Author Archive: Ed Driscoll

SPRINGTIME FOR HARRIS: Tim Walz Now Caught in a Scandal Involving a Muslim Cleric and Adolf Hitler.

Democratic vice presidential nominee Tim Walz, on at least five occasions as governor of Minnesota, hosted a Muslim cleric who celebrated Hamas‘s Oct. 7 attack last year on Israel and promoted a film popular among Neo-Nazis that glorifies Adolf Hitler, the Washington Examiner found.

The imam, Asad Zaman of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, joined other Muslim leaders in May 2023 for a meeting about mosque security with Walz’s gubernatorial office in Minnesota. Zaman also spoke at a May 2020 event to call for peaceful protests with the governor during the riots in Minnesota sparked after George Floyd’s death. In April 2019, the cleric delivered an invocation before Walz’s state address — just months after Zaman called for an end to a government shutdown at a press conference with Walz in January 2019.

Zaman, moreover, attended a May 2019 event that Walz hosted for Ramadan, social media posts show.

Red State’s Bonchie writes, “I believe Harris is stuck. To make a switch just prior to the DNC would be a major admission of defeat, and I don’t think she would even entertain doing that voluntarily. Democrats are stuck with Walz, and from what I’m hearing, there’s a lot more to come on various subjects.”

But the DNC is totally plug-and-play at this point. Plug in Harris for Biden, plug in somebody new for Walz, and the MSM will quickly write 2000-word “explainers” on why each was a brilliant move.

RICK BEATO INTERVIEWS ALAN PARSONS (Video):

WATERGATE? AS ZHOU ENLAI NEVER SAID ABOUT THE IMPACT OF THE FRENCH REVOLUTION, “TOO EARLY TO SAY:” Nixon Shouldn’t Have Resigned.

What have I learned in the 50 years since? Although we are a long way from the summer of 1974, the Watergate pieties haven’t changed, and the media retrospectives this week will likely be repeating all the clichés about saving America: “The system worked.” “No man is above the law.” But a genuine retrospective of Nixon and Watergate needs to be shorn of cant and caricatures, unburdened by the clockwork bromides of “crook” or “resigned in disgrace.”

I hope new generations are open to some different thinking—or at least a balanced treatment that goes beyond the story of bungling burglars and political damage control. It must include how the “Watergate affair” was also the culmination of Nixon’s political opponents’ long-yearned-for goal of destroying him. Nixon had a political target on his back from his congressional days of vanquishing the communist Alger Hiss, a favorite of Washington’s intellectual left. Through his entire presidency, Congress was controlled by opposition Democrats, with confrontation aggravated further by Nixon’s determination to end the Vietnam War he had inherited from the Kennedy and Johnson administration planners at the State and Defense departments.

Sen. Edward Kennedy set up the Senate Watergate Committee. Three months later John F. Kennedy’s 1960 campaign director of opposition research against Nixon, Archibald Cox, was hired as Watergate special prosecutor with a staff seeded from the ranks of Robert F. Kennedy’s Justice Department. The subsequent special prosecutor, Leon Jaworski, expressed concern in an internal memorandum that his chief deputy reflected “an attitude I discussed with you before—the subjective conviction that the president must be reached at all cost.”

Watergate scholar Geoff Shepard has unearthed further damning evidence that the special prosecutors had several unethical private meetings with Judge John Sirica in the absence of attorneys for Nixon and Watergate defendants—each violating the most basic legal protections. Nixon’s adversaries weren’t looking only for the truth. They were looking for a scalp.

As Glenn wrote last year, “Recent events have made me doubt the entire Watergate story.” Much more on that topic from him here: Nixon’s Revenge.

UPDATE: “Reconsidering United States v. Nixon, from Josh Blackman at the Volokh Conspiracy.

RICHARD GOLDBERG: “Let’s have an honest conversation about what happened last night in Michigan and what’s going on right now with the @VP team’s clean-up attempt:”

She was not on a teleprompter. She was not hiding behind a press release or a surrogate. It was Harris being confronted by a radical pro-Hamas group asking her to consider an arms embargo on Israel. When confronted with radicals in her face, she said she’s open to it.

This is not the first time this has happened. Flashback: September 2021. Harris visits a school, and a kid goes off about Israel. Her response? “Your truth cannot be suppressed, and it must be heard.”

