Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) said her constituents want to see reparations for descendants of slaves in the form of “direct payment.”
Tlaib hopes the House has a “serious conversation” about voting on H.R. 40, the Commission to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals for African-Americans Act, after the reparations hearing that took place last week in the House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties.
“This is something that is very rooted in trying to combat what’s happened and continues to happen with black Americans not being actually able to get a level playing — on the same level after slavery,” Tlaib, who represents Michigan’s 13th congressional district, said on Capitol Hill.
“I support any opportunity for restorative justice and that can come up all above in some instances, but I think there’s a serious conversation happening in committee and I hope it continues to happen regarding reparations. But I guess it should be determined by all of us and I can tell you at home it is direct payment that people want to see but also increased access to higher education, to real equitable funding in education systems, right now, across the country,” she added. (Read more from “Tlaib Says Her Constituents Want to See ‘Direct Payment’ as Reparations” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Rashida_Tlaib_on_Voice_of_America-2.jpg10801526Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 15:26:442019-06-25 15:22:34WATCH: Tlaib Says Her Constituents Want to See ‘Direct Payment’ as Reparations
A grand jury refused to indict a woman charged with assaulting an 82-year-old pro-life activist outside Kentucky’s only remaining abortion clinic, the Courier Journal reported.
Janaya Alyce Gregory, 32, was charged with second-degree felony assault after surveillance video showed her approaching Donna Durning outside EMW Women’s Surgical Center April 12 and allegedly pushing her to the sidewalk. Durning was hospitalized with a broken leg that required surgery and rehabilitation. . .
During, a longtime anti-abortion activist, told the Courier Journal in a separate article she was at the clinic on the day of the incident as a part of the local “40 Days for Life” campaign involving her church. . .
The woman initially ignored Durning but then “turned back around and charged at the victim, bumping [the] victim with her body and causing [the] victim to fall backward,” the Courier Journal reported, citing the criminal complaint.
Surveillance video shows the woman walking toward a waiting car as Durning approached her on the sidewalk. After the woman reached the car, she turned around, walked toward Durning, and appears to make contact with the victim.
[Surveillance clip of the assault:]
(Read more from “Grand Jury Refuses to Indict Woman Charged with Assaulting Pro-Life 82-Year-Old” HERE)
CNN anchor John King admitted what many liberal critics of President Donald Trump refuse to acknowledge about controversial migrant child detention in a segment Tuesday.
“I just want to remind people, that under president Trump, Democrats don’t like anything he says about immigration, he’s had problems with his own party on immigration,” King explained.
“But this particular issue is not new. I just want to go back, this is an interview, going back to 2014, with the then-Democratic president of the United States,” he added.
“There are some Democrats who come to the table and say Trump created this crisis, this is all about Trump,” King continued. “Alright, maybe it escalated under Trump, the numbers are certainly higher under Trump, but this has been a problem the United States government has had to figure out a solution to, for a very long time.” . . .
“Oh, our message absolutely is don’t send your children unaccompanied on trains,” he said, “or through a bunch of smugglers, that is our direct message to families in Central America, do not send your children to the borders. If they do make it, they’ll get sent back…”
(Read more from “CNN Host Forced to ADMIT Child Immigrant Detention Happened Under Obama” HERE)
The University of Washington is recruiting pot-smoking pregnant women to participate in a study conducted by its Radiology Department, and is paying the expectant mothers to continue to smoke weed throughout their pregnancies so researchers can track the drug’s impact on babies. . .
According to the university’s website, researchers are looking for women who are less than 13 weeks pregnant, “and must either consume marijuana frequently or not at all.” If accepted, test subjects will be paid $300 to complete the program, which entails three drug tests during pregnancy and an assessment of their baby’s development at six months of age.
The project study explains that researchers “will recruit 35 pregnant women who are using cannabis to alleviate morning sickness and 35 pregnant women who are using prescribed medication for morning sickness.” . . .
KOMO-TV reported that “throughout their pregnancies, test group subjects will have to report weekly pot use, purchase marijuana only from licensed sellers, and send photos of the product’s packaging for researchers to record percentages of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), pot’s active ingredient and cannabidiol (CBD), a non-active compound whose potential therapeutic properties are the focus of the current investigation.”
