beane queries his team of scouts when discussing a prospective player, “If he’s a good hitter, why doesn’t he hit good?” The scouts all have solid explanations, at least in their minds, of why a prospect might be a good hitter, from the sound of the crack of the bat when they hit the ball to the player’s good looks.

These explain why the player should be a good hitter, but what if the numbers, from batting average to on-base percentage, tell a different story? The question Billy poses is obvious in its simplicity, good hitters should hit good. And if they don’t, then perhaps they are not really good hitters.

What if we ask the same question about COVID vaccines, rephrased as “If the vaccines work, why aren’t they working?”

This is the time when I must add the necessary disclaimer that I am not anti-vaccine, having been personally fully vaccinated almost a year ago. Nor am I offering medical advice, only an analysis of current news of COVID cases rising in many highly vaccinated locales, seemingly against common sense.

Some readers have asked why such a disclaimer is necessary. I am a practicing physician, although I don’t treat COVID patients, administer vaccines, or offer medical advice regarding COVID to my retina patients. But today, just having an opinion can be hazardous to one’s livelihood.

The American Federation of Medical Specialists makes it clear, “Physicians who generate and spread COVID-19 vaccine misinformation or disinformation are risking disciplinary action by state medical boards, including the suspension or revocation of their medical license.”

Hopefully asking thoughtful questions and observing how the medical authorities like Dr. Anthony Fauci have changed their own positions on vaccines is not considered “misinformation.” Or that citing the CDC and major news organizations won’t be considered “disinformation.” In the 1950s, x-raying pregnant women was standard practice, and questioning that harmful procedure, were such a thing to be done in the 1950s with today’s climate now might be considered mis- or disinformation.

If you think such medical censorship is all conspiracy theory, ask Dr. Mary Bowden, a Houston ear, nose, and throat specialist suspended from her Houston hospital for tweeting about vaccine mandates and ivermectin.

Back to COVID vaccines. The CDC website states, “COVID-19 vaccines are safe, effective, and free.” Those three words are all relative. Let’s quickly unpack them.

VAERS is the “Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.” From their website, one can compare adverse events from COVID vaccines from the past 11 months they have been available to adverse events from all vaccines for the past 30 years, 1990 and onward.

Note this is 11 months versus 30 years of side effects and in most categories, the cumulative cases are similar between the two groups, despite a 30-fold time difference of data recording. Of note, hospitalizations, deaths, permanent disabilities, and birth defects were greater for 11 months of COVID vaccines than they were for 30 years of all other types of vaccines – such as shingles, influenza, measles, mumps, hepatitis, and so on.

VAERS is voluntary reporting. For a variety of reasons, all cases do not make it to the VAERS database. How much is this underreporting? VAERS did their own analysis about ten years ago and found, “Fewer than 1% of vaccine adverse events are reported.” Their words, not mine.

This means adverse events could be happening far more frequently than what we are being told by the corporate media who don’t even report VAERS’s current data. What if these adverse events are 10 or even 100 times more common than VAERS reports? To paraphrase Billy Beane, “If the vaccines are safe, why aren’t they safe?”

Are they effective? The CDC answers an emphatic yes,

COVID-19 study shows mRNA vaccines reduce risk of infection by 91 percent for fully vaccinated people. Vaccination makes illness milder, shorter for the few vaccinated people who do get COVID-19.

Does the real world agree and support the CDC’s optimism? Gibraltar is more than fully vaccinated, they are 118 percent vaccinated, meaning that many fully vaccinated have had booster injections too. Yet this headline doesn’t jive with CDC assertions, “Most vaccinated place on Earth told to cancel holiday plans amid an exponential rise in COVID cases.”

Pick another country: “93% vaccinated Ireland has gone into partial lockdown, including midnight curfew.” This recent headline too, “COVID surge in Singapore despite 80 percent vaccination.” Or from the U.K. where the Spectator reported, “The rates of Covid infection per 100,000 are now higher among the vaxxed than the unvaxxed.”

Closer to home it’s much the same, “Vermont has the highest vaccination rate in the country. So why are cases surging?” My home state of Colorado is singing from the same hymnal, “Colorado’s COVID hospitalizations jump again as virus’ statewide death toll surpasses 9,000.” Colorado’s 12 and up population is over 80 percent partially or fully vaccinated.

If these numbers are misinformation, tell that to big media. I am quoting their headlines. Will their licenses be threatened?

The CDC on its website claims, “Research provides evidence that COVID-19 vaccines are effective at preventing COVID-19.” Yet cases in highly vaccinated locations are surging, now almost two years into the COVID pandemic. As Billy Beane might say, “If the vaccines work, why aren’t they working?”

Last is the “free” claim. Nothing from the government is “free.” Recipients may not be charged but that is not the same as “free.” The government produces nothing and therefore is not able to offer anything for free. They confiscate money from those they lord over and redistribute it back to those from whom they took it.

