Shhh! Don't Tell Anyone.

 

This is an organization, determined that "no other unarmed Black or Brown person is murdered again," that deserves an A for revealing its motive.

In March of 2024, Al Sharpton's National Action Network announced an upcoming forum, Turning Grief Into Action, to beheld at the annual convention of the organization.  The NAN noted that moderator Ben Crump, whom Reverend Sharpton had called the "Attorney General for Black America," would be joined by family members of Eric Garner, Ahmaud Arbery, George Floyd, Trayvon Martin, Tyre Nichols, and AJ Owens. 

Each individual had been, the press release stated, "unjustly killed either by law enforcement or in violent acts of hatred" and that NAN had

covered costs for the funerals, with Rev. Sharp and Attorney Crump delivering eulogies and calls to action at their ceremonies. The organization continues to work with these families either to hold their loved one's killers accountable or advance issues to ensure no other unarmed Black or Brown person is murdered again.

Whatever one thinks of the virtue of Ben Crump and Al Sharpton or of the specific cases in which they've intervened, these activists clearly believe they are acting on behalf of not only the families, but of the black community itself, in the struggle against allegedly unjust violence- especially from police- against blacks.

And so, unless we live in Texas, you- and I- did not hear about this splendid police work four years ago when

Timothy Michael Randall was on the phone with his mother when a police car pulled up behind his Nissan Altima with its lights flashing. It was just after 12:30 a.m. on Sept. 14, 2022, and Randall was heading to his cousin’s house after a night out.

“He had called to let me know that he was going to be home a few minutes later,” Randall’s mother, Wendy Tippitt, recalled. “So I wouldn’t worry.”

Randall, 29, pulled over and hung up with his mom. Sgt. Shane Iversen of the Rusk County Sheriff’s Office walked up to the Altima and told Randall that he had run a stop sign, police dash camera footage shows. Randall denied doing so, and Iversen ordered him out of the car.

What began as a routine traffic stop, on a country road two hours east of Dallas, quickly spun out of control.

As Randall was stepping out of the car, he put his wallet in his back pocket and adjusted his waistband.

Iversen dug his hands into the front of Randall’s pants and then told him to put his hands behind his back, the dash cam footage shows. Randall kept his arms raised.

I don't know the reason for this- uh-- excursion, but I'm straight and it seems odd. Evidently, Mr. Randall didn't understand the importance of keeping one's mouth shut while being molested (searched) and

“Officer, I don’t have anything on me,” he said.

“Officer, please, can you tell me what I’m under arrest for?” Randall asked moments later.

Iversen didn’t respond. Instead, he wrestled Randall to the pavement.

“Officer, please,” Randall pleaded again as he struggled to get to his feet.

Police often are appreciative if the motorist is respectful to the point of being submissive. Not so this officer because

Then Iversen threw Randall to the ground again. He landed on his back several feet away, but the momentum brought him back to his feet. Randall began to turn to run away from Iversen, who had already pulled out his gun and was pointing it at Randall.

“Get down,” Iversen yelled as he fired one shot, striking Randall in the chest.

Randall continued to run down the street but collapsed face down. Iversen radioed for help and then tried to render medical aid, but Randall died on the pavement. The bullet had torn through his ribs, lungs and heart, according to autopsy records.

After another deputy arrived minutes later, Iversen, then 57, returned to his patrol car and phoned a colleague.

Chastened from just having killed a human being, “I just smoked a dude,” he said in a hushed voice.

It gets worse. 

You don't recall (as I didn't) this incident unless you live(d) in Texas, western Arkansas, or southern Oklahoma, or possibly not even there. Nor would you recall the customary arrival of the Crump & Sharpton Roadshow because it didn't make an appearance. 

Two days after the incident, Iversen  told Texas Rangers investigators that he threw Randall to the ground because he was concerned the man might be able to reach what he thought was gun but Randall quickl got onto his fat. Iversen added "at this point in time, I see him running towards me. I'm on my knees and I'm like he's coming at me." After Randall was cut down, the officer found in his pocket a methamphetamine pipe which he thought be a gun before he searched him.

The case was presented to the grand jury, which issued a no bill, thus failing to indict the policeman. This might strike one as odd, given the a prosecutor can indict a ham sandwich, or rather, persuade a grand jury to do so. Exceptions, Crump & Sharpton would point out, would include a black man killed by a police officer, especially a white police officer What they won't tell you- and what the media won't tell you- is that sometimes a white man is killed with impunity.

Wait- what? We haven't been told that by police reform advocates, the media, Democrats, and- yes- even Republicans. But if this were a story merely of police sometimes being able to get away with (figurative and literal) murder, it would be a story only half-told. There is an even more important moral to the story because

After reviewing the dashcam footage and the Texas Rangers report, two police use-of-force experts contacted by NBC News said they saw no reason for Iversen to open fire during the encounter.

Mickie McComb, a former New Jersey state trooper, said Randall never made any movement that would suggest he was “drawing or attempting to draw a weapon” and at no point was he “charging the officer.”

“There was no threat,” added McComb, who now works as an expert witness on use-of-force cases. “He should have never used deadly force. It was completely uncalled for.”

 David Klinger, a former police officer in Los Angeles and Redmond, Washington, offered a similarly blunt assessment.

“It doesn’t make any sense why he shot the guy,” said Klinger, a criminology professor at the University of Missouri-St. Louis who researches police shootings.

Klinger said he doesn’t understand why Iversen would try to tackle a man whom he believed to be carrying a gun. If he wasn’t able to grab the weapon himself, Klinger said, he should have stepped back, drew his own firearm, radioed for back up and ordered the man onto his knees or onto a prone position on the ground.

“You give him verbal commands to keep his hands in plain view,” Klinger added.

McComb said he believes that Iversen would have faced criminal charges — and likely ended up in prison — had the incident occurred in the Northeast.

“It’d be a completely different ball game,” McComb said. “That’s a bad case.”

It's possible that McComb may be informed by his experience in the People's Republic of New Jersey. There, the investigation of the death of any civilian in an "encounter with a law enforecemnt officer" must be presented to a grand jury, and the investigation conducted not by a county but by the state to maintain its independence from law enforcement.

Nonetheless, what McComb said may in fact be not only common, but standard throughout the northeastern USA   Here, it is a completely different ballgame than in Texas and no doubt some other states.

It's a radical statement because you will hear it nowhere else. One would think that, as the "defund the police slogan" has brought increasing criticism, there would be questioning of the two premises of the black lives matter movement: police overreach is imposed against only blacks; and 2) police misbehavior is widespread, almost uniform, throughout the USA.

