2020: The Year 'Expert' Credibility Died

By Michelle Malkin

If there were ever a time to "question authority," as the old counterculture slogan of the 1960s urged, the authoritarian age of COVID-19 is that time. 2020 will go down in American history as the year that public health "experts" got everything wrong.

It's not just that their judgment was faulty. It's that time and again, the professional elites deceived the citizenry, derided other academics and medical professionals who challenged them and de-platformed outspoken dissidents who refused to obey them. These pathological liars are the true public health threat.

Exhibit A: Anthony Fauci.

The incurably smug director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases led the "Great Mask Hoax" in March 2020 when he told CBS News, "There's no reason to be walking around with a mask." He very explicitly characterized mask-wearing as a performative gesture that "might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is.”

Months later, fact-doctorer Fauci performed a whiplash-inducing 180-degree turnaround and became the planet's No. 1 mask cheerleader. He rationalized that he needed to mislead the nation about the efficacy of masks in order "to save the masks for the people who really needed them because it was felt that there was a shortage of masks."

I don't know about you, but in my house, we call this sick behavior "covering your behind."

Recently, Fauci was at it again. After repeatedly asserting over the past year that 60-70% of Americans would need to submit to vaccine jabs to reach herd immunity, he cranked up the number to between 70-90% in an interview with The New York Times. Fauci confessed that he manipulated the numbers based on polling data about citizens' vaccine hesitancy:

"When polls said only about half of all Americans would take a vaccine, I was saying herd immunity would take 70 to 75 percent… Then, when newer surveys said 60 percent or more would take it, I thought, 'I can nudge this up a bit,' so I went to 80, 85. We need to have some humility here… We really don't know what the real number is."

"We" need to have some humility? Speak for yourself, Dr. Gasbag!

Fauci further disclosed on CNN that his herd immunity pronouncement was nothing more than a "guesstimate."

            I don't know about you, but in my house, we call this kind of prestidigitation "pulling things out of your behind.

Fauci's colleagues performed similar feats of scientific fraud, deception, misdirection and political propaganda.

The Erroneous Experts shut down playgrounds, ordered us to stop singing and dancing, and canceled Easter, Thanksgiving and Christmas in the name of social distancing — but gave the green light to Black Lives Matter marches, antifa protests and post-election celebrations by Joe Biden supporters.

The Erroneous Experts caused panic shortages of hand sanitizer and antiseptic wipes with unsupported claims that COVID-19 spread through surfaces.

The Erroneous Experts facilitated the suffering of countless patients by recklessly hooking them up to ventilators, turning their lungs to mush and forbidding their loved ones from comforting them as they lay dying unnecessary deaths — while publicity-thirsty doctors and  nurses went viral twerking for TikTok and Twitter.

The Erroneous Experts conducted online purges and witch hunts against naturopaths, chiropractors, independent investigative journalists, informed parents and frontline doctors who advocated vitamin D, zinc, sunshine, exercise, hydroxychloroquine or any other commonsense measures that did not involve lining the pockets of Big Pharma — even as two-faced Fauci admitted he takes vitamins C and D to boost his immunity.

The Erroneous Experts stoked widespread fear of "asymptomatic transmission" of COVID-19, forcing catastrophic lockdowns of healthy people around the globe. But as a new British Medical Journal article acknowledges: "(W)e know very little about the proportions of people with positive results who are truly asymptomatic throughout the course of their infection." About half of people classified as "asymptomatic" go on to develop symptoms. Contrary to the impression Erroneous Experts have left the public with, they have no idea to what extent people with no symptoms transmit the virus to others.

Moreover, the BMJ article makes clear: "No test of infection or infectiousness is currently available for routine use. As things stand, a person who tests positive with any kind of test may or may not have an active infection with live virus, and may or may not be infectious."

So, the COVID-19 tests are unreliable as we hurtle toward mandatory, universal testing, tracking and tracing. And, as I reported in my three-part series on the clinical trials, the COVID vaccines are neither safe nor effective by any honest measure. Indeed, the World Health Organization's chief scientists admitted what I had recently pointed out

"I don't believe we have the evidence on any of the vaccines to be confident that it's going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on," Dr. Soumya Swaminathan stated.

The "believe science" cult of Erroneous Experts is the epitome of anti-scientific thought. May 2021 be the year of resistance and the death knell for COVID control freakism.

Source: www.creators.com

CAPITOL POLICE OFFICER BRIAN SICKNICK

View fullsize

Article & Artwork by Jonny Castro

Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick was one of hundreds of officers who were on the ground actively defending the Capitol Building on January 6, 2021. While in the middle of the chaos, an unknown suspect violently struck him in the head with a fire extinguisher. Though shaken up, Officer Sicknick continued to stay in the fight until things quieted down. Once he returned to the division office, the officer collapsed from the injuries he sustained. He was rushed to hospital where he passed away the following night. The individual who murdered him still has not been apprehended.

Officer Sicknick served as a Capitol police officer for 12 years, and was assigned to the elite First Responder’s Unit; a tight-knit unit who are tasked with safeguarding and protecting the dignitaries inside the Capitol Building on a daily basis. In addition to wearing the badge, Officer Sicknick was a U.S. Air Force combat veteran who served his country proud in support of Operation Enduring Freedom. He was 42 years old.

Attack in Nashville: Were there clues we should have seen?

By Joseph Pangaro CPM, CSO, MOI

On a quiet Christmas morning at 1:20 a.m., an RV packed with explosives drove up Main Street in Nashville Tennessee and parked near the AT&T building. The driver killed his lights and sat there for the next 5 hours.

At about 06:30 a.m., the police received a call about shots fired in the area and responded to see what was going on. Upon arrival, they did not find an active shooter; instead they found the area quiet except for the eerie sound of music playing on a loudspeaker somewhere nearby.

The officers began checking the area when they heard the music playing change to a verbal warning telling anyone in the area to evacuate. The officers immediately recognized the potential for danger and began evacuating local residents. It was shortly thereafter that the RV exploded, decimating a large section of the downtown. Luckily, none of the officers or the local residents were injured in the blast. The fact that no lives were lost is a tribute to the work of the Nashville cops on the scene that morning.

In the hours and days after the blast the investigation continued in an effort to understand the threat. Was there a larger conspiracy at work? Was this a foreign or domestic terror group at work and what else might they have planned?

The answers began to come as the investigators pieced together the available evidence. Hundreds of tips were called in as an attempt to identify a suspect or suspects were pursued. Crime scene investigators identified human remains in the blast and DNA was gleaned from them. Before long, the investigation revealed a name and face - Anthony Quinn Warner, a Tennessee resident living about 10 miles from Nashville’s downtown. A search warrant was served on Warner’s home and evidence was collected. Now the next phase of the investigation began, putting a motive to the crime.

The first reports about Warner were based on anecdotal information from neighbors, police records and friends of the suspect. The initial picture of this man was one of a “nice guy, a quiet man, a friendly person.” People who knew him claimed shock at his involvement in something so horrendous. And, as is often the case, the profile of the man coming to light did not match the terrible act of detonating a bomb in a downtown area.

Over the course of the next few days, it was learned that Warner had acted alone and that he may have held some negative opinions of the police in general. The slow drip of information continued as the investigators began to release more information. Now we saw a very different picture of Anthony Quinn Warner emerging.