* * * * * * * *

They were her words — not a carefully crafted statement or post on X by a surrogate. It has happened before. They reinforce what we’ve seen for months as Harris became much more publicly hostile to Israel than Biden.

Only Kamala Harris can speak to what she said. Not Phil Gordon. Not a Jewish liaison. Not a communications director. Kamala Harris. Until she stands for a press conference and takes questions on it, her words in Michigan stand — no one else’s.

It’s impossible to imagine this headline from CNN if the parties were reversed:

Buried lede: Replacement for Democrat presidential candidate who can’t get through softball interviews yet another presidential candidate who can’t get through softball interviews!

And as Jim Treacher has said:

UPDATE: Note that Harris’s strategy is working for her so far. Philip Klein writes that “The Coddling of Kamala Is Taking Left-Wing Bias to a New Stratosphere,” adding that “I was a conservative journalist during the Obama era, and I have to say, even he had periods of negative coverage. I cannot recall anything like what we are now witnessing:”

Politico’s Playbook has a story out today, titled “Why Harris Isn’t Taking Questions,” that once again is a meta-analysis of how amazing her campaign is and how there’s no sense in messing with a winning streak. It notes that she has been informally chatting with reporters on her plane off the record, which, Dave Weigel surmises, is why we haven’t been hearing more complaints about access. This makes campaign reporters look even worse. Essentially, it means that access is all about their own insecurities rather than about actually doing their jobs and informing the public by asking a candidate for the presidency to answer challenging questions about her positions on important issues.

Perhaps the most damning indictment of the media comes from the Harris campaign itself.

“What is the incentive for her [to take more questions]?” Politico quotes somebody close to the campaign as saying. “She’s getting out exactly the message she wants to get out.”

Exactly. If you can get away with scripted events and the media are happily behaving as a mere extension of your public-relations team, why bother?

As Treacher wrote today, the MSM side of the DNC-MSM are happy to go along with their folie à deux. “Nobody wants to be the reporter who gave us more President Trump. That’s all it is. They don’t care that we know they’re lying. Some of them, I suspect, actually enjoy that part. Anything that makes your enemy angry is good, and lying to them works every time.”

PELOSI ON BIDEN: ‘Never been that impressed with his political operation.’

Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says she was long dissatisfied with President Joe Biden’s campaign before he dropped out — not to mention his prospects for winning in November.

“I’ve never been that impressed with his political operation,” she told The New Yorker in an interview published Thursday. “They won the White House. Bravo. But my concern was: this ain’t happening, and we have to make a decision for this to happen. The President has to make the decision for that to happen.”

In her interview, the 84-year-old former speaker signaled her personal frustration with the strength of Biden’s campaign operation, which she suggested was not up to the task of beating former President Donald Trump despite doing so successfully in 2020. And she reiterated her public stance that the president’s decision to get out of the race and endorse Vice President Kamala Harris as his replacement at the top of the ticket was Biden’s and Biden’s alone.

While Pelosi privately voiced concerns to Biden about the dire polling of June and July which suggested a widening battleground map, she has only just begun to publicly reflect on her view that the Biden campaign was not in a winning position. The San Francisco Democrat was still hesitant to admit playing a singular role in the push to bring Biden down.

“I really wanted him to make a decision for a better campaign, because they were not facing the fact of what was happening,” Pelosi said after praising Biden’s accomplishments. “We couldn’t see it go down the drain, because Trump was going to be president and then he was going to take the House. Imagine! Imagine how that would be! Well, we don’t have to imagine. We saw.”

Yes, prior to 2020, we saw the booming stock market, low inflation, and low unemployment. Can’t have that! But perhaps the real buried lede here is that New Yorker proved it’s actually possible to have blue-on-blue journalism:

Because, ordinarily both sides of the equation are perfectly comfortable with calculated silence:

QUESTION ASKED AND ANSWERED: Why Wasn’t ‘Scranton Joe’ at the Harris-Walz Launch Rally?

Democrats packed into Temple University’s Liacouras Center in Philadelphia for the new Democratic ticket’s first rally. Earlier that morning, news broke that Vice President Kamala Harris had picked Minnesota’s Governor Tim Walz as her running mate. The choice simultaneously carried undertones of 2008, when the younger Barack Obama chose an older, white, generic politician in Senator Joe Biden, and 2016, when Hillary Clinton picked the low-name-ID Senator Tim Kaine to appear moderate. Notably absent from this rally, however, was the now-President Joe Biden, known for playing up his Pennsylvania roots.