Moms + Marijuana project leader Dr. Natalia Kleinhans said in a press release, “This study is targeting a very specific population of women who are using marijuana to manage their symptoms while they’re pregnant. There’s little research to back up the medical and public health advice they’re getting to stay away from pot to control nausea.” (Read more from “U.S. University Is Paying Pregnant Women to Do Drugs” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Pregnancy_ultrasound_110322105347_1056300-1.jpg560650Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 15:15:142019-06-25 15:12:29U.S. University Is Paying Pregnant Women to Do Drugs
Justice Neil Gorsuch seems really determined to give violent gun felons a degree of due process our founders never envisioned. In yet another opinion, expanding upon previous decisions declaring the “crime of violence” statute unconstitutional, Gorsuch joined with the four liberal justices to vacate the criminal conviction of two violent robbers while declaring the statute upon which the conviction rested as unconstitutional. Meanwhile, there is no urgency from Congress to promote “criminal justice reform” that would actually stem the tide of judicially-mandated jailbreak of violent criminals.
One of the centerpieces of the Reagan-era tough-on-crime regime was the federal Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA). ACCA established mandatory minimum sentencing for those who used firearms while committing crimes and enhanced penalties for repeat offender. The bill helped spawn the most precipitous drop in crime in our nation’s history by taking the most violent criminals (not just “nonviolent” drug offenders) off the streets. Numerous statutory clauses reference a “violent felony” as eligible for these penalties. Violent felony is described as including crimes such as assault, burglary, arson or a crime that “otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk of physical injury to another.”
Thousands of these cases were tried in the courts for three decades without any problems until in 2015, the Supreme Court in Johnson v. U.S. “struck down” that final clause of the statute, known as the residual clause, as unconstitutionally ambiguous. A year later, in another creeping pattern of applying their breaches in the Constitution retroactively, the Court in Welch v. United States applied this ruling retroactively to the thousands of people who were sentenced under this law since 1984. Justice Clarence Thomas vigorously dissented.
Thus, the worst of the worst within the prison system are now eligible to reopen their cases in front of numerous liberal district judges, even if they committed violent offenses, as long as they weren’t the handful of crimes enumerated explicitly in the statute.
Last April, Justice Gorsuch joined with the four liberals expanding Johnson to the context of immigration cases in Sessions v. Dimaya. In that case, Gorsuch said that a criminal legal immigrant cannot be deported under crime of violence laws. As we noted at the time, this was a massive expansion of his own doctrine of constitutional vagueness because even if crime of violence language is too vague for a criminal convictions, the courts have long said that deportations are not criminal punishments but the extension and consequence of sovereignty. As Thomas noted at the time, it was the first time the court held a criminal alien statute unconstitutional.
Which brings us to Monday’s ruling in U.S. v. Davis. Gorsuch once again joined with the four liberals in expanding the assault on the Armed Career Criminal Act, this time by saying that 924(c)(3), the statute that prohibits using or carrying a firearm during and in relation to a federal “crime of violence,” is unconstitutional, and therefore vetoed out of existence. This was a huge expansion because, as Justice Brett Kavanagh noted in his dissent, unlike in Johnson and Dimaya, which “involved statutes that imposed additional penalties based on prior convictions,” Davis dealt with “a statute that focuses on the defendant’s current conduct during the charged crime.”
Yet, Gorsuch joined with the four liberals to say the entire statute is unconstitutionally vague, thereby vacating the criminal conviction of two armed robbers who pointed short-barreled shotguns at store clerks during their robberies.
The problem with his assertion is that there is no vagueness here. The letter and intent of Congress is clear. They wanted to put away people who have violent tendencies. After all, we see this debate playing out today in the political branches over deciphering between violent and nonviolent criminals. 924(c)(3)(B) simply targets those who use a firearm in a crime that “by its nature, involves a substantial risk that physical force against the person or property of another may be used in the course of committing the offense.” This standard is all over the criminal code, and while we don’t like Congress delegating too much authority to the executive, this falls well within the reasoned delegation that had already been in the system long before the rise of the administrative state.
Moreover, there is no doubt that this specific case of two convicted armed robbers who robbed a convenience store with short-barreled shot guns jabbed in the side of a store clerk would be viewed by any reasonable person as part of the statute. The fact that there might be some cases where Gorsuch believes the statute might be applied in a vague way does not veto the statute. Courts don’t get to veto laws and rip statutes out of the law books. They render judgments in individual cases. If there is an individual defendant where 924(c) is applied to a case that is not clear-cut, it would be OK for Gorsuch to vacate the conviction. But he has no such power to abstractly rip statutes out of the books, thereby making it that even the most violent actors would not be covered.
The Due Process Clause of the Constitution doesn’t give criminal defendants the power to have statutes they believe as vague to be categorically “struck down.” The entire modern vagueness doctrine is new to the 20th century and rose exactly at the same time that the courts began using the due process clause in general to “veto” democratically-passed laws rather than rule on individual cases. Any true originalist would scuttle this doctrine as a violation of judicial power.
However, putting aside the legal analysis, even if one agrees with Gorsuch’s very strict standard on the vagueness doctrine in criminal statutes, everyone should agree from a political perspective the results of these cases, culminating with Monday’s ruling, will be devastating to our communities. Thousands of the most hardened violent criminals who graduated to the federal system, and often work for transnational cartels and gangs, will be released early and many will never be convicted. As Kavanaugh warned in his dissent, which was joined by John Roberts, Thomas, and Samuel Alito, “defendants who successfully challenge their §924(c) convictions will not merely be resentenced. Rather, their §924(c) convictions will be thrown out altogether.”
Shouldn’t everyone agree that Congress must rewrite the statute? Indeed, even former Attorney General Eric Holder agreed that retroactivity should not be applied to those who received a mandatory minimum sentence for a firearms offense pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
Yet, rather than pushing the first step of getting tough on the most violent criminals, Jared Kushner is pushing President Trump into supporting a “second step” act on behalf of criminal justice “reform.” But if their entire premise was to help nonviolent criminals, how can they remain silent and not push to convict the most violent gun felons under clear statutes?
I guess Kim Kardashian’s zeal for gun control only applies to law-abiding gun owners, but not armed robbers. And yes, Kushner’s zeal for helping so-called nonviolent criminals is not reciprocated with a commensurate zeal for keeping the violent criminals off the streets and preserving the last modicum of Reagan’s successful reduction in violent crime. (For more from the author of “SCOTUS Decision Might Lead to Release of Thousands of Violent Felons” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/USSupremeCourtWestFacade.jpg13311871Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 15:11:222019-06-25 15:08:15SCOTUS Decision Might Lead to Release of Thousands of Violent Felons
House Democrats are again delaying plans to move forward on a spending proposal to increase Congress’ pay for the first time in a decade, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters Tuesday.
At a weekly press briefing, Hoyer explained that there wasn’t enough support among House members to move forward with the “Cost of Living Adjustment” (COLA) proposal this week, saying that “we don’t have the votes.”
At the Tuesday briefing, Hoyer also cited a lack of GOP support as a reason for not moving forward. Hoyer also echoed concerns already voiced by Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) about serving in Congress only becoming a possibility for the wealthy if pay doesn’t increase at some point.
The original pay hike proposal was included in a spending bill appropriating the budget for the Legislative Branch and was initially tabled after public pushback. That bill will not be brought for a vote this week either, Hoyer explained at the briefing. However, he also explained that he is still trying to reach a deal with GOP leadership on the matter.
Politico reported Monday night that efforts to advance COLA on a bipartisan basis appeared to be in trouble due to a lack of Republican votes in favor of the proposal.
One of the most vocal proponents of a congressional pay increase has been far-left freshman House member Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) who claims that a cost-of-living-driven pay increase to Congress’ $174,000 salary is necessary to keep lawmakers from turning to lobbying or other means of cashing in on their service after they leave.
However, voters just don’t see eye-to-eye with her or the other pay increase proponents on this issue. According to a recent Politico/Morning Consult poll released earlier this month, almost three-quarters of registered voters — 72 percent — are against the idea of increasing congressional salaries to some extent. Only 14 percent of respondents supported the idea.
Last week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said that the Senate wouldn’t be working on the issue, but Hoyer nevertheless persisted, calling the idea “the right thing to do to ensure that the Congress reflects all of America — not just the wealthy.”
Other members of Congress have been far less enthused with the idea.
“Instead of writing a budget or reforming our bankrupt entitlement programs, House Democrats are angling for a pay raise,” Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) said when the idea was first reported. “These jokers couldn’t hold down a summer job at Dairy Queen pulling this kinda crap.” (For more from the author of “Dems Scuttle Vote on AOC-Endorsed Congressional Pay Hike After It Fails to Get Enough Support… Again” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/Alexandria_Ocasio-Cortez_-_Caricature_29369606158.jpg10801920Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 15:08:122019-06-25 15:06:05Dems Scuttle Vote on AOC-Endorsed Congressional Pay Hike After It Fails to Get Enough Support… Again
When an American is killed by a foreign national, it is not more tragic or painful for the family members and society than it is when a person is killed by a citizen. However, from a public policy standpoint, it is more outrageous because the death is usually avoidable, and in the case of an illegal alien or legal immigrant with prior convictions, it is 100% avoidable. We can’t pick our natural-born citizens, but we can pick our immigrants and we can and must remove those who are harmful at the first sign of trouble.
Volodymyr Zhukovskyy, 23, was arrested on Monday by Massachusetts police at his home in West Springfield for the negligent homicide of seven motorcyclists in Randolph, New Hampshire, last Friday night. Seven bikers were killed, and three others injured when his pickup truck and attached trailer plowed into the motorcycles traveling in the opposite direction on Route 2.
According to local media, he has two prior DUI arrests, including one conviction in 2013, which led to his license being suspended for 210 days because he was tagged as “an immediate threat.” The other DUI arrest was just last month in Connecticut. He was also arrested in Baytown, Texas, on Feb. 11, 2019, on possession of a crack pipe.
According to WMUR, Zhukovskyy was charged for unlicensed operation of a motor vehicle, negligent operation of a motor vehicle and speeding in April 2012, but charges were dismissed. He also pleaded guilty to two drug charges in January 2017 for possession of cocaine and heroin, but just paid a fine.
In addition to the driving and drug charges, according to the Boston Globe, Zhukovskyy received a 90-day suspended jail sentence in Connecticut in 2015 for larceny after he admitted to stealing ladders and windows at a Home Deport warehouse.
Massachusetts police also found suspected heroin pockets in his home. Zhukovskyy pleaded not guilty at Tuesday’s arraignment.
Video of the arraignment is available here:
Zhukovskyy is not an illegal alien, but is a citizen of Ukraine who resides here on a green card and has been living here with his family for 13 years. However, a green card does not entitle anyone to an affirmative right to remain in this country. It’s a probationary period for them to demonstrate “good moral character” (INA 316(e)). While there are, unfortunately, many Americans who have DUI and drug charges, it should go without saying that immigrants – legal or otherwise – should not be allowed to remain here without good moral character.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement has confirmed with CR that “a detainer has been placed to take Mr. Zhukovskyy into custody at the conclusion of local criminal proceedings.”
Obviously, when it comes to illegal aliens, it makes sense that any illegal arrested for any crime should be deported since they must be deported even if they did not commit any crimes. While we might not want a threshold of deporting legal immigrants for any misdemeanor, there is no reason someone with multiple misdemeanors that includes dangerous driving offenses should be allowed to remain in the country. What is clear is that ICE should have access to all records of foreign nationals and they should be aware of multiple criminal offenses, especially in this case, when there were numerous cross-state arrests that would each individually be viewed as low level within the respective states, but taken together, pain the picture of someone who should be deported.
It’s clear from the fact that ICE is only now requesting information on the 2017 drug conviction that it had no idea of his status at the time.
The 2015 larceny conviction should have made him deportable right away and ICE should have been notified. Theft is included in a crime of moral turpitude making legal immigrants deportable under 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(A). Then again, in 2017, Zhukovskyy should have been deportable because drug possession (except for certain marijuana offenses) make an alien deportable under 8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(B).
The fact that someone like this could have continued to rack up driving offenses for this long without his past history ever being conveyed to the right authorities demonstrates how the weakness in enforcing current law leads to so many avoidable murders. All deaths at the hands of foreign nationals whom we could have deported are, by definition, avoidable. This is one of the most redressible problems from a public policy standpoint because no foreign criminals should ever cycle in and out of the criminal justice system for years without being removed.
What’s worse is that sanctuary states like Massachusetts work to hide criminal records from ICE to ensure that they can’t weed out the criminal elements among the many good immigrants in this country. Jessica Vaughan of Center for Immigration Studies, who lived in Massachusetts for many years, told CR that Massachusetts laws are “inadequate to protect the public.”
“It is evident that the commonwealth of Massachusetts is failing to manage the issuance of regular and commercial driver’s licenses to prevent unqualified, unsafe drivers from obtaining these credentials, and yet at the same time, the Legislature wants to add to the problem by allowing illegal aliens to receive driver’s licenses. This will make the problem worse because the Registry of Motor Vehicles will have no way to authenticate their identity, meaning that they will have no clue about their past driving history or suitability for a license. Clearly, the state needs to be more restrictive in screening for licenses, not less.”
Then there is the issue of undermining federal immigration officers. According to Vaughan, the bill before the state Senate “would not only discourage sharing of information between local and federal authorities about non-citizens who are a danger to the public, but it would protect them from contact with ICE and even mandate their release while charges are pending, even if ICE is seeking to deport them.”
So rather than preventing situations like this, the bill would also “require the release of an illegal alien who is charged with an atrocity like this – guaranteeing that they remain free in the country and likely free from consequences for their actions.”
Current law could have worked to save the lives of these seven individuals based on the larceny and drug charges. But Congress should go a step further and make two DUIs grounds for deporting legal immigrants. We see so often that manslaughter or homicide is born out of refusal to enforce current law, especially when deportable offenses were suggestive of the ultimate offenses that proved fatal.
In this case, Zhukovskyy should have been deported anyway, but Congress needs to ensure that repeat DUI offenders are deported and that DUI arrests of aliens are sent to ICE.
At Tuesday’s arraignment where Zhukovskyy was charged with seven negligent homicides, Judge Peter H. Bornstein said his “criminal and driving history exhibit a pattern of operating a motor vehicle in a dangerous manner. If released, he will likely present a danger to the safety of defendant or the public.”
The big question is why was this history enough to allow him to remain in the country for the past four years? Moreover, the suspect’s father told the Boston Herald that his son “recently” obtained a green card. If that is in fact true, then it would mean that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) adjusted his status, even though he had such a robust criminal record.
At the end of the day, Edward Corr, 58, of Lakeville, Mass., Jo-Ann Corr, 58, of Lakeville, Mass., Michael Ferazzi, 62, of Contoocook, N.H., Albert Mazza, 59, of Lee, N.H., Desma Oakes, 42, of Concord, N.H., Aaron Perry, 45, of Farmington, N.H., and Daniel Pereira, 58, of Riverside, R.I., are all dead thanks to the systemic breakdown of enforcing current immigration laws.
Yet, somehow the deaths of Americans due to the lack of immigration enforcement is never as sexy as the death of illegal aliens at the hands of cartels being blamed on our border agents. Sadly, these avoidable murders happen every day and go unreported in the media. (For more from the author of “Truck Driver Accused of Killing 7 Bikers Was Immigrant Who Should Have Been Deported” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/very-vivid-colours-fragment-arrest-weapons-104727.jpg7441200Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 15:06:252019-06-29 20:14:15Truck Driver Accused of Killing 7 Bikers Was Immigrant Who Should Have Been Deported
The FY20 National Defense Authorization Act is incomplete, Rep. Mark Green argued on Tuesday. He’s hoping Congress will consider his amendment to tackle the alarming rate of active-duty and veteran suicides. About 20 service members and veterans take their lives every day, he explained, in part because they are not spiritually prepared for war.
His amendment would direct the Department of Defense to assess the availability and usage of the assistance of chaplains, houses of worship and other spiritual resources for members of the Armed Forces of all self-identified religious affiliations in order help counter the tragic rate of military suicides, Green explained in a press release. The congressman served in the military for 24 years.
“In the past year, the rates of active-duty military suicides have increased dramatically,” he said. “It is our duty to ensure warriors and veterans are mentally, emotional, and spiritually prepared for war.