Updated reports told us he held not only anti-police sentiments, but he also believed in conspiracy theories about the World Trade Center bombing and the moon landing. These are classic conspiracy theories often considered the thoughts of the mentally unhinged or those on the kook fringe. Cementing that belief was the revelation that Warner believed that reptile aliens from other worlds secretly live among us by concealing their presence by mind control and orchestrating what we do here on earth. Clearly the two pictures of Warner we were given, only days apart, are as disparate and disconnected as to be shocking.

As the days continued we saw official reports that Warner was believed to have died in the blast along with his dog and he was not an unknown subject. In fact, he had been reported to be building bombs in the very RV he used as a rolling bomb and there were indicators that he was suffering bouts of depression. He was giving away property, a classic sign of a depressed person contemplating suicide.

His potential bomb building was investigated, but due to the circumstances the investigation went no further than knocking on his door to ask some questions. The trail then went cold, and Warner was off the radar.

This case, as strange as the facts are, reveal great questions for all of us in law enforcement, the number one question being: did we miss the signs of potential violence that seem so apparent?

In hindsight the answer seems clear. The warning signs were there, but were either not seen, not recognized or not understood by the authorities. In any event, the fact that this act of violence only resulted in the death of Warner and maybe his dog is a small miracle.

This case screams out to us about the need to bridge the gap between events and the ability to see them for what they are in real time so an intervention can take place to prevent a future horror, one that might be much more devastating as it relates to the loss of innocent life.

As an expert in threat assessments, I know the reality of these kinds of events often follow a pattern to one degree or another. We know the initial reports that come out are often wrong. The rush to report the name of a suspect or a motive can cause news reporting that is inaccurate and filled with misinformation, all in the name of being the first to report on the event.

We also know that it is very rare for a person of sound mind to simply wake up one day and build a bomb and detonate it in a place where people can be killed or severely injured. People who commit these kinds of acts, bombers or school/workplace shooters, very often think about what they want to do as they plan for it and then act on it in ways that can be seen.

In the world of threat assessors this behavior, the things that can be seen, is called “leakage.” The perpetrator often says things, or writes things, or posts on social media, creates lists of people they want to target and then acquires the weapons and materials they need to strike out as they advance their plans.

Our problem as a society is that most of us, including our law enforcement agencies, are not properly trained to see these signs for what they are--warnings of things to come.

In the Nashville case there was that report Warner was building bombs in his RV. Getting a search warrant based on the word of an ex-girlfriend may or may not be enough to justify a warrant, but the report of a person building a bomb could trigger more investigation.

Looking in hindsight affords us a crystal-clear view of any signs; seeing things in real time are not always as clear. This tells us we need to find a way to anticipate getting this kind of information and then what will we do with it. The realities of disparate information coming to us are what make connecting the dots so difficult.

With the growing concern over this type of crime, perhaps it’s time to set up a data system similar to VICAP, the violent crime reporting data base intended to link seemingly separate criminal events together with other similar events in other parts of the country. An officer in each agency could be designated to review tips and concerns and try to connect them to local events or reports of suspicious or concerning behavior. This would help to prevent missing possible signs of potential violence from getting lost in the sea of information that comes through every agency.

As we see with Warner, he made negative comments, he harbored strange beliefs and conspiracy theories, he was said to be making bombs, holding grudges against corporate entities, and he was depressed. This is a recipe for attack.

As for how to approach such a situation and what investigative techniques we could use to facilitate the investigation, we need to create an investigative plan that fuses on-the-ground investigations by trained investigators, with the psychological community to offer insight on the profiles of people like Warner to help make the connections the courts need to issue warrants based on solid research-based information. We need to come to an understanding that training for every person in law enforcement and the courts needs to take place on a national level if we are to address these threats moving forward.

The truth is, we can see signs of potential violence, but we must be prepared to investigate these incidents properly, thoroughly, and completely before violence erupts that requires a new paradigm of thought and action. It is only a matter of weeks, days or minutes until the next attack takes place in public, in our schools or in our workplaces. We can wait no longer to act.

THE 44-YEAR PURSUIT OF ONE COP’S DAUGHTER TO FIND HIS SHOOTER

By Lori Cooper

The nation’s most sought-after college football recruit in 1961 went on to become a member of The Columbus, Ohio Division of Police, foregoing a career in the NFL and graduating in November of 1965 from its 33rd Academy Class. Officer Nick Cooper found an instant attachment to third shift as a patrol officer, or what civilians who work those hours like to call the “graveyard shift.” He was an adrenaline junkie who thrived on the criminal element, and a fearless protector. He was my father, an American law enforcement hero.

Before the days of SWAT, an elite tactical unit was formed called “D Company” overlapping second and third shifts from 2000 to 0400 hours. Its officers were required to take all runs where the worst criminal offenses had occurred. My dad was selected to be a member of this prestigious unit in 1966.

On March 15, 1972, he and his partner interrupted a small band of residential career burglars who lived in Dayton, a smaller, urban city 75 miles west of Columbus. Charles Edward Hays, William Raymond Viars and Charles Douglas Cox all carried guns. These men chose to burglarize neighborhoods far from their own. One team member would serve as the getaway driver, while the other two committed the breaking and entering of nice, middle-class homes. If these homes happened to be occupied, they would immobilize their prey by steering their victims to their most prized valuables and cash, all under the threat of death. This was long before the term “home invasion” had ever been created.

At approximately 2200 hours, a young couple arriving home from church pulled into their driveway. They lived on the main thoroughfare that served as the entrance into and exit out of the neighborhood. The couple flagged down my dad and his partner. Their dog wasn’t barking and they knew instantly something was wrong.

My dad’s partner took the rear, while he stayed with the young couple in the front. It was incredibly dark without any streetlights. Suddenly, gunfire erupted, and Officer Cooper’s partner yelled: “Here they come, Coop.” Two men bolted like lightning from the backyard, with my father’s partner chasing after them, tackling Viars to the ground, with Hays flying by Cooper, engaging him in a foot pursuit.

Hays ran across the street and was stuck in a corridor with nowhere to go, surrounded by fences on every side of him. Like a cornered rat, he turned and shot my father at point-blank range with a Browning 9MM. My dad had the inherent knowledge to turn his torso to keep the bullet from penetrating his chest. Vests weren’t worn in 1972. Officers didn’t even have walkie talkies. There was no mode of communication except the radios in the patrol cars and wagons. My father returned fire, striking Hays once in the abdomen.

All three men were indicted by a grand jury on 14 felony charges, including the Intentional Shooting of a Police Officer. Hays was given an O.R. Bond, while Viars and Cox entered into plea bargains and were sentenced to Ohio’s maximum-security prison, The Ohio Penitentiary, located in downtown Columbus, serving 8 and 3-1/2 years, respectively. Hays fled, failing to appear in court, and was later apprehended in Kentucky in 1974 and Connecticut in 1976. Ohio Governor’s Extradition warrants were acquired, with officers assigned to extradite Hays. Both times, each warrant was squashed. Why? I’ve spent these last four years in my own battle to find out, with answers that seemed to lead to coverups from cops to high-ranking public officials.

Hays was allegedly “in the wind,” living a life in Warwick, Rhode Island for many years. Eventually, he moved back to Dayton when he inherited a house from a relative within his extended family. Forty-four years would pass before I would find Hays all by myself, locate the arrest warrant and encourage our current prosecutor to reactivate the 1972 indictment under its old case number, eliminating all statute of limitations issues. Columbus officials had ceased looking for Hays by 1980. My dad succumbed to his original gunshot injury and subsequent surgeries.

In February of 2017, a judge ruled the constitutional right to a speedy trial of Charles Edward Hays had been violated when the state of Ohio refused to extradite him twice in the 1970s, legally “prejudicing” him. The case was dismissed, though not without historical significance.

