Fighting Crime or Just Locking Up Blacks? Liberal Authorities in Chicago Make it Impossible for Blacks to Get Guns and Lock Up Thousands for Gun Possession While Making Few Arrests in Gun Shootings

From [HERE] In Chicago, the race to get guns off the street often begins with a police stop.

Officers just need a pretext to search someone. A man in a white Ford sedan blocking an alley. A bulge in a fanny pack at the beach. The smell of “fresh cannabis” wafting from an open window. Tinted windows. A missing license plate. Police reports show that the list goes on.

“Each gun recovered, regardless of how, is a potential life saved,” then-police Supt. David Brown said at a news conference last year, a mantra he repeated frequently.

But, in Chicago, gun enforcement overwhelmingly focuses on crimes involving possession — not use.

Officials justify the focus on confiscating guns — even if they aren’t being fired at anybody — as a way of curtailing violence. Yet even as the number of possession arrests skyrocketed, the number of shootings increased, and the percentage of shootings involving victims in which someone was arrested declined.

For this article, The Marshall Project read nearly 300 arrest reports to understand the tactics police use to find guns and compiled decades of police data showing a history of discriminatory gun enforcement, conducting more than 100 interviews with people navigating gun cases, researchers, attorneys and community residents. Key findings:

  • From 2010 to 2022, the police made more than 38,000 arrests for illegal gun possession. The number of these arrests — almost always a felony in Illinois — doubled during this time.

  • Illegal possession is the most serious offense in most of the cases analyzed, the charges often bearing names that imply violence, like “unlawful use of a weapon.”

  • Research by Loyola University Chicago found that most people convicted in Illinois for these charges don’t go on to commit a violent crime and that people who already committed violent crimes are more likely to do so again. 

  • Although Black people comprise less than a third of the city’s population, they were more than 8 in 10 of those arrested for guns in the period reviewed. The majority were men in their 20s and 30s.

  • Even if not sentenced to prison, those we interviewed faced criminal records, probation, job loss, legal fees and car impoundments.

  • Weapons arrests, which include illegal gun possession, are at their highest since the mid-1990s.

“Guns are not assembly-line cases, and they shouldn’t be treated as such,” says Chris Hudspeth, 31, who has been incarcerated for illegal possession. “I’m scared for my life — and I gotta go to prison because I fear for my life, for my family’s safety? Because we’re not fortunate enough to live someplace else?” [MORE]

Fed Court Temporarily Blocks Illinois Gun Ban as a Blatant Violation of 2nd Amendment: 'The Supreme Ct Held Citizens have a Constitutional Right to Own and Possess Guns and Use them for Self-Defense'

From [HERE] An Illinois federal district judge Friday issued a preliminary injunction to prevent the enforcement of Illinois’ Protect Illinois Communities Act (PICA) until there is a final determination as to the law’s constitutionality. The case is in the US District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

District Judge Stephen P. McGlynn issued the preliminary injunction pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 65(a). The court ruled that “PICA seems to be written in spite of the clear directives” of US Supreme Court precedent. Additionally, the court ruled that “the overly broad reach of PICA commands” that injunctive relief be granted. As a result of the ruling, Illinois is enjoined from enforcing PICA.

PICA bans the ownership of over 190 models of firearms and criminalizes the possession of magazines that hold over 10 rounds, among other things. Judge McGlynn filed the opinion on April 28, 2023. The opinion is straightforward. In the fifth paragraph, after describing the events leading up to the passage of PICA, Judge McGlynn expounds on the rights Americans enjoy, which are protected by the United States Constitution. From the opinion:

As Americans, we have every reason to celebrate our rights and freedoms, especially on Independence Day. Can the senseless crimes of a relative few be so despicable to justify the infringement of the constitutional rights of law-abiding individuals in hopes that such crimes will then abate or, at least, not be as horrific? More specifically, can PICA be harmonized with the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution and with Bruen? That is the issue before this Court. The simple answer at this stage in the proceedings is “likely no.” The Supreme Court in Bruen and Heller held that citizens have a constitutional right to own and possess firearms and may use them for self-defense. PICA seems to be written in spite of the clear directives in Bruen and Heller, not in conformity with them. Whether well-intentioned, brilliant, or arrogant, no state may enact a law that denies its citizens rights that the Constitution guarantees them. Even legislation that may enjoy the support of a majority of its citizens must fail if it violates the constitutional rights of fellow citizens. For the reasons fully set out below, the overly broad reach of PICA commands that the injunctive relief requested by Plaintiffs be granted.

Judge McGlynn expounds on the immediate harm to the plaintiffs. He explains any denial of Constitutionally protected rights is an immediate harm. Even so, Judge Stephen P. McGlynn, argues (arguendo, “for the sake of the argument”), there are other, obvious, immediate harms. Plaintiffs may not purchase firearms or magazines they desire. Plaintiffs may not sell existing inventory.

But for PICA, Barnett and Norman would purchase additional banned firearms and magazines. Should either one attempt to do so, he could face criminal penalties. There is no monetary award that can compensate for such an injury and make them whole.

There is also no question that both Hoods and Pro Gun have lost income and will continue to do so while PICA remains in effect. The declarations of both James Hood and Paul Smith, owners of Hoods and Pro Gun respectively, expressed that a large percentage of their income was derived from sales of items banned under PICA and that they currently had in their possession tens of thousands of dollars worth of inventory that they have been prohibited from selling since PICA’s effective date.

