Is San Francisco on Fire???
September 13, 2020 8:24pm
The above tweet from The New York Times is a good example of how the so-called "news" media engages in deceptive propaganda.
Where is that fire? Did you think San Francisco?
What bridge is that? Did you think Golden Gate Bridge?
The words in the tweet don't say where it is other than "the Bay Area in Northern California." So if you thought the fire was that close to San Francisco's Golden Gate Bridge, you would not be alone. And, based on that tweet, such a belief would not be unreasonable. But it would be false.
The bridge in this photo is the Bidwell Bar Bridge over Lake Oroville which is 162 MILES FROM SAN FRANCISCO! It's 78 miles north of Sacramento, which means it is nowhere near "the Bay Area in Northern California" as The New York Times described it.
Twitter allows 280 characters per tweet. That tweet used 177. The New York Times had 103 more characters it could have used to accurately report the bridge's (and thus the fire's) location. So, why didn't it? Because they wanted to deceive you! They knew the Bidwell Bar Bridge looks very similar to the Golden Gate Bridge. They knew a fire that close to San Francisco would be much more alarming than a fire in the relatively rural Butte County 162 miles away. They knew most people would not do any further reading to learn details. They knew people would be left with a false impression of the reality of California's fires. And that was their goal.
The tweet's deception was deliberate, disgusting, and disgraceful.
You can verify the accuracy of my post by viewing the original tweet at https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1303770185246150658
Why Does President Trump Love Pensacola?
September 8, 2020 6:05pm
At today's event in Jupiter, Florida, President Trump signed an order that prohibits oil drilling off the Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina coasts until at least 2032.
During his speech, he said of Pensacola, "As long as I’m president of the United States, we will conserve this wondrous national inheritance from Key West to Key Biscayne, from Tampa to Tallahassee, from the Pensacola, beautiful Pensacola, I love Pensacola. I think it was 97%, that’s one of the reasons I like it. They say, 'How’d you do in Pensacola?' I said, 'Was that maybe 95? 97?' Right up there, so that helps. It’s amazing how that can help, isn’t it?"
I assume the "97%," "95," and "97" were referring to the percentage of the vote he got from Pensacola in 2016.
His actual percentage of the vote in Pensacola's two-county MSA was 63.47%.
But I suppose it's still nice for our community to be loved by the President of the United States.
Kyle Rittenhouse Acted in Self-Defense
September 6, 2020 11:15am
If you have an opinion on the innocence or guilt of Kyle Rittenhouse but have not read the actual criminal complaint against him, then your opinion is meaningless. You're entitled to it, of course. This is America, so you're free to pull opinions out of your ass if you want to. But any opinion not based upon facts is worthless. And the so-called "news" media has not reported the facts. Even worse, the facts are being actively censored.
"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." - Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY)
Whether it was wise for Rittenhouse to be out that night in Kenosha is debatable. He certainly violated the curfew that had been imposed (as did the two decedents). And Rittenhouse might be guilty of carrying a firearm in public while under 18 years old (a misdemeanor). But even that charge may not stick if it is successfully argued that he had to flee the private property (where he was legal) to avoid being harmed by the rioters who assaulted him.
Joseph Rosenbaum, the first guy shot by Rittenhouse assaulted him in the car lot. Anthony Huber, the second guy shot by Rittenhouse had hit him in the head with a skateboard. And Gaige Grosskreutz, the third guy shot by Rittenhouse (but did not die) had a pistol in his hand as he attacked Rittenhouse.
The charges against Rittenhouse, which include the district attorney's detailed account of the three shootings, are viewable at https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/7047765-Kyle-Rittenhouse-Criminal-Complaint.html?fbclid=IwAR1DvVDMYuF99hUx6I5UYMUTTd-kTAY6VMjCQ6xDGxBEz93_oMU7Vgx9Pb8. Despite the document alleging First Degree Intentional Homicide and other crimes, what it describes is clearly lawful self-defense by Rittenhouse.
I am 100% certain Rittenhouse will not be convicted on any of the five felonies for which he's been charged. This prosecution/persecution is purely political. And that's disgraceful.
Don't take my word for any of this. Go read the district attorney's description of the incident, and make up your own mind. But I have an important question to ask; should my educated and informed opinion, which is based on my knowledge of the law and of what transpired that night, be censored from public view? Should the Stalinist censors at Facebook delete comments that explain why Rittenhouse's shootings were lawful self-defense?
That is exactly what Facebook has done with other posts that don't support the "Rittenhouse is a cold-blooded killer who went out that night hoping to murder somebody" narrative. Facebook, Inc. has concluded that Kyle Rittenhouse is a “mass murderer" (their words), and that any comments defending his actions must be removed from the social media platform. Is that really the role of Facebook or any corporation? To determine what people can and cannot say about an issue that is vitally important to this nation? Keep in mind that any posts denouncing him as a murderer remain intact. So this is all one-sided censorship.
Such censorship is a very dangerous threat to our Republic. I would say the same thing if Facebook was removing posts and comments that attack Rittenhouse and only permitting those in support of him to remain.
But it's not just Facebook. Twitter suspended the account of Rittenhouse's attorney because he tweeted facts about the case that Twitter's censors didn't want the public to know.
Oh, you haven't heard about Facebook's censorship of open discussion about the Rittenhouse shootings? That's because there is an active effort to censor that information also. Most Big Media knows; they simply choose not to report it. But here's a piece about it in The Wall Street Journal. www.wsj.com/articles/facebooks-rittenhouse-mistake-11599260134
Big Tech's censorship must stop! "Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." - Benjamin Franklin
World War II ended 75 years ago today.
September 2, 2020 11:24 am
World War II ended 75 years ago today.
The pictures above are worth a thousand words, so I'll just leave it at that.
Why Did the Police Shoot Jacob Blake in Kenosha, Wisconsin?
August 28, 2020 5:15am
We don’t have enough information yet to determine why Jacob Blake was shot in Kenosha, Wisconsin.
Remember, for at least a week after Michael Brown was shot and killed in Ferguson, the public was outraged based on what we were initially told by the so-called "news" media. But later evidence proved that Michael Brown was shot while committing felony battery against a police officer, so the shooting was completely justified, appropriate, and necessary.
So let's save the outrage over Blake's shooting until after we know if we should really be outraged or not.
What we do know is that in 100% of the instances - not 99.9% - but in ONE-HUNDRED PERCENT of the instances in which the race agitators have successfully instigated violence to protest the shooting of an "unarmed black man" in public, the suspect failed to comply with the lawful instructions of a police officer.
The most effective strategy for not getting shot by the cops is to do what you're told to do. Don't fight. You're not going to prevail at the scene anyway. If it turns out the police were in the wrong, that will come out in court. And you'll be alive to see it. This applies to everyone without regard to race, creed, or color.
For all you cop haters who are so quick to blame the police, do you know why the police must prevent a person who is resisting arrest from getting back in their car? The two minute video posted above has the answer.
#BlueLivesMatter
#DontResistArrest
That Time I Got Tased in Jail…
August 15, 2020 6:19am
Exactly ten years ago today, I spent the night in jail and got tased. This video is of the tasing incident.