Why wasn’t Joe there? Because it very likely wasn’t his decision to voluntarily pass the baton, and because of intense fears there would be a moment like this, as Jim Treacher writes:

CBS “journalist”: Are you confident that there will be a peaceful transfer of power, January 2025?

Joe: If Trump wins, no, I’m not confident at all. [EXCRUCIATING PAUSE AS HE REALIZES WHAT HE JUST SAID IN FRONT OF THE WHOLE WORLD] I mean, if Trump loses, I’m not confident at all.

Oh. Whew!

Good thing he remembered the difference between “win” and “lose.” A lot of people get those two things mixed up, right?

His initial thought was: “If Trump wins, we riot.” Which is what happened in 2016. But then he realized he’s not supposed to say that out loud.

It’s especially galling, given the past four years of outright lies about Biden’s senility. If he hadn’t botched that debate so badly, all these “journalists” and their fellow Democrats would still be lying to you.

“He’s as sharp as ever, we can barely keep up with him,” etc.

It’s 89 days until the election, and they just need to keep the old man breathing. And keep Kamala and her new running mate away from pesky reporters.

Can Kamala & Co. run out the clock by staying silent? Possibly, given that anything Trump says in a press conference will be dissected for auras and penumbras of partying like it’s 1939: Daily Show Claims Trump Is Invoking Themes From Mein Kampf.

RIP, MATE: Jack Karlson, Mr. “Democracy Manifest” is off to a succulent Chinese meal in the sky:

Background at Wikipedia, and an update on Karlson’s life in this recent Australian TV clip:

JON GABRIEL: Journalists: Heroes in Their Own Minds.

Sometimes, a selfie is worth a thousand words. CNN White House reporter Jim Acosta, the definition of journalistic self-regard, posted a photo to Twitter midway through the Trump presidency. Taken just before his 2018 appearance on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert, Acosta stares longingly into his Broadway-style lighted mirror, grasping a director’s chair emblazoned with the show’s logo. His reflection gazes into the camera’s eye revealing his bottomless well of self-satisfaction, insolence, and unearned pride. An open box of Zantac sits on the vanity.

The image was widely mocked across social media, much to the shock of the D.C. press corps. That picture revealed far more than the flaws of one spotlight-hogging reporter. It laid the soul of modern political journalism bare: the media’s supercilious id and ego, perfectly framed in an ignorant instant. Acosta quickly turned into a lightning rod, getting banished from the White House after a set of tedious stunts and histrionic hatred for the president of the United States. Yet he is far from the only Narcissus on the Potomac. The legacy media’s love for itself is topped only by its contempt for its audience.

Read the whole thing, which is an except from Against the Corporate Media, due out next month.

STOLEN VALOR: Tim Walz launched political career on false claim as combat veteran in the War on Terror.

UPDATE: Walz Falsely Claimed He Served in Afghanistan. When a Local Vet Called Him Out, His Office Did Nothing. Walz launched his first congressional campaign as ‘a veteran of Operation Enduring Freedom.’

FLASHBACK: Why would anyone need to lie about having been in Vietnam? “O,the stained souls, the small-hours doubts, the troubled manhood of so many American men who didn’t go to Vietnam when they could have — the strange guilt they seem to feel when they confront Vietnam veterans. Strange: There were some cheaters and liars, but all that most of them did was exercise their legal rights, in the manner of Richard Blumenthal, Connecticut attorney general and Democratic Senate candidate — five deferments, then a safe stateside slot in the Marine reserves…Harvard and Yale and social connections are nice, but at 3 o’clock in the morning you find yourself outranked by high school dropouts whose names are on the wall of the Vietnam Memorial. Not in the eyes of the world, but in your own eyes. What a withering stare it must be for some men, that they’ll shame themselves far worse than they were shamed before, by telling a lie.”

MORE:

UPDATE (10:40 PM):

I LIKE HIS STYLE:

MAKE AMERICA MINNESOTA AGAIN!

UPDATE:

And an appropriate Kinsley Gaffe from NPR:

UPDATE: It really is a Kinsley Gaffe from NPR: Tim Walz Cozied Up to Anti-Semitic Terror Defender at 2019 CAIR Event, Photos Show.