To obtain a preliminary injunction in federal court, the movant must show that (1) they will suffer irreparable harm in the interim prior to a final resolution; (2) there is no adequate remedy at law; and (3) they have a reasonable likelihood of success on the merits. The court ruled that the plaintiffs satisfied all three requirements and that there is a reasonable likelihood that PICA does in fact violate the Second Amendment. The court noted that “no state may enact a law that denies its citizens rights that the Constitution guarantees them.”

Illinois Governor JB Pritzker signed PICA in response to the Highland Park shooting that occurred during a Fourth of July parade. Seven people were killed in the shooting, and dozens more were injured. Last month, an Illinois state court ruled that PICA is unconstitutional under the Illinois Constitution. 

White liberals have two main philosophical arguments.The two arguments are, first: “That was then, this is now.” This is a major component of Progressivism. Things change. Things change fast. Political decisions have to be made fast to react to the change. The argument is in opposition to the philosophy of the Constitution. The founders understood human nature does not change. They understood: it is human nature to attempt to use emotional events to push through unwise change, partisan change, and change to favor special interests quickly.

The Second argument is: Experts know what is better for you than you do. Therefore there should be a government by experts, and there should not be any limits on the power of government. Limits on government only prevent the government from doing good things for you. Therefore, limits on government power are bad. This is the root of “means/ends” arguments.

Both these philosophical arguments have failed real-world tests.

Fast decisions based on emotional arguments almost always are decisions that are bad for the people as a whole. Unlimited governments tend to rule for the benefit of those in charge to the detriment of everyone else. Philosopher kings tend to find philosophical arguments to support debauched lifestyles without responsibility or accountability. [MORE]

Maryland Gun Law May be Struck Down by 4th Circuit: At the time the 2nd Amendment was Ratified MD had no Tradition of Requiring fees, Training or Background Checks before Someone Could Buy a Handgun

From [HERE] In March of this year, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit heard oral arguments in the appeal of Maryland Shall Issue v Hogan.

The case of Maryland Shall Issue v Hogan (Governor of Maryland), has been in the courts since 2013, when the case was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland.  In 2013, Maryland passed the Firearm Safety Act of 2013, which contained a Handgun Qualification License (HQL) provision which forbids the sale, transfer, rental, purchase, or receipt of a handgun by any person who does not have a valid HQL license. Shall Issue Maryland and several other plaintiffs challenged the law on Second Amendment, Fourteenth Amendment, and other grounds.

The District court held the plaintiffs lacked standing. Shall Issue Maryland appealed the case to the Fourth Circuit. A three-judge panel on the Fourth Circuit reversed the District ruling and remanded the case back to the District Court.

The District Court, on remand, decided the case under intermediate scrutiny and granted the State of Maryland summary judgment. Shall Issue Maryland appealed the case to the Fourth Circuit for the second time.

On June 22, 2022, the Supreme Court of the United States published the opinion in the case known as Bruen, giving clarification of the Heller decision and clear instructions for lower courts to use in determining if statutes violated rights protected by the Second Amendment. Bruen ruled means-ends tests were inappropriate, and there should not be different levels of scrutiny in Second Amendment cases.

Every court which has examined the Maryland Shall Issue v Hogan case has found the HQL provisions burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment.  The District Court found it did; the first three judge panel did, and the District Court on remand did so.  In Bruen, the Supreme Court of the United States found if the statute burdened conduct protected by the Second Amendment, it is the burden of the State to show such burdens were common and accepted at the time the Second Amendment was ratified. To a lesser extent, what happened at the time of the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment is applicable. Anything after 1900 is clearly too late to be considered a historical context.

Maryland had no burdens on handgun purchase or ownership until 1941.  In 1996, Maryland passed the “Gun Violence Act of 1996”, which required all handgun transfers to be registered with the state, private or commercial. Additional requirements were passed in 2013. The HQL requirements passed in 2013 include fees, training, and background checks before a person is allowed to purchase a handgun.

According to Jurist.org, two of the three judges appeared to agree there was no historical tradition of requiring fees, training, or background checks before someone is allowed to purchase a handgun. During questioning by the judges, Maryland Assistant Attorney General Ryan Dietrich had to admit there was no historical precedent for a requirement for pre-clearance to purchase a firearm.

Dietrich eventually conceded, “We were unable to find any that required advance permission,” to the republican-majority three judge panel.

At courthousenews.com, it was reported one of the two judges, Circuit Judge Julius N. Richardson, took issue with Maryland’s use of statistics. Maryland contends gun-related murders decreased after the law went into effect. Richardson asked why did they exclude data from Baltimore City/County, which has most of the murders in the state? Assistant AG Dietrich replied it was because of the increase in murders in Baltimore City/County.

Dietrich said the reason for leaving Baltimore out of the statistic was the uptick in crime associated with the 2015 police killing of Freddie Gray. 

“It seems odd to say it is associated with a decrease in these three counties, but 70% of murders happen in Baltimore City-County,” Richardson said. “The murder rate is higher in 2020 than it was in 2015.” 

The increase or decrease in murders is not germane to the case under the standards set forth in Bruen. Bruen ruled out mean-ends testing for the Second Amendment, as for other rights protected in the Bill of Rights.