My upcoming book, THE SOUND OF SILENCE, reveals this entire true story about the man who shot a heroic cop, my late dad, who never served a day of time for his shooting, and my entire journey of locating him over four decades later. It is due for worldwide release by Notebook Publishing in June, 2021. 

We Got the Call

By Julia Maki

May 30, 2020. We got the call. We packed our bags, laced up our boots and left families in the night to head into the nation’s capital. It is never easy, especially the older I get. Life as I know it instantly stops in its tracks. I notified my job, and coworkers who will have to cover for me. I rattled off the next few days of meal ideas I had planned to my husband. I had an appointment two days later that I had to remember to cancel. There are challenges to being an “on call” mom because you are suddenly plucked from your “normal” life and put into a new one, but it is what we signed up to do.

Jan. 6, 2021. There was talk of activation. We got the call. The cycle begins all over again. Because of my involvement with last summer’s protests in Washington, D.C., I was somewhat prepared this time. I knew the hours were going to be long and the riot gear was going to be painful after carrying it for a length of time. I was prepared for the hatred and disdain that I was faced with last time. I promised myself I would not let it affect me this time. I had extra snacks in my gas mask bag and packed my mole skin for my potential blisters. I was ready to protect and defend against enemies foreign and domestic. But just who was the enemy? Who are we defending our country against?

The citizens? The politicians? The media?

We loaded onto the bus and headed to the Capitol from the Armory to relieve the guys that had been working a 24-hour day. As I stared out the bus window into the streets, I saw houses and parks lined with colorful Christmas lights. Wreaths still decorated the streetlamps. An occasional car would pass, and every few blocks, a couple would be walking down the sidewalk. It looked like… well, what one would imagine Washington, D.C., looked like on any other winter night.

In fact, the only indication that anything was out of the ordinary were the streets that were barricaded, making a police escort for us into the city necessary. There was also a black chain-link fence that had been put up around the Capitol lawn. This matched the fence that was placed around the White House in earlier months. It had since been covered with signs that read Black Lives Matter with additional words that supported peace, and other words that continued to divide.

We were sworn in support of the Capitol Police and sent out to guard the Capitol Building and all the congressional office buildings that surround it. The night was quiet. The protesters had gone home, and only the D.C. residents remained. There was stillness and rest, and yet it had only been a day since the break-in at the Capitol during the protesting event. For now, it appeared to be business as usual. And as people passed us, they expressed their appreciation for us being there. They told us to be safe. It caught me off guard, as I had prepared for the worst. But for the next ten hours, not a single negative word was uttered to us by the public.

Every night for over two weeks last June we worked for the DC Park Police, patrolling the streets and monuments while the protests endured until tensions calmed and destruction eventually eased. Now here we were, seven months later after another politically motivated incident of destruction and all D.C. National Guard has been activated. Although I had heard many comparisons of these two events, in my personal experience, there were very few similarities.

Previously, during the BLM movement, we (the guards and other federal agencies) were called every name in the book. We were verbally assaulted. We were physically assaulted. Bottles of bleach and urine were thrown at us along with bricks, rocks and any other available object. We were threatened every day by our own American citizens. We did our best to stop the fires and destruction across the city. And though I can only speak to what I saw in D.C., I know this happened in multiple cities all over our country. I would have expected something like this in another country, but not in our own. But the media glossed over this- even encouraged it- as, “The only way to be heard was to be destructive and cause turmoil.”

The division on social media grew apparent. The dehumanizing of people had begun months ago. In this current state, we saw masks instead of smiles. We saw uniforms or color instead of people. We saw labeled political parties instead of the personal issues and concerns that were the real reasons behind our votes. If we are for this, then we cannot be for that. If we are focused on what divides us, we will not see the breakdown of our country that’s happening before our eyes.

It took me a quite a few weeks to let go of the animosity that I felt last summer. I was fortunate. I could take off my uniform and go back to my quiet job in southern Maryland- a place that felt like it was on the other side of the world compared to D.C. However, the police forces that worked in that city never got a break.

It is true that the extremists in the crowd are always the loudest. We must remember, though, that they do not represent all voices of the population. In the end, don’t we all want the same things for ourselves and our children? They are the simple promises that this country was founded on: Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It has never been more apparent how important it is for us to stand united right now. To spread kindness and understanding instead of judgment. To listen to others. To be kind to others. It could change everything.

The Next 10 Years for Law Enforcement: Will We Survive?

By: Kirk Lawless

On 9 August 2014, in Ferguson, Missouri, Michael Brown, a criminal engaged in actively assaulting a police officer, met his fate at the end of the officer’s gun.  The event created the near “perfect storm” and has proved to be the catalyst for the anti-police agenda that the radical left had been praying for. 

While none are kneeling at the shrine of the one they have elevated to martyr status, he was the best they had to offer and they took advantage of it. In reality, he means nothing to them.  He was just another dead black guy; but he was killed by a cop, a white cop, and that’s what the “Left” and their anti-police agenda needed.  MB could have encountered a black cop and ended up as dead as a beaver hat, just the same, but that’s not what the left wanted.  That would have just been a 10-second spot on the local news. 

I’m from the area, so I am more than familiar with the event and its aftermath, and most importantly what it did to cops across the nation.  It served as the benchmark for the monsoon of shit that cops are still dealing with.  Before Officer Darren Wilson did his job, nobody knew anything about Ferguson, Missouri.  Now it’s an everyday household word.  “The Ferguson Effect” is a bullshit term, based on a lie, but I suppose we’re stuck with it.

After then President Barack Obama weighed in and sent the criminal AG Eric Holder to conduct his Salem Witch Trial on the individual officer, the Ferguson Police Department, and all local cops were in the sights of the Justice Department. From there, it spread like wildfire.  Those actions have continued to spread aggressively and cancerous-like with no sign of letting up, which leads us to the present, here and now. It has changed law enforcement, the way we operate, the intensified scrutiny, second-guessing, armchair-quarterbacking, and continued condemnation of an honorable and necessary profession.

Can we make it another 10 years?  My answer is yes, but things need to change. I’m not so foolish to let it go at that. That’s how politicians talk, but I’m a cop so I’ll put a more personal spin on it.

First, the manipulation of left-wing media by “dark money” has steered the general public toward demonizing and hating the cops.  We have thick skin. We’re used to it.  The events of January 6th proved it at a level that disgusts me.  If the public is so naïve to believe that everybody in the crowd at the United States Capitol were Trump supporters, grab a dictionary and look up “Agent Provocateur” and get back to me. 

The media loved the event, those on the “Left” some on the “Right” were enthusiastic and jumped at both the chance to attack the standing president, while jumping ship, mostly to protect themselves and their positions by switching sides.

Did you notice who was stuck in the middle, in addition to the innocents and the peaceful protesters?  The cops!  We don’t get to run away.  We get to stick around and deal with the shit. As usual, the cops had only seconds to react and by their actions, the events post-Ferguson had some of the boys and girls in blue exhibiting a great deal of self-restraint, hesitation, or a combination of both.  Damned if we do, damned if we don’t. 

Like the poor copper in the Capitol that had his expandable baton at the ready, who retreated up several flights of marble steps, instead of charging the bearded attacker and opening his head like a book.  Pre-Ferguson, that guy would probably still be getting his head stitched up. I don’t blame him for not splitting the bearded guy’s wig (but it should have happened).

I don’t know the particulars yet, as to how the Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick died, but he died doing his job. His blood is on someone’s hands, but certainly not on President Donald Trump’s.