HOW IT STARTED:

How it’s going: Cori Bush: ‘AIPAC, I’m Coming to Tear Your Kingdom Down.’

More here: Squad’s Cori Bush meltdown after being ousted from Congress in rant revealing who she is blaming for embarrassing loss.

Progressive Squad member Cori Bush had an on-stage meltdown Tuesday after losing her reelection bid.

The progressive Democrat became the second Squad member to be taken down after a hotly-contested primary against a more moderate challenger who hammered Bush for supporting pro-Gaza protests.

Now, she is blaming her defeat on pro-Israel group AIPAC which put a whopping nearly $9 million to oust her, that she threatened to ‘tear down.’

Her unhinged remarks came during a primary election watch party in St. Louis, Missouri, where she took a stage in front of supporters.

Pacing back and forth on the stage and speaking so loudly that the microphone shook, the former Black Lives Matter organizer condemned ‘corporations’ and AIPAC, charging them with orchestrating her ousting.

Defiantly, Bush told the crowd that now she is no longer bound to the decorum of Congress, and that now she had ‘some of the strings [cut] off,’ her opponents will ‘see this other Cori, this other side.’

Why is the far left such a cesspit of anti-Semitism and not-so-veiled threats of violence, just weeks after an assassination attempt on the Republican candidate for the presidency?

MOVE ALONG, NOTHING TO SEE HERE COMRADE: Tim Walz’s deep links to China: Kamala’s VP pick taught and went on honeymoon in the country… and oversaw a scholarship program funded by Beijing.

Related: That’s what Xi said!

UPDATE:

JAMES LILEKS’ WEDNESDAY REVIEW OF MODERN THOUGHT: Great moments in far left Gnosticism, as kitsch painter Thomas Kinkade is declared “fascist:”

Just so you know: The personal is political extends to aesthetic preferences. Your tastes put you in the political camp that deserves violence. Hunt down the fash Kinkade fans and ship them to the camps, or our democracy is in peril!

Rockwell? Oh, we’ll get around to him.

Read the whole thing.

QUESTION ASKED AND ANSWERED: “Is Joe Biden Calling ‘Defund’ Democrats Crazy?,” Noah Rothman asked in 2021:

This week, President Joe Biden attended a town hall-style forum hosted by CNN where anchor Don Lemon gently guided the president toward reframing the defund debate in a way that could benefit Democrats. “You said police are up against—well, they’re up against the narrative that, you know, the country is anti-police, Democrats are anti-police, Joe Biden is anti-police,” Lemon probed the president. “They’re not saying it,” Biden interjected. “Republicans are saying it on the far–,” the president caught himself. “I’m not going to—anyway.” “No,” Lemon pressed. “I want you to talk about this, because, I mean, it’s an important narrative.”

That word—“narrative”—conveys to the audience that they’ve been privy to little more than a story. It’s a more nuanced variation of the idea that Democrats have never really sought to defund local police forces, and you only believe that because you’ve been gulled by the GOP’s mesmeric powers of suggestion. But Biden expounded on this theme in a rather bizarre exchange with reporters on the subject.

“Are there people in the Democratic Party who want to defund the police?” a reporter asked the president. Biden snapped back: “Are there people in the Republican Party who think we’re sucking the blood out of kids?” he said to the sound of bewildered silence. Check and mate.

To translate, Biden’s veiled answer to the question posed by his interlocutor is, yes, of course, some Democrats support defunding the police. But they are as fringe, paranoid, and, indeed, vicious as the Republicans who subscribe to the most unhinged QAnon conspiracies. If that were true, we would be in big trouble. By any objective assessment, the number of Republicans who subscribe to some version of Q’s incomprehensible theories is dwarfed by the amount of elected Democrats who weren’t just amendable to defunding police but tried to translate that slogan into policy.

Flash-forward to today, where the Washington Examiner reports: Kamala Harris donated last year to defund police group backing DC ‘sanctuary city’ law.

Reuters reports that “Vice President Kamala Harris is toughening her position on illegal immigration, taking on hardliner Donald Trump on his signature issue in a series of campaign events and digital ads in coming weeks, according to campaign staff.”

Why wasn’t she doing that prior to running for the White House?

(Although perhaps the buried lede in the Reuters story is that they’re actually referring to “illegal immigration,” a phrase Kamala herself once tried to memory hole: Kamala the Language Cop: Harris Urges End to Terms ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism,’ ‘Illegal Alien.’)

WHAT “FUNDAMENTAL TRANSFORMATION” LOOKS LIKE: America Is Ready for a Jewish Veep. The Democrats Aren’t.

Almost as soon as Harris began her search for a running mate in earnest, a campaign from the progressive left made it clear that the anti-Israel wing of the party would not vote for Shapiro. Though his support of Israel is identical to that of every other contender, though he hates Benjamin Netanyahu a lot, though his view on college campus protesters (he called it “absolutely unacceptable” that “universities can’t guarantee the safety and security of their students”) is the most common, most popular view, none of this was a match for his last name, the fact that he is an observant, kosher-keeping proud Jew, and that, like the vast majority of Jews, he supports the state of Israel.

In their criticism of Shapiro, leftists pointed to the fact that he excoriated University of Pennsylvania president Liz Magill for refusing to condemn calls for the genocide of the Jews—I know, what a monster!—that he called on Penn to shut down the anti-Israel encampments, which violated university codes and guidelines—the shame!—and that he told The New York Times, “If you had a group of white supremacists camped out and yelling racial slurs every day, that would be met with a different response than antisemites camped out, yelling antisemitic tropes.” How dare he suggest antisemitism should be condemned, no matter what side it comes from! 

As The Babylon Bee put it Monday night, “Democrats Worried Choosing Jewish Vice President May Cost Them The All-Important ‘Death To America’ Vote.” By Tuesday morning, the Harris campaign had turned farce into tragedy and picked Walz for Harris’s running mate.

There can be no doubt about it: there was only one reason to reject Shapiro, and it was that the Democrats would rather cater to their antisemitic base and lose the election than embrace the vast non-antisemitic American middle and win. “You also have antisemitism that has gotten marbled into this party,” Van Jones said on CNN Tuesday. “You can be for the Palestinians without being an anti-Jewish bigot, but there are some anti-Jewish bigots out there.”

This is a party whose “progressive” politics have gone very far “back and to the left,” as Oliver Stone would say, since Al Gore chose Joe Lieberman to be his veep in 2000: Back then, “the media not only applauded it as a historical milestone but considered his piety a political plus: Lieberman was well-known for his devout faith, which, the Democrats/media hoped, would contrast nicely with President Clinton’s cigar-tinged indiscretions. The possibility of liberal blowback wasn’t even considered. But now, the truth is just too big to ignore,” Scott Pinsker wrote yesterday. “When Lieberman was tapped, antisemites weren’t yet a key Democratic voting bloc. Now they are.”

FINALLY, KIER STARMER HAS LOOKED AT THE RIOTS IN ENGLAND AND IS FIGHTING BACK — Against Elon Musk, for some reason: Could Elon Musk Face Legal Action For UK ‘Civil War’ Post?

After Elon Musk said “civil war is inevitable” following days of rioting in cities in the United Kingdom, the nation’s government warned that anyone inciting violence online will face legal consequences. Could the billionaire be one of those people?

It’s not going to happen, according to a legal expert contacted by Newsweek, who instead said he was “shocked” that newly elected British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, of the left-wing Labour Party, would make such a threat.

In the U.K., the febrile situation has raised concerns about misinformation on social media, but also concerns, including among some far-right activists, about social cohesion in multicultural societies.

Musk, the Tesla CEO and owner of X (formerly Twitter), posted his comment on the same social media platform under a video showing rioters setting off fireworks at police. Musk has claimed there will be a civil war in Europe multiple times previously.

Newsweek has reached out to a representative for Musk via email for comment.

“There is no justification for comments like that,” Starmer’s spokesman said on Monday.

And seemingly moving in lockstep in response, as Brendan O’Neil writes: The British elites’ crazy rage against Elon Musk.

It’s not enough to call this a ‘mask-off moment’. It’s more like the phoney liberals have ripped their masks to shreds and stomped them into the dirt for good measure. Their rage is linked to the riots currently rocking the UK. Musk’s own tweets, they say, not least his chatter about Britain being on the road to ‘civil war’, have helped to whip up the mayhem. Worse, his ‘free-speech absolutism’, as one ‘liberal’ magazine snottily refers to it, has meant that every tosser with a smartphone has been able to tweet their inflammatory views on the riots and even to spread misinformation. In essence, says a writer for the Guardian, Musk has been ‘leading from behind on UK thuggery and race riots’.