These two things are not true and never were. Democrats will not acknowledge it because the base of the party is black women. Republicans won't acknowledge it because they will not admit that police can be in wrong, and also wish to throw blame upon any combination of Democrats, liberals, the underclass,or the media. The media will not acknowledge it because Democrats and Republicans won't, and thus it is not "news".

But it's reality. Many police officers do their job very well, some poorly, and some merely adequately.... kind of, like, other Americans. But they often are characterized as a whole as God's gift to humanity or racist pigs.  Most are neither, and the minnority who are irresponsible are irresponsible to civilians regardless of their race. And when they are, the consequences can range from nothing to very severe, often depending on the jurisdiction in which the act occurred. It's Criminology 101.

   

Share |

Tell the Truth, Vivek

We don't know what precipitated or exactly what happened in downtown Cincinnati on Frida night/early Saturday morning. However, we do know that Vivek "the fake" Ramaswamy, running for the Republican nomination for Ohio governor, is right, and he is wrong. On Monday, Ramaswamy spoke to the young woman, Holly, who was assaulted and later that day stated

She’s a single working mom who went to a friend’s birthday party. It’s unconscionable that there were no police present in that area of Cincinnati on a Friday night, or even an ambulance to take her to the hospital. Hard-working Americans shouldn’t have to worry for their safety when they have a good time in our cities. Holly said not a single local or state official had yet reached out as of earlier this afternoon, other than one police detective.

Leftists like to lecture about ‘systemic injustice’ while thugs turn our cities into war zones. I’m done with their excuses.  As governor, I’ll make sure they’re behind bars, not running wild. Our cops will have the green light to restore order—no apologies. Holly appreciates the kind words and prayers from patriots across the country, and hopes that the publicity around her story ensures that local & state leaders clean up our failing cities. We hope to visit Holly soon as she recovers.

      

The mayor of Cincinnati is chosen in a non-partisan election. The incumbent is currently embroiled in a re-election race with Corey Bowman, the half-brother of Vice President J.D. Vance. The Representative for the city in the US House of Representatives is a Democrat but the governor, as well as the state's two US Senators, are Republicans. 

Those are the public officials who could have called the young victim, about whom the gubernatorial candidate has some concern. Yet, Ramaswamy blames "leftists" whom, he claims, "like to lecture about 'systemic injustice' while thugs turn our cities into war zones." 

Our cities, the congressional candidate contends, are "failing" and  being turned "into war zones" by officials unwilling, unlike himself, to give police "the green light to restore order- no apologies." Accountability, evidently, is so last decade. 

And so, ironically, is Ramaswamy, who raves about those "leftists (who) like to lecture about 'systemic injustice."" In what world is the Ohio Republican living in? As a resident of the USA, I've heard very few leftists decrying systemic injustice the last few years. And the phrase "systemic injustice" has nearly disappeared from popular discourse.

At :50 of its video above, the New York Post noted "It remains unclear what sparked it- but witnesses told WXIX that one of the groups made racial comments before the blows started."

We don't know which side made a comment about race before the brawl started. However, we do know that the white man and the white woman were outnumbered and being pummeled. Police chief Terri Theetge, noting that only one  of the "over 100 witnesses" called the police (at 3:06 a.m.) remarked

Nobody called the police. Nobody got us there as quickly as we could get there. They waited until they saw it on social media. That is unacceptable, to not call the police when you view this. Traffic was horrendous. People saw this, they were fighting in front of traffic. Why didn't somebody call us?

Presumably, the main reason is that individuals, particularly young people as most of these were, prefer to use their phone as a cameras rather than, well, as a phone.  There also is the bystander effect.

Nonetheless, there is a likely third reason. The criminal behavior appears to have a racial component- and the blacks present seem to have emerged relatively unscathed. That lessened the incentive for witnesses to call the police. Nor did any of the witnesses remain behind to speak to the police.

That lessened the incentive also for two other, prominent individuals to get involved. Whenever there is a hint of a bias crime committed against one or more blacks or a crime which may, just may, have been racially motivated, Benjamin Crump and Reverend Al Sharpton are at the scene in two shakes of a lamb's tail.

They are, of course, not in Cincinnati and for that, police and the citizens of the city should be thankful as law enforcement continues an exhaustive investigation.   Ramaswamy need not have called out Crump or Sharpton by name. However, for a  guy quick to condemn government officials, leftists, and "failing cities," he's awfully reticent to identify what's really going on. Seems about right for a Trump acolyte.

Share |

Why This Comment?

Who's he talking about?

Joe Scarborough wisely and very courageously asserts

.... Again, a good question to ask about what he said in a private fundraiser. A good question to ask- I would have asked the same question. But to ask that question about absent any context seems to me to be- you talk about a phony, a moral relativism is just screaming through that part of the interview. And I must say I was shocked.

Scarborough was talking about Lester Holt, the anchorperson for NBC, the parent company of MSNBC, where Scarborough works. He criticized him as a "phony" displaying "moral relativism." After the "Joe" of Morning Joe, Reverend Al Sharpton claimed "I completely agree with you."

Not so much. The money quote 

Clearly, I don't think that President Biden has engaged in that kind of rhetoric that would in any way incite people to do things that we saw on January 6 or the attack on (Nancy) Pelosi's husband. But at the same time, I think we have the moral obligation to be consistent. You cannot- cannot- stand up against what happened to Pelosi's husband or what happened on January 6 and then act like it's alright what happened to Donald Trump and I think that is part of the challenge that we have.

Besides threatening to quit if Morning Joe is pulled from the air again, Joe Scarborough also swiped at NBC colleague Lester Holt for his Biden interview, namely his question about the "bullseye" remark.

"Talk about phony moral relativism... I must say, I was shocked!" pic.twitter.com/dTuOd1OhX4

— Justin Baragona (@justinbaragona) July 16, 2024

There are two possible explanations for Sharpton's terrible bothsiderism. Or the motive might be the characteristically bad judgement of someone who was an anti-white crusader in the 1980s.and  virulent anti-Semite in the 1990s.

In either case, the implication that Democrats have condoned the shooting of Donald Trump bears resemblance to the criticism of a few Democrats, most significantly South Carolina Representative James Clyburn, for condemnation of alleged sloganeering with "defund the police."  That would have been valid had Clyburn identified any Democrats who employed the slogan. He could have done so- there were two of them, Representative Cori Bush and Representative Rashida Tlaib.

There- I've named names, which is more than Clyburn did, as befitting the ardent supporter of the doomed black lives matter movement, which gave rise to what small support there was of the defund the police movement.

And it's also more than what Al Sharpton has done in the matter of Democrats minimizing the assassination attempt upon Mr. Trump It would be truly impressive to hear the scoundrel do so, given that there seems to have been none.  Decades ago, we recognized him as a race hustler. To this day, whatever Al Sharpton is up to, it's no good.