Santa Rosa County had constructed a new wing for its jail. The night before it began taking inmates, it was used as a fundraiser for the Law Enforcement Explorer Scouts. The public was invited to purchase a night in the jail. The Scouts served as guards under the supervision of the real correctional officers, we slept in the bunks, and we were fed jail food.
I was asked by the Public Information Officer to cover the event as media. I don't recall where my wife was scheduled to be that night, but I told the PIO that I could only spend the night in jail if my two boys, then ages 13 & 11, could accompany me. He was fine with that, so the three of us reported to the jail at 6:00pm to serve our 12 hour "sentence."
We were processed in with photographs, fingerprints, metal detectors, and pat-downs. But we didn't just sit around doing nothing for twelve hours. As part of the experience, the correctional officers gave instructional lectures about law enforcement and prison life. It included a use-of-force exhibition in which they demonstrated proper use of handcuffs, leg restraints, pepper spray, batons, asps, etc.
At the conclusion, the officer asked if we had any questions. I inquired if he was going to demonstrate the taser. He replied that he was not. "Why not?" I asked. "Because we don't have someone to tase," he responded. So I said, "I'll do it!" After realizing I was serious, he set up the demonstration.
Cameras and cell phones were considered contraband, so we were not allowed to have them with us in the jail. But under escort by a guard, I was permitted to retrieve my camera from my car, so the tasing could be videotaped. My oldest son served as videographer.
So how was it? It hurt like bloody hell! It felt like a branding iron was searing into my back. Full disclaimer: I have never actually had a branding iron searing into my back, so this analogy is speculative. But it was a severe burning sensation. And for the few seconds the 50,000 volts were hitting my body it really hurt.
The human body responds to being tased in one of two ways: 1) it locks up like rigor mortis and falls to the ground like a tree, or 2) it goes loose and collapses down. I experienced the latter. I don't know why the reactions differ, and I don't know if the same person would react to a tase the same way each time. To reduce the chance of injury from the fall, two correctional officers guided me to the ground.
I am very glad that I experienced what it is like to be tased. Once. But I would never want to be tased again.
A word of advice. If you are ever told by the police to comply or be tased, comply!
We were released from our twelve hour jail sentence at 6:00 the next morning after being fed a jail breakfast, which I ate but my boys didn't (it was barely edible). I drove straight to the Waffle House and bought us delicious breakfast food.
My boys and I all thought the experience in jail was interesting and informative. But the conversation at the Waffle House was about following the law to avoid being sent to jail involuntarily. It was a good lesson, if you ask me.
Why President Trump's Executive Orders on Coronavirus Relief Are NOT Unconstitutional
August 9, 2020 11:28pm
The $600 per week of federal unemployment benefits provided by the CARES Act expired last month. Republicans in Congress had offered to extend unemployment benefits and fund other Coronavirus relief programs. Democrats wanted more funding, of course (the House proposed a $3.4 trillion bill). And Democrats also demanded inclusion of a plethora of policies that have nothing to do with the pandemic. But no compromise agreement was reached because Nancy Pelosi made the political calculation that Democrats would benefit in the elections if Republicans were blamed for there being no deal, which of course, the so-called "news" media did assign blame to Republicans.
Yesterday, after Congress failed to reach an agreement, President Trump signed four executive orders regarding Coronavirus economic relief efforts. The Democrats and the media - but I repeat myself - denounced those actions as unconstitutional and omitted critical facts from their stories. They decried the orders as unconstitutional because the President cannot spend money without congressional authorization to do so. Until this evening, I had not read Trump's orders, so all I knew was what was reported by the so-called "news" media. Consequently, I believed his orders were unconstitutional.
But I finally had time to read all four executive orders this evening, and guess what? The media was lying! No surprise there. The media usually lies about Trump. The President's orders are very narrowly tailored and DO NOT spend any money that wasn't previously authorized by law. Consequently, I see no constitutional violations with any of his four orders. I've linked to the orders below, so you can read them yourself and see the truth without it being filtered by activists posing as journalists in the dishonest, agenda-driven, propaganda press.
Trump's four executive orders:
1) Trump's "Memorandum on Authorizing the Other Needs Assistance Program for Major Disaster Declarations Related to Coronavirus Disease 2019" provided $400 per week in federal unemployment benefits (down from the legislated $600 per week that expired last month). The President knows he lacks the power to appropriate funds from the public treasury. So to pay for these benefits, he said he would tap federal funds that have already been allocated for natural disaster relief. If the pandemic can be classified as a "natural disaster," then this action is lawful.
It should be noted that Trump's "generosity" of $400 per week would only happen in states that agree to pay an additional $100 per week (meaning the federal government would only pay $300 in states that pony up the $100 per week, which I suspect few states will do). Republican states are unlikely to fund it because they oppose increasing welfare, and blue states - which would normally be eager to increase welfare - won't do it because they don't want the recipients to give Trump credit for the free cash. But Trump's order specifically addresses the source of both federal and state dollars! That source is unspent money from previous congressional appropriations for which the executive branch does have rule making authority. This order is constitutional, but I expect resistance from states anyway.
2) Trump's "Memorandum on Deferring Payroll Tax Obligations in Light of the Ongoing COVID-19 Disaster" directed the Secretary of the Treasury to delay withholding of Social Security and Medicare taxes through December 31st for employees making less than $104,000 per year. This order did not cancel any taxes; it only deferred payment of those taxes until January. But can the President legally do that? Yes.
Current law (26 U.S. Code § 7508A) specifically allows the executive branch to "specify a period of up to 1 year that may be disregarded in determining, under the internal revenue laws, in respect of any tax liability of such taxpayer" in the event of a "federally declared disaster." President Trump declared the pandemic to be a nationwide disaster back on March 13th, so he is on solid legal grounds with this order.
3) Trump's "Memorandum on Continued Student Loan Payment Relief During the COVID-19 Pandemic" extended the administration's student loan payment deferral policy. This action appears to be within the scope of presidential authority because federal law explicitly authorizes payment deferrals if "the borrower has experienced or will experience an economic hardship" (20 U.S. Code § 1087e(f)(2)(D)). So this order also passes constitutional scrutiny.
4) Trump's "Executive Order on Fighting the Spread of COVID-19 by Providing Assistance to Renters and Homeowners" simply directs the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development "to promote the ability of renters and homeowners to avoid eviction or foreclosure resulting from financial hardships caused by COVID-19." Those are nice words, but they have no substance. This order did not extend the CARES Act's eviction and foreclosure moratorium at properties with federally-backed mortgages, which expired last month. Instead, it directed federal agencies to consider what they can do to temporarily halt evictions. This order is so weak that it doesn't rise to the point of being unconstitutional. But that also means it doesn't rise to the point of being useful either. This one is pure political theater.
Both the Republican-controlled Senate and the Democrat-controlled House deserve criticism for their failure to reach some sort of an agreement. Both sides are playing politics at the expense of the American people. Our country cannot afford the trillions of dollars we've already spent - or the trillions more Congress will eventually spend - in a futile effort to save our economy from the self-inflicted Coronavirus Depression.
We should never have shut down the economy as we did. Government cannot fund restitution for the financial losses of businesses and individuals - only free commerce can do that. So government needs to get out of the way and allow it to occur. I fear, however, that irreversible damage to our economy and our nation has already been done.