According to the Supreme Ct there is now a presumption that gun laws are unconstitutional unless the government can prove there was a similar law at the time of the ratification of the 2nd Amendment

From [HERE] The United States of America is founded on the presumption of innocence. After the Supreme Court’s landmark New York State Pistol Rifle Association v. Bruen Supreme Court decision, there is now a presumption that gun laws are unconstitutional unless the government can prove there was a similar law at the time of the ratification of the Second Amendment.

According to the Bruen decision, the interest balancing test does not apply to Second Amendment cases. The courts can only rely on the original text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment.

This decision put most anti-gun politicians and advocates in a precarious position. Almost no gun control existed at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification.  With the combination of little to no supporting historical evidence and without leniency from the previous interest balancing test, gun control advocates will have a much harder time of successfully passing legislation that will defeat SCOTUS’s new test. The anti-gun side had to find something in history that would save gun control laws.

Anti-gun state and gun control advocates usually point to the Sir John Knight’s Case that challenged the Statute of Northampton. According to the anti-gun side, the law forbids carrying a firearm in public. Still, most legal scholars agree that it banned the carrying of a gun in public only if the intent is to terrify the people. Without many other examples of gun control laws, the anti-gun side must base their arguments on this case.

Unfortunately for the gun control side, the Supreme Court addressed the Sir John Knight’s Case and others like it. According to Footnote 11 of the Bruen decision, whenever multiple interpretations can be taken from a case, the Supreme Court will favor the interpretation that favors the Second Amendment. This demand puts the burden on the state to prove their analog is consistent with the original text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment.

Footnote 11 reads: “The dissent discounts Sir John Knight’s Case, 3 Mod. 117, 87 Eng. Rep. 75, because it only “arguably” supports the view that an evil-intent requirement attached to the Statute of Northampton by the late 1600s and early 1700s. See post, at 37. But again, because the Second Amendment’s bare text covers petitioners’ public carry, the respondents here shoulder the burden of demonstrating that New York’s proper-cause requirement is consistent with the Second Amendment’s text and historical scope. See supra, at 15. To the extent there are multiple plausible interpretations of Sir John Knight’s Case, we will favor the one that is more consistent with the Second Amendment’s command.”

Because SCOTUS referenced the case in a footnote doesn’t mean the state will not try to use Sir John Knight’s Case. We have seen states argue that they can use laws from the ratification date of the Fourteenth Amendment to defend their anti-gun statutes. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified shortly after the Civil War ended when states passed laws to prevent formerly enslaved people from getting firearms. Some courts might even accept these arguments, but it is delaying the inevitable.

SCOTUS laid down a straightforward test for gun laws. If a law is inconsistent with the plain text, history, and tradition of the Second Amendment, it must be thrown out. This new test puts the burden on the states to prove that their law is compatible with the Second Amendment.

The "Death Penalty" is Arbitrarily Applied: 36 States Haven't Executed Anyone in the Past 10 Years. Southern States are Responsible for 82% of the Scheduled Murders by Authorities

From [HERE] The accompanying graph (click to view separately) displays the time in years since the last execution by each state as of May 1, 2023. 

The death penalty in the U.S. is a distinctly minority phenomena, with thirty-six states plus the District of Columbia not carrying out an execution in over 10 years. Twenty-three states and the District of Columbia have abolished capital punishment, and additional jurisdictions, including the federal government, have a hold on executions. Last year there were 18 executions nationwide, carried out by six states, an 82% decline from the 98 executions carried out in 1999. The South, as a region, is responsible for 1,279 of the 1,568 executions (82%) in the U.S. since 1976.

Four states that retain the death penalty have not had an execution in more than 20 years (PA, OR, WY, and KS). Wyoming has not executed anyone in more than 30 years and Kansas has not executed an individual since 1965. Several states that no longer have the death penalty have not executed an individual since the 1800s, including Michigan — which carried out its last execution 193 years ago. On the other hand, four states (TX, FL, MO, OK) have carried out a total of 10 executions in 2023, with the most recent being in Florida.

2 White Torrance (CA) Cops Arraigned on Manslaughter Charges After Murdering Christopher Deandre Mitchell. Both Cops Linked to a Racist Texting Scandal in Which Cops Spoke about Practicing Racism

From [HERE] The L.A. County District Attorney’s Office revealed charges against two Torrance PD officers, in connection with the 2018 fatal shooting of 23-year-old Christopher DeAndre Mitchell.

Anthony Chavez and Matthew Concannon pleaded not guilty for voluntary manslaughter charges stemming from a traffic stop-turned-deadly after previously being exonerated from the incident.

When Gascón took over as District Attorney in 2021, he asked the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors for permission to appoint a prosecutor to “reevaluate” previous shootings involving L.A. County police officers. That is when the December 2018 shooting became eligible for re-investigation.

“Special Prosecutor Lawrence Middleton was given the independence to reevaluate, investigate and determine whether to pursue criminal prosecution in this case,” District Attorney George Gascón said. “He thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the evidence and decided to seek a grand jury indictment. We support his decision to do so and we are pleased that the grand jury returned the indictment.”

On October 9, 2019, then District Attorney Jackie Lacey declined to file charges on the officers, saying the officers acted “lawfully in self-defense.”