The woman who got shot (I wasn’t there, so I’m not going to weigh in on it, other than to say, if she hadn’t been there she wouldn’t have been shot; that is 100% true), I don’t know what her agenda was.

I would like to commend the copper on the front line throwing haymakers at the fence giving as good as he got, taking a quick break to Frisbee toss his uniform hat to someone at the rear so he could get right back at it, putting in work and punching folks who needed to get punched.

So part of us surviving the next 10 years - my second point - is we need more bosses like that guy. I’m certain he was a boss, by his uniform. 

Point three: People will say, “The police need more training.” You probably have zero idea how much training some of your cops have.  I’ve lost track of how many training hours I have under my belt (like most cops), a bachelor’s degree and a graduate degree and 28 years of rock-solid street cop experience.  Where do you “get” street experience and “street creds?”  On the streets, not hiding behind a desk, and point of clarification you really don’t “get” those creds, you earn them.

I spend time in the police academies and run in certain training circles, my opinion. Some of these places are setting up their recruits for failure (or worse).  These academies should be churning out top-notch recruits, but then they’re turned out with field training officers who have only been cops for less than five years (it happens).  It’s a recipe for disaster. If you have dinosaurs at your service, and don’t take advantage of them, shame on you!

Point four:  This is really two parts.  You want to fix the police? The system? You have to start at the top. Yup, politicians. You have just witnessed the work of the most pro-police and pro-law enforcement president the United States has had in the White House.  I don’t need to get political other than to say look at the most problematic cities in the U.S. and follow the trickle, down to the local level. That includes mayors, prosecutors, judges, police chiefs and start there. The police can’t fix it; the voters are the only ones who can correct the ills of society. 

Most taxpayers have zero idea where their tax dollars go.  You get more bang for your buck when you elect folks who have a vested interest in their respective communities.  The elected folks, who do the appointing and hiring, have an obligation to get the best people for the taxpayer’s money.  Hold them accountable. 

Say you work in a community that has a history of “bad politics,” the ones so incestuous everybody has eyes set a little too far apart as though their daddy was a hammerhead shark.  In departments where “who you know” is more important than “what you know,” you might end up with a chief of police with a GED instead of a required college degree and those “rocket boys” or “wonder ponies” who are routinely promoted without the required qualifications and with the speed of a comet are the ones without street creds or street smarts.  You put guys like that in charge and there you go, you’ve been had. Oh, they can fluff up a resume and lie about the education they wish they had, but they haven’t put in the work. 

So, what kind of boss are you getting with a guy or gal like that?  You’ll get a political hump; the kind that will talk about transparency, (even though they probably can’t spell it).  It’s quite easy to figure out and is entirely correctable, but they’ll make you work for it. Show me a guy who made a career of kissing ass and demanding political favors and I’ll show you the boss that will spend his or her time hiding in the bushes when “shit gets real.”  You’ll also end up with a second-rate department that will become a “jumping-off point” for cops to get a couple years under their belts and then leave. The cops in it for the “long haul” will surely suffer.

The politicians who condemn us, some of whom were protected at the Capitol and escorted to safety by wait, who? Oh, yeah, the police officers.  Look, you bastards can’t have it both ways. You want us to be professional and non-violent for the most part, but when the excrement hits the oscillator, you want us to dial that violence shit up to 10. You are no more important than the next guy. We’ll put in the work.  Here’s a clue, just let us do our jobs. The stick doesn’t discriminate; so don’t complain when we use it.

Cops are always going to be on the frontline. We’re also going to be targeted and we’re definitely going be stuck in the middle. We’ll line up to be the sacrificial lambs. But, we’re also going to wade into the middle of it to save your ass!

Can we survive the next 10 years?  I believe we can, but we need to make some changes.  The next four years are going to be tough on us. The cops reading this know it’s true, they just can’t say it. I will continue to do so. Be safe (and deadly if need be)!  

Artificially Driving Down Crime Rates

By David A. Clarke Jr., Sheriff (Ret.) Milwaukee County

Keeping crime and violence in check has always been a challenge with major urban city law enforcement agencies. Agencies are almost maniacally driven about crime statistics. Staffing and deployment strategies are being determined based on how much crime is occurring and where. Neighborhood residents get nervous when news reports of crime waves set in. Safe city rankings are determined by crime rates. Insurance rates are calculated by how much property crime occurs in a particular city. Crime reduction matters.

You may recall that beginning in the late 1980s and lasting for nearly two decades, a renaissance occurred all across the country when a crime reduction strategy called Fixing Broken Windows emerged. Its authors, George Kelling and James Wilson, put forth a thesis that was based on police putting a higher priority on going after lesser crimes like property crimes and acts of disorder. The theory was that quality-of-life offenses were an indication to criminals that nobody cared about their behavior and that citizens were numb to it and were not likely to call police nor would anything be done about it. This cynicism allowed the criminal element to operate in the open as resident fear increased. It caused people to withdraw from engaging in neighborhood life. Social interaction can reduce crime. Kelling and Wilson’s thesis was that the occurrence of property crimes and other quality-of-life offenses were the precursor to more serious crimes.

When William Bratton became commissioner of the New York Police Department, a top commander named Jack Maple came up with a strategy based on the Broken Windows theory of policing. He called it Comp Stat, short for computer statistics. When crime was mapped using computers, patterns emerged. The thought was to “put the cops on the dots” thus going from reacting to crime to preventing crime. Computer generated statistics allowed neighborhood precinct commanders to get information to front line officers in real time. It allowed officers to identify the criminals on their beat where they could be focused on while targeting specific offenses. Quality of life offenses like subway turnstile jumpers and squeegee men were harassed. It brought that disorder to an end. Policing went from being reactive to being proactive. Citations began to be issued for lesser crimes and disorder. When fully implemented and over time, not only did property crime and disorder go down, violent crime was reduced by record numbers. New York City went from having over 2,200 murders a year to just over 250. Gotham went from being considered unlivable to becoming America’s safest large city based on low crime rates.

Many of you reading here might remember the period of what was called the great crime decline. It is important to have a reference point to compare what was an intolerance toward crime at the end of the 20th century to what some policy makers are proposing today.

As if ideas like defunding police, abolishing and re-imagining police is not crazy enough, now get this out of the cities of Seattle, Portland and Minneapolis. These lunatics are actually talking about reducing crime not through sensible crime reduction strategies like were done in the 1990s. No, they are actually talking about declassifying certain types of lesser crimes and inserting clauses into certain categories of crime that allow the perpetrator an escape from arrest and accountability if they can show a basic need to have committed a crime. In other words, poverty will absolve the perp along with mental health or addiction. That’s right. If you are a drug addict and you commit crime in furtherance of that addiction then you walk. So what if you throw a rock through the plate glass window of a business or damage your car? If you claim the devil made you do it, you are absolved of that being classified as a criminal act. And get this. Selling property that you stole from somebody else is now lawful if you can show a basic need like poverty.

In any other time period, this would be considered unfathomable. Unfortunately, however, we are no longer applying common sense to public policy. We are going from what worked in keeping neighborhoods safe to a model of social engineering using neighborhoods as petri dishes and human subjects as lab rats.

This is not going to end well. It never does when people in position of suggesting public policy and who should know better behave irresponsibly and in what is nothing more than an act of moral preening. As this, let’s make believe it is not crime, is being proposed, both property crime and crimes of violence are escalating in the cities I mentioned. The shame is that these policy-makers will not be held accountable for this insane policy nor are they likely to be the victims of this buffoonery.