But contrary to the claims of the Trump-haters, yesterday’s executive orders were NOT unconstitutional.
The American Public's "Knowledge" of COVID-19 Deaths is Wrong by More Than 22,000%!
August 6, 2020 11:19pm
According to a poll conducted by Kekst CNC between July 10th and July 15th, which was published on July 27th, the typical American is so uninformed or misinformed that they believed 20% of the U.S. population had been infected with COVID-19 and that 9% of the population had died!
The reality is that nowhere near 20% of the U.S. population has been infected and nowhere near 9% has died. When the survey was taken, the actual infection percentage was 1.05%, which means the people thought there were nineteen times more infections than there actually were!
And the perceived death count was so far off that it would be laughable if that ignorance didn't actually affect policy decisions. Nowhere near 9% of the U.S. population has died. Nowhere near 9% of the U.S. population has even gotten sick with the Coronavirus. When the survey was taken, the actual percentage of Americans who had died with COVID-19 was 0.04%. People's beliefs were off from reality by more than 22,000%!
To put it another way, on July 15th, the typical American thought we had 66.4 million Coronavirus cases in the U.S. We really had 3.4 million. And they thought we had 29.8 million deaths. We really had 137,357. The American public's perception is not just inaccurate, it's delusional. It's not even close to what the truth is.
Despite Americans being so ignorant of the facts, the poll showed that Americans weren't the only people who thought this illness is far worse than it really is. People in other countries surveyed also thought their infection rates and death rates were far higher than what was really happening. But the people in the United States believed we had the highest death rate as a percentage of our population than any other country. Why is that? Because in the United States, the activists posing as journalists in the so-called "news" media have spewed so much misinformation, dishonest propaganda, and fake news that most Americans don't have a clue what the truth is.
Ronald Reagan described it nicely when he said, "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant. It's just that they know so much that isn't so." And long before that, Mark Twain said, "If you do not read the newspapers, you are uninformed. If you do read the newspapers, you are misinformed."
Contrary to what the dumb masses (read those two words together quickly) believe, the COVID-19 situation in America is NOT a crisis that justifies shutting down our economy and closing our schools in a futile effort to combat it. And it never was.
The Coronavirus is a real virus. But the reaction to it has been politicized since the very beginning. It has been weaponized as a club with which to attack President Trump, and it will remain so until election day despite the truth being that the facts don't justify it.
As the late Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-NY) said, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." And there is a saying in computer science; "Garbage In, Garbage Out." Well, that applies to politics as well. When people believe garbage, they vote for garbage. The problem is the entire country has to live with the results of what the majority votes for even when the majority doesn't have a clue what they're basing their votes upon. It's disgraceful. And dangerous. It is also deliberate. The Democrats and the media - but I repeat myself - are intentionally deceiving the public in an effort to take down the President of the United States. Don’t believe their lies.
Read those Kekst CNC poll results yourself. They are viewable online at https://www.kekstcnc.com/media/2793/kekstcnc_research_covid-19_opinion_tracker_wave-4.pdf?fbclid=IwAR3HgPih2KPCdE8RUWogxBrn_yEMrNqDXdG16GYQPTj73Vkh23Jtb-tLH8U
Herman Cain Dies at 74
July 30, 2020 10:55am
HERMAN CAIN 12/13/1945 - 7/30/2020
I am saddened to hear of Herman Cain's death today. He'd been hospitalized for several weeks with COVID-19. He was 74.
To say I knew him "well" would be an exaggeration. But I did know him, and he knew me. My radio station carried his program; I interviewed him many times on the radio; I interviewed him face-to-face after the presidential debate in Orlando in September 2011; and I was Master of Ceremonies at an event where he was the keynote speaker in 2016.
I voted for Herman in the Republican Straw Poll at Florida's Presidency 5 Convention in 2011. Unfortunately, after winning that straw poll with an astonishing 37% of the vote (considering there were seven other candidates), unfounded attacks on his character ruined his reputation and derailed his campaign. He would have been a much better candidate than Mitt Romney, who ultimately received the Republican nomination. And he would have been a much better president than Barack Obama, who defeated Romney.
Rest in Peace, Herman. The world is a better place because you lived in it. And I am a better person because I knew you.
Pensacola’s Confederate Monument Lawsuit
July 25, 2020 8:45am
On July 14th, the Pensacola City Council voted to remove the Confederate Monument from Lee Square. Although I didn’t like the decision, I figured, well, it’s the city’s property; they can do with it what they want. But then I read the lawsuit that says they can’t. And I thought it had merit.
So I asked David McCallister with Save Southern Heritage Florida to come on the radio with me this morning to discuss it. He's the attorney representing the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
Whichever side of the monument issue you're on, I encourage you to listen to the interview. It is now online as a podcast at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200725
MASK WARS: What Does the Science Say?
July 18, 2020 5:22pm
Many cities and states require people to wear masks while in public. Why? With a virus that spreads via airborne particles and exhaled droplets, it seems reasonable that a mask would prevent both ingress and egress of the virus and thus would prevent infections. But paradoxically, that is not necessarily the case.
The Centers for Disease Control released a new report titled "Effectiveness of Cloth Masks for Protection Against Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2" (Volume 26, Number 10 - October 2020). It is an early release article that is subject to change before its official release in October. But it does provide some insight into the effectiveness and risks of cloth masks worn by the public in community settings. I wrote about some of these points on May 17th at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/blog/200517-1316
The CDC report, which can be read at https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/10/20-0948_article, repeats the CDC's current recommendation that masks should be worn in public. But it doesn't state that doing so will actually reduce exposure to the Coronavirus or prevent infection for the mask wearer or those around him. Like every study and medical article - and I have read literally hundreds of pages of such information - the CDC report is filled with so many weasel words and warnings of incomplete data, that no conclusion can be drawn from them. But they are presented to the public as if they are the peer-reviewed, infallible, Nectar of the Gods.
In fact, the report makes numerous statements about how masks "may" work and about how masks have significant deficiencies that actually increase risk of infection.
If you are interested in the actual science and not just what the news media spoon-feeds you, I encourage you to read the entire report. But here are a few excerpts (words in ALL CAPS have been capitalized from lower case by me for emphasis):
"THE GENERAL PUBLIC SHOULD BE EDUCATED ABOUT MASK USE BECAUSE CLOTH MASKS MAY GIVE USERS A FALSE SENSE OF PROTECTION because of their limited protection against acquiring infection."
"The filtration effectiveness of cloth masks is generally lower than that of medical masks and respirators; however, cloth masks MAY provide SOME protection IF WELL DESIGNED AND USED CORRECTLY."
"Multilayer cloth masks, designed to fit around the face and made of water-resistant fabric with a high number of threads and finer weave, MAY provide reasonable protection."
"In community settings, however, cloth masks may be used to prevent community spread of infections by sick or asymptomatically infected persons, and the public should be EDUCATED ABOUT THEIR CORRECT USE."
"To our knowledge, only 1 randomized controlled trial has been conducted to examine the efficacy of cloth masks in healthcare settings, and THE RESULTS DO NOT FAVOR USE OF CLOTH MASKS."