“Every commander can tell me how well their equipment is ready to deploy. Things like marksmanship, and training on various maneuver tasks are all measured. But I am confident not a single commander in the military could measure the spiritual readiness of those soldiers who self-identify as spiritual or religious. The data is clear, treating spiritual wounds can save lives.” . . .
Non-religious individuals are more at risk for suicide, he explained. Chaplains and churches can help soldiers cope with “moral injuries,” such as the guilt of having survived while their best friends did not. (Read more from “GOP Rep Warns: Our Troops Are Not ‘Spiritually Ready’ for Battle” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/us-army-379036_960_720-1.jpg637960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 15:03:322019-06-25 15:00:44GOP Rep Warns: Our Troops Are Not ‘Spiritually Ready’ for Battle
By Townhall. Last night during an interview with CNN, Carroll backtracked her claims and then made an insane statement about rape.
“You don’t feel like a victim?” Cooper asked.
“I was not thrown on the ground and ravished, which, the word ‘rape’ carries so many sexual connotations. This was not sex…this was not sexual,” Carroll said.
“I think most people think of rape, it is a violent assault,” Cooper responded.
“I think most people think of rape as sexy,” Carroll said. “Think of the fantasies.”
Would you look at that — nothing in here about E. Jean Carroll's bizarre comments about rape being seen as enjoyable in the Firefighter Newsletter. But plenty of Fox News bashing though as if they're the real enemy! cc: @redsteeze@robeno@NickFondacarohttps://t.co/dZKOz5XqxE
By The Independent. Donald Trump has denied raping the author E Jean Carroll, the latest woman to accuse him of sexual assault, partly on the basis that “she’s not my type”.
Carroll appeared on CNN on Monday to provide further details of the alleged mid-1990s incident in which she claims Mr Trump cornered her in a dressing room, forced her up against a wall and raped her. . .
Speaking to American publication The Hill in the Oval Office, the US president said Carroll was “totally lying”. He added: “I’ll say it with great respect: Number one, she’s not my type. Number two, it never happened. It never happened, OK?
“I don’t know anything about her,” he said, referring to Carroll. In previous interviews he has suggested he never met the author, until it emerged the pair have been pictured together. “I know nothing about this woman. I know nothing about her. She is – it’s just a terrible thing that people can make statements like that.” (Read more from “Trump Denies Raping Author E Jean Carroll” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/1280px-CNN_hq.jpg9601280Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 14:59:582019-06-25 14:56:34Woman Who Claimed Trump Raped Her Backtracks, Makes Insane Statement Even CNN Can’t Handle
Tucker Carlson had historian Victor Davis Hanson on last week, where the latter said that California is on the verge of becoming the nation’s first Third World state. From trash being illegally dumped to city hall becoming a rat-infested den in the city of LA, it all points to the decay suffered when Democrats run things. Even police stations in the city are loaded with rats; one was fined $5,000 over its conditions that left one officer stricken with typhoid fever. It’s to the point where there is a possibility that bubonic plague—yes, the black death—may be present in the city. This isn’t new. . .
Oh, yeah, and bubonic plague could be roaming the streets (via Daily Wire):
“We have a complete breakdown of the basic needs of civilization in Los Angeles right now,” Pinsky told Fox New host Laura Ingraham. “We have the three prongs of airborne disease, tuberculosis is exploding, rodent-borne. We are one of the only cities in the country that doesn’t have a rodent control program, and sanitation has broken down.”
Pinsky said bubonic plague — also known as the “Black Death,” a pandemic that killed off millions in the 14th century — is “likely” already present in Los Angeles. The plague is spread by infected fleas and exposure to bodily fluids from a dead plague-infected animal, with the bacteria entering through the skin and traveling to lymph nodes.
[…]
“This is unbelievable. I can’t believe I live in a city where this is not Third World. This is medieval,” Pinsky said, according to Fox News. “Third World countries are insulted if they are accused of being like this. No city on Earth tolerates this. The entire population is at risk.”
(Read more from “Bubonic Plague in Los Angeles? Is California on the Verge of Becoming a Third-World State?” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/homeless-man-2653445_960_720-2.jpg640960Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2019-06-25 14:55:242019-06-25 14:50:45Bubonic Plague in Los Angeles? Is California on the Verge of Becoming a Third-World State?