The Pfizer vaccine costs the government about $20 per dose, with the other COVID vaccines in the same ballpark. Some 445 million doses of vaccine have been administered in the U.S. to date. That’s $9 billion right there. Spending on research and development has been estimated at $40 billion, pushing the total north of $50 billion, and likely much higher given the many hidden or non-transparent costs.

If these numbers seem off, major vaccine maker Pfizer expects $36 billion in COVID vaccine revenues in 2021, in the same range as the above numbers. While the vaccine may be free to the person getting jabbed, someone is paying the tab for the vaccine, syringe, and time of the person administering the shot. It always works that way – nothing is really “free.”  As Billy Beane might say, “If the vaccines are free, why do they cost so much?”

There is nothing wrong with the medical establishment saying, “we don’t know” or “we’re not sure” about COVID prognostications, rather than being cocksure about everything until reality turns their pronouncements upside down. Gaslighting the public, being wrong more than right, doesn’t engender confidence.

Those who preach “follow the science” seem to neither understand nor desire to actually follow the science, instead letting politics replace science with our COVID policies often not following the science.

Dr. Anthony Fauci acknowledged the new vaccine reality in a New York Times podcast last Nov. 12,

They are seeing a waning of immunity not only against infection but against hospitalization and to some extent death, which is starting to now involve all age groups. It isn’t just the elderly.

When others observe and acknowledge this reality, they are ostracized and shamed. How long has Dr. Fauci known this? Last May, the CDC said that once vaccinated, you can return to a normal life. How is that working out?

Instead of transparency, we see this, “FDA wants 55 years to process FOIA request over vaccine data.” Is this, “part of the FDA’s commitment to transparency” as the FDA itself claims? This is the same FDA that took only 108 days to review Pfizer’s clinical trial data, deeming it safe and effective enough for FDA approval. But for the public, the FDA needs 20,000 days to “review” the same data before public release.

The published concept of “imperfect vaccinations enhancing the transmission of highly virulent pathogens,” meaning that vaccinating during a pandemic can create new vaccine-resistant virus strains, is never discussed. Neither are off-label therapeutics that while not a panacea, may save lives. Instead, the government and medical establishment balkanized the world, vaccinated versus unvaccinated, us versus them, the worthy versus the lepers, creating further division in an already divided society.

Despite the shaming and ridicule, here we are, almost two years into the COVID pandemic, with a mostly vaccinated population, and hospitals and ICUs are overrun with COVID cases. This pandemic should be in the rearview mirror, yet in some respects, it is bad as it was last year. Leaving Billy Beane to ask, “If the vaccines work, why aren’t they working?”

California’s Alarming Cocktail of Criminal Justice ‘Reforms’ Responsible for Major Crime Wave

Malls, drug stores, high end and inexpensive stores are being invaded.  In most cases no arrests. It took a $40,000 heist to get the cops to start making arrests. Los Angeles has a 47% crime increase and San Fran is about as bad.  Want to roller coaster ride, go to Disneyland.  Want to be a crime victim, come to California.

““California has implemented an alarming cocktail of criminal justice ‘reforms’ that are likely to lead to a major crime wave into 2016,” I wrote in the chapter on crime in James Lacy‘s Taxifornia 2016, for which I interviewed Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert. She was instrumental in providing confirmation about the rising crime rate in Sacramento and California. I wrote:

“In 2014, California voters were sold on reforming the state’s drug laws with Proposition 47. However, the measure covered more crimes than non-violent drug offenders. Moreover, drug addicts are likely to get less treatment in the state’s drug courts because prosecutors have lost a bargaining chip in the plea process. Add to it the court-ordered prisoner releases as a part of the state’s prison realignment under the 2011 AB 109 law, and you have a state ripe for a surge in crime; such as what is already underway in Oakland, which even after Jerry Brown’s eight years on-the-scene as Mayor, the FBI still considers one of the most dangerous cities in America.”

Like other crisis issues, crime is on the front burner because of government policies, rules and laws.  This is a suicide, not a murder.

California’s Alarming Cocktail of Criminal Justice ‘Reforms’ Responsible for Major Crime Wave

The house that Californians built and Democrats remodeled is on fire

By Katy Grimes, California Globe,  11/21/21   

This crime wave is also reflected in recent Globe articles about Walgreens announcing that five additional outlets in San Francisco would be closing on top of the 17 already shuttered just since 2019, as well as serious daily theft and crime troubles at the iconic Target on Mission Street between Third and Fourth Streets. “This store loses $25,000 a day to shoplifting,” an SFPD officer recently told the Globe in lengthy, taped interviews. “That’s $25,000 that walks out the door on average between 9 and 6 every day.”