Got that? The reason Britain is going to shit is not because of any internal rot but because a billionaire in Texas said ‘civil war’ on the internet. Glad we cleared that up. Even worse than the great and the good’s shameless deflection tactics – where they try to pin the blame for their own failures on a foreigner with money – is their tinpot solutions to this supposed problem. It might be time, says that sexagenarian Marxian in a leather jacket, Paul Mason, to ‘pull the plug’ on X entirely. Yesteryear’s tyrants smashed up printing presses and chased booksellers out of town – today’s want to switch off a website on which no fewer than half a billion souls regularly share their thoughts and feelings.

They really have taken leave of their senses. Musk’s ‘horrific version of Twitter’ is ‘a bit like Paris under Nazi occupation’, says Peter Jukes of Byline Times, the preferred publication of rich liberals who’ve been in a state of red mist since the plebs voted for Brexit eight years ago. Just like Paris in the 1940s, says Jukes, some are fleeing Musk’s X, while others are sticking around to ‘work for liberation’. The narcissism of it. Imagine thinking that keeping your X account open so you can continue spouting bollocks in your echo chamber is as brave as when Parisians stayed in Paris to resist Nazi rule.

Why are multiculti British leftists so furious at an African-American?

NANCY PELOSI AND THE WRAP-UP SMEAR:

But, an AP “fact check” notes: Video takes 2017 clip of Nancy Pelosi discussing smear tactics out of context.

CLAIM: A clip shows then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi openly admitting how Democrats get the media to legitimize lies using a tactic called the “wrap-up smear.”

AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. A clip of Pelosi speaking at a 2017 press conference has been edited to remove context. Pelosi was describing a tactic she accused Republicans of using against Democrats. In other portions of her response not shown in the clip, Pelosi makes it clear she is not talking about her own party.

Of course, Democrats would never, ever use such tactics themselves. Just like AP would never, ever have an office in the same building in Gaza as Hamas.

Related: Speaking of San Fran Nan, “Pelosi snapped back at MSNBC host Joe Scarborough — a Democrat [well, effectively so these days — Ed] and former House member — when he suggested Walz is ‘progressive.’ ‘Tim Walz is wonderful. He served in the House,’ Pelosi said. ‘To characterize him as left is so unreal. He’s right down the middle.'”

But is he ready for Mount Rushmore, as Pelosi said of (P)resident Joe Biden on Sunday?

TWO-TIER KIER: Rioters will feel the full force of the law.

Rioters will face “the full force of the law”, Sir Keir Starmer has vowed ahead of a further expected wave of riots across the UK.

The Prime Minister, speaking after an emergency Cobra meeting at Downing Street, said rioters should expect “substantive sentences” on conviction.

More than 400 people have been arrested following the violent unrest in nearly two dozen cities and towns in England, Wales and Northern Ireland over the past six days.

Sir Keir promised communities “will be safe” and that the criminal justice system has shown a “robust and swift response” in the face of the unrest.

Police forces are bracing themselves for up to 30 potential gatherings of rioters on Wednesday.

A list of solicitors’ firms and advice agencies has been shared in chat groups as possible targets for gatherings, with the message inviting would be rioters to “mask up” if they attend.

The Law Society of England and Wales described such gatherings as a“direct assault on our democratic values” and urged the Government to treat such “threats against the legal profession” with the “utmost seriousness”.

So serious that the chief of London’s police force is punching reporters’ microphones! Mark Rowley’s mic grab sets a dreadful example to police officers.

Sky News reporter having his microphone grabbed and dropped to the ground might seem like a trifling story right now, given everything that’s happening in the country. But when the mic-grabber is none other than Sir Mark Rowley, Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, it’s a different matter. A very different matter. In a democracy, cops don’t treat journalists in such a dismissive, degrading fashion.

It was outside the Cabinet Office that Sir Mark outrageously interfered with the property of a reporter. The man from Sky News asked him if he was going to ‘end two-tier policing’. And instead of answering – or not answering, if he wants to be a big baby about it – Sir Mark yanked Sky’s mic and seemed to push it to the ground. As he then arrogantly strutted to his car, the reporter could be heard saying: ‘Did he just do that?’

Yes, he did. And it was beyond inappropriate. For the most powerful cop in the country to manhandle an instrument of journalism, to try to physically prevent a reporter from recording something, sends a terrible message. Will Sir Mark’s lower-downs now behave likewise? Will they take their cue from the big man and grab and discard the kit of any journalist who asks them a pesky question?