PREPARATION: Use of Force and Self-Defense

By Lt. Robert Centkowski

2020 was a crazy year by all accounts. Police officers have had to deal with a national COVID pandemic that put a strain on officer’s health as well as on manpower. If this was a normal year, that in itself would have been a lot to deal with. Well it was 2020 and that was just the beginning.

On May 25, The Minneapolis Police Department responded to a counterfeit $20 bill call at a deli. In this incident captured on video, George Floyd is on the pavement with officer Derek Chauvins’ knee on his neck. These nine minutes would set back all the hard work and professionalism 99% of us officers have been doing, igniting nationwide protests and a new call to “defund the police.

NJ Advanced Media conducted a six-month investigation of the use of force incidents involving New Jersey officers from 2012 to 2016 and found a reported 70,405 incidents. The average officer will be involved in approximately four use of force incidents a year. In NJ we receive a block of defensive tactics training in the Police Academy, but for most officers that will be the last time in their career they will receive this form of training.

To Chief Michael Foligno of the Elmwood Park Police Department this just was not enough. He is a 31-year veteran of law enforcement who has been chief for the past seven years. He was an accomplished wrestler and has over 25 years of coaching experience, including coaching for the NCAA Division 3 wrestling team at Delaware Valley University. He continues his own training at Tiger Shulmann’s Martial Arts. While training, he met Jimmie Rivera. Jimmie Rivera is currently ranked within the top 10 of the UFC’s Bantamweight Division; Jimmie holds the record for the best takedown defense accuracy in UFC history and has been practicing martial arts for over 20 years.

While training together, the two often discussed police work and the lack of defensive training offers receive. Chief Foligno is very community policing-oriented and understands that a trained confident officer is a benefit to the safety of the community, the safety of the officer involved, and even the safety of the person being detained.

This, along with Jimmie Rivera’s respect for law enforcement and the work we do sparked the beginning of a program that they developed to provide often-neglected training of defensive tactics. Each class is 90 minutes long and is broken down into three parts. After a quick warmup, officers begin the jib jets portion of the training. The officer learns how to escape from chokes and life-threatening holds, learns how to perform and defend from takedowns and learns the art of gaining control from the bottom and top positions on the ground. All the techniques are developed with the presence of the officer’s duty weapon in mind.

The second portion of this class focuses on defending from strikes on your feet. This involves bag strikes and learning defensive and effective counters to a stand-up attack.

The last part of the training involves calisthenics which helps in the officer’s fitness which is also key to his overall safety and health. The main point of this training is to provide officers with the confidence in their ability to defend themselves in a use of force situation.

We all do a lot of training in many aspects of our jobs, from domestic violence to firearms qualifications. Defensive tactics has been often overlooked. We focus on use of force guidelines that point out the things we are not allowed to do but neglect providing an officer with training and practice of useful techniques to keep us safe. This program is designed for that lack of training and strictly adheres to the Attorney General Guidelines surrounding use of force.

Officers of the Elmwood Park Police Department, for example, are expected to attend three of these classes at a minimum monthly. The program began in August 2020. Most officers have experienced positive changes in both physical fitness as well a greater confidence in their own abilities.

The opportunity to work with a professional like Jimmie Rivera is a once-in-a-lifetime experience. He takes his time to go over the moves slowly and takes time with each officer to help adjust their technique. He puts his heart into the curriculum, and his respect for law enforcement and the work we do is apparent in the time he dedicates to our department.  All of this while training for his career and upcoming fights in the UFC. So in an age where the term “defund the police” has grown in popularity, it’s great to see as an officer that there are still people who care about our safety. We are provided many tools on the job from, OC spray, Tasers, to a firearm, so why not provide officers with one of the most important tools we can, the training and confidence in our own skills to protect ourselves and the community.

MY BROTHERS KEEPER

By: Michael D. Boll

During my police career, I increasingly wanted to do get more involved and really help my brothers and sisters in blue. I saw the great work done by the New Jersey State PBA and decided to run to become the local's PBA delegate. Since being new and not knowing much about my new position, my friend and fellow delegate Ken Burkert took me under his wing and immediately began mentoring me. Still to this day, Ken continues to give me advice and assists with the work we do for our charity.

Ken Burkert grew up in Hillside, New Jersey and attended Hillside High School where he was both an outstanding football player and wrestler. Shortly after graduation, Ken was hired by Union County Corrections. While employed at the jail, Ken became the local’s state delegate and was responsible for helping over 300 members. Ken has always put his members first and has helped so many brothers and sisters in blue get the fair treatment they deserved. Fortunately, Ken’s work did not go unnoticed and, in a very short period of time, he was elected to the New Jersey State PBA’s state board, where he remained for the remainder of his illustrious career.

Ken is a great family man married to his wife Renee for past 27 years and she has been his biggest advocate throughout his career. He has a daughter and twin sons who became extremely successful in their endeavors.  His daughter, Victoria, is completing graduate school at Rutgers for a (MSW) Masters in social work.  His sons Ryan and Connor were both New Jersey state finalist wrestlers, and received scholarships to continue wrestling Division I at Hofstra University in the EWIA conference.  Both sons graduated with marketing and finance degrees from the Zarb School of Business.

Ken has always made himself available, spending countless hours helping our uniformed heroes get through some really difficult times. During his time on the state board, Ken spearheaded numerous anti-suicide programs and events. He was a founding member of the PART (Peer Assistance Response Team) and served on the New Jersey Suicide Task Force. Ken also helped create a law enforcement suicide awareness walk, which brings officers and their families from all over the state together to honor our lost members to this ongoing tragic crisis.

This incredible work was done mostly on his own personal time and he hasn’t slowed down since his retirement. After Ken retired, he was employed by the Penn Medicine-Princeton House Behavioral Health Team. Currently, he is a liaison to first responder organizations, facilitating the smooth transition of first responders to Princeton House Behavioral Health’s First Responder Treatment Services and outpatient care within the community.

Recently, Ken and his team partnered up with the Union County Sheriff, Peter Corvelli, for employee support and counseling training. Members from the Union County Sheriff’s Office in collaboration with Penn Medicine Princeton House Behavioral Health hosted training on traumatic events in the workplace, offered Peer-to-Peer counseling and provided mental health wellbeing for officers and supervisors.

Recently, Ken has joined our team as the Peer Support Specialist, and he continues to advocate for uniformed heroes.  In the next few months, Ken will be assisting us with its first statewide PTSD awareness and anti-suicide campaign. The initiative is fully backed by the NJSPA, NJ FMBA, American Legion, NJ VFW, and numerous elected officers. Ken will be helping us build a strong mentorship program that aggressively seeks out veterans and first responders in crisis, always focused on the goal to help prevent suicide by taking a proactive approach.

Recently, law enforcement in this country has been experiencing some hard times which has resulted in some necessary changes. Throughout these changes, though, we must always assure the well-being of our brothers and sisters in blue. I know that having my friend Ken Burkert on our team will definitely have a huge impact on helping our first responders live a better life. First responders in New Jersey need to know there are people like Ken Burkert out there making a positive difference and working day and night for them. It is essential that their needs are addressed properly by those who understand their experiences.

If anyone is in need of peer assistance, please call his cell (908)346-1691.

Editors Point of View

Welcome to our final issue of 2020. As you can see on our cover, we confront the critical issue of speech suppression. As officers, we are intimately familiar with speech suppression, having worked under many totalitarian departmental policies that severely infringe upon our constitutional rights. Moreover, nowadays, citizens are getting a taste of this treatment. Social media tech giants are silencing their users, and it’s not going over well. Backlash is unprecedented, and alternative social media platforms have seen a spike in users switching over to avoid censorship. But this doesn’t address the underlying problem.  Freedom of speech is under attack in our country, and little is done to correct this assault. Blue Magazine will continue to lead the law enforcement discussion on this topic as we move ahead into 2021. Be sure to check out our cover story.

During this time of year, we must slow down and reflect on what is important to us. The value of family and real friends in your life must never be underestimated. Make sure you set some time aside this holiday season to spend time with the people who are worthy and deserving of our most precious commodity (time). At Blue Magazine, we are thankful for our writers and sponsors who have been with us for many years and the many new ones who have recently come aboard. After Pres. Trump complimented our magazine at his 2020 campaign rallies, we received a tremendous uptick in article submissions. Thank you, Pres. Trump for helping us continue to grow our influence and voice across our great nation. We are the only independent voice owned and run by active and retired officers. We are proud to be the uncensored voice of the front-line officers. We are looking forward to continued success in 2021.

And lastly, I am glad 2020 will shortly be behind us. The anxiety of 2020 has been massive for many traveling uncomfortable roads. 2020 has taught us many significant lessons, including that happiness is a mindset and attitude you control no matter what the circumstance. Material possessions, relationships and wealth can be taken from you, but only you can surrender your mindset and attitude. In every difficult situation, there is light. Seeing that light is at times our greatest challenge. Therefore, as we welcome 2021, bring a better you along for the journey. Push forward and stay focused.

Congratulations to Leonia Police Chief Tom Rowe, who recently retired after 30 years of service. Chief Rowe established an admirable reputation as an intelligent and skilled law enforcement leader who stood up for his officers and provided excellent policing services to the community. Blue Magazine wishes Chief Rowe much success in retirement!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!

 By: George Beck

Speech Suppression: The Erosion of Our Rights Continues

By David A. Clarke Jr., Sheriff (Ret.) Milwaukee County

We are entering a very precarious and dangerous time in the American history of our experiment in self rule. The Framers of the Constitution knew that if they didn’t codify what a strong central government was limited to in its exercise of power over the people that the abuse they experienced under the Crown of Great Britain would continue. We would simply have new masters. We are seeing that today like no other time in recent history.

There is nothing ambiguous in the words, “Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech found in the First Amendment to the US Constitution." 

Once upon a time, both sides of our political discourse, certain aspects of freedom and liberty like free speech practice of faith, right to protest, unreasonable search and seizure extremely sacred. Today? Not so much. What is interesting is that a half a century ago, it was the American left, liberals and Democrats who were very distrustful of a strong central government. They recoiled when they felt free speech was being infringed upon. They despised government intrusion into their lives. They were very distrustful of agencies like the CIA and FBI. They guarded their right to speak freely so closely that liberals sometimes even went overboard like protecting flag burning and hate speech. They saw that no right was safe unless taken to the extreme. Civil rights groups like the American Civil Liberties Union did not hesitate to sue in federal court when they suspected an infringement on speech no matter what the political persuasion of the aggrieved. That day is gone.

We are now in a period where speech is being not just limited, but suppressed. Only certain speech is allowable. Now certain words are called “triggers” that will get the person who uttered it fired from their jobs or ordered to attend brainwashing training on becoming woke. It gets you suspended from social media sites. Even constitutionally protected political speech is being squashed.

The difference today is that government isn’t necessarily the oppressor. They have proxies doing it for them. Twitter, Facebook, YouTube are squelching speech on behalf of government. The CEO’s of these sites are unabashed liberals who vote Democrat and hate conservatives. What makes this untenable is that they receive government protection under what is called Section 230 of the Federal Communications Commission code. Without getting into the weeds in understanding this federal bureaucratic maze, this section protects platform providers from Big Tech corporations and says they are not responsible from what others say or do online for instance. In part it says, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” In other words they cannot be held responsible for what somebody else says. So the question is why does Twitter, Facebook or YouTube care what somebody posts, within limits of course, or whether or not it’s true. Section CDA 230 was created to allow free speech online to flourish but it is being abused by totalitarian speech Nazis. Instead, these corporations have turned this on its head by monitoring things said on their platforms and removing it if they find it distasteful whether true or not. They have anointed themselves fact checkers. It’s highly subjective as it appears that people on the left can say anything they want with impunity and only conservative speech is removed. In other words they are deciding who can say what.

What makes this even more oppressive is that the goal post of the media corporation’s terms of service continue to move. Nothing is clear. The rules continue to be interpreted on a sliding scale. Who is making these decisions to remove speech from the public domain, some millennial living in their parent’s basement? Do they have any First Amendment education or training? Do they have names where we can search their social media for biases?

What Big Tech needs to be reminded is that although they own the platform, they do not own the content. In other words the speech is owned by the person posting it. If it is simply an opinion and the person saying it is way off base, who cares? If something factual is posted with accompanying evidence that hurts Democrats like Joe Biden about what role he played with his son and selling US influence in dealing with government leaders in China and Ukraine, why would Big Tech remove it? The answer is obvious. It is a power political move to suppress information from the public.

I have personal experience in having my speech suppressed by Twitter numerous times. In one post referencing government lockdowns due to the pandemic, I posted for people to resist and take to the streets because there is no health crisis exception for government to violate my freedom of movement by putting me under house arrest without due process. Some courts have shot down some of these onerous restrictions regarding lockdowns. Twitter said that my post violated their terms of service because it promoted and advocated for suicide. I am not kidding.

This is how dictatorships are spawned. It’s straight up totalitarianism. There is only one way to stop this. We the people have to stand up to government and their proxies. One way is to build a critical mass of people to rise up and resist. If this doesn’t work, then we have to up the ante. Just like the Founders had the courage and will to in the Declaration of Independence. Our rights are God given and no man or woman can take them away through some edict. 

ELECTION 2020… An Unlikely Outcome

By: Lt. Patrick J. Ciser (Ret.)

As of this writing we are one month post-election and we still seem to have more questions than answers. I would like to give an objective view of what happened in our recent presidential election, but being a supporter of President Donald J. Trump, and his “Make America Great” policies, I confess that I probably won’t be. Let me say that Trump isn’t just a man, but also now represents a movement of approximately 74 million strong; if not more.  

As police officers, we are well aware of circumstantial evidence vs. direct evidence. While it’s difficult, if not impossible to get a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the more you have, the more it makes you want to look further. On its face, the results and outcome of the 2020 Presidential Election seem quite unlikely, perhaps even absurd. Think about it? A candidate who barely campaigned, was a career politician for 47 years and never impressed anyone, got more votes than any presidential candidate in history, including Barack Obama. That man, on his third try for the White House, beat a man who basically became a “Rock Star” and drew hundreds of thousands to his rallies. Never in the history of American politics has an incumbent (Trump) garnered 10 million more votes than he did in his first win four years ago, and yet lost a second term.

In 2005, former president, Jimmy Carter, said that mail-in balloting can’t be trusted as it’s open to too much fraud. Barack Obama said the same thing in 2008, and the New York Times agreed with both of these men in 2012. Many states sent out copious amounts of unsolicited ballots, including two to three to the same voter at times, using a middle name, middle initial, or no middle name; maiden and current names plus also former and current addresses, many in two different states. And an astounding number sent out to dead people like we’ve never seen before. Some listed the voter as old as 120 years old. Most states didn’t even bother to check signatures against voter rolls. In Philadelphia County alone, 8,000 dead people voted! Can you imagine how many voted across the country? Strangers could’ve taken countless ballots out of people’s trash, and filled them out. Illegals and ex-cons voted 90% or more Democrat I’m sure. In major cities across the country, but especially in Detroit, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, more people voted than there are registered voters. 

Did you know that Joe Biden underperformed against Hillary Clinton’s 2016 numbers in every American city except four? Milwaukee, Detroit, Atlanta and Philadelphia, all in swing states, are the only cities that he surged ahead in on election night after 3 a.m. How can that even be possible? The rest of the Democrat cities didn’t like him much?  He just “happened” to be more popular in those cities and states where Trump was winning when I went to bed at 2:30 a.m.? Did you also know that Joe Biden got more votes than did Barack Obama in African American areas in the cities in swing states? I might’ve been born at night, but it wasn’t last night. In Democrat strongholds in Pennsylvania, Democrats were notified if they didn’t fill out the ballot properly, so they could “cure,” or fix their vote. No such option was available in Republican counties. Can you say, “Equal Protection?” Hundreds of thousands of votes in Democrat cities in swing states were tallied without Republican monitors being allowed into the polling areas. Is it odd to anyone that this practice just happened to occur again in only swing states? States that Trump won in 2016? Like Rudy Giuliani pointed out, did they all get the same idea to do this in different states at the same time overnight, after saying at about 2 a.m. that they were going to stop counting? You’d have to be a fool to believe their specious explanation.  

Did you know that the 2020 rejection rate while using mostly mail-in ballots was 30 times lower than the in-person voting of 2016? How is this even remotely possible?  

Some claim that it was the hate for Trump that drove people to vote for Biden, but I’m not buying it! I’d say that that theory could apply to about one third of the voters. Another third would support Trump no matter what. That would leave one third of the voters neutral, thereby, they didn’t vote based on hatred or love. I’ll NEVER believe that 80 million Americans would vote for a man who showed signs of dementia, and barely came out of his basement. I truly believe that Donald Trump, on election night, was headed for a landslide victory when they decided to “stop counting.”

Attorney Sydney Powell, a former federal prosecutor, and Attorney Lin Wood, have recently brought to light the “Dominion” election machine, which can be easily hacked, and/or manipulated. Many politicians in the past, including Democrats like Elizabeth Warren, and many media outlets, voiced concerns about using these machines in so many states. Texas blatantly refused to use them at all, citing security issues. Canada rejected them outright! Legal expert and constitutionalist Mark Levin concurs with Ms. Powell that this system, supposedly developed in Venezuela for Hugo Chavez years ago, should be at least looked into. Our votes were supposedly shipped to Spain and then on to Germany where “Smartmatic” would tabulate the votes. Could this be foreign interference? Stay tuned!  

Fulton County New York Sheriff Giardino Interview on Executive Orders, Enforcement and More

Interview by Daniel Del Valle

The BLUE Magazine spoke with Sheriff Richard C. Giardino to hear his insights on the pandemic, executive orders, public health concerns and enforcement from his personal and professional points of view.

 The BLUE Magazine: How long have you served as Sheriff?

Sheriff Giardino: I was elected in 2015 and then re-elected in 2019 for my second term.

The first question is, why now? Why would you at this point, because let's go back to when coronavirus started when they closed down the economy. A lot of people at that time felt that law enforcement should not be enforcing these types of executive orders, and because law enforcement rolled over and let things spiral out of control, we've reached a point where the government is telling us how many people we could have in our home. When this first began, were you in agreement to close things down?

No. You have to understand. The executive orders about the number of people, face masks, business hours and separating tables are governed by the State Liquor Authority and the Health Department. They had the administrative duty to set rules and regulations with penalties. So if you are a bar or restaurant or store and do not comply, they can fine you, suspend your license, or revoke your license. So that's all constitutional and set up to balance the Constitution and the public safety elements. So that's why a governor can do those and be enforced by the administrative, right.

So that's why there is no need to speak up. Once, the Governor issued an executive order a couple of weeks ago, splitting and capping the number of people at your home at 10, making you wear masks in your own home that to me was an overreach and unconstitutional. So, I felt that with the number of people who have anxiety and mental health issues as a result of COVID and the number of people who've been bashing the leaders and bashing police for the last six months that it was unconstitutional and not a good use of resources and would further create problems with the community and law enforcement if we went to your doors.

I live in a rural county, in the Adirondacks, with fifty-five thousand people. I only have three deputies on a shift, so car accidents, domestic violence, larcenies, and everything else takes precedence over going and checking how many people have at Thanksgiving. I don't have the manpower and the practical reason. And second, if you don't let me in, by the time I get a search warrant, Thanksgiving will be over, and people will be on their way. And I don't even know if you can legally get a search warrant to enter someone's house on this executive order because it's not a crime. So that's the reason I spoke up.

So, sheriff, the initial closing down of the economy was therefore justified in your view? In other words, you're separating that from someone being ordered how many people to have inside their homes?

Correct. For a hundred years, the law has been clear, the case law from the United States Supreme Court, that when there's an epidemic or pandemic or medical crisis, then a governor or the president can quarantine individuals in their own house. If they refuse to be quarantined, he can get a court order to put them into a hospital or a facility until the quarantine is over. So that's already been established. So he can issue substantial executive orders. An executive order is not a law, but it can add consequences, and they can set rules for fines and suspensions based on your conduct.

Got it. In your opinion, how likely is a conviction for having too many people in your home on Thanksgiving?

I don't even see making an arrest on this. I don't think you could even arrest someone for having more than 10 people in your house. I don't think you can probably even get a search warrant because you have to say, I believe I have probable cause to believe a crime was committed or an offense. These are not crimes or offenses. These are violations of the executive law. Business is a different thing. They can tell you got close at 10. Now, I can tell you that I don't its smart closing at 10 because I think you are doing three things. You can leave a gym open twenty-four hours a day. You can stagger the number of people, and the time they can be there. That allows for more people to get out of the house, get some exercise, and clear their minds. Two, it provides for employees to be employed and get paid, and three, it allows for taxes to be paid to the government. Those are very valid reasons to keep a gym open. The reasons to close restaurants and bars it's understandable but it's devastating the economy. I'm not in a position that I can advocate for businesses other than to give them my sympathies.

The other thing is COVID is very serious, but we don't do things. We know that 99% of the people who get COVID recover within one to three weeks. We know that the high-risk people, the elderly, the older you are, the more risk to you. We know the older you are that you're more likely to catch it. We know if you have ailments like heart disease, diabetes, you're overweight, or have an autoimmune disease, you're more at risk. So, anybody who loses a life, your family hurts, their friends hurt, and it's sad. For anyone who gets sick, it can be anxiety-producing, pretty nerve-wracking.

The only thing restrictions have caused is a spike in mental health issues, people attempting suicide or debating suicide, a spike in anxiety, depression, and other mental illnesses. So what happens, what I'm afraid of is this. If you have COVID, 99%, you're going to be cured, and you'll be moving on after three weeks. If you have a mental health issue that was exacerbated by this, it will continue for decades or until the end of your life because mental health stays with you. Are you having sleepless nights? Are you drinking more? Are you getting agitated? Are you having a lot of anxiety? So we are creating a lot more mental health problems that will be long term because of some of these orders.

Has there been a spike in crime or domestic violence in your county?

There's been a little spike in disorderly conduct, domestic violence, but across the country, particularly in big cities, there's been a larger spike. Some of it is coronavirus. Mostly are judicial or administrative changes such as bail reform or discovery reform. What's ironic is city leaders, the councils, the governor 'Oh don't enforce this law! Don't enforce that… don't do this, don't do that! And now crime is out of control in the major cities. Homicides are up 50% in most big cities. There's a total disregard of the rules. We had cities where the riots were going on. There were cities where the mayors and the council told the police to stand down. Let them take over the police precinct. Let them burn buildings, let them damage property.

What do you say to that chief today who is enforcing this executive order and not only enforcing it on Thanksgiving but maybe even looking for probable cause, such as a mom buying three turkeys and having two shopping carts full in a supermarket and telling the officers take note because this family might be having a large gathering? What do you say to that chief who has that mindset today?

That chief’s got to make his own decision. Because of my background as a lawyer, and district attorney, and judge, I come from a unique background that I think the system of constitutional law and I taught constitutional law for 30 years, I taught in law school and college. I'm not telling anyone else to doubt my position, but most police have adopted the position they don't have the manpower or the resources or the priorities. So I'm not telling another chief or sheriff what to do. I'm telling people in my community that I trust you as adults to make the decisions. Everybody knows the risk by now. If grandma's sick, don't bring her to your house. If somebody got diabetes or other comorbidities, maybe don't invite them or don't have people come to their house. I'm not. What I'm saying is that it's unconstitutional. What I'm saying is, use common sense, don't invite more people than you need to, and don't invite people if you think you have high-risk people in the room, which is a lot different.

What do you say to the resident on Thanksgiving Day who has 15 people in their home and an officer knocks on their door. What would you advise them to do since you wore many hats in the judicial system?

I'm not going to tell them what to do. That's an individual choice. We can't kick in your door. We can't get a warrant. I would tell them it's their discretion.

What degree of accountability do you believe law enforcement has on what's going on today? I mean, you mentioned people are violating the law with police departments who were backing down and just pretty much allowing lawlessness.

They are being told to back down by the civilian leadership. So it's not the police department's fault. What most people have been doing with COVID, most agencies in the country have been educating the public, saying you've got to wear a mask, here's a mask, you know you can ask to spread out a little folks. It's too close. They haven't been arresting people. They have been recommending and giving you advice on what to do.

What would you say to the families today who unfortunately lost a family member and friends throughout the world because of COVID? In other words, there's going to be families who have lost relatives and are looking at you, sheriff, and saying, "Sheriff Giordano, How would you not want to enforce this executive order? Look at us. We've lost family members, and there's going to be more people dying because of the lack of enforcement by you." What would you respond to them?

I would say I'm very sorry for the loss of your loved one, but I know the anxiety that comes along with that. So I would tell people that I'm not cold-hearted. I'm making it strictly legal. This is a legal decision based on the Constitution. I would tell them to continue to share small groups, continue to protect yourselves and the rest of your families, and remember that we have to protect the most vulnerable. Most people who get it, it's one to three weeks of inconvenience, and they will bounce out of it, and they will be fine.

Are you afraid of any pushback that maybe you could be charged with not enforcing the executive law? Are you concerned that the attorney general, at some point, can go after you for not enforcing an executive order?

I think that the only one that can go after you is the governor. The governor can overrule the sheriff if he does not do his job. I will be doing my job because I took an oath to the Constitution. So, in my opinion, I'm doing my job by taking an oath to the Constitution. So I don't feel any guilt or anything about, you know, so like can the governor remove me for malfeasance. But I argue that the Jim Crow laws allowed for segregation. I'm sure they felt that they are unconstitutional. And I didn't want to enforce them. Would you tell me, go ahead and enforce them? Or would you say that he's doing what's right. You know, I think it's unconstitutional, and it's impractical to try to enforce it, so I feel two ways. Most would go with the impracticality, which is ridiculous. But I see those as a constitutional issue.

So you're not afraid that you can be charged with conduct unbecoming.

I'm not afraid of anything, but I think if the governor tried to remove me, he'd be making a big mistake.

Has Governor Cuomo contacted you at all?

He's mentioned other sheriffs and me; he's called us arrogant. He said we're dictators. He said we were reckless and irresponsible. And what he's doing is setting us up to point the blame at us if there is a spike after Thanksgiving. But we already know it's going to be a spike because Dr. Fauci said there is going to be a national spike. We know what more people in a confined area, inside with the warmth, are at a greater risk of spreading it. We know that. So I just have faith in the people of my county, to exercise good judgment, to follow the rules and I think they’re adults and can make their decision. I don't have to order them to do so. We have a 1.3 rate as of today, which is pretty low. I don't want to jinx this. But I expect we're going to rise. We're not going to increase as high as everybody else because we've been doing what we are supposed to do.

There are a lot of officers today who are contemplating suicide. Blue Magazine is a big advocate to combat Blue Suicide. What's your perspective on this crisis we face?

The biggest threat to law enforcement officers is suicide and mental health issues. And nothing helps when everyone is condemning the police and saying that the police officer wakes up in the morning wanting to shoot someone.

What's your message to an officer right now who is contemplating suicide? What would you tell him if you had his or her ear?

Get help, talk to your peers. Talk to your supervisors. It's more important that you get help; people understand—your friends care about you. When you commit suicide, a lot of people get hurt that you don't even anticipate. Nothing is so bad that you can't get through with help from your friends and family.

Sheriff, do you have a wife and kids?

Well, no, I have a single life. I have three dogs!

What is your strongest quality you have as a person?

The ability to take my job seriously, but not take myself too seriously.

What is the weakest trait you have?

I make decisions based on facts, and I sometimes come across as maybe a little bit uncaring or not feeling necessarily because I don't make my legal decisions out of emotion. However, I'm very emotional and such, probably because I'm Italian, and we Italians have huge family Thanksgiving, Easter, and Christmas holidays. I also think that some people think that I'm not compassionate. I'm very compassionate. My father was a pediatrician for 50 years, and my mother was a Sunday school teacher and his secretary. And they raised me and my brothers and sister with compassion and understanding. My dad didn't care what color somebody was or what religion or what their politics were. He treated everybody and everybody's kid and treated them like they were his own. So I got my compassion from both my mother and my father.

For all of us that have never really known about Fulton County, what stands out in your department that you would like the whole nation to know?

I want the nation to know that Fulton County is a beautiful place to live in the foothills of the Adirondacks. That people care about their neighbors. We got the same problems as everybody else, you know, with mental health problems, with domestics, with issues. But I think that we have a community that when a neighbor needs help, everybody comes to help. I think that's a very strong marker of our community.

It's been a pleasure. Thank you so much for speaking out. I have nothing but respect for you, sir.

Thank you for interviewing me. Thank you for what you do. Thank you. God bless you.

Dysfunctional Justice System Inflicts Cruel, Unusual Sentences

By Bernard B. Kerik with Rod Blagojevich

At 26 years-old, Ross Ulbricht made history, when he did something that many called genius — he wrote code and created a website called Silk Road.

It was the first modern online free market, where users could anonymously buy and sell goods and services, both legal and illegal.

As a result of his genius, 2020 marks the eighth year anniversary of his federal prison incarceration in what is considered one of the worst travesties of our criminal justice system.

Ulbricht was targeted, investigated, and prosecuted with the zeal equaled to those like John Gotti, Osama bin Laden and Al Capone.

He was ultimately held responsible for everything users listed on his site and was convicted on all nonviolent charges, including conspiracy to traffic narcotics, money laundering conspiracy, and engaging in a continuing criminal enterprise.

Following his arrest in 2013, prosecutors also alleged that he planned murