The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
Was the Cop's Knee On George Floyd's Neck 'Racism'? No!
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Racism consists of a mindset or a worldview that boils down to impolite and impolitic thoughts and words written, spoken, preached, or tweeted.

If that’s all racism is, you ask, then what was the knee on George Floyd’s neck? Was that not racism?

No, it was not.

On the facts, the knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck was a knee on a man’s neck. That’s all that can be inferred from the chilling video recording in which Floyd expired slowly as he pleaded for air.

Floyd begged to breathe. But the knee on his neck—“subdual restraint and neck compression,” in medical terms—was sustained for fully eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing “cardiopulmonary arrest.”

There are laws against what transpired between former Officer Derek Chauvin and Mr. Floyd.

And the law’s ambit is not to decide whether the offending officer is a correct-thinking individual, but whether Mr. Chauvin had committed a crime.

About Officer Chauvin’s mindset, the most the law is supposed to divine is mens rea—criminal intension: Was the officer whose knee pressed on Floyd’s neck acting with a guilty mind or not?

For fact-finding is the essence of the law. The law is not an abstract ideal of imagined social justice, that exists to salve sensitive souls.

If “racism” looks like a felony crime, then it ought to be prosecuted as nothing but a crime and debated as such. In the case of Mr. Chauvin, a mindset of depraved indifference seems to jibe with the video.

This is not to refute the reality of racially motivated crimes. These most certainly occur. It is only to refute the legal and ethical validity of a racist mindset in the prosecution of a crime.

Surely, a life taken because of racial or antisemitic animus is not worth more than life lost to spousal battery or to a home invasion.

The law, then, must mete justice, in accordance with the rules of evidence, proportionality and due process. Other than intent, references to the attendant thoughts that accompanied the commission of a crime should be irrelevant—be they racist, sexist, ageist or anti-Semitic.

Ultimately, those thoughts are known only to the perp.

To make matters worse, legions of libertarians and conservatives have joined the progressive establishment in the habit of sniffing out and purging racists, as though they were criminals.

Sniffing out thought or speech criminals is a no-no for any and all self-respecting classical conservative and libertarian. We should never persecute or prosecute thought “criminals” for utterances not to our liking (unless these threaten or portend violence).

If those who think and speak the unthinkable don’t act out in violence—it is incumbent upon civilized citizens in a free society to refrain from doxing, firing, cancelling or otherwise hounding dissidents to suicide.

In the case of criminal acts of aggression, racist thoughts or taunts that accompany the violence should be irrelevant.

If all lives matter, then the targeting of one innocent because Jewish or black is not more egregious an offense than the harming of another innocent just because.

Thoughts and words spoken or written that are not politically polite—for example, racism—ought to retain protected status as speech beyond the adjudication of law-makers, bureaucrats, mediacrats, educrats and technocrats.

ORDER IT NOW

Good people are being pushed to floor. The mental anguish and material loss that a mere accusation of racism carries in America is untold. It’s crystal clear that the constitutional freedoms guaranteed by the First Amendment to the Bill of Rights have been lost and alienated.

In 1978, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) “took a controversial stand for free speech by defending a neo-Nazi group that wanted to march through the Chicago suburb of Skokie, where many Holocaust survivors lived.”

These days, this once-venerable champion of unpopular expression no longer vigorously defends marginalized speakers and thinkers. Instead, the ACLU is purveying and protecting the ideology du jour.

Paradoxical as it may seem, the ACLU defrauds the public about its mission when it devotes its resources to the well-popularized causes of the Left’s privileged populations: LGBTQ demands, illegal immigrant claims-making, seekers of abortion-on-tap, looters of property and destroyers of peace and prosperity (in Orwellian speak, “peaceful protesters”).

The ACLU is a disgrace to its proud roots. In retrospect, a return to the good old days of ACLU free-speech radicalism is required.

In the current climate—and considering the inherently paranoid style of American politics—it’s worth contemplating special protections for politically impolite, racist speech, to be offered by a loose association of employers in the private sector and across civil society.

As I’ve argued here, racism amounts to a thought “crime.” Thought crimes are the prerogative of a free people. To intellectually disembowel the Left, the Right must unapologetically reject the very idea of policing, purging and persecuting people for holding and expressing politically unpopular ideas.

***

Watch a video version of Ilana’s column,Systemic Racism Is Systemic Rubbish.

Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly, paleolibertarian column since 1999. She’s the author of Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011) & The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed” (June, 2016). She’s currently on Gab, YouTube, Twitter & LinkedIn, but has been banned by Facebook.

 
Hide 27 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Kerry C says:

    “Thoughts and words spoken or written that are not politically polite—for example, racism—ought to retain protected status as speech beyond the adjudication of law-makers, bureaucrats, mediacrats, educrats and technocrats.”

    Our freedom of speech and expression used to be assumed in this country, but it doesn’t fly in 2020 . People are deplatformed not just from social media sites, but from banking institutions for wrong think. It’s really awful and it really needs to stop.

    As for George Flloyd’s death, having watched the bodycam footage a few times it’s very, very clear that race had absolutely nothing to with the arrest and the aftermath. If a White guy, or a Chinese guy would have resisted and behaved as erratically as Flloyd (and was on the same cocktail of drugs,) the outcome would have been exactly the same.

    • Agree: Juckett
    • Replies: @Wyatt
  2. I heartily agree that thought crimes are the prerogative of every man and woman in a free society. But I am not persuaded that Floyd’s death was a homicide at all. Let’s see what is brought out at the trial. In the meantime, I note that Biden, like Warren and Harris before him, called Floyd’s death “murder” in his acceptance speech. How can any white person think of voting for him?

    • Replies: @follyofwar
  3. Racism is just the latest iteration of US attacks of free speech/thought. Look at Lincoln & his disregard for habeas corpus when arresting all & sundry who voiced objections against his war. Then there’s Wilson, & Eugen Debbs & the Wobblies. And … well, there are many examples where “thought” & speech have been criminalised. So — the point is US Elites have rarely hesitated to attack their ideological enemies, first amendment be damned.

  4. About Officer Chauvin’s mindset, the most the law is supposed to divine is mens rea—criminal intension: Was the officer whose knee pressed on Floyd’s neck acting with a guilty mind or not?

    This might at one stage have been true, but in the legal systems of the civilised (i.e., non-US) Anglophone West, a homicide is a murder if the perpetrator knew or ought to have known that his actions were likely to cause death [or grievous bodily harm].

    In R v Crabbe [1985] HCA 22, the High Court of Australia confirmed the trial judge’s decision that forms the basis of the doctrine of ‘recklessness‘ as it applies to murder.

    The question in Crabbe (from the point of view of the jury, who kept coming back to ask for clarification of the ‘intent’ requirement for murder to be made out) was whether Douglas Crabbe was ‘wilfully blind’ to the likelihood of his act (of driving a laden semi-trailer truck through the front of a pub) causing death (or GBH).

    Chauvin may not have specifically intended to kill (or cause GBH to) George Floyd; he may not have known that his actions were likely to cause George Floyd’s death – he simply didn’t give a fuck whether they did or not.

    Defending Chauvin by appeal to the dated doctrine of mens rea is analogous to defending Crabbe by claiming that he didn’t know whether or not there were any people in the pub: it doesn’t matter whether he knew or not… driving a semi-trailer through a hotel is prima facie an act likely to cause death (or GBH) unless there are exceptional circumstances (i.e., the pub is empty).

    So is kneeling on someone’s neck for almost 9 minutes as the person declares that they can’t breathe.

    American jurisprudence has always been a dog’s breakfast (no less so than English), especially insofar as legislators think that waffly imprecise bullshit is a feature and not a bug.

    When the ‘Model Penal Code’ (MPC) was in development, they had a crack at bringing mens rea out of the realm of wishy-washy inconsistent drivel – and they did quite a good job, including adopting mens provisions for recklessness that are derived from Crabbe-type considerations.

    Sadly, Minnesota didn’t buy into the revisions to mens in the MPC, and so kept in place stupid anachronistic terms like “evincing a depraved mind” (part of the mens for murder) and “culpable negligence” (part of the mens for manslaughter)… neither of which are defined in their criminal code.

    This is quite a good discussion about Minnesota’s very specific, stupid and archaic mens doctrine.

    TL;DR: without trawling through the entire Minnesota case history of the doctrine of recklessness in cases where someone’s actions have caused death or GBH, it’s not possible to ‘wave away’ Chauvin’s actions as manslaughter simply on the basis that he may not have had a specific animo felonico with regard to George Floyd.

    However Minnesota does have a felony murder statute, so it suffices if the restraint methods used (including the length of time they were used) went outside guidelines he was obliged to follow: that’s enough to make it a violent felony, which then rules out manslaughter.

    Chauvin’s actions fit the description of 2nd degree murder in Minnesota Law – specifically Minn Stat 609.19 Subd. 2 Unintentional murders:

    (1) 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 other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting

    Note that this has no mens rea elements: no requirement for premeditation, intent, malice, foreseeability of harm, or any such thing. It extends to actions triggering the cause of death (the ‘Fentanyl overdose hypothesis’)… so long as Chauvin was committing a felony at the time.

    I feel no remorse for Chauvin, although it seems that his Masters have decided to totally throw him under the bus: he’s been charged with a bunch of tax charges that rise to felony level – so he’s going to lose the “police privilege” extended by criminal juries.

    • Disagree: Juckett
  5. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:

    Ms. Mercer is trying to crawfish out of her June 4 “death by cop” take on George Floyd, in which she exalted the “determin[ation]” of “Dr. Michael Baden … [t]he nation’s foremost forensic pathologist” over the “comical” official autopsy report. Still no mention of the complete video withheld from the public by DA Keith Ellison, or Mr. Floyd’s abuse of various drugs that now seem to have contributed substantially to his death.

    Note, too, before taking seriously her high minded pleas here about “racism” that the June 4 column was entitled “Looting Is Local — Courtesy of Leroy & Lakisha.”

    • Replies: @Realist
  6. In the case of Mr. Chauvin, a mindset of depraved indifference seems to jibe with the video.

    You’ve been watching too much Law & Order.

    Officer Chauvin was using an approved subdual method. He did not appear to do it with any particular excessive force. If it was used to an excessive length of time, the worst one might reasonably conclude was that it was gross negligence. The correct charge would be manslaghter, and there are plenty of affirmative defences, such as the blood toxicology, the pre-existing cardiovascular condition, and the recent bout of COVID-19.

    • Agree: Realist
    • Replies: @Dieter Kief
  7. But the knee on his neck—“subdual restraint and neck compression,” in medical terms—was sustained for fully eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing “cardiopulmonary arrest.”

    Choking someone to death doesn’t take eight minutes.

  8. Wyatt says:
    @Kerry C

    You should see the videos of trigger happy cops dealing with absolutely non-threatening whites. There’s nothing quite like seeing some drunk white kid get triple tapped for trying to pull his pants up or a homeless guy get blown the fuck away by multiple rifle armed cops after he tells them off.

    If there’s a police brutality problem in America, it’s certainly not against the race that is responsible for a huge share of the crimes.

  9. Realist says:
    @anonymous

    Ms. Mercer is trying to crawfish out of her June 4 “death by cop” take on George Floyd, in which she exalted the “determin[ation]” of “Dr. Michael Baden … [t]he nation’s foremost forensic pathologist” over the “comical” official autopsy report.

    You are an astute observer of crayfish locomotion and of Mercers about face. Her effort to reappear on the correct side of the situation is not very artful.

    I have pointed out her duplicity a number of times since June 4th.

    • Agree: Juckett, Haxo Angmark
    • Replies: @anonymous
  10. @Tono Bungay

    After analyzing the tape many times, it seems evident to me that, while the neck hold employed by Officer Chauvin to restrain a drugged-up George Floyd was legal and necessary, the question is whether he kept it on too long – indeed for minutes after Floyd had stopped struggling, and after he was advised of such by one other officer (the white one, I think). Did Chauvin not realize that Floyd might be dying, and that, if Floyd did, he would be in a whole lot of trouble? His action, with many blacks watching, yelling at him, and recording the encounter, does appear to be reckless. Of course, Chauvin had no way of knowing the powder keg he had set off.

    Did Chauvin commit a crime – I think so. Was it murder, which involves criminal intent – that’s up to a jury to decide after they weigh all the evidence. It’s outrageous that Biden called Floyd’s death a murder before the case has even gone to trial. What else can you expect from today’s degenerate democrats? But, it’s clear to me that impartial justice doesn’t matter in this case – and that Chauvin must be sacrificed to the mob.

    • Replies: @Robert Dolan
  11. anonymous[245] • Disclaimer says:
    @Realist

    Looks like Ilana’s loftiest principle’s alliteration.

    Pretty sure she’s on the edge of her seat reading these, but it usually takes some goo-goo eyed comment from a fan boy to prompt her reply.

    • Replies: @Realist
  12. Realist says:
    @anonymous

    Pretty sure she’s on the edge of her seat reading these, but it usually takes some goo-goo eyed comment from a fan boy to prompt her reply.

    That won’t be me.

  13. @follyofwar

    Not a murder.

    The recently released bodycam clips show the cops doing their best to deal with a tweaking whacked out druggie thug…..the cops showed infinite patience and did the best they could do. Anyone could see they certainly did not intend to kill that out of control buckwheat screaming and crying for his mommy.

    The small hat media lied to our citizens, incited the black community to riot, and now 40 innocent people have been murdered as a result.

    And people wonder why some of us criticize those nice jews that run the media.

  14. Sean says:

    About Officer Chauvin’s mindset, the most the law is supposed to divine is mens rea—criminal intent: Was the officer whose knee pressed on Floyd’s neck acting with a guilty mind or not?

    He is charged with felony murder, meaning the prosecution merely have to show that he used the “approved police control technique” in a way that crossed the line into assault. It is not necessary to show intent for anything but the felony for a felony murder conviction.

    Floyd begged to breathe. But the knee on his neck—“subdual restraint and neck compression,” in medical terms—was sustained for fully eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing “cardiopulmonary arrest.” There are laws against what transpired between former Officer Derek Chauvin and Mr. Floyd

    There were three cops on Floyd, Chauvin was in charge. His compression of Floyd’s neck being a cause of death need not be proved for a murder conviction, the important issue is was Floyd still was being subjected to the maximal restraint technique for several minutes after he was handcuffed because Chauvin’s behaviour amounted to committing an assault. Weight on Floyd’s back may have been mainly responsible for his death; three are charged with aiding and abetting Chauvin in the murder.
    It quite clearly says “Place the subject in the recovery position to alleviate positional asphyxia”. Minneapolis police department rules at the time of Floyd’s demise “explicitly required moving an arrestee from a prone position to a recovery position when the maximal restraint technique is used and required continuous monitoring of an arrestee’s condition” according to Chief Arradondo. Chauvin has not got a leg to stand on, he had all the time he needed but did not move Floyd from prone to recovery position even after no pulse could be found.

    And the law’s ambit is not to decide whether the offending officer is a correct-thinking individual, but whether Mr. Chauvin had committed a crime.

    Yes but that crime is not murder, because Floyd died they can get Chauvin for felony murder, which is what he is charged with to side steps the issue of intent to do anything that might kill. All they have to do is show Chauvin was committing an assault on Floyd and they have Chauvin on cast iron felony murder.

  15. This essay is the clearest and most effective explanation as to why racism and other bad ideas are not criminal. Of the numerous Mercer essays I have read, this is the best. Thank you.

    • Thanks: ILANA Mercer
  16. Why does anybody assume that there was sufficient pressure on the side of George Floyd’s neck to harm him? He was complaining he couldn’t breathe while standing and asked to be allowed to lie down. He had a bad heart, was infected with COVID-19 and had taken fentanyl and methamphetamine. There were plenty of other possible reasons for his death. Nobody saw him murdered; they just saw him held down while continuing to say for some time that he couldn’t breathe.

    I was shocked by the knee on neck hold but it was standard practice in Minneapolis and other people didn’t die. I’ve always been too clumsy for a technique like that but other people seem to be capable of using it safely.

    Why deduce anything from Democrats laying charges. These are the people who wouldn’t allow the public to see the video from the police cameras; that had to be leaked. It seems like a deliberate Democrat Party attempt to frame the four policemen in their trial by media by only allowing the public to see the shocking but misleading phone videos. [email protected]

    • Agree: throtler
  17. Loup-Bouc says:

    Fine article, Ms. Mercer. Unlike all other Unz Review authors who have addressed the Floyd case, you apprehend accurately/correctly much of the pertinent law. But you do not account all of the pertinent law and do not account some material facts and supporting evidence.

    Still, the missing law does not alter, substantially, your mostly correct analysis. Your analysis’s only notable weakness is its treatment of the evidence arguably supporting a finding of racial animus.

    Against Officer Chauvin, the state charged: (1) 2nd degree murder, unintentional, while committing a felony; (2) 3rd degree murder – perpetrating eminently dangerous act and evincing depraved mind; (3) 2nd degree manslaughter – culpable negligence unreasonable risk.

    Your analysis indicates, correctly, that Chauvin is guilty of all three charges. But you do not treat the important considerations that (a) the charge 3 offense is “included in” the charge 1 and charge 2 offenses and (b) the charge 2 offense is included in the charge 1 offense. Those offense-inclusion matters are important.

    Your not-racial-animus crime conclusion depends on the meaning “unintentional” bears in the context of the “while committing a felony” terms of charge 1.

    In the case against Chauvin, the “felony” (of the allegation “murder…while committing a felony”) is an offense “included in” the offenses named in charges 2 and 3; and that same felony is implicit in the material facts necessary to maintaining charge 1. That “lesser included” offense is felony assault. Minnesota is among a minority of states that permit a felony murder charge to be predicated on a felony that is a lesser offense included in the homicide involved in a charged felony murder.

    Per Subdivision 1of 2019 Minnesota Statutes 609.221 ASSAULT IN THE FIRST DEGREE:
    “Whoever assaults another and inflicts great bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 20 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $30,000, or both.” The provided penalty (not more than 20 years or not more than $30,000) makes that crime a felony. The “great bodily harm” terms fit Chauvin’s conduct. Either alone or together with the police who applied dorsal thorax compression to Floyd, Chauvin’s conduct (knee-press neck-compression) was the legal proximate cause of Floyd’s death. [I have shown so many times in comments posted under other articles, linked below.]

    For the same reasons, 609.223 ASSAULT IN THE THIRD DEGREE, Subdivision 1, fits Chauvin’s conduct. 609.223 subdivision 1 provides: “Whoever assaults another and inflicts substantial bodily harm may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than five years or to payment of a fine of not more than $10,000, or both.”

    Unless Chauvin pleads (a) insanity, (b) temporary insanity, or (c) “diminished capacity” kindred to insanity, Chauvin cannot defend on the theory that he did not intend the assault he wrought against Floyd.

    Chauvin has, or may, put the theory that the assault was not an “assault,” because it was not excessive force but force properly used to restrain Floyd. I shall not argue that matter (a) because you do not argue that Chauvin was just “acting in the line of duty” and (b) because the evidence does not support, but, rather, clearly and compellingly refutes, such theory. [Again see my comments put uner the articles linked below.]

    Other Unz Review authors and sundry Unz Review comment-posters have asserted that fentanyl (alone or together with one or more other drugs) killed Floyd. I shall not address that assertion, because that assertion is untenable, even risibly absurd, for the many, many reasons I put in comments posted under articles linked here https://www.unz.com/article/or-did-george-floyd-die-of-a-drug-overdose/
    and here https://www.unz.com/proberts/what-is-a-fatal-dose-of-fentanyl/
    and here https://www.unz.com/freed/her-name-is-breanna-taylor/

    So, though the 2nd degree murder charge involves an allegation that the murder, itself, was unintentional, the 2nd degree murder charge’s predicate offense — Chauvin’s Floyd-death-causing underlying felony assault — WAS an intentional act. The issue, then, reduces to whether Chauvin assaulted Floyd at least partly for reason of racial animus.

    I concede that the matter is not clear. Chauvin did not do anything like yell “take this (Chauvin’s knee-press neck-compression), you coon, you dumb, filthy nigger.” But Chauvin did say and do things that are markedly consistent with an inference that Chauvin’s conduct was racially motivated.

    When Chavin participated in taking Floyd to the ground next to the squad car and then throughout his (Chauvin’s) applying the neck-compression hold to Floyd, Chauvin uttered angry, contemptuous, words at Floyd while his (Chauvin’s) facial expressions grimaced violent disdain. And Chauvin did not merely press his knee onto Floyd’s neck. Chauvin situated virtually his entire body-mass atop Floyd’s neck and did not merely press his knee and weight onto Floyd’s neck, but bobbed his (Chauvin’s) leg and torso up and down apparently to magnify his knee-press’s effect.

    See, e.g.,
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8576371/Police-bodycam-footage-shows-moment-moment-arrest-George-Floyd-time.html
    See also

    AND the sundry other online-published audio/video recordings of Floyd’s arrest, restraint, and death.

    The racial animus argument is not a slam dunk. And it is not involved in the criminal charges filed against Chauvin and the three other criminal defendants. But the pertinent evidence is sufficient to support a pro-plaintiff jury-verdict in the federal civil rights lawsuit Floyd’s surviving family filed against Minneapolis — sufficient especially because in that civil case, the burden of persuasion is NOT “beyond reasonable doubt,” but merely “the preponderance of the evidence.”

    Again, Ms. Mercer, I observe that you have written a fine article. Brava.