I can’t imagine why anyone would be questioning British authorities about “two-tier policing,” especially when its new PM released a photo of himself in June of 2020 kneeling in sympathy with American BLM protestors:

UPDATE: What did you expect? Britain’s protests reflect DECADES of elite failure.

Well, not so much “failure” as deliberately planned: “Labour wanted mass immigration to make UK more multicultural, says former adviser. Labour threw open Britain’s borders to mass immigration to help socially engineer a ‘truly multicultural’ country, a former Government adviser has revealed.”

MORE: When the elites loved rioting. From the London riots to BLM, liberals and leftists have spent far too long celebrating street violence as virtuous.

JAMES LILEKS IN MARCH: Four years ago today:

The story had no “Two weeks to stop the spread” messaging. The lockdown was open-ended, although I seem to recall we thought it was supposed to be two weeks, then reviewed. In two weeks the headline would be “New Target — May 4” which was almost a month away.

The rules were adjusted to let landscapers go back to work.

On May 3 a story noted that the target date was now May 17. A “business analyst was quoted as saying he would still stay home because he thought “There wil be a couple of waves of death,” and that the skyways should be all closed because they were a “cesspool” of disease.

On the 14th the lockdowns were modified: “faith gatherings of 10 or fewer” were permitted, and the paper noted that people “can leave the house more.” Restaurants, bars, gyms, and the like would be closed until June 1st. Another order: “anyone who can work from home, must.”

Also in March of 2020: Walz Implemented COVID Hotline To Snitch On Neighbors.

The hotline generated thousands of reports – against people playing basketball, walking their dogs, or attending church, local outlet Alpha News reported in 2022. Walz’s administration continued to monitor the hotline until November 2020, though it remained operational until June 2022.

In one example of a complaint, someone alerted authorities to a church service that wasn’t following Walz’s “legal requirements,” the outlet noted.

“I am aware that the apostolic Lutheran church at [address] is planning to hold church services oct 2-4th [sic]. Hundreds are expected And [sic] they will be serving meals in the church dining hall. I don’t believe this fits with legal requirements and I am. Aware [sic] that multiple families that attend this church currently have coronavirus.”

People also called in lists of “non-essential” businesses that remained open or didn’t strictly follow government masking requirements.

A recording of the hotline circulating online reveals a prerecorded message telling callers they have reached the “Office of Public Safety Stay At Home Hotline.”

But not everybody had to stay at home: Getting back to the Minneapolis Star-Tribune in 2020, Lileks wrote that “There was nothing on the front page on June 1st about COVID restrictions lifting, because it was the sixth day of the Floyd Protests.”

That was the day that Walz referred to “the week of righteous anger being expressed by community leaders and all people of conscience,” in a press conference.

And that feeling of “righteous anger” was infectious! During those legendarily “peaceful but occasionally slightly fiery protests,” Walz’s wife was imbibing the sweet smell of small businesses in flames, his daughter was tweeting advice to the rioters on whether or not the National Guard or SWAT would be present, and Kamala was offering to bail out those few who were actually arrested.

John Hinderaker writes, “As an American, I am horrified at Walz’s selection:”

He is small-minded, mean-spirited man. In one way, he will fit in with the Harris ticket: he ran a basement campaign for re-election in 2022, refusing to show up for debates with Republican Scott Jensen after the first one went badly. So Jensen was left debating an empty chair.

Walz’s character defects are considerable, but let’s leave it at this: he was largely responsible for the George Floyd riots that devastated Minneapolis and other cities, because he dithered for days rather than calling out the National Guard. By his own admission, he held off out of sympathy for the rioters’ cause. We are still living with the consequences.

Why, it’s almost as: The Riots Are Part of the Plan. Review: ‘NextGen Marxism: What It Is and How to Combat It.’

Related: Democratic Socialists of America: “Harris choosing Walz as a running mate has shown the world that DSA and our allies on the left are a force that cannot be ignored.”

WOW: Josh Shapiro Backed Out of the Kamala Veepstakes at the Last Minute.

Shapiro’s chances remained high even after he faced serious allegations by a fellow Democrat of covering up harassment in his office. The sexual harassment cover-up didn’t take Shapiro out of contention, and neither did another cover-up — this one involving murder.

In 2011, 27-year-old Ellen Greenberg, a first-grade teacher, was found dead in the apartment she shared with her fiancé, Sam Goldberg. Her body was discovered on the kitchen floor with a knife in her chest and 20 stabs and slash wounds, half of which were in the back of her neck and head. Initially, Philadelphia Assistant Medical Examiner Marlon Osbourne ruled her death a homicide. However, after police publicly challenged this finding, Osbourne changed the ruling to suicide without explanation.

Related: Why Did Kamala Harris Pick Tim Walz?

In 2019, then-Pennsylvania Attorney General Shapiro supported the suicide determination when the case reached his desk—and many speculate his connection to the fiancé’s family was the reason. Shapiro, for his part, seemed to be actively campaigning for the job, going so far as to abandon his faith and principles to help make himself palatable to the progressive, antisemitic wing of the Democratic Party.

Take a look at this report from Politico (emphasis in the original):

Why not Shapiro? By contrast, Pennsylvania Gov. JOSH SHAPIRO’s team felt that his own interview with Harris did not go as well as it could have. There was “not a great feeling” coming out of it, according to a person in touch with Shapiro’s advisers. A person familiar with the selection process told our colleagues that, after their meeting on Sunday, Shapiro called Harris’ team and made clear that he was “struggling with the decision to leave his current job as governor, in order to seek the vice presidency.”

Does anyone believe that Shapiro was “struggling with the decision to leave his current job as governor”? Of course, he wasn’t. This sounds like Shapiro realized that the risk of joining the Harris ticket was too high after the terrible jobs report on Friday and the subsequent stock market crash on Monday.

In other words, he dropped out.

Question: Did Philly Mayor Ruin Shapiro’s Chances?

The video in question hit social media on Friday and was interpreted initially by some as an inadvertently posted announcement of Shapiro’s selection as running mate until the mayor’s office pushed back, claiming it was merely an expression of support. The reason reporters thought that is because the video looks like an announcement. It featured Philadelphia mayor Cherelle Parker and other locals explicitly promoting “Kamala Harris for president” and “Josh Shapiro for vice president.”

Considering that we now know Harris’s mind was not made up at the time, and that reporting indicates there was a concern with Shapiro’s ambition which a slickly produced hype video would seem to validate, the decision to make that video in the first place is mind-boggling.

Politico reported a few hours ago that, apart from the video, the Pennsylvania governor’s style already rubbed some in Harris’s orbit the wrong way:

Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, another finalist, avoided the green-room circuit and instead touted Harris and his own record at a series of events throughout the state. A pro-Harris event in Philadelphia turned into a Shapiro-for-VP party.

His style was seen by at least some in Harris’ world as showboating. One senior Democrat in touch with Harris’ team called it “counterproductive.”

Heinrich reports that Shapiro had nothing to do with the Philadelphia video. If that’s the case, it’s fair to wonder whether the mayor helped tank the governor’s bid in the course of trying to do the opposite.

Noah Rothman writes that “The Walz Pick Is a Statement of Weakness:”

Beyond Walz’s presumed capacity to shore up the party’s faltering lines in the Midwest, it is also believed that the governor’s popularity among progressives in positions of authority mollifies the more rabid far-left elements in the streets. As Nate Silver wrote, the value proposition here was to “avoid news cycles about a disappointed left and Democrats’ internal squabbling over the War in Gaza.”*

This tacitly concedes the GOP’s claim that Democrats are unduly beholden to a radical faction within the party that is overrepresented in the press, on college campuses, and in online forums. This is terrain Republicans are eager to attack. Walz’s selection may foreclose on taking the campaign to the GOP’s turf, forcing them to commit finite resources to what should be safe states and triangulating their issues in the effort to pick off erstwhile Republican voters at the margins.

In much the same way Donald Trump’s running mate doubled down on the qualities already represented in Trump, Harris’s veep pick suggests that her campaign will not seek to remake the electoral map. As such, it is still playing the same defense Joe Biden spent much of the year playing until it became obvious to all that he had already lost.

Don’t get cocky.

* Well, that’s one way to phrase it. America’s Newspaper of Record not surprisingly, is much bolder in their phrasing:

Found via Ace of Spades, who in a post headlined “Tim Walz Quit the National Guard and Abandoned His Unit When They Got the Call-Up to Deploy to Iraq in 2005,” quips, “Make America Somalia Again!”