"Rates of infection were consistently higher among those in the cloth mask group than in the medical mask and control groups. This finding suggests that risk for infection was higher for those wearing cloth masks. The mask tested was a locally manufactured, double-layered cotton mask. Participants were given 5 cloth masks for a 4-week study period and were asked to wash the masks daily with soap and water. THE POOR PERFORMANCE MAY HAVE BEEN BECAUSE THE MASKS WERE NOT WASHED FREQUENTLY ENOUGH OR BECAUSE THEY BECAME MOIST AND CONTAMINATED." Cloth masks get moist very quickly.
"Filtration effectiveness of wet masks is reportedly lower than that of dry masks."
"Filtration effectiveness of cloth masks varies widely; some materials filter better than others. Filtration effectiveness of cloth masks depends on many factors, such as thread count, number of layers, type of fabric, and water resistance."
"Protection is affected by proper mask use as well as by selection of fabric and design of the masks for water resistance, filtration, and fit. Current evidence suggests that multilayered masks with water-resistant fabric, high number of threads, and finer weave may be more protective. Several studies have examined filtration, but fewer have examined fit or water resistance."
"The degree of fit affects effectiveness because air flows in the direction of least resistance; IF GAPS ARE PRESENT ON THE SIDES OF THE MASK, AIR WILL FLOW THROUGH THOSE GAPS INSTEAD OF THROUGH THE MASK."
If people fail to properly decontaminate cloth masks frequently enough, they "MAY RISK SELF-CONTAMINATION."
"Some randomized controlled trials have shown masks to be efficacious in closed community settings, with and without the practice of hand hygiene. Moreover, in a widespread pandemic, differentiating asymptomatic from healthy persons in the community is very difficult, so at least in high-transmission areas, universal face mask use MAY be beneficial."
"Correctly putting on and taking off cloth masks improves protection. Taking a mask off is a HIGH-RISK PROCESS because pathogens may be present on the outer surface of the mask and MAY RESULT IN SELF CONTAMINATION during removal."
"The filtration, effectiveness, fit, and performance of cloth masks are inferior to those of medical masks and respirators."
"Protection provided by cloth masks may be improved by selecting appropriate material, increasing the number of mask layers, and using those with a design that provides filtration and fit. Cloth masks should be washed daily and after high-exposure use by using soap and water or other appropriate methods."
So that's what the Centers for Disease Control says. What does the World Health Organization say?
In April, the World Health Organization acknowledged that "there is currently no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by healthy persons in the wider community setting, including universal community masking, can prevent them from infection with respiratory viruses, including COVID-19." SOURCE: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/331693/WHO-2019-nCov-IPC_Masks-2020.3-eng.pdf?fbclid=IwAR0q0zgix1O5krfLG1_sMD6XQ-oWgbWSnYsbsnqud_rZu-8-kArncOZtExw (bottom right corner on page 1).
Updated guidance on the use of masks by the general public is at https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1279750/retrieve. Its information on the efficacy of mask usage by the public begins on page 6 of the report.
If you read it, pay particular attention to the paragraph that says, "Many countries have recommended the use of fabric masks/face coverings for the general public. At the present time, THE WIDESPREAD USE OF MASKS BY HEALTHY PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY SETTING IS NOT YET SUPPORTED BY HIGH QUALITY OR DIRECT SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE AND THERE ARE POTENTIAL benefits and HARMS to consider."
That same WHO document lists among the potential benefits to wearing a mask is that they help in "making people FEEL they can play a role in contributing to stopping spread of the virus" and that "fabric masks can also be a form of cultural expression, encouraging public acceptance of protection measures in general."
Depending on the material, homemade masks have a filtration rate of 1.1% - 26%. And that assumes proper fit and usage, which almost nobody does. In addition to the very low filtration rate of air moving THROUGH cloth, the air leaking AROUND the cloth has a filtration rate of zero. Next time you're wearing a mask, check the gaps at the chin, cheeks, and below the eyes. You'll find there is a lot of air going around the cloth not through it. Mask wearers with glasses often complain that their glasses get fogged up. Why is that? Because the warm, moist, exhaled breath is escaping through the massive gap at the top of the mask and causing condensation on the lenses. That gap is not filtering any air at all.
But let's assume proper fit and usage in these examples: 1) If a non-medical mask is worn by an infected person, 74% - 98.9% of virus-laden particles escape to the air; 2) If a mask is worn by a healthy person in an infected area, 74% - 98.9% of virus-laden particles would be inhaled. But what about the 1.1% - 26% of the virus-laden particles that do get filtered? They remain on the mask, and every time a mask wearer touches his mask, his fingers become contaminated! So, unless hands are cleaned after EVERY touch of the mask, the risk of infection increases!
If you wear a mask in public, do you decontaminate your hands after every touch of your mask? When you put it on? When you pull it down to your chin to eat? When you raise it back over your nose and mouth after eating? When you adjust its fit? When you scratch an itch through it? When you take it off? If you answered "yes" to all those, I'm calling you a liar - because I know you don't wash your hands that often. And you know also, so quit lying. Dishonesty benefits no one.
Risk of infection is affected by both the intensity and the duration of exposure. So do masks allow you to be in an infected environment longer than if you didn't wear a mask. Yes, but it's marginal. If a mask has a filtration rate of 26% (which is the highest rate among cloth masks), a masked person would inhale/exhale the same amount of viruses in 60 minutes that a maskless person would in 44.4 minutes. With a mask filtering 1.1%, that masked hour equals 59.3 minutes unmasked. This comparison also applies to the time it would take for an infected person to contaminate his surroundings.
How often do you see masks pulled down beneath the nose? Or on the chin covering neither the mouth or nose? They don't do much good there.
Masks provide zero eye protection, of course. But the eyes are a conduit for infection from contaminated hands or contaminated air. So what's the next government mandate? Goggles or space helmets?
The World Health Organization has cautioned that masks provide a false sense of security and may actually increase risk of infection. The WHO lists among the possible harms of mask use by healthy people in the general public "potential increased risk of self-contamination due to the manipulation of a face mask and subsequently touching eyes with contaminated hands," "potential self-contamination that can occur if non-medical masks are not changed when wet or soiled. This can create favourable conditions for microorganism to amplify," "potential headache and/or breathing difficulties, depending on type of mask used," "a false sense of security, leading to potentially lower adherence to other critical preventive measures such as physical distancing and hand hygiene." And it cites numerous mask problems for "those living in hot and humid environments" Summer in America, anyone?
To minimize the dangers of mask usage, single use masks must be discarded after being worn for a few hours. Most people don't toss them daily; even fewer dispose of their masks more frequently. And what about cleaning reusable cloth masks? Cloth masks should be washed DAILY in soapy 140°F water, boiled for one minute, or soaked in a chlorine solution for one minute then thoroughly rinsed with clean water. How many people do that? If it is not zero, it's almost zero.
That same WHO report cautions that "a non-medical mask is neither a medical device nor personal protective equipment" and that because of lower filtration and breathability, "the use of non-medical masks, made of woven fabrics such as cloth, and/or non-woven fabrics, should only be considered for source control (used by infected persons) in community settings and not for prevention," and "their use should always be accompanied by frequent hand hygiene and physical distancing." Why? Because frequent hand cleaning and physical distancing are far more effective in preventing the spread of the Coronavirus than masks are.
So if masks aren't really as effective as people believe, why are so many cities and states mandating masks? It's theater. And it's being directed by politicians who want to look like they're doing something even though they're not. Well, I refuse to be cast as a lemming in their stage plays.
I obviously haven't read every mask law in the country. But I have read Pensacola's (which uses the exact same verbiage as some other jurisdictions). Section 1(b) of that order defines a face covering as "a material that covers the nose and mouth and that fits snugly against the sides of the face so there are no gaps. It can be secured to the head with ties or straps or simply wrapped around the lower face. It can be made of a variety of materials, such as cotton, silk, or linen. Coverings with materials made of multiple layers is highly encouraged. A cloth face covering may be factory-made or sewn by hand, or the cloth face covering can be improvised from household items. The CDC has posted additional information regarding how to make, wear, and wash a cloth face covering at https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/prevent-getting-sick/about-face-coverings.html"
Under this definition, wearing underwear on the head would be in compliance. And since there's no minimum thread count requirement, a mask made from sheer lace lingerie would also be legal. Or for that matter, a mask made from a fishing net. But don't take my word for it, read it yourself. The full order is at https://www.cityofpensacola.com/DocumentCenter/View/19673/Declaration-of-State-of-Emergency-20-03_062620
An oft-cited article in the British Medical Journal recommends universal masking but acknowledges it does so based upon the Precautionary Principle, which they define as "a strategy for approaching issues of potential harm when extensive scientific knowledge on the matter is lacking.” The BMJ has taken the position that policy makers should apply the precautionary principle now and encourage people to wear face masks on the grounds that we have little to lose and potentially something to gain from doing so. I respect their opinion and commend them for their honesty.
Why do most American publications hide their lack of evidence in small print in the appendix (or entirely omit it) but amplify their recommendations as indisputable fact? I find such unjustified, holier-than-thou, authoritarianism to be dishonest, disgusting, and detrimental. Anytime scientists hide facts, their motives should be suspect.
There is still a lot we don't know about the COVID-19 Coronavirus. And we are similarly ignorant about the efficacy of masks to prevent its spread. The bottom line is that the scientific evidence neither supports universal masking nor says universal masking is pointless.
So if someone wants to wear a mask, they should be able to wear one without ridicule.
And if someone doesn't want to wear a mask, they should be able to go maskless without condemnation.
Why Hillary Clinton Did NOT Win the Popular Vote in 2016
July 11, 2020 8:36am
Contrary to the false claims made by Democrats, Hillary Clinton did NOT win the popular vote in 2016. That’s not a theory. That’s a fact. And it has nothing to do with voter fraud.
If you'd like to hear the irrefutable truth about Hillary's 2016 loss, listen to the first two segments of this morning's radio program which are archived at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200711
In segment 3, I discussed the Supreme Court's unanimous decision in Chiafalo v. Washington that dealt a severe blow to the Democrats who are scheming to unconstitutionally circumvent our process for electing the President. It is also archived at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200711
The Declaration of Independence Was NOT Signed on July 4th
July 4, 2020 8:34am
The Declaration of Independence Was NOT Signed on July 4th!
Why do we celebrate America's birthday on July 4th? We were taught in elementary school that was the day the Declaration of Independence was signed, and we got our independence from Britain. But that is an inaccurate oversimplification of what actually happened. The REAL story is much more detailed and far more interesting.
That real story was the topic of this morning's radio program. I think it's worth your time to listen to it as a podcast, and perhaps even to share. The full episode is now online at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200704
The Declaration of Independence is just one page and 1338 words, not including the signatures. Yet its effect on world history was immense. I share some details about each of its 56 signers who, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, mutually pledged to each other their Lives, their Fortunes and their sacred Honor.
Despite all the problems in our country today, the fact is that the United States of America is the greatest country the world has ever known. We have done more good in the world than any nation in the history of civilization. Be proud to be an American. Appreciate what this nation means. Respect the men and women who have made it possible. Commit to passing to future generations this great country we inherited. And be knowledgeable about how it all happened.
American history is interesting. But when you know the details, it's spectacularly fascinating. You'll love the details I shared at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200704
Happy Birthday, America!
The Real Truth About Trump's "White Power" Tweet
June 28, 2020 2:40pm
The so-called "news" media has been enthusiastically reporting all day that President Trump retweeted a "White Power" video, which he later deleted.
The media's narrative of this story has been that Trump tweeted it because he's a white supremacist who supports the message of the "White Power" chant. But do you know what has been missing from nearly every story? The offensive video itself!
Have you seen it? Probably not. Instead, the propaganda press has been describing six seconds of the video and reporting negative comments made by Trump's critics, in which Trump is portrayed as being a racist. A few media outlets played the six second portion of the video that contained the "White Power" chant. But the entire video was 128 seconds.
Because I have been in the media for forty years and know how the news business works, I suspected the video was not nearly as racist as the activists posing as journalists claimed it to be. So I searched for the full video myself and found it was extremely difficult to locate. Neither Google nor YouTube searches yielded any results. Only after discovering that Trump retweeted the video from an account named "Fifty Shades of Whey" and searching for that account on Twitter, did I find the full video he tweeted.
So what did the video say?
WARNING: The following contains language some may find offensive, so don't read any further if you are an overly sensitive wuss.
The news story could just as easily been, "Trump Tweets Video Saying FUCK TRUMP!"
Approximately six seconds of the video taken on June 14th at The Villages in Florida during a pro-Trump golf cart parade (seriously) consists of a man in a "Veterans for Trump" t-shirt driving a golf cart yelling "White Power!" twice in response to a protester shouting to him, "Where's your white hood? Where's your white hood? Racist! Racist!" The protester responded with, "There you go. White Power. Did you hear that?"
But the other two minutes of the video contains the following from the protesters (in order of appearance):
"Fuck Trump! Fuck Trump!"
"Get back in your cart, asshole! Get back in your cart, asshole!"
"We don't need fucking Nazi pigs!"
"You're a Nazi!"
"You little turd. You fucking turd!"
"You know you're a fucking Nazi. Nazi, racist, pig! That's what you are. Nazi, racist, pig!"
"Where's your white hood? Where's your white hood? Where's your white hood?"
"Grab 'em by the pussy! Grab 'em by the pussy!"
"White trash! White trash!"
"Nazi! Nazi lovers! Nazi lovers!"
"Where's your white hood?"
"Trump sucks!"
Numerous signs held by protesters read, "MAKE AMERICA SANE AGAIN," "TRUMP BIGOT AND RACIST," "BIGOTS/RACIEST FLY TRUMP FLAGS" [that is the exact spelling on the sign at the 1:22 point in the video], "DONALD J TRUMP DUMB AS A ROCK,""Trump PATHOLOGICAL LIAR," "WHITE TRASH," and "HITLER AND TRUMP EXACTLY SAME."
Now that you've read this, your understanding of what happened is quite different than it previously was, right?
