I was glad that one of the most accomplished defense attorneys in recent US history, Tom Mesereau, endorsed and circulated my article on last week’s Bill Cosby ruling. Debates over Cosby’s moral probity or lack thereof are beside the point. The essential point is how the virulently angry response to that ruling by the nation’s leading cultural “influencers” goes a long way to highlight a key dynamic underlying the ongoing ascendance of latter-day left-liberalism.
Michael, I would like you to address the similar situation with Derek Chauvin's trial. We can all debate his guilt but objectively looking at the trial, he did not get a fair trial.
1. He was refused a change of venue,
2. The judge refused to sequester the jury (even OJ Simpson's jury for sequestered for 265 days),
3. The jury was using social media during the trial
4. One jury member Brandon Mitchell lied to get on the jury about not being at a protest even though his pics later revealed he was at BLM protest with BLM shirt/hat and a "Get Off Our Necks" shirt on.
5. Another juror making her decisions based on a photo which she claimed to show Chauvin with his hands in his pocket as if nobody could stop him - despite this being corrected during the trial that he DID NOT have his hand in his pocket and his black gloves in front of black pants make it look like that but if one looks even for a couple second, they can see his hand isn't in his pocket. This Juror based this on something that not only never happened, but something that even a very cursory review of the video makes clear that it never happened. Source of her interview:
Fantastic (not ironic) but cannot happen. I think you’re right but wow the consequences . That would take some real courage, anyone who overturns Derrick C. conviction would immediately have a significant place in history. That would be the Rodney King riots all over again. I like your moxie.
Overturning the trial would be epic - the face that launched a thousand ships - Homer’s Odyssey. Man that would be something to see! The judge that decided to do that would be modern-day Hercules.
I think you’re right but no way Jose, that would shred America.
OMG, I did not know that all 3 women on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court voted to release. And why did I not know? Because the bias/corrupt liberal-left media chose not to report this absolutely critical fact. Thank goodness I read you and others on Substack. I would be so ill informed if I did not have this resource.
Keep in mind that among the leaders who advocated and/or voted for the anti-crime legislation of the 1980's and 1990's were people like Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and most of the black elected officials of the time.
Gen'Xer here. I feel like I am in some bad star trek episode where my lefty friends all of a sudden have goatee beards and are attending Bob Jones 'university'... WTF!?!?!
"So the fact that women were the ones who handed down this decision would seem to pose a problem for Tamblyn & Co. Don’t expect that to even be acknowledged, though. Grappling with contradictions is not necessary per the construct of contemporary left-liberalism."
I'll take a guess - the contradiction is illusory because these women are yoked by a patriarchal court system. Also the law is racist and sexist.
You were one of the few public figures to take Biden seriously as a candidate early on, and you recognized his popular appeal to normalcy while also acknowledging his shift to the cultural left. An event that went almost entirely unacknowledged in 2019 was when he decried the Anita Hill incident as damned by "a bunch of white guys." That was about the composition of the panel. But he didn't stop there: he went on to say, "It’s an English jurisprudential culture, a white man’s culture. It’s got to change."
The law itself is white and male! (And English!) And it will indeed change. Unfortunately I'm very pessimistic about this and think in ten years we'll read back on articles like this and wonder how on earth we let this system slip away.
Hence the reappearance of discussion about inconvenient facts like racial and gender IQ gaps. I wouldn’t bet against both sides looking back with regret.
My tin foil hat does wonder if the Cosby “metoo” had anything to do with him criticizing Obama and the black community culture? We all know what democrats are capable of (Kavanaugh?)
I would encourage you all to watch Razorfist's latest video on Bill Cosby. He points out several instances of shenanigans during the Cosby trial which should never have been allowed in any "sane" trial:
Michael, a while back, you asked for what we'd like to see covered. I had an idea but held off because I didn't want you risking your neck over a suggestion of mine. But your announced plans were bolder than my idea, so now I'll offer my idea...
Cover the SF shoplifting epidemic. I find that really interesting. I don't know if it's overblown or what, but there have been a lot of changes and store closings. And now there's been a raid of a Neiman-Marcus store. Anyway, just a thought.
> At a board of supervisors hearing last week, representatives from Walgreens said that thefts at its stores in San Francisco were four times the chain’s national average, and that it had closed 17 stores, largely because the scale of thefts had made business untenable.
In Bill Cosby's case, his money was his downfall. Also him speaking out openly against Obama and black community culture (Pound Cake speech) created too many enemies.
The illiberal left is so impatient, with so much certainty, on the right side of history, doing god’s work (minus God), that they forgive themselves for their wild inconsistencies.
I just reread Francis Fukuyama‘s “the end of history”, essay, it was not about this topic but I think he coined the perfect phrase for this illiberal woke moment. They think they’re right, they are certain and they forgive themselves when they gloss over inconvenient details. The old, hard won lessons like free-speech and due process, those old guard rails can be ignored because they have escaped history: they can be trusted they know what to do. The inverse is also true, if you allow those inconvenient details to be debated you fuel the fire of intolerant bigots as evidenced by Trump’s election .The end of history, we know what to do trust us.
I have much sympathy for their upset: Cosby, 60 women, that’s enough for me, he did it. But I prefer due process, the number one lesson of history, governments oppress their people.
I was commenting that their opinion was intolerant bigot, I found him crass and hilarious. He was a fantastic comeuppance for the chattering class.
Substack is like the Freesian‘s : free thought and tolerance. MSM journalists are indentured servant‘s - feudal fealty.
Could you imagine Michael Tracy‘s piece getting past an editor. The article would never get published and he would be put on the list for layoff when the next round of cutbacks come. MSM journalists tack very closely to the prevailing winds as a matter of self preservation and personal economics. Douchebaggery abounds.
Michael, I would like you to address the similar situation with Derek Chauvin's trial. We can all debate his guilt but objectively looking at the trial, he did not get a fair trial.
1. He was refused a change of venue,
2. The judge refused to sequester the jury (even OJ Simpson's jury for sequestered for 265 days),
3. The jury was using social media during the trial
4. One jury member Brandon Mitchell lied to get on the jury about not being at a protest even though his pics later revealed he was at BLM protest with BLM shirt/hat and a "Get Off Our Necks" shirt on.
5. Another juror making her decisions based on a photo which she claimed to show Chauvin with his hands in his pocket as if nobody could stop him - despite this being corrected during the trial that he DID NOT have his hand in his pocket and his black gloves in front of black pants make it look like that but if one looks even for a couple second, they can see his hand isn't in his pocket. This Juror based this on something that not only never happened, but something that even a very cursory review of the video makes clear that it never happened. Source of her interview:
https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/george-floyd/derek-chauvin-trial-alternate-juror-lisa-christensen/89-97b74eb1-c875-4ed5-93ad-5c72620b9f18
Exhibit 17:
https://cdn.locals.com/images/posts/originals/393864/393864_btiq3vjs1x6fk4x.jpeg
6. Politicians like Maxine Waters were literally threatening if they didn't get a guilty verdict
7. Year long of riots while not changing the venue
8. Politicians including the president stating already making up their minds on guilty verdict before the trial?
9. The judge refused to declare it a mistrial even after all this bs?
All this isn't even referring to the evidence of the trial. We are talking about whether he got a fair trial or not.
If we don't stand up for fair trials for those whom we hate, then we are basically a banana republic.
"then we are basically a banana republic."
Yes, we are, complete with the green renewable inspired power outages, brownouts, and rolling blackouts.
Fantastic (not ironic) but cannot happen. I think you’re right but wow the consequences . That would take some real courage, anyone who overturns Derrick C. conviction would immediately have a significant place in history. That would be the Rodney King riots all over again. I like your moxie.
It’s not about overturning imo. It needs to be declared a mistrial and the judge needs to be punished for overlooking such obvious things.
Until there’s a fair trial, there’s no verdict in my eyes.
Overturning the trial would be epic - the face that launched a thousand ships - Homer’s Odyssey. Man that would be something to see! The judge that decided to do that would be modern-day Hercules.
I think you’re right but no way Jose, that would shred America.
OMG, I did not know that all 3 women on the Pennsylvania Supreme Court voted to release. And why did I not know? Because the bias/corrupt liberal-left media chose not to report this absolutely critical fact. Thank goodness I read you and others on Substack. I would be so ill informed if I did not have this resource.
Keep in mind that among the leaders who advocated and/or voted for the anti-crime legislation of the 1980's and 1990's were people like Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, and most of the black elected officials of the time.
Bill Clinton and those Democrats really enacted the Reagan revolution.
Gen'Xer here. I feel like I am in some bad star trek episode where my lefty friends all of a sudden have goatee beards and are attending Bob Jones 'university'... WTF!?!?!
"So the fact that women were the ones who handed down this decision would seem to pose a problem for Tamblyn & Co. Don’t expect that to even be acknowledged, though. Grappling with contradictions is not necessary per the construct of contemporary left-liberalism."
I'll take a guess - the contradiction is illusory because these women are yoked by a patriarchal court system. Also the law is racist and sexist.
You were one of the few public figures to take Biden seriously as a candidate early on, and you recognized his popular appeal to normalcy while also acknowledging his shift to the cultural left. An event that went almost entirely unacknowledged in 2019 was when he decried the Anita Hill incident as damned by "a bunch of white guys." That was about the composition of the panel. But he didn't stop there: he went on to say, "It’s an English jurisprudential culture, a white man’s culture. It’s got to change."
The law itself is white and male! (And English!) And it will indeed change. Unfortunately I'm very pessimistic about this and think in ten years we'll read back on articles like this and wonder how on earth we let this system slip away.
Hence the reappearance of discussion about inconvenient facts like racial and gender IQ gaps. I wouldn’t bet against both sides looking back with regret.
Relevant skit by Ryan Long: when woke and racist agree on everything:
https://youtu.be/Ev373c7wSRg
My tin foil hat does wonder if the Cosby “metoo” had anything to do with him criticizing Obama and the black community culture? We all know what democrats are capable of (Kavanaugh?)
Cosby's 'Pound Cake' speech got him into eternal hot water. They've never forgiven him for it, nor his attempted purchase of NBC.
https://youtu.be/cx4fAevsRwQ
I would encourage you all to watch Razorfist's latest video on Bill Cosby. He points out several instances of shenanigans during the Cosby trial which should never have been allowed in any "sane" trial:
https://youtu.be/lJvijmbWOvk
Razorfist said on Jun 17, 2019 that it would be overturned on appeal. He was right.
Michael, a while back, you asked for what we'd like to see covered. I had an idea but held off because I didn't want you risking your neck over a suggestion of mine. But your announced plans were bolder than my idea, so now I'll offer my idea...
Cover the SF shoplifting epidemic. I find that really interesting. I don't know if it's overblown or what, but there have been a lot of changes and store closings. And now there's been a raid of a Neiman-Marcus store. Anyway, just a thought.
You might find this video very useful. It digs even further than the Prop 47: "The Secret Behind San Francisco's Shoplifting Problem":
https://youtu.be/qYTwznRuCr8
> At a board of supervisors hearing last week, representatives from Walgreens said that thefts at its stores in San Francisco were four times the chain’s national average, and that it had closed 17 stores, largely because the scale of thefts had made business untenable.
Cool! Thanks much. I'll definitely watch it.
Here's another:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VXGnbS0DyE
Just as I was reading your comment, I got this in my recommended lol
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nDDzaZq910
What also makes America great is that the more you can afford a team of good lawyers, the more justice you get.
In Bill Cosby's case, his money was his downfall. Also him speaking out openly against Obama and black community culture (Pound Cake speech) created too many enemies.
The illiberal left is so impatient, with so much certainty, on the right side of history, doing god’s work (minus God), that they forgive themselves for their wild inconsistencies.
I just reread Francis Fukuyama‘s “the end of history”, essay, it was not about this topic but I think he coined the perfect phrase for this illiberal woke moment. They think they’re right, they are certain and they forgive themselves when they gloss over inconvenient details. The old, hard won lessons like free-speech and due process, those old guard rails can be ignored because they have escaped history: they can be trusted they know what to do. The inverse is also true, if you allow those inconvenient details to be debated you fuel the fire of intolerant bigots as evidenced by Trump’s election .The end of history, we know what to do trust us.
I have much sympathy for their upset: Cosby, 60 women, that’s enough for me, he did it. But I prefer due process, the number one lesson of history, governments oppress their people.
That “60” number doesn’t make any difference. Watch this video on the complete shit show of the Cosby trials:
https://youtu.be/lJvijmbWOvk
Calling orange man “intolerant bigot” is ironic btw especially considering his opponents. What was intolerant bigot about him anyway?
I was commenting that their opinion was intolerant bigot, I found him crass and hilarious. He was a fantastic comeuppance for the chattering class.
Substack is like the Freesian‘s : free thought and tolerance. MSM journalists are indentured servant‘s - feudal fealty.
Could you imagine Michael Tracy‘s piece getting past an editor. The article would never get published and he would be put on the list for layoff when the next round of cutbacks come. MSM journalists tack very closely to the prevailing winds as a matter of self preservation and personal economics. Douchebaggery abounds.
Corporate media is thankfully dying. Best thing that could have happened.