Share |

At It Again

The eulogy for Jordan Neely, killed by Daniel Penny, on a New York City subway train, was delivered in Mount Neboh Baptist Church in New York City on Friday by Reverend Al Sharpton.

A New York jury, assuming there is no guilty plea, ultimately will render a judgement as to whether Mr. Penny actually murdered Mr. Neely. Presumably, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg believes that the jury will pronounce a guilty verdict upon the accused, who was charged with second degree Manslaughter eleven days after the incident. (By contrast, Bragg did not secure an indictment against Donald Trump until 401 days after Special Assistant District Attorney Mark Pomerantz resigned because Bragg decided against charging Trump for what Pomerantz termed "various felony violations.") 

Sharpton at the church was doing what he does, viewing a set of facts and accepting some while discarding others, and coming to a premature and entirely predictable conclusion.

Reverend Sharpton appears to have spoken for about twenty-one minutes, and the video below captures only the highlights.  He remarked

We should not- not- celebrate Jordan's life but we should not ignore how he died. This funeral was not on the schedule. We're not here because of natural causes.... Jordan was not annoying someone on the train.

Neely was alleged to have been annoying people on the train, the extent to which no doubt will be addressed at trial. However, if he were not annoying people there, he'd be way out of character because he reportedly

had a troubling history of violent attacks on straphangers in New York City before the disturbed man reportedly threatened passengers and Marine vet Daniel Penny allegedly put him in a fatal chokehold.

The 30-year-old vagrant, who once performed as a Michael Jackson impersonator, had been arrested dozens of times – including most recently for vicious assaults on subway riders, court records show.

In 2021, Neely socked a 67-year-old woman as she exited the Bowery station in the East Village in Lower Manhattan.

The woman sustained a broken nose, a fractured orbital bone, and "bruising, swelling and substantial pain to the back of her head" in the Nov. 12 attack, according to a criminal complaint. 

The woman sustained a broken nose, a fractured orbital bone, and "bruising, swelling and substantial pain to the back of her head" in the Nov. 12 attack, according to a criminal complaint. 

A pillar of the community, the Michael Jackson impersonator pled guilty to felony assault and

Court records show that as an adult Neely regularly lashed out at strangers on the subway and on the street.

From January 2020 to August 2021, he was arrested for public lewdness after pulling down his pants and exposing himself to a female stranger, misdemeanor assault for hitting a woman in the face, and criminal contempt for violating a restraining order. All three cases were dismissed as part of his Feb. 9 plea deal.

In June 2019, Neely attacked Filemon Castillo Baltazar, 68, on the platform of the W. 4th St. Station in Greenwich Village, according to the court papers.

"Out of nowhere, he punched me in the face," the victim told the New York Daily News. He said he'd seen Neely before looking for food in the trash bins.

One month prior, he hit a man so hard in the face that he broke his nose on the platform of the Broadway-Lafayette station – the same subway stop where he died four years later.

For both 2019 cases, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor assault and was sentenced to six months in jail.

Reverend Sharpton maintained also

Jordan was screaming for help...

We keep criminalizing people with mental illness. People keep criminalizing people that need help. They don't need abuse. They need help.

If Jordan was screaming for help, then..... oh, he simply wasn't. The New York Times explains

In February, Mr. Neely, who had been in jail on an assault charge for punching a 67-year-old woman and breaking several bones in her face, was released to a residential treatment program, under a plea deal that required him to avoid trouble for 15 months, stay on antipsychotic medication and not abuse drugs.

Two weeks later, he walked out of the facility and did not return, and the arrest warrant was issued.

In March, Mr. Neely was approached by homeless-outreach workers at a subway station in Manhattan. He was neatly dressed and calm and accepted a ride to a shelter in the Bronx where he spent the night, according to outreach records shared with The New York Times.

But on April 8, when outreach workers found him at an end-of-the-line station in Coney Island, Mr. Neely, wearing dirty clothes riddled with burn holes, exposed himself and urinated inside a subway car, according to the notes shared with The Times.

Outreach workers, whose job requires them to win the trust of people who seek to avoid contact with the authorities, typically do not check for warrants, but they summoned the police, who ejected him from the station.

The police were also apparently unaware of the warrant. A program launched in 2019 in which the police did warrant checks on people caught violating transit-system rules was abandoned during the pandemic, after criticism that it was criminalizing homelessness.

"We" are so "criminalizing people that need help" that after Neely violently assaulted an elderly woman, he was not incarcerated but instead given an opportunity to get healthy at an in-patient treatment program at no expense to him.  He left, and when found the next month was taken to a shelter. When he committed a misdemeanor the following month, he was not taken to jail.

Mr. Neely was a criminal who was afforded considerable leniency by a law enforcement and court establishment which leans backward not to criminalize homelessness or mental illness. Ultimately, that approach failed, as it does with some and doesn't with others, because Jordan evidently wanted nothing to do with anyone who tried to help him.

The killing of Neely was unfortunate, even tragic, and a jury will decide whether (in its view) it was criminal. No one, not even- and  perhaps especially- the deeply tainted Sharpton can know for certain yet if this homicide was murder.  It's long past time for us, especially the Morning Joe crew which affectionately calls him "the Rev," to question the motives of Reverend Sharpton. Whether motivated by money, personal glory, racial prejudice, or an honest commitment to jumping to conclusions, he represents an ever-increasing obstacle to healing of the body politic.

Share |

Con Men

Put Reverend Al Sharpton together with Joe Scarborough, a reprehensible discussion is likely to follow- but not quite to this extent.

The MSNBC host noted (below) on November 3 a Pew Research Center poll which indicates that 82% of black Democrats but only 33% of white Democrats believe "violent crime is very important to mid term vote."  He added

This explains so much of what you've been trying to tell us and teach us for two years, that white, woke latte liberals sit in Park Slope and say "oh, don't talk about crime, that's racist." But you say everybody in the congregation is telling you crime's a top issue.

Results from a new Pew poll say that Black voters are most concerned about violent crime. #MorningJoe pic.twitter.com/efS5PH6ha8

— Reverend Al Sharpton (@TheRevAl) November 2, 2022

This is a  white, woke latte conservative criticizing white, woke latte liberals.  Formerly, currently, and forever a right-winger, Scarborough changed his tune- without changing his ideology on core issues- when a few years ago Donald Trump on his way to the presidency viciously attacked Scarborough and his co-host (now also, wife) Mika Brzezinski. 