There is good reason a witness at trial swears to tell the truth, THE WHOLE TRUTH, and nothing but the truth." A partial truth can be deceptive. In this instance, the whole truth is quite different than the partial truth the so-called "news" media spoon-fed the dumb masses [read those two words together quickly]. Sure, Trump was an idiot for retweeting it. My guess is that he didn't hear or notice the "White Power" chant when he retweeted it at 4:39am. If he was still in the residence quarters, his sound may have been muted. But if he didn't know what the video said and retweeted it anyway, that's even worse.
Trump is his own worst enemy. His unforced errors are too numerous to count. The man needs someone to censor his social media account - but I don't mean the Stalinist censors at Twitter and Facebook (who should not censor any content). As has been the procedure until Trump's presidency, The White House has a communications team that clears messages before releasing them. Trump would be wise to resume that.
But the media is guilty also. Their dishonest coverage of this non-issue has been disgraceful - or so it seems to me. But unlike most in the media, I have given you the full story, so you can make up your own mind. I posted the full video above. Decide for yourself what it means. Don’t ever accept what Big Media wants to spoon-feed you.
Black Lives Matter Founder Admits it was Created by Marxists!
June 27, 2020 8:47am
The entirety of the Black Lives Matter movement is about destroying our Constitutional Republic and ushering in a Marxist state!
That is not my conspiratorial opinion. That is fact.
It was stated by Patrisse Cullors, one of the three co-founders of Black Lives Matter. In fact, she said in a 2015 interview with Jared Ball, a radical Leftist professor at Morgan State University, that she and Alicia Garza (another BLM co-founder) were "trained organizers" and "trained Marxists" who are "super-versed on sort of ideological theories" seeking to "build a movement" that will bring about their Marxist society. You can listen to those words come out of her mouth in segment 2 of today’s radio program that is now archived at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200627. You won’t hear the mainstream media report this information because they censor the truth if the truth hurts their agenda. But I assure you, the recording is genuine.
The recent protests, riots, and looting are all part & parcel of pursuing that objective. The Democrats and the media - but I repeat myself - amplify BLM's lies as part of their "divide & conquer," "us versus them" strategy to defame and delegitimize America's founders, history, Constitution, laws, and institutions; and thus demonize the current state of our nation, which then should obviously be destroyed and replaced.
They are dangerous enemies of our Republic. That the Democrats have allied themselves with BLM in this civil war speaks volumes of the destructive goals of the Democratic Party.
I am also certain - but I can't yet prove - that Russian money is helping to fund these protests just as it was proven they funded the anti-war movements of the 60s, 70s, and 80s. And it wouldn't surprise me if Chinese and Iranian money was also involved.
That doesn't mean every protester is getting paid, of course. Not every protester during the Vietnam War was getting paid either. Most were not. But enough were on Russia’s payroll that the anti-war protests were a bought-and-paid-for tool of our nation's enemies. And so are today’s protests.
These foreign adversaries know they cannot militarily defeat the United States. So they seek our destruction from within by fomenting hatred, promoting chaos, sowing confusion, and instigating violence. The useful idiots of the Democratic Party then go along with it - partly because they are ignorant and partly because they also hate the United States of America.
My use of the term "useful idiots" to describe the current protesters and rioters is deliberate. Vladimir Lenin described his ignorant Bolshevik followers during the Russian Revolution that brought about Communism as "useful idiots" - although the actual translation from Russian is closer to "useful fools" than "useful idiots," the term "useful idiots" is better known.
And that's exactly what most of the people protesting and rioting are. In fact, I'd actually expand that beyond just the protesters and rioters to include ANYONE who supports their cause. The goal of Black Lives Matter is to destroy the free capitalist foundation of the United States and create from the ashes an authoritarian Marxist state.
Do I believe most supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement want that too? No, I don't. But I do believe most supporters of the movement are ignorant of the movement’s real goals, and they're being used as useful idiots. Education is the key. That's why I do my radio program; to educate. Unlike the Left, which wants to restrict speech and silence the opposition, I welcome the free and open expression of ideas from all sides, because I believe that my side is correct. And if people heard my side, they would reject the lies they're spoon-fed by the activist media.
The destructive philosophy of the Democratic Party and their various advocacy groups must be stopped by informing people of the truth. The Left simply cannot win any debate in which facts matter.
Well, facts do matter. And the fact is, the Black Lives Matter movement was founded by Marxist revolutionaries. And their violent tactics are typical of Marxist revolutions. The criminal destruction of property must be stopped by any means necessary. That Democrat officials refuse to do so is proof that they support the rioters, the vandals, the destroyers. It’s disgraceful. And dangerous.
Do not misinterpret this post. Just because I oppose the Black Lives Matter movement does not mean I oppose black lives. Black people should be treated as all people should be treated; as human beings who should be judged not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.
Operation Neptune Spear: Killing Osama bin Laden
June 20, 2020 8:50am
How did the United States kill Osama bin Laden? Read this book!
"No Ordinary Dog" is an outstanding book written by Will Chesney, a retired U.S. Navy SEAL who served with SEAL Team Six. He was the dog handler during the 2011 mission in Abbottabad, Pakistan that killed Osama bin Laden.
Will was my guest for the entire hour on this morning's radio program. We discussed the book, his career, "Cairo" his combat assault dog, and the bin Laden raid. It was a fantastic interview.
The book is a love story (with man's best friend). It's a drama. It's an action tale. It's simultaneously both a biography and an autobiography. And it's history - all rolled into one.
To get a preview of the book's content and to hear Will's incredible life story, you can listen to our radio interview which is now archived as a podcast at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200620
Trump’s Campaign Ad Censored by Facebook
June 18, 2020 3:35pm
The above image is a screenshot of the Trump Campaign ad Facebook removed and banned claiming it violated their community standards on hate speech.
If what Trump said is so hateful and offensive, then let the people see it and judge him harshly for it! But for Facebook to censor the President of the United States is disgraceful. And dangerous.
"Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech." - Benjamin Franklin
An upside-down triangle was one of many symbols used to identify prisoners in Nazi concentration camps. It is allegedly a current symbol for Antifa, which is what the Trump Campaign says they used it as. But that is beside the point. The point is it should not be censored.
If Trump's ad used actual Nazi swastikas and slogans, and advocated Nazism, should Facebook censor it or allow it to be seen for what it is?
NO CENSORSHIP OF POLITICAL ADVERTISING SHOULD BE DONE. Candidates should sink or swim on their merits (or lack thereof). It is not the job of Facebook or anyone else to protect us from a candidate or to protect a candidate from himself.
No political candidate's speech should be censored by anyone at any time for any reason. If the speech is that horrible and offensive, the candidate will lose votes and thus the election. Censorship would deny voters critical information about candidates, which could result in favorable votes based upon ignorance - ignorance forced by the censors. I'd rather know the candidates, warts and all.
Amateur Hour in The White House
June 18, 2020 11:51am
Today's DACA ruling by the Supreme Courts was the result of amateur hour in The White House. It was Trump's own fault.
Obama unconstitutionally created DACA via executive action. Trump could have ended it via executive action. But instead, he simply allowed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to order its termination based upon his view that it was unconstitutionally created (which it was, but without the Court affirming that, Sessions could not unilaterally end it).
This decision was based on process not merits. Had Trump openly directed its termination via executive action, the Supreme Court would have certainly upheld it.
Obama's creation of the DACA program was blatantly unconstitutional. Says me? Says President Obama! At a Univision TV town hall meeting in March 2011, President Obama said, "With respect to the notion that I can just suspend deportations through executive order, that's just not the case, because there are laws on the books that Congress has passed... we've got three branches of government. Congress passes the law. The executive branch's job is to enforce and implement those laws. And then the judiciary has to interpret the laws.
"There are enough laws on the books by Congress that are very clear in terms of how we have to enforce our immigration system that for me to simply through executive order ignore those congressional mandates would not conform with my appropriate role as President."
But don't take my word for it. See Obama say it for yourself at www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfZ3kaKZoIw
Obama originally sought to implement DACA via the DREAM Act. But when Congress rejected it, he unilaterally imposed it, even though he previously acknowledged that doing so would be unconstitutional.
For the record, I want the DACA DREAMers to stay in the United States. But it must be done legally via an Act of Congress.
The decision is at https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/19pdf/18-587_5ifl.pdf
The full story is at https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/courts_law/supreme-court-rules-against-trump-administration-attempt-to-end-daca-a-win-for-undocumented-immigrants-brought-to-us-as-children/2020/06/18/4f0b6c74-b163-11ea-8758-bfd1d045525a_story.html?fbclid=IwAR0bpVPobeArBhPbSZamKTbUi1JUKBvdqqndMIsITBvZGJSWI8ASXWRnNME
Why George Floyd's Death Was NOT a Murder
June 6, 2020 8:41am
PREFACE: I believe Officer Derek Chauvin killed George Floyd. And I want him to be prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to the maximum allowable time in prison. With that said, let's set emotion aside and focus on the facts.
On Wednesday, charges against Chauvin were upgraded to second degree murder, third degree murder, and manslaughter. Also on Wednesday, the other three officers (Tou Thao, Thomas Lane, and Alexander Kueng) were charged with aiding and abetting second degree murder and aiding and abetting second degree manslaughter.
As I discussed on my radio program this morning, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison is engaged in a dangerous, politically motivated, disservice to the community as he pursues murder charges against Officer Derek Chauvin for the death of George Floyd. To be clear, Mr. Floyd is dead as a result of Chauvin's actions, so the death is a homicide.
But what is a homicide? A homicide is a death caused by the intentional actions of another person. However, that doesn't mean the action was illegal. Just because a homicide was committed doesn't mean a crime was committed. For instance, if someone breaks into your house in the middle of the night and assaults you, and then you shoot him dead, that's a homicide. But it's not a crime. Well, there are some jurisdictions in the Peoples Republics of California, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Maryland who would prosecute. But in decent jurisdictions, that would be a perfectly reasonable act of self-defense and not a crime. It would be a homicide, but it wouldn't be a crime, even though you intentionally pulled the trigger.
But a death that occurs through an unintentional act - such as most traffic deaths - are not homicides; although they could be if the driver was drunk or speeding 100 mph through a school zone as the buses were offloading.
So in the case of Officer Chauvin, he intentionally put his knee on George Floyd's neck. And that action caused - or at the very least contributed to - Mr. Floyd's death. That makes it a homicide - a death caused by the intentional actions of another person. But just because the act was intended, doesn't mean the death was intended. And that's a big part of the reason why murder charges are excessive. Under some circumstances, an unintentional death can still constitute a murder, but those circumstances aren't applicable to this situation.
The dishonest media has been lying about what happened to George Floyd since day one.
Clearly, Officer Chauvin acted inappropriately; probably unlawfully. But it wasn't murder. In law, there are more than 50 shades of grey. The jury will be instructed that they cannot convict Officer Chauvin based on the definition of the word “murder” as used in the common vernacular. The very specific verbiage of Minnesota's statutes will matter.
Unlike most so-called "journalists" and nearly everyone else who is 100% certain this was murder, I have actually read Minnesota's statutes. So what does Minnesota law say? Minnesota has three types of murder and two types of manslaughter.
Murder in the First Degree (Minnesota Statute 609.185) is when a person "causes the death of a human being with premeditation and with intent to effect the death of the person or of another." Chauvin did not premeditate the death. NOTE: I am not addressing language in the statutes that is not even remotely applicable to Mr. Floyd's death. If you want to read the full statutes, click on the links I have included.
Murder in the Second Degree (Minnesota Statute 609.19) has two classes; intentional and unintentional. Intentional second degree murder is when a person "causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation." No legitimate argument can be made that Chauvin intended to kill Floyd. Unintentional second degree murder is when a person "causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense." Not only was Chauvin's knee-to-the-neck not a felony, it is a restraint maneuver that is authorized and taught by the Minneapolis Police Department. See my fuller explanation and accompanying proof at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/blog/200530-1803.
Murder in the Third Degree (Minnesota Statute 609.195) is when a person "without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life." While an argument can certainly be made that placing a knee on someone's neck is "eminently dangerous," trained Minneapolis police officers are specifically authorized to perform it. Also, a "depraved mind" is a necessary component of the crime. The statute requires both an eminently dangerous act AND a depraved mind. The act alone is not enough. And a depraved mind is not enough. They must BOTH be present simultaneously. Based upon the number of citizen complaints against Chauvin over the years, it appears that he's an asshole. But that's not the same as depraved.
Manslaughter in the First Degree (Minnesota Statute 609.20) is when a person "intentionally causes the death of another person in the heat of passion provoked by such words or acts of another as would provoke a person of ordinary self-control under like circumstances." As previously stated, Chauvin did not intend to kill Floyd. Manslaughter in the First Degree can also occur when a person "violates section 609.224 and causes the death of another or causes the death of another in committing or attempting to commit a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offense with such force and violence that death of or great bodily harm to any person was reasonably foreseeable, and murder in the first or second degree was not committed." Chauvin's actions do not meet this criteria, and prosecutors have not charged him with this higher level of manslaughter.
Manslaughter in the Second Degree (Minnesota Statute 609.205) is when "by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another." That does describe what Chauvin did. While his knee-to-the-neck maneuver was authorized, its duration of 8 minutes and 46 seconds, including 2 minutes and 53 seconds after Floyd became non-responsive was not authorized. Chauvin was quite clearly negligent, created unreasonable risk, and consciously took the chance of causing death or great bodily harm to Mr. Floyd. That's the exact definition of second degree manslaughter in Minnesota. So THAT is the crime prosecutors should pursue; not murder charges.
Most people don't understand the significant legal differences between murder and manslaughter. They think all homicides are murder and that manslaughter is a lightweight, petty offense. But it isn't. Under Minnesota law, second degree manslaughter is a serious felony which can result in ten years imprisonment.
The harsh truth is that what Derek Chauvin did to George Floyd does not meet the legal definition of murder in Minnesota law. Is it possible that prosecutors have unreleased evidence to justify pursuing murder charges? Sure it is. It is "possible" that Derek Chauvin said to George Floyd, "I'm going to kill you" before he put his knee on the neck. And if that's the case, then fine; it's murder. But based upon the evidence that has been made public, this is a case of second degree manslaughter. Consequently, that is what prosecutors should pursue.
With only one death, how can there be three death crimes? The multiple charges will allow the jury to find Chauvin guilty of manslaughter when they determine he didn't commit murder. Without the manslaughter charge included, a full acquittal would be the result. But it is irresponsible to overcharge him in an effort to placate the protesters.