On December 9, 2018, two Torrance, California, police officers shot and killed 23-year-old Black man Christopher Deandre Mitchell while he was sitting in a car minding his own business. The cops claimed they saw his hands move toward what turned out to be an air rifle that was wedged between his legs.

According to the Los Angeles Times, Matthew Concannon and Anthony Chavez have been charged with one count each of voluntary manslaughter, which carries a maximum penalty of 11 years in prison.

Police claim the cops did nothing wrong. “Based on Mitchell’s failure to follow the officers’ directions, his continued efforts to conceal the object in his lap, the physical appearance of the object, and the movement of his hands toward the object, it was reasonable for the officers to believe that the object was a firearm and to respond with deadly force,” prosecutors wrote in 2019, when former Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey declined to prosecute Concannon and Chavez.

Christopher Deandre Mitchell’s family have maintained that Mitchell did follow commands and was never a threat to the officers, who they say never gave him a chance to surrender. They claim he was asleep in the car when the cops approached him. Black Lives Matter Los Angeles organizer Sheila Bates said Monday that the officers unnecessarily escalated the situation despite Mitchell not threatening them in any way, and they opened fire within seconds of approaching him.

In the video the white cops pretend to be threatened - as the Black man appears to be very calm and trying to comply with their confusing, excited commands. Mitchell speaks in a calm, non-threatening voice and appears to be apologizing to them for not understanding their disfluent commands or not complying fast enough. Police are not facing any imminent threat of deadly harm when they fatally shoot him - at least from a reasonable, non-racist point of view.

“It’s been a long time coming, ” Mitchell’s mother, Sherilyn Haines said Monday. “It’s been a rough journey. My heart, my soul, is deeply hurting. So bad. I miss my son…so much. My son’s life was stolen by Matthew Concannon and Anthony Chavez. He didn’t get a chance to live his best life.”

Both Concannon and Chavez have been linked to a racist texting scandal in which at least 15 officers with the Torrance Police Department sent approximately 390 racist, sexist and homophobic messages from 2018 to 2020. This is something that appears to be somewhat common among cops in California and elsewhere.

More from the Times:

The messages included jokes about setting up Black men to be killed, with one officer suggesting he wanted to shoot and hang several Black suspects, and a picture of a teddy bear being lynched inside the police department’s headquarters, according to documents previously reviewed by The Times.

While The Times never found evidence that Concannon or Chavez sent any of the messages, they were both under investigation as part of the scandal, according to documents previously reviewed by the newspaper and sources who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Messages sent by unidentified officers used the N-word to describe Mitchell’s loved ones and celebrated other officers’ decision to use force against protesters who supported Mitchell’s family during a demonstration in front of the Torrance City Council. Several of the officers who used racist language in the messages were also later accused of using excessive force against protesters in civil lawsuits.

So, two cops—who were under investigation behind another racist police group chat in racists advocated for practicing racism have now been charged for a fatal act of alleged police brutality against a Black man. 

Timothy Johnson "Was Reachin'" [for an Imaginary Gun] When Lathered Up White VA Cops Fatally Shot Him During Foot Chase Over Sunglasses Outside Upscale Shopping Mall. Special Grand Jury to Hear Case

From [HERE] Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano said Tuesday he had requested a special grand jury to investigate the fatal police shooting of an unarmed Black man outside of Tysons Corner Center, reviving the possibility that an officer would be charged in the case a week after a grand jury refused to do so.

“After considering all options on a path forward, I have elected to request a special grand jury,” Descano said. “This is an ongoing matter and due to the sensitive nature of this case, we will not be commenting further at this time.”

The announcement comes after a grand jury declined to indict Sgt. Wesley Shifflett, the Fairfax County officer who shot and killed 37-year-old Timothy McCree Johnson on Feb. 22 after a foot pursuit that began when Johnson was suspected of stealing sunglasses at the mall. Shifflett was one of two officers to fire during the encounter, though police have said his shots were fatal, and officials moved to fire him from the police department following the incident.

Prosecutors had sought to indict Shifflett on charges of manslaughter and reckless discharge of a weapon. The other officer, James Sadler, remains with the department.

Carl Crews, an attorney for the Johnson family, said Tuesday he hoped Shifflett would be held accountable in Johnson’s killing.

“I believe that the Commonwealth feels that there was a crime committed,” Crews said. “And so Descano’s definitely pursuing this in that fashion.”

Last month after the family watched the video of the incident Crew stated,

“The best way to describe the video is to say first what was not on it,” said Carl Crews, an attorney for the family, after viewing the footage Wednesday. “What it doesn’t show: danger. It doesn’t show the officers faced any danger — imminent or otherwise.”

Crews said he and the family watched eight minutes of the Feb. 22 footage, ending with Sgt. Wesley Shifflett and Officer First Class James Sadler firing at Johnson, 37, who authorities have said was suspected of stealing designer sunglasses at the mall nearby. The Fairfax County Police Department is planning to release the footage publicly on Thursday afternoon.

Crews said the footage showed Shifflett, who was in uniform, and Sadler, who was in plain clothes, attempting to stop Johnson after the suspected theft and chasing him on foot into a wooded area. He said the officers can be heard telling Johnson to stop running and to lie down before they shoot him.