When George Floyd protests broke out twenty-nine months ago, Scarborough jumped onboard, probably both to placate his guests and position himself as newly woke, all the while criticizing people who are "woke." Still a supporter of lowering taxes for the wealthy, cutting entitlements/earned benefits, deficit reduction if it doesn't affect the Pentagon, reduced government regulation, and free (rather than fair) trade. he yearns for conservative candidates less crude and rude than Donald Trump.

But that is Joe Scarborough, former Republican congressman. Al Sharpton, once an overweight, poorly-dressed, race-based activist, has now transitioned into a slimmed-down, well-dressed race-based activist and informal Democratic spokesman.

The last attribute is subject to change based on Sharpton's decades-long need for self-promotion and taking a swipe at whites. He responded to Scarborough

Everywhere I've gone this year and you know I preach to different congregations every Sunday because my ministry is National Action Network- it's all people talk to me about. Reverend, we get it about police reform. We get it about voting rights but what about crime? Why aren't you talking about that? So I didn't get this out of some great study. I got this from real people. I got this from people.

As against unreal people, we are to suppose- perhaps those "white, woke latte liberals" (perhaps others) Scarborough mentioned. Of course, blacks are on the whole more concerned about crime than are whites, Asian-Americans, or Latinos. It is more prevalent in black communities than elsewhere, and so it is more likely to be uppermost in the minds of African-Americans than in non-blXKA. That is totally apart from what to do about it, which presumably was not polled. Sharpton continues

And you know Reverend Mike Waldon- outstanding minister in Harlem, said this woke analysis of we don't want police comes from privileged people because people that are not privileged need police on the ground to deal with the carjackings, deal with home invasions, deal with that they can't walk to the subway, get on the subway landings and step back because they're afraid of being pushed in front of the train.

This is a daily reality. There are women and men getting ready for work right now that are afraid to go to the subway station right no, afraid to walk. That's not exaggeration, that's explaining. If we don't address that, we're not rally dealing with the masses that we claim to speak for.

Public officials have tried to address that. Mayor Mike Bloomberg instituted stop-and-frisk in New York City to deal with the proliferation, possession, and use of illegal firearms, which in other instances Al Sharpton has, however disingenuously, decried. The policy was extremely controversial, significantly curbed by the courts, and its use declined measurably.

But during the several years in which this policy was under attack and he called for "police reform and accountability," Sharpton never suggested an alternative to stop-and-frisk.   Three themes were obvious: 1) Police brutalize black citizens; 2) Police brutalize black citizens; 3) Police brutalize black citizens.

Hints of Reverend Sharpton's trinity were evident decades ago. When in 1987 fifteen year old Tawana Brawley unbelievably claimed she had been raped by a group of white men, Reverend Sharpton took up her cause while accusing various officials of covering up the alleged crime (later determined definitively to have been a hoax) because of racial bias, and he and Brawley were successfully sued by county prosecutor Steven Pagones.  Sharpton paid off his debt with funds from supporters, the National Action Network. To this day, Sharpton claims that he actually believed Brawley, which if true would make him the most naive race hustler in New York City history.

In 1990 Sharpton played a leading role in the boycott of  Korean-owned grocery stores in Brooklyn, precipitated by a perceived slight to a black woman. The following year

... after a Chasidic Jew accidentally killed a young black child in a car accident, Sharpton went to Crown Heights, where he spoke at the funeral for the child. There, he said that “diamond merchants” had “blood of innocent babies” on their hands. He also said, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.” The Crown Heights riots led to the death of Yankel Rosenbaum, an Orthodox Jewish student. Rosenbaum’s brother told TruthRevolt, “He has never apologized, he has never offered any sincere remorse for the atrocious things he has done by way of terrible racist behavior and lies, for inciting racial events. Anybody who takes a look at that person and wants to spend advertising dollars on him should take a hard look at their moral stance in terms of their position in business, in commerce, and in the community.”

There were other incidents because Al Sharpton was all in on racial antagonism, and still is. Currently, he is the beneficiary of an ongoing effort at MSNBC to portray him as a responsible member of the media, with a one-hour show and guest appearances with Joe Scarborough and other hosts.

It has been over 35 years of Al Sharpton featuring racial exploitation and division.  Now Sharpton's shtick is that woke whites are disregarding the fear of crime pervasive in black neighborhoods and which the residents are powerless to address.

While presented in a different complexion, it bears a similarity to those "pointy-headed bureaucrats" the late and not-great George Corley Wallace once excoriated. A misleading narrative, it boosts Republican electoral chances and helps Joe Scarborough establish the reputation for being a friend to the black community he is carefully cultivating.

 

Share |

Motive Misunderstood

There has been considerable speculation that two Americans, Paul Whelan and Britney Griner, will be swapped for convicted Russian Viktor Bout, serving a 25-year sentence for arms dealing. Whelan has been incarcerated in Russia for over three years years and Griner has been detained there after she entered the nation at Moscow's Sheremetyevo airport with vape cartridges containing hashish oil.

On the Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show Friday, former President Donald J. Trump remarked of Griner

She knew you don't go in there loaded up with drugs and she admitted it. I assume she admitted it without too much force because it is what it is. And it certainly doesn't seem like a very good trade, does it? He is an absolute one of the worst in the world and he is going to be given his freedom because a potentially spoiled person went to Russia loaded up with drugs."

Addressing Donald Trump’s statement on Brittney Griner. #MorningJoe pic.twitter.com/iyOfBjNwbk

— Reverend Al Sharpton (@TheRevAl) August 1, 2022

The vape cartridges containing hashish oil seized by authorities when Britney Griner entered Russia evidently contained only a small amount of the prohibited substance. So Messrs. Scarborough and Sharpton were correct that the WNBA star wasn't "loaded up with drugs." But their central point is invalid.

With Sharpton as a guest, as he frequently is on "Morning Joe," Scarborough went on full pander mode, remarking of Trump "and you cannot help but wonder if he's saying that because she's a black basketball player." 

Scarborough and Sharpton have made a cottage industry of pandering to one another on the show. And of course the charge that Trump wouldn't have made the comment if Griner weren't a black basketball player met with Sharpton's approval because "RevAl"- as the cool cat, disrespectful host typically calls the minister- has always been about race. He was a race hustler in his early days in New York City, and still is.

When a young man is shot and killed by police, Al Sharpton will be practically the first on the scene. However, not always: his outrage is reserved for black victims of police violence while the others are invisible to him.

You cannot help but wonder- as Scarborough would put it- that after more than six years as a congressman and 16 years as a news show host, if one could be so naive as to believe that Donald Trump is criticizing a possible deal for Britney Griner primarily because she is a black basketball player.

On CNN's "New Day" Monday morning, Bout attorney Steve Zissou strongly implied that a deal releasing his client will be consummated. Donald Trump agrees. The ex-President is anticipating running a presidential campaign asserting that the Biden Administration is characterized by weakness.  He will charge, as he did in the 2016 campaign, that America's enemies are taking advantage of the nation and making us a laughingstock around the world.