By overcharging, prosecutors are setting up Chauvin's acquittal on the murder charges. And that will set the stage for another round of riots in 2021 or 2022 when the verdicts are rendered.
Similar violence will likely ensue when officers Thao, Lane, and Kueng are each acquitted on their charges of aiding and abetting.
Prosecutors should charge people with the crimes they actually commit; not with the crimes the public erroneously thinks they committed.
This written post is an abridged explanation. I gave the full explanation on today's radio program, which is now archived as a podcast at www.TheMikeBatesShow.com/podcasts/200606
George Floyd Was NOT Murdered, and the Neck Hold was NOT Illegal
May 30, 2020 6:03pm
It seems everyone is saying that the neck hold Officer Chauvin used against George Floyd was illegal, against police policy, and is not practiced or taught by any police department in the country. Upon what do they base that?
Just like almost every other belief people hold about current events that isn't true, it's because they've blindly accepted whatever nonsense the dishonest activists posing as journalists in the so-called "news" media have spoon-fed them. They haven't done anything to verify the information. Instead, they just regurgitate the false, agenda-driven propaganda of Big Media.
Well, I don't. Ronald Reagan said, "trust but verify." He was referring to the Soviets. But I have less faith in the truthfulness of today's media than I did of the Soviet Union in the 1980s. I don't trust the media at all. I do, however, verify their claims.
And what did I find in the course of confirming the veracity of their claims? It's no surprise. The information from Big Media was wrong!
The Minneapolis Police Department's Policy & Procedure Manual DOES authorize the use of knee-on-the-neck holds against a subject who is actively resisting. This restraint technique is authorized only for sworn employees who have received training from the MPD Training Unit. I could not discover whether Derek Chauvin received such training, but as a 19 year veteran, he probably has.
Trust but verify, right? So don't take my word for it, see for yourself in Section 5-311 of the Minneapolis Police Department's Policy & Procedure Manual. It is online at http://www.minneapolismn.gov/police/policy/mpdpolicy_5-300_5-300
Am I excusing Officer Chauvin's actions? Not at all. I am appalled that he held Floyd in a neck hold for almost eight minutes, including nearly two minutes after he stopped breathing. By any reasonable definition, that is excessive force. And Chauvin must be held accountable to the fullest extent of the law.
But the facts of the case don't support a murder charge of ANY degree. Manslaughter? Maybe. Murder? No way. In law, there are more than 50 shades of grey. Not all actions that result in the death of a human constitute murder. I think Officer Chauvin acted inappropriately; and probably unlawfully. But it wasn't murder.
If prosecutors overcharge to appease the mob, it will only guarantee future violence when the officer gets acquitted. Chauvin needs to be charged and convicted for the crime he committed NOT the crime the mob demands.
But even a manslaughter conviction might be difficult to obtain. The Hennepin County Medical Examiner's preliminary autopsy report found no physical evidence to indicate the cause of death was asphyxiation, strangulation, or anything else directly related to the type of restraint used by Chauvin against Floyd. Mr. Floyd had underlying health conditions including coronary artery disease and hypertensive heart disease.
One of the policemen on the scene, Thomas Lane, expressed concern while Floyd was in the neck hold that Floyd may have been experiencing Excited Delirium. I was not familiar with Excited Delerium, so I looked it up at the U.S. National Institutes of Health's National Library of Medicine. It is a condition in which a person's behavior is characterized by agitation, aggression, acute distress and sudden death. "It is typically associated with the use of drugs that alter dopamine processing, hyperthermia, and, most notably, sometimes with death of the affected person in the custody of law enforcement. Subjects typically die from cardiopulmonary arrest, although the cause is debated." You can learn more about the condition through the same source I did at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3088378
The irresponsible media has failed to adequately describe the circumstances that lead to Mr. Floyd being put into the neck hold. So I have looked into it myself. The Statement of Probable Cause for the arrest of Officer Chauvin gives far more detail of what happened that day than the media is reporting. And that detail paints quite a different picture than the cell phone video does. Floyd actively resisted arrest and aggressively refused to be placed into the police car. It should be noted that this description of events is based upon footage from the police body cameras not the testimony of law enforcement officers.
Again, trust but verify. Read what the Hennepin County Medical Examiner's preliminary autopsy report said, and read the Statement of Probable Cause. It's online at https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6933246/Derek-Chauvin-Complaint.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2NRvIZVMKoYdp2313PUcIbOh4nFpU7iv2nLSyUhe-vO_weagfAWneDufA
I'm not saying George Floyd's death was justified. It wasn't. But the narrative surrounding it was created to inflame not to inform.
And that brings me to the protests.
The problem with the protests over the death of George Floyd, beyond their unlawful violence, is that they are based on a false premise. George Floyd was killed because of “police violence.” That is NOT the same as "racist violence." I am angry that a police officer "killed a man" not that he "killed a black man." Skin color is irrelevant. We are all humans.
The protests should focus on the militarization of police and their frequent use of excessive force - which is common against people of every color. There is no reason to believe George Floyd was killed because of his skin color. He was killed because the cop was an asshole.
But Democrats never miss an opportunity to foment racial discord. When will Democrats start judging people not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character? Never. Because playing the race card buys them votes. And with this being an election year, the Democrats and the media - but I repeat myself - are blaming Donald Trump. I don't see how a Republican President of the United States is responsible for the actions of a police officer in a heavily Democrat city (which by the way, is in Congresswoman Ilhan Omar's district), in a heavily Democrat state, where the mayor, police chief - and perhaps even Officer Chauvin himself - plus 12 of the 13 members of the city council are Democrats (the only non-Democrat on the city council is Green Party). The politicization of this terrible incident is disgraceful.
And it is also disgraceful that what should be peaceful protests have become violent with looting, arson, and murder. We have the right to PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE. When protesters get violent and commit arson, they must be stopped by any means necessary.
Contrary to the popular narrative, the tragic death of George Floyd is NOT proof that America is a racist nation. It is proof that we need to demand that the police “Protect & Serve” not “Dominate & Kill.” And we need to also demand that the media quit lying in their deliberate effort to divide us.
UPDATE at 8:08pm on 6/1/2020:
Today, the Hennepin County Medical Examiner officially concluded that the cause of Mr. Floyd's death was "cardiopulmonary arrest complicating law enforcement subdual, restraint, and neck compression."
This finding should make it easier to convict Officer Chauvin of a crime. But I still don't think it will be a murder conviction. We'll know in 2022.
Because I prefer to go by facts that have not been filtered by the dishonest press, I read the actual report that was released by the Hennepin County Medical Examiner.
If you wish to read it, it's online at https://content.govdelivery.com/attachments/MNHENNE/2020/06/01/file_attachments/1464238/2020-3700%20Floyd,%20George%20Perry%20Update%206.1.2020.pdf
UPDATE at 4:28pm on 6/3/2020:
Today, charges against Officer Derek Chauvin were upgraded to second-degree murder, third-degree murder, and manslaughter. The other three officers (Tou Thao, Thomas Lane, and Alexander Kueng) were charged with aiding and abetting second-degree murder and aiding and abetting second-degree manslaughter.