Crews said it was unclear to see who fired and when, though police have previously said that both officers fired shots and that Johnson was struck once in the chest. Authorities said he was taken to a hospital, where he died.

“This was an execution by Fairfax County police officers,” Crews said.

Crews said that a judge approved Descano’s request to impanel a special grand jury. He had previously said in a statement that Fairfax County police detectives “turned the Grand Jury away from returning an indictment” in their presentation of evidence last week to the panel. Descano said after the grand jury’s declination that no prosecutors were permitted to be present in the room when detectives made their presentation, and that he “could not say for sure what information was conveyed to the grand jurors.”

During a special grand jury investigation, a commonwealth’s attorney can be present during the investigatory stage of the proceedings, according to the Virginia Supreme Court court handbook for grand jurors.

Fairfax County police declined to comment on the request for a special grand jury.

The use of special grand juries in Virginia is rare, though in 2020 Descano empaneled such a group and obtained indictments charging two U.S. Park Police Officers with involuntary manslaughter and reckless use of a firearm in the fatal shooting of Bijan Ghaisar. The case was later moved to federal court and the charges were dismissed by a judge there, and Virginia’s attorney general dropped the state’s appeal.

Judge Orders Chicago Chief to be Deposed after Liberal Authorities Hid Information in a Police Brutality Case to Protect a White Cop who Body-Slammed a Black Man Into a Curb, Causing Brain Injury

On Thanksgiving Day 2019, A WHITE a Chicago police officer TRIED TO MURDER Bernard Kersh, an unarmed Black man with schizophrenia, BY PICKING HIM up, lifting him high and and THEN forcefullY body-slamming/PILE DRIVING HIM INTO A CURB IN FRONT OF A BUS STOP. [MORE]

ABOVE A WHITE LIBERAL IN CHICAGO DEFENDS WHITE COP AND THE SYSTEM OF AUTHORITY (see video below). EVEN THOUGH THE WHITE COP FACEd NO IMMINENT THREAT OF DEADLY HARM, HE HAD TO GET REVENGE AFTER HE WAS ALLEGEDLY SPIT ON. NO SPIT IS VISIBLE ON ANY VIDEOS. but SHEOPLE believe the spit existed like THEY believe in the existence of authority, which is a granfalloon.

From [HERE] Former Chicago Police Supt. David Brown will be questioned under oath by lawyers for a schizophrenic man who suffered brain injuries when he was body-slammed by a police officer.

At a hearing last week, Judge Gerald Cleary ruled city lawyers withheld evidence from lawyers for Bernard Kersh by failing to turn over a letter in which Brown said that Officer Jerald Williams used excessive force when he slammed Kersh onto the sidewalk after, Williams claims, Kersh spit on him.

Brown in 2020 signed off on a letter that confirmed the finding of the Civilian Office of Police Accountability that Williams had used "massively excessive" force against Kersh, with the superintendent calling for a longer suspension than the one recommended by COPA. But Kersh's lawyers said they only learned of the letter and damning COPA report in February after seeing a news report about Williams allegedly abusing a detainee.

During a hearing last week, city attorneys said they had not looked at Brown's letter or the COPA reports, and that COPA made its findings in Kersh's case public by posting them to the agency's website.

"The court is confounded about how the city operates with regard to discovery in these types of cases. Confounded of the fact that inside city attorneys don't keep track of COPA and the COPA records, and things that are developed ... letters like the superintendent's. They don't keep track of it .... They don't - it's all to the detriment of the plaintiffs," Cleary said according to a hearing transcript.

The judge noted that despite the findings of excessive force by COPA and Brown, city lawyers have argued that outside experts hired to defend the case said Williams's actions were justified.

"The court had to spend numerous amounts of hours reviewing that motion to decide that summary judgment, wherein the city said, there's no evidence whatsoever of willful, wanton conduct or excessive force," Cleary said. "Yet they were sitting on this letter from Superintendent Brown."

The judge ordered that Kersh's legal team will be allowed to depose expert witnesses they had questioned before the city turned over Brown's letter and also question Brown. The city will be required to reimburse Kersh's lawyers for the costs and fees for the additional depositions as well as preparing their motion for sanctions against the city.

Kersh's attorney Andrew M. Stroth said Wednesday that the city has been sanctioned for discovery violations in other cases and the Kersh case was part of that "disturbing" pattern.

"Bernard Kersh was almost killed by a cop, caught on video, and lawyers for the city failed to share material evidence in a timely fashion," Stroth said. "When the senior executive for the Chicago Police Department says in writing that this force is excessive, that's material evidence."

UnDeclinable Service from Authorities who Know the Difference btw Right/Wrong but Disregard It When Race is a Variable: IL Cop Charged for Assaulting Disabled Black Teen, Made Him Sit on Spike Strips

From [HERE] and [HERE] A Washington Park police officer has been charged after he was accused last month of assaulting and using a stun gun on a person with an intellectual disability.

The St. Clair County State's Attorney's Office charged Justin Gaither, 32, on Tuesday with official misconduct and aggravated battery in the March 19 incident.

According to the Illinois State Police, Gaither responded to the area of 45th Street and Bunkum Road for a call for service and got into a physical altercation with 19-year-old Larry Shaw. An ambulance arrived to treat Shaw's injuries (caused by the assault by police?), at which point ISP alleges Gaither struck him in the face and used a stun gun on him while he was strapped to an ambulance gurney.