As luck (for him) would have it, the clusterf_ _ _ that is the threatened visit of the Democratic Speaker of the House to Taiwan fits into this narrative. The USA military, the State Department, and the President of the United States of America all are displeased that Nancy Pelosi has suggested that she will visit Taipei. The speculation has angered mainland China, but the trip may accomplish..... we don't know. Whatever the response- now or delayed, overt or covert- from Beijing, it's not a good look for the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives to defy the wishes of the President from the same party.

I don't think we lose anything if Pelosi refuses to go to Taiwan any more than we lost anything by withdrawing troops from Afghanistan.

Wisdom and prudence is strength, not weakness. And acting out of ego and pride is weakness, not strength.

— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) July 30, 2022

  

Donald Trump is complaining about Britney Griner because he will present any agreement as proof of the weakness of Washington Democrats. Sure, the ex-President could complain about the white guy, Paul Whelan- but practically no one knows who Paul Whelan is. The media, traditional and social, including Scarborough's show itself  have made sure of that as they have repeatedly invoked Griner's name, emphasized the plight of the basketball star, and virtually ignored Whelan.

Nonetheless, Scarborough will attribute Trump's attack to race because that's how Al Sharpton wants to frame it. Returning the favor, Sharpton actually referred to Joe's assistant and sort-of co-host as "Mika Brzezinski, our civil rights leader in that area."  Mika Brzezinski, Mrs. Joe Scarborough: our new civil rights hero!

It's no surprise that Donald Trump is taking the side of the Russian government over the American government and lying about the amount of drugs involved. It should be no surprise, also, that lifetime right-winger Joe Scarborough continues to evoke race to establish liberal bona fides.

 

Share |

Finally, All Lives Matter

Ten days after the murder by a white police officer of George Floyd in Minneapolis, a senor editor of Good Housekeeping argued "responding 'All Lives Matter' to 'Black Lives Matter' is actually more divisive than unifying. That's because it discounts and diminishes the focus on the violence and discrimination Black individuals face every day in this country."

The following day, a sportswriter named Donnovan Bennett generously offered  "a tutorial on why 'All Lives Matter' is somewhere on the spectrum between tone deaf and offensive." A columnist at Cleveland.com labeled it "one of America's most ignorant rallying cries." Joseph Margulies, a professor of law and government at Cornell University, charged "saying that 'all lives matter' is a weapon of racism."

Even John McWhorter, in his naive days, maintained "Black lives matter’ means ‘black lives matter, too.’ The ‘too’ is implied." (It rarely was.)

"What a difference a day makes, 24 little hours," sang Dinah Washington 62 years ago. Twenty-four hours can make a difference, and what a difference 18 months make. Back in those heady days of "black lives matter" and "Black Lives Matter," the slogan "All Lives Matter" was widely considered racist in liberal and progressive circles. 

It seems the worm has turned:

Father of Ahmaud Arbery just now: “ALL lives matter. I don’t want no daddy to watch his kid get shot down like that. It’s ALL our problem. So let’s keep fighting to make this a better place for all human beings. Love everybody! All human beings need to be treated equally.” ❤️👏🏼👑 pic.twitter.com/PlGwBeMlhU

— Michael Shellenberger (@ShellenbergerMD) November 24, 2021

Marcus Arbery should be applauded, and not only for stating "for real, all lives matter, not just blacks. We don't want to see nobody going through this." He said this in the presence of Reverend Al Sharpton, irreverently referred to as "the Rev," by the rude Nicole Wallace and a few others at MSNBC. Sharpton had contended fifteen days after the murder of Floyd "The problem is it has not been equal on the other side, so there’s been no equal need to say white lives matter – that has been a given and the system has worked that way."

Safe prediction: personalities appearing on MSNBC and CNN will either ignore Mr. Arbery's remark or claim the context has changed. The context in the spring/summer of 2020 was racial justice; the context in the autumn of 2021 is.... racial justice.

As Reverend Sharpton knew, virtually no one was saying "white lives matter." Some people were saying "all lives matter." And now the father of Marcus Arbery has said so, also.

                                                HAPPY THANKSGIVING

 

Share |

Race, Race, And More Race

Mention to northeasterners of an advanced age Freddy's Fashion Mart, Crown Heights, and Steve Pagones, and they may know to whom you're referring. Swap out Steve Pagones for Tawana Brawley, and they almost surely will.  Allow Glen Loury to remind us of that day in November, 1987 when

.... a 15-year-old black girl was found lying in a garbage bag, smeared with feces, with various racial slurs and epithets written in charcoal on her body. She said that she’d been raped by six white men and that two were law-enforcement officials. Mr. Sharpton relentlessly championed her cause. And yet, after seven months of examining police and medical records, a grand jury found “overwhelming evidence” that Ms. Brawley had fabricated her entire story.

Yet Mr. Sharpton proceeded to accuse the prosecutor, Steven Pagones, of being one of the perpetrators of the alleged abduction and rape. Mr. Sharpton was successfully sued (along with Ms. Brawley’s lawyers, Anthony H. Maddox Jr. and C. Vernon Mason Sr.) for defamation. The jury in this civil action found Mr. Sharpton liable for making seven defamatory statements about Mr. Pagones, whose life fell apart as a result of the entire episode. Mr. Sharpton refused to pay his share of damages, which was later paid by a number of his supporters, and he has refused to apologize.

To this day, as reported in a fawning profile in March, 2018 unfortunately appearing in The New York Times, Sharpton defiantly defends his actions in this matter, stating "If I had to choose between a 15-year-old black girl and a white legal system that has always done us wrong, I’m going with her."

As a New Jerseyan of a certain age, I recall  being confident that the matter was a hoax, only because it was obviously so. . And now anyone who has a clue would recognize the same Al Sharpton defending racial bias and discrimination. Politico reports

The Rev. Al Sharpton has made calls to at least one member of Congress to convey his concerns that the full axing of the so-called carried interest loophole that’s being discussed for inclusion in the reconciliation bill would hurt Black businesspeople trying to build wealth, four sources tell Daniel.

 — Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio), a member of the House Financial Services Committee and chair of the powerful Congressional Black Caucus, told POLITICO that Sharpton called her twice in mid-September to ask her whether a carve-out for those businesspeople could be created. Such a carve-out would be unprecedented and of questionable legality. Two sources said Rep. Steven Horsford (D-Nev.) has also called Sharpton to hear his views on this issue, and a spokesperson for the congressman said the two spoke “about ways to help Black-owned businesses. Reverend Sharpton’s National Action Network has a chapter in Las Vegas, and he and Congressman Horsford speak often about priorities for the Black community"....

Asked about his stance on this issue, Sharpton said in a brief interview that he “raised a question about whether there could be a carve-out about Black first-generation people who say that it affects their money. … I’m concerned about the unintended consequences.” He said he was not being paid to bring the issue up with lawmakers, calling it a position of his National Action Network, which has worked on advancing civil rights for decades. Sharpton said later that he wanted the businesspeople's concerns to be considered as Congress deliberates the provision. “I’m concerned that Black businesses that I fought for be heard and that their concerns be heard,” he said.

Al Sharpton is lobbying against closing the carried interest loophole in the Biden budget - a rule that allows billionaire investors to pay as low as 20% on taxes, lower than their janitors -- and he's saying he's doing it to protect Black businesspeople trying to build wealth. pic.twitter.com/SK26TNwo1u

— Lee Fang (@lhfang) October 21, 2021

Sharpton evidently is not concerned about small businesses. He's not concerned about even black small businesses.  He's concerned about wealthy black business owners.

Al Sharpton is lobbying against closing the carried interest loophole in the Biden budget - a rule that allows billionaire investors to pay as low as 20% on taxes, lower than their janitors -- and he's saying he's doing it to protect Black businesspeople trying to build wealth.

That's because Al Sharpton has little interest in social justice even less in economic justice.  His passion is race, and he is little more than a race hustler.  Yet he retains credibility among some Democratic politicians as well as a show on MSNBC, which should be disturbing among people who actually do care about social and economic justice.

 

Share |

Still The Race Man

Look who's back- it's Al Sharpton!

At 57:46 of the relevant portion of the video below, Reverend Sharpton claims

We should not let them submit us to a double standard whether they be on the left or on the right because many of us are not intimidated on either side.  A lot of people call themselves progressive- that call themselves progressive, are progressive about everything but race.

Sharpton then went on to defend the nomination of Lloyd Austin for Secretary of Defense. He did not argue that General Austin should be granted a waiver because he is a particularly good nominee, or that a retired general is a good choice for the position, or that President Biden should be given the utmost deference. No sir, skin color was the overt basis.

Sharpton didn't specify by name anyone not progressive on race. He didn't because he couldn't. He couldn't because, at least among Democratic governors, members of Congress, and presidential candidates, the number varies between 1 and -1,

Among such prominent Democrats, there is none who questioned the motives, ideology, or tactics of the defining organization- Black Lives Matter- of the racial justice/police brutality protests in the summer. Among such Democrats, there is none who questioned the selection of a black vice-presidential nominee as "historic" nor suggested that the candidate, whose father was born in the Caribbean nation of Jamaica, might not be African-American. Nor is there any who has suggested that a President Biden should nominate for cabinet posts individuals on the basis of qualifications and ideological principals aside from race. None.

Only ironically entertained, Matt Stoller finds Sharpton's "critique of progressives who advocate against corporate influence in government as racist somewhat interesting." That's more polite than inaccurate and much more so than reprehensible.  

I also find Al Sharpton's critique of progressives who advocate against corporate influence in government as racist somewhat interesting. https://t.co/87vF0lI02G

— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) December 12, 2020

In January, 2019, as the race for the Democratic presidential nomination began to heat up, Glenn Loury reminded us

Mr. Sharpton came onto the national scene in 1987, during what is now known as the Tawana Brawley affair. On Nov. 28 of that year, a 15-year-old black girl was found lying in a garbage bag, smeared with feces, with various racial slurs and epithets written in charcoal on her body. She said that she’d been raped by six white men and that two were law-enforcement officials. Mr. Sharpton relentlessly championed her cause. And yet, after seven months of examining police and medical records, a grand jury found “overwhelming evidence” that Ms. Brawley had fabricated her entire story.

Yet Mr. Sharpton proceeded to accuse the prosecutor, Steven Pagones, of being one of the perpetrators of the alleged abduction and rape. Mr. Sharpton was successfully sued (along with Ms. Brawley’s lawyers, Anthony H. Maddox Jr. and C. Vernon Mason Sr.) for defamation. The jury in this civil action found Mr. Sharpton liable for making seven defamatory statements about Mr. Pagones, whose life fell apart as a result of the entire episode. Mr. Sharpton refused to pay his share of damages, which was later paid by a number of his supporters, and he has refused to apologize.

In August 1991, after an automobile accident involving the motorcade of a Hasidic rabbi accidentally killed a black child, riots broke out in the Crown Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn. Much of the press portrayed it as a kind of cultural clash between the black and Jewish communities, but it was described accurately by the Times columnist, A.M. Rosenthal, as a “pogrom.”

Following the death of the boy, Gavin Cato, hundreds of black men took to the streets. Within hours of the accident, 20 young black men surrounded Yankel Rosenbaum, a 29-year-old Australian yeshiva student visiting the United States to conduct research for his doctorate. They stabbed him several times in the back and beat him. He subsequently died of his injuries. The rioting continued for three days, leaving 152 police officers and 38 civilians injured. At least 122 blacks and seven whites were arrested.

Amid this unrest, Mr. Sharpton led hundreds of protesters on a march in front of the headquarters of the Chabad-Lubavitch Hasidic movement. During his remarks at Gavin Cato’s funeral, at which there was a banner declaring, “Hitler did not do the job,” Mr. Sharpton let loose with a eulogy blaming “the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights,” and insisted that “the issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid.” He continued: “All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no kaffeeklatsch, no skinnin’ and grinnin’. Pay for your deeds.”

Four years later, Mr. Sharpton incited violence again. In 1995, Fred Harari, a Jewish tenant of a retail property on 125th Street who operated Freddy’s Fashion Mart, sought to evict his longtime subtenant, a black-owned record store called the Record Shack. Beginning that August, Mr. Sharpton led a series of marches against the planned eviction. Protesters led by Mr. Sharpton’s National Action Network picketed outside the store day after day, referring to Jews as “bloodsuckers” and threatening, “We’re going to burn and loot the Jews.” At one point Mr. Sharpton told protesters, “We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business.” Never mind that the building was actually owned by a black Pentecostal church.

Then, on Dec. 8, 1995, a protester named Roland J. Smith Jr. entered Mr. Harari’s store, told all the black customers to leave, shot several remaining customers and set the store on fire. The gunman fatally shot himself, and seven store employees died of smoke inhalation.

These incidents transpired a quarter of a century or more ago. Often as people age, they acquire perspective, a modicum of common sense, and a positive moral compass.  It was reasonable to expect that with wider exposure and even a program on a major cable network, Reverend Sharpton would have learned that individuals should be judged on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. It was reasonable- but naive, because Al Sharpton remains a race hustler.

 

Share |

Cataclysmic Event

In a statement Saturday, Bill Maher wrote

Friday nights are always my worst night of sleep because I'm up reflecting on the things I should or shouldn't have said on my live show. Last night was a particularly long night as I regret the word I used in the banter of a live moment. The word was offensive and I regret saying it and am very sorry.

Prior to the apology, Reverend Al Sharpton had contended

The n-word has a long history of hate, murder, violence, oppression and terror associated with it. People forget that even in the not-so-distant past, it was used to delegitimize an entire group and deny them voting rights, fair housing, jobs, access to upward mobility and so much more. Today, it is still being used to target, harm and attack folks no matter how successful or famous they are. We cannot accept usage of this term even when it is in the context of a bad joke. A joke, I might add, that made reference to ‘working in the fields’. There is no misconstruing what the subject matter was here. Maher should be ashamed.

Maintaining "regret" at saying something "offensive" for which he is now "very sorry" is as complete an apology we'll get from any public figure for anything, a little short of self-flagellation.

And so it is now not time to defend Maher or to consider the list of rap performers who use the "n-word" with no criticism from Sharpton or most of Maher's critics. Nor is it necessary to criticize Sharpton for implying that Maher somehow is responsible for anything pertaining to voting rights, fair housing, jobs, or access to upward mobility.  If Al Sharpton remains credible in the eyes of a substantial number of people after his despicable record, no amount of reasoning will help. And- to be fair- he is not alone in his simplistic approach.







As the video above indicates, Maher did not use the actual "n-word" but rather "house nigg_ _ ," which associate professor of English and comparative literature John McWhorter maintains "is a word that developed from 'nigger,' but has a different pronunciation and also a different meaning." Addressing the controversy over Larry Wilmore's reference at the 2016 White House Correspondents' Dinner to President Obama as "my nigga," McWhorter argued

These days, many seem to think that the intent of the person using the N-word is less important than the offense taken by the hearer. But there are times when hearers might reconsider the offense they are taking, especially because language submits only reluctantly to policing.

Let's police the use of the N-word as a slur, but not a word that started from it but now means "friend," and not people only talking about, rather than using it. 

While linguistic pespective is provided by a live English professor, history perspective may be provided by a deceased activist.  At Michigan State University in 1963, Malcolm X explained

So you have two types of Negro. The old type and the new type. Most of you know the old type. When you read about him in history during slavery he was called "Uncle Tom." He was the house Negro. And during slavery you had two Negroes. You had the house Negro and the field Negro.
The house Negro usually lived close to his master. He dressed like his master. He wore his master's second-hand clothes. He ate food that his master left on the table. And he lived in his master's house--probably in the basement or the attic--but he still lived in the master's house.

So whenever that house Negro identified himself, he always identified himself in the same sense that his master identified himself. When his master said, "We have good food," the house Negro would say, "Yes, we have plenty of good food." "We" have plenty of good food. When the master said that "we have a fine home here," the house Negro said, "Yes, we have a fine home here." When the master would be sick, the house Negro identified himself so much with his master he'd say, "What's the matter boss, we sick?" His master's pain was his pain. And it hurt him more for his master to be sick than for him to be sick himself. When the house started burning down, that type of Negro would fight harder to put the master's house out than the master himself would.

But then you had another Negro out in the field. The house Negro was in the minority. The masses--the field Negroes were the masses. They were in the majority. When the master got sick, they prayed that he'd die. [Laughter] If his house caught on fire, they'd pray for a wind to come along and fan the breeze.

If someone came to the house Negro and said, "Let's go, let's separate," naturally that Uncle Tom would say, "Go where? What could I do without boss? Where would I live? How would I dress? Who would look out for me?" That's the house Negro. But if you went to the field Negro and said, "Let's go, let's separate," he wouldn't even ask you where or how. He'd say, "Yes, let's go." And that one ended right there.

Still, Bill Maher shouldn't have made his remark. If comments like that are not eradicated or at least universally condemned when uttered, we might one day vote in as President of the United States someone who believes he can own a black person.

Share |

Predictable


The killing fields go on.

Two young men and one juvenile are accused of gunning down an Australian baseball player, jogging in the Oklahoma town of Duncan, for "the fun of it," as the 17-year old reportedly has acknowledged.

Fox and Friends' guest host Anna Kooiman, recognizing the absence of a live shot of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton she expected, commented "Oh, wait, we don't have it.  Why don't we have it. Because they haven't come forward and said anything. Are they going to? Will they? And should they?"   Colleague Steve Doocy responded "We heard a lot from them during the Trayvon Martin situation."  (JesseJacksonSharpton: they are the same person, right?)

Rush Limbaugh also suggests that JesseJacksonSharpton is responsible for any problem among blacks, emphasizing "We have not heard from the Reverend Sharpton, the Reverend Jackson, the NAACP. We haven't heard from anybody."  He claimed:

Two black guys and a white guy in the group.  No matter where you look in the media, it's not a racial event. Nothing about is racist. This is the epitome of media irresponsibility.  It's a classic illustration of just what role the mainstream media is playing in the destruction of American culture and society...

The Trayvon Martin shooting? I'll just tell you something: From Obama on down, they didn't care about Trayvon Martin.  All that mattered was that incident offered them an opportunity to advance their political agenda.  This doesn't.  Everything to these people is political.  There's nothing about this Oklahoma shooting that will allow the left or the Democrats to advance their political agenda.  This harms their agenda, so that's why the media is not trumpeting it.

Will Bunch observes "Both Lane and (Trayvon) Martin would be alive today if the strangers that they encountered were not carrying guns" and explains

Meanwhile, you may have heard on the news that some people in Lane's native Australia are furious at the United States, that a few have even talked about a tourism boycott. But many media accounts have left out the real reason why Australians are so angry. It's not so much about the "thug culture." It's that the U.S. body politic refuses to take action on guns: 

Tim Fischer, who served as deputy prime minister under John Howard from 1996 to 1999, urged Australians not to travel to the United States. He said that such a boycott would send a message about the need for tighter gun control regulations in the United States, according to News.com.au.


 “I am deeply angry about this because of the callous attitude of the three teenagers (but) it’s a sign of the proliferation of guns on the ground in the USA,” Fischer said this week. “This is the bitter harvest and legacy of the policies of the NRA ..."

As deputy prime minister, Fisher led Australia’s gun control reforms in the late ‘90s alongside Howard.


It's ironic, because Australia is proof that things in America don't have to be this way. Before enacting saner gun laws, the Land Down Under had witnessed 13 mass killings in 18 years. Since legislation was passed there have been none. Let me repeat that: None. Isolated murders by gunfire have not been eliminated there, of course, but they have dropped substantially -- down 59 percent over a decade. And the last I heard, Australia has not become a tyrannical hellscape because of its saner gun laws.


Hard at work, Bunch probably wasn't aware that a mere three hours before his post, the St. Louis Dispatch had reported

A 20-year-old man with mental disabilities apparently accidentally shot and killed his 15-year-old sister Thursday afternoon in St. Louis, police say.

The man told police he didn’t know the gun was real, according to authorities.

St. Louis Police Lt. John Green said that the man and his family moved into a home in the 4600 block of San Francisco Avenue a few days ago, and that the man had found a shotgun — spray-painted gold — hidden behind a dresser. The gun belonged to a friend of the family and was there when the family moved in, Green said. The shooter’s mother told police she had tried to hide the shotgun.

Authorities identified the victim as Alicia Anderson. Several relatives at the scene Thursday declined comment.

Incidents such as the T. Martin and A. Anderson killings are attributed to race by conservatives, who are blamed by liberals for pointing the fingers at blacks.    Apparently, Australians are more-cleared than are we because, Bunch finds, they are mystified when they "look at our failure to act after a slaughter like the Newtown massacre, at our seeming tolerance of dozens of gun muders like that of Chris Lane every day." And now, we have yet another victim of our fondness for firearms, this time of someone even younger than was Trayvon Martin.



Share |

Really? Weiner But Not Sharpton?


Prachi Gupta of Salon, without comment, reports on a segment from Sunday's Up With Steve Kornacki:

As former congressman Anthony Weiner talks about returning to politics after an embarrassing Twitter scandal, Salon columnist Steve Kornacki reminded voters that there’s another, more compelling to reject Weiner — a history of race-baiting and slimy politics:

It was at this point that Weiner’s campaign decided to blanket the district with leaflets attacking his opponents. But these were no ordinary campaign attacks: They played the race card, and at a very sensitive time. They were also anonymous.

On his MSNBC show, Kornacki explains further:

“This is the story that reveals something important about what Weiner’s been willing to do in his public life. He made an ugly appeal to voters’ worst nature. He did it at a very sensitive time. He did it to get ahead and he did it because he figured no one would catch him. Really he did get away with it. If it hadn’t been for the Twitter silliness, he’d be well on his way to being mayor right now and maybe more.”

Kornacki, then and still a writer/blogger at Salon, is not new to the subject.  As the links from Gupta reveal, twenty-three months ago, Kornacki had explained  

... the Crown Heights riot — a deadly, days-long affair that brought to the surface long-standing tension between the area’s black and Jewish populations — had played out a few miles away from the 48th District. The episode had gripped all of New York and had been national news. It was just days after order had been restored that Weiner’s campaign distributed its anonymous leaflets, which linked Cohen — whose voters he was targeting in particular — to Jesse Jackson and David Dinkins, who was then New York’s mayor. It is hard to imagine two more-hated political figures in the 48th District at that moment. Jackson just a few years earlier had called New York “Hymie town,” and it was an article of faith among white voters in Weiner’s part of Brooklyn that Dinkins had protected the black rioters in Crown Heights — and thus endangered the white population — by refusing to order a harsh police crackdown. (Two years later, Dinkins would lose to Rudy Giuliani by an 80-20 percent margin in the 48th District.) The leaflets urged voters to “just say no” to the “Jackson-Dinkins agenda” that Cohen supposedly represented. At City Hall, Dinkins held up the flier and branded it “hateful.”

It’s impossible to say what precise effect this all had on the election, but it clearly didn’t hurt Weiner. In a surprise result, he finished in first place — 125 votes ahead of Garson, and 195 ahead of Cohen. Only after the ballots were counted did he admit that he’d been behind the leaflets, claiming that “We didn’t want the source to be confused with the message.” This prompted an editorial rebuke from the New York Times, which noted that “Mr. Weiner’s hit-and-run tactics tarnish his come-from-behind campaign.”

Opprobrium is due Weiner additionally for having selected the Reverend Jesse Jackson, who at least had (and still has) some commitment to principle, as a scapegoat rather than a more loathsome individual.   In August, 2011 Andy Soltis of the New York Daily News recalled the Crown Heights affair in which three days of riots were "touched off when 7-year-old Gavin Cato was struck and killed by a car in the motorcade of a Hasidic leader.   Yankel Rosenbaum, an Australian-born Hasidic scholar who had nothing to do with the motorcade, was stabbed to death in the violence that followed."

The Reverend Al Sharpton led demonstrations and became a central figure in the controversy, even before he stated at Cato's funeral

Talk about how Oppenheimer in South Africa sends diamonds straight to Tel Aviv and deals with the diamond merchants right here in Crown Heights. The issue is not anti-Semitism; the issue is apartheid. . . . All we want to say is what Jesus said: If you offend one of these little ones, you got to pay for it. No compromise, no meetings, no coffee klatsch, no skinnin' and grinnin'.

There is debate about Sharpton's role in igniting the three days of rioting.  But there was no dispute about Sharpton's role four years earlier in the hoax perpetrated by Tawana Brawley, aided and abetted by Reverend Sharpton.  The latter had falsely accused a local prosecutor in upstate New York, Steve Pagones, of having "kidnapped, abused, and raped" the young black woman. However, a grand jury found that it was a made-up story and Sharpton lost a defamation lawsuit filed by Pagones.

In August, 2011 Reverend Sharpton conceded "I would have also included in my utterances that there was no justification or excuse for violence or for the death of Yankel Rosenbaum." That and other remarks fell short of a genuine apology but indicated that he understood that his behavior at the time was at least partially misguided.  Disturbingly, though, he has stood by his actions in smearing a public servant and aggressively exacerbating racial tensions in the Brawley episode.  And he is completely unrepentant about leading a boycott of two Korean-owned groceries in 1990 in Brooklyn.

A few days later Sharpton expressed (limited) regret for his involvement in the Crown Heights events.  Within days, the guy who justifiably had earned a reputation as a racial hustler and now had become an informal adviser to President Obama was rewarded with a nightly program on MSNBC. And now Steve Kornacki, himself recently rewarded with a program on MSNBC, denounces stalwart progressive Anthony Weiner for his role in the Crown Heights affair while Kornacki conveniently ignores the more destructive role played by the latter's fellow host.

Anthony Weiner will not get the Democratic nomination and therefore will not become Mayor.  And Al Sharpton no longer views events on a purely racial basis.   He is no longer merely a community organizer, having branched out to being a bad talk-show host and shill for President Obama.  But if Steve Kornacki is so exorcised by opportunistic race-baiting undertaken nearly a quarter of a century ago, principle demands he look inside the cable news network he now works for to find an even better example.




Share |