    • Thanks: ILANA Mercer
  18. Patricus says:

    I watched the available videos and read the original coronor’s report including the toxicology results. It is hard to see how he can successfully be convicted of murder, certainly there will be reasonable doubts. The not guilty verdict will be followed by riots and looting.

    Personally, I did not observe racial animus by the cops. The jury will see more evidence and hopefully make the right decision.

  19. On the facts, the knee on Mr. Floyd’s neck was a knee on a man’s neck. That’s all that can be inferred from the chilling video recording in which Floyd expired slowly as he pleaded for air.

    Floyd begged to breathe. But the knee on his neck—“subdual restraint and neck compression,” in medical terms—was sustained for fully eight minutes and 46 seconds, causing “cardiopulmonary arrest

    I don’t know where you’re getting that from, but the original official autopsy stated the knee on the neck had nothing whatsoever with Floyd’s death, and the knee on the neck technique is taught to the police and is an approved and established procedure when a detainee is resisting arrest.

    Chauvin is obviously no racist, but he also did not commit police brutality. This article contributes to the problem of fake news and hysteria, instead of lessening it.

  20. Anonymous[428] • Disclaimer says:

    The ironic part about that disgusting video is that the life of that raccoon is worth INFINITELY more than George Floyd’s or Rayshard Brooks, or Trayvon Martin’s etc… or for that matter any nigger on the face of Planet Earth. That raccoon actually contributes something to this Earth. Whereas niggers essentially just consume and destroy.

    Compare and contrast.

  21. chuck lowe says: • Website

    The actual, categorical reason, Americans are enduring this chaos, destruction and lawlessness, is KEITH ELLISON (Minneapolis DA.) WHO HID THE ENTIRE VIDEO (until it leaked) OF GEORGE FLOYD’S ARREST. Those cops are innocent.

    David Mamet had a famous saying, essentially: …‘in order for democrats, liberals, progressives et al to continue their illogical belief systems they have to pretend not to know a lot of things’… By pretending ‘not to know’ there is no guilt, no actual connection to conscience. Denial of truth allows easier trespass. (Sundance)

    Keith Ellison knew. Keith Ellison knew the the truth when cities were burning. Keith Ellison knew the truth when people were dying. Keith Ellison knew the truth when stores were looted and burned. Keith Ellison knew the truth when hundreds of police officers were wounded and innocents were bloodied and beaten over the last 2 months. Keith Ellison knew the truth when his BLM/Thug/DNC Brown Shirts effected a nightly “Beer Hall Putsch” in the streets of American cities night after night.

    There is a straight line, categorical reference, from the exculpatory video, now available, which would have, at least to some extent, diminished the outrage and modified the opinions of all Americans, to the worst riots in American history.

    Keith Ellison, who is surely one of the most evil, nefarious, deceptive and criminal bureaucrats ever to hold office, is responsible for the lion’s share of hatred, violence and destruction that has turned many of our cities into a real live, boots on the ground, Hieronymus Bosch painting.

    THIS is what Keith Ellison is responsible for and there is now, no denying it.

    https://medium.com/@mtracey…

    Obfuscation and the pretense of ignorance is a standard boilerplate method of operation with the Progressive left. It is a necessary club in the bag hoisted in defense of illogical narratives and an excuse for irrational behavior. But here, is the Progressive Magnum Opus of Obfuscation. The purposeful suppression of the truth in order to achieve political power on the backs of the dead and the husks of burned out cities.

    The full video, would have, as Keith Ellison, the radical, lying friend of Louis Farrakhan, knows, tempered the emotions and mitigated the anger.

    He hid it.

    He is burning America to the ground and no one is saying anything.

    • Replies: @throtler
  22. @The Alarmist

    I

    Derek Chauvin expected the ambulance to arrive quite soon – normally within three minutes. – But the ambulance driver dove to the wrong place and had to be redirected, which took 8+ minutes in total – ca. three times as long as would have been expected.

    (Plus George Floyd said he couldn’t breathe while he obviously seemed to breathe just fine.)

    II

    Absurdities touching reality

    If somebody would have burned himself to death with gasoline and then be thrown in a pool by a police officer in a futile attempt to rescue him (because he was already fatally wounded when the officer threw him in a nearby pool) – should this police officer then be accused of drowning the man?

  23. TwistTie says:

    There’s a new law we didn’t know about : if a black kang or queen decides they ain’t being arrested today then laws don’t apply to my nikka! Laws is raycis!

Current Commenter
says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
How America was neoconned into World War IV
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?