Shaw was then taken to an area hospital with injuries.

Gaither knew Shaw had a severe or profound intellectual disability, according to ISP. Shaw’s father, David Johnson said Officer Gaither was very familiar with his son because of their frequent interactions.

The Washington Park Police Department said Gaither was put on administrative leave earlier this month while the Illinois State Police Division of Criminal Investigation conducted a use-of-force investigation. 

Gaither turned himself in to authorities on Tuesday after a warrant was issued for his arrest. He has since posted bond and was released pending trial.

In early April, 5 On Your Side spoke to Shaw and his father David Johnson.

Johnson said Shaw, who has bipolar disorder, autism and an intellectual disability, often calls the police. 

"He gets upset about some things and he might want to talk to somebody else besides us, so he wants to talk to a police officer," Johnson said.

The Psychopathic Racial Personality. Dr. Bobby Wright explains ‘there is A COMMON MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT PEOPLE DESCRIBED AS PSYCHOPATHS. THEY ARE GENERALLY THOUGHT TO BE PERSONS who DO not know the difference between right and wrong. This belief is not true; psychopaths simply ignore the concept of right and wrong. By ignoring this trait in the White race (the lack of ethical and moral development) Blacks have made and are still making a tragic mistake in basing the worldwide Black liberation movement on moral suasion. It is pathological for Blacks to keep attempting to use moral suasion on a people who have no morality where race is the variable.

…by and large, white people treat each other humanely. But in their relations with BLACK people, racists function as psychopaths. 

…The presence of this trait in RACISTS has grave implications for Blacks who seek solutions to their problems FROM RACISTS SUSPECTS. FOR EXAMPLE, White GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES AND WHITE professionals (lawyers, doctors, judges, BANKERS, REAL ESTATE AGENTS, TEACHERS, politicians). consistently take advantage of Blacks without any guilt, anxiety, or threat to their self-esteem.

…This then is the psychopathic personality of the matador. The one constant in this ever-changing world is the behavior of the White race in their relationships with Blacks.’ [MORE]

Johnson said on March 19 his son made the emergency call once again. Gaither responded to their home.

"He knows Larry's condition. He's dealt with Larry several times," Johnson said.

Larry said he and the officer first had a casual conversation but their chat quickly turned into a violent confrontation in the family's kitchen. 

"I walked away and went to my room because I wanted to be a better man," said Shaw. "We got into a fight and then he started swinging me to the floor. I said 'Can you let go?'" Shaw recalled.

Shaw said the officer handcuffed him, escorted him outside and then put him in a police cruiser and had him sit on spike strips. Shaw’s father, David Johnson says that when he arrived his son was sitting on spike strips. A spike strip (spike belt, traffic spikes, tire shredders, stingers, stop sticks, Stinger or formally known as a tire deflation device) is a device or incident weapon used to impede or stop the movement of wheeled vehicles by puncturing their tires. [MORE] He said he asked the cop why his son was sitting on spike strips but the white cop ignored him.

"I was crying, but I didn't know what to do," added Shaw.

Johnson said the officer let his son out of the police cruiser, but it wasn't over.

"Yes, I grabbed his walkie talkie and then he started punching me," Shaw said.

Shaw said the officer of punched him in his face and repeatedly used his stun gun on him as he was lying on his back, partially handcuffed and suffering a seizure.

"The EMS and the East St. Louis police officers said 'stop, don't do that that isn't right,'" Johnson said.

Black People are More Likely to be Killed by Police, More Likely to be Unarmed and Less Likely to Pose a Threat When Killed - according to Mapping Police Violence

The majority of gun deaths in America aren’t even homicides, let alone caused by mass shootings. Two-thirds of the more than 33,000 gun deaths that take place in the U.S. every year are suicides. People who commit suicide and people who commit mass shootings both tend to be white and male, [MORE]

You’re 55 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than a terrorist. This number does not account for "race," which means the number is probably higher. [MORE]  [MORE]

chart and data is from MAPPING POLICE VIOLENCE’s 2022 Police Violence Report. and [MORE]

Puppetician Hakeem Jeffries Meets w/His IsrAlien Puppet Master, Benjamin Netanyahu and then Lays a Wreath for the Fallen Soldiers of Democracy Charading Israel. Does He Do Anything for Black People?

Twelve congressional Democrats, led by House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.), met on Monday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Israel.

The purpose of the trip, according to a release from Jeffries, was to address “Israel’s unique challenges within the region and discuss our efforts to maintain and strengthen the special relationship between our nations.” The group also planned to commemorate Yom Ha’atzmaut, Israel’s 75th anniversary, and to recognize Yom Hazikaron, Israel’s Memorial Day. [MORE]

On the eve Israel’s most somber and reflective day, the crowd of 7000 at Yad L’Shiryon in Latrun somehow felt intimate, engaged together in the solemn task of remembering the Jewish State’s fallen soldiers and victims of terror.

They were joined virtually by hundreds of thousands of viewers across the globe, along with major Jewish and U.S. Congressional leaders, as part of the largest English Yom HaZikaron ceremony in the world. The event is hosted every year by Masa Israel Journey, a long-term adult education program and part of the Jewish Agency for Israel.

Congressman Hakeem Jeffries, Minority Leader of the U.S House of Representatives, laid one of the wreaths to honor the loss of life. He was joined at the event by 12 members of the House of Representatives, including Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz. [MORE]

To Create the Illusion of Widespread Support Pfizer Gave Millions to ‘Independent’ Groups (medical associations, consumer groups and civil rights organizations) to Push Irrational COVID Vax Mandates

From [HERE] Pharmaceutical giant Pfizer in 2021 made numerous grants to medical associations, consumer groups and civil rights organizations for the purpose of creating the appearance of widespread support for COVID-19 vaccine mandates, investigative journalist Lee Fang reported.

As the vaccine mandates rolled out in 2021, Pfizer stayed quiet on the question of mandates — but public health groups, patient advocacy groups, doctors’ associations, community groups and others, along with the Biden administration, actively advocated for vaccine mandates as a key measure to protect public health.

New disclosures from Pfizer, posted by Fang on his Substack, show that many of these same groups were taking money from Pfizer while they promoted the idea that the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines were “safe and effective,” despite a lack of scientific data to back those claims.

Prominent groups on the extensive list of those who took Pfizer funding while pushing the mandates included the Chicago Urban League, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), the National Consumers League, The Immunization Partnership, the American Pharmacists Association, the American College of Preventive Medicine, the Academy of Managed Care Pharmacy, the American Society for Clinical Pathology and the American College of Emergency Physicians.

Many groups did not disclose their ties to Pfizer.

“[These groups] set the nature of the debate,” Fang told comedian and political commentator Russell Brand on a recent episode of “Stay Free.” “They appear in the news media, they create events and they create a discourse that looks authentic, that looks organic, but it benefits the bottom line of their benefactors, of companies like Pfizer.”

Fang said many of these organizations, particularly civil rights organizations like the Chicago Urban League or the National Consumers League — which actually has a Pfizer lobbyist on its board — have powerful influence precisely because of their independent status.

When these groups speak out, Fang said:

“It affects how regulators see these issues and how the public sees them. When they see these third-party groups that have some credibility — these are famous organizations that are known for standing up for the public interest.

“When they say ‘hey these mandates are a good idea for the American public,’ it seems genuine.

“But they aren’t disclosing the Pfizer money, which is a relevant factor when you are talking about a policy that compels Americans to take this product.”

After the COVID-19 vaccines became widely available in early 2021, vaccine mandates followed in different forms across the country.

At the federal level, the U.S. Department of Defense mandated vaccines for military personnel, and the Biden administration mandated vaccines for federal contractors and for all employers with 100 employees or more — the latter was struck down in federal court.

Universities mandated vaccination for students and staff, and many public and private employers across the country mandated vaccination for their employees.

Several school districts across the country planned to mandate vaccination for children to attend school, but most of those plans have since been rolled back.

Those who instituted mandates justified them by asserting that mass vaccination — and only mass vaccination — would “stop the spread” of COVID-19.

But it has since been revealed that in March 2021, when Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky publicly and unequivocally stated on MSNBC that vaccinated people would not get sick, there was no evidence to support her statement.

In fact, the CDC had to walk back the statement a few days later.

Biden also falsely claimed that the vaccinated would not get infected — in July 2021, just before COVID-19 vaccine mandates went into effect.

The vaccine makers have since acknowledged they never tested whether the vaccines would stop transmission, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reported that vaccinated people in both Pfizer and Moderna’s clinical trials contracted the virus.

Big Pharma’s big reach

Pfizer isn’t the only actor in Big Pharma that quietly funds third parties to do its work.

Fang told The Defender that “Many pharmaceutical firms covertly shape public opinion and regulations through the use of front groups and financial relationships with community organizations.”

For example, Purdue Pharma covertly funded third-party advocacy groups to encourage looser criteria for prescribing its highly addictive opioid painkillers, he reported.

As for Pfizer, Fang said, third-party funding is just one of the many strategies the drugmaker deployed to drive COVID-19 policymaking.

“Pfizer flexed its lobbying muscles around many COVID-19 policies, including efforts to curb drug-pricing initiatives and a bid to prevent the creation of generic COVID medications,” he said, adding, “The vaccine mandate debate is yet another example of Pfizer’s reach into public policy.”

Big Pharma — along with the Biden administration and its intermediaries — also lobbied to suppress those who questioned the vaccine program.

Pfizer BioNTech and Moderna pressured Twitter and other social media platforms to set moderation rules that would flag purported COVID-19-related “misinformation,” as part of the effort to drive the national conversation about the COVID-19 vaccines, Fang reported as part of the “Twitter files.”

“Pharma is unique in the raw amount of money they spend to control the entire public sector on regulatory, on policy, on everything in terms of how it affects medicine as it is practiced in the United States,” Fang said.

The pharmaceutical and health products lobby is one of the biggest industry lobbies. According to OpenSecrets.org, last year alone the industry spent $372 million lobbying Congress and federal agencies, outspending every other industry — and each year it increases its spending.

Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla is on the board of Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the top individual lobbying spender in the industry, which spent $29.2 million last year. Pfizer itself spent more than any other drug company.

The industry also spends massive amounts of money on advertising. Pfizer alone spent nearly $2.8 billion on advertising for all of its products in 2022.

The COVID-19 vaccines netted $37.8 billion for Pfizer in 2022, up from $36.7 billion in 2021. The company’s overall earnings hit a record $100 billion.

Big Pharma and the CDC did similar work to promote mandates and vaccination

There is a “revolving door” between pharma industry lobbyists and the government — nearly 65% of lobbyists formerly worked for the government.

And the strategies used to build support for Big Pharma’s products are some of the same strategies used by federal government agencies like the CDC.

Since 2021 — the same time Pfizer started funding community groups — the CDC has doled outhundreds of millions of dollars in grants for the creation of “culturally tailored” pro-vaccine materials and for training “influential messengers” to promote COVID-19 and flu vaccines to communities of color in every state across the country.

For those grants, the CDC sought out community organizations that would communicate the CDC’s message without the CDC’s trademark, so the messages would appear to come organically from within local communities rather than from the government, particularly among communities of color.

In another case, the CDC hired a public relations firm to write what looked like news articles but were actually ad placements created to persuade parents of young children and elderly people — with a focus on Spanish speakers — to get vaccinated.

Both Pfizer and the CDC used their funding to target black and Latino communities that had lower vaccination rates. In one case, they both funded the same organization — the National Hispanic Medical Association (NHMA).

According to Fang, the organization worked with a public relations firm called Culture ONE Worldto distribute “press releases and media placements” that “called on employers of essential workers to mandate COVID-19 vaccines.”

Fang also wrote that the NHMA also signed joint statements lobbying in favor of Biden’s vaccine mandate and that “it received $30,000 from BIO [Biotechnology Innovation Organization], a vaccine industry lobby group that represents Pfizer and Moderna, IRS filings show.”

The Defender found that NHMA received $2,070,000 in two annual grants so far for their “Vacunas! Si Se Puede, Immunization Campaign for Hispanics” program, which later became “We Can Do This,” to create culturally tailored content to be circulated throughout Latino communities.

American Academy of Pediatrics received multiple grants from Pfizer in 2021

The AAP also appeared on Fang’s list of notable organizations that received direct Pfizer funding.

According to Fang:

“The American Academy of Pediatrics was one of the most visible organizations working to build public support for vaccine mandates. The organization received multiple, specialized grants from Pfizer in 2021.

“Pfizer also provided grants to individual state chapters of the AAP earmarked for lobbying on vaccine policy. The Ohio AAP chapter, for instance, lobbied the Ohio legislature against bills to curb coercive COVID-19 vaccine policies, while receiving an ‘immunization legislation’ advocacy grant from Pfizer.”

Beyond its COVID-19 vaccine mandate work, the organization also was a public advocate for COVID-19 vaccines for children. Its then-president, UCLA professor Moira Szilagyi, M.D., Ph.D.,publicly advocated, on media outlets such as CNN, for vaccinating children.

The organization, “dedicated to the health of all children,” previously issued policy guidance to its members stating that it is an “acceptable option to pediatric care clinicians to dismiss families who refuse vaccines.”

And in June 2022, the AAP issued a press release applauding the CDC’s recommendation of “safe, effective COVID-19 vaccines” for babies as young as 6 months old, despite concerns raised — by the FDA vaccine advisory commission, among many others — regarding a lack of clinical data for the vaccines in children.

In addition to the Pfizer funding, the AAP receives much of its funding directly from the CDC, raising questions about the organization’s ability to act independently, particularly with respect to vaccine recommendations, BMJ editor Peter Doshi wrote in 2017.

FDA Complicit in at Least 10M Deaths by Distorting Info about Ivermectin and Vitamin D3 (the Lie that ‘there were No Safe/Effective COVID Treatments’ Enabled Emergency Use Authorization for COVID Vax)

From [JOEL SMALLEY] The FDA (that’s the most influential public health agency in the world if you didn’t know) is responsible for the most egregious disinformation

Joining the collaboration of those conspiring against safe and effective early treatments like ivermectin, the FDA is responsible for the preventable “COVID” deaths and all those caused by the (truly “dangerous and lethal”) “vaccine” that could not have been granted EUA (Emergency Use Authorisation) in the presence of a safe and effective alternative. That’s more than 10 million by my estimation. 

So, while the rest of us were being deplatformed and put on terrorist watchlists for sharing the truth about the benefits of early treatment and harms of the “vaccine”, especially for young people and pregnant women, this FDA tweet still remains. Exhibit 1, your “honour”

2 for the Nuremburg II trials that will never happen. [MORE]

Another Study Demonstrates Ivermectin is One of the Safest and Cheapest Drugs for COVID in the World

JOEL SMALLEY explains, here is yet another definitive study on the effectiveness of one of the safest and cheapest drugs FOR HUMANS in the world - ivermectin. 

Desort-Henin et al., 5 Jan 2023 was a Double Blind Randomized Controlled Trial, placebo-controlled*. It does not come better than that.

The SAIVE Trial, Post-Exposure use of ivermectin in Covid-19 prevention: Efficacy and Safety Results

Violaine Desort-Henin, Anna Kostova, Elmozafar Ahmed Babiker, Audrey Caramel, Richard Malamut

This study demonstrated highly statistically significant evidence in a large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study that daily oral treatment with ivermectin reduced the risk of infection following exposure to SARS-CoV-2. 

Ivermectin was also shown to be safe in doses and duration higher than currently used in approved indications. [MORE]