California was once the land of opportunity and innovation. There was a time when nearly anyone with a good idea and work ethic could open a business. California led the nation in manufacturing – today there isn’t much manufacturing left in the state. California’s schools were once envied by the nation – today they rank at the bottom of the list of states. California agriculture has always provided for more than just our state, but even that is under attack. What made California great is systematically being destroyed.

Prison Realignment and Props. 47 & 57 – A Premeditated Crushing of California

The chickens have come home to roost.

“California has implemented an alarming cocktail of criminal justice ‘reforms’ that are likely to lead to a major crime wave into 2016,” I wrote in the chapter on crime in James Lacy‘s Taxifornia 2016, for which I interviewed Sacramento District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert. She was instrumental in providing confirmation about the rising crime rate in Sacramento and California. I wrote:

“In 2014, California voters were sold on reforming the state’s drug laws with Proposition 47. However, the measure covered more crimes than non-violent drug offenders. Moreover, drug addicts are likely to get less treatment in the state’s drug courts because prosecutors have lost a bargaining chip in the plea process. Add to it the court-ordered prisoner releases as a part of the state’s prison realignment under the 2011 AB 109 law, and you have a state ripe for a surge in crime; such as what is already underway in Oakland, which even after Jerry Brown’s eight years on-the-scene as Mayor, the FBI still considers one of the most dangerous cities in America.”

As the Globe has consistently and repeatedly reported, there were three big legal changes that fostered the anarchy, violence and chaos in California today.

Assembly Bill 109, in 2011, was then-Gov. Jerry Brown’s signature legislation he sold as “prison realignment.” However, AB 109 only served to overwhelm county jails by re-housing “nonviolent” state offenders from prison. AB 109 has been a failure. “Governor Brown had a choice. He could have built more prisons, but instead he reduced the population by releasing or pushing inmates to local county jails, which are not designed to house someone past a year and prevents law enforcement from taking low-level offenders in,” Ronald A. Lawrence, the Citrus Heights Chief of Police and President of the California Police Chiefs Association, told the Globe in 2020.

Proposition 47, passed by misinformed voters in 2014, flagrantly titled “The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act,” decriminalized drug possession from a felony to a misdemeanor, removing law enforcement’s ability to make an arrest in most circumstances, as well as removing judges’ ability to order drug rehabilitation programs rather than incarceration. And perhaps the most obvious aspect of Prop. 47 on display today raised the theft threshold to $950 per location, and bumped theft down to a misdemeanor from a felony.

Notably, U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) opposed Prop. 47, concerned that it would reclassify a wide range of crimes from a felony to a misdemeanor, and would result in the re-sentencing and release of thousands of individuals already convicted of these crimes. She was correct, as her concerns came to fruition.

Proposition 57, shamelessly titled “the Public Safety and Rehabilitation Act,” now allows nonviolent felons to qualify for early release, and parole boards can now only consider an inmate’s most recent charge, and not their entire history because of this proposition. Notably, both Prop. 47 and 57 were given their ballot titles by then-Attorney General Kamala Harris.

Crimes now considered “nonviolent” under Proposition 57 in California include:

  • human trafficking of a child
  • rape of an unconscious person or by intoxication
  • drive by shooting at inhabited dwelling or vehicle
  • assault with a firearm or deadly weapon
  • assault on a police officer
  • serial arson
  • exploding a bomb to injure people
  • solicitation to commit murder
  • assault from a caregiver to a child under eight years old that could result in a coma or death
  • felony domestic violence. 

Democrats even killed six real criminal justice reform bills in the California Legislature in 2019, which would have addressed Prop. 57’s flaws and expanded the definition of violent crime to include human trafficking, elder and dependent adult abuse, assault with a deadly weapon, rape, and other crimes most Californians consider violent.

Is it any wonder we see these headlines today?

Nearly all Democrat politicians in California supported Props. 47 and 57, and AB 109, despite the warnings from law enforcement, judges, parole boards, police and sheriffs, District Attorneys and Assistant DA’s.

California Officials who supported 2014 Proposition 47

Remember these politicians: Gov. Gavin Newsom, former Senate President and current Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg, former Oakland Mayor, California Attorney General and Gov. Jerry Brown, former Sen. President Don Perata, former Sen. President Kevin de Leon, former Senator and current Insurance Commissioner Ricardo Lara, former Assembly Speaker John Perez, former Assembly Speaker and current Rep. Karen Bass, former Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, Sen. President Toni Atkins, Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, Sen. Nancy Skinner, Sen. Scott Wiener, former Sen. Mark Leno, and former California Attorney General, former U.S. Senator and current Vice President Kamala Harris, all have a recent hand in destabilizing California with their felonious legislation and policies.

How can any of these politicians claim their criminal justice “reforms” are successful, unless today’s violent crime and anarchy was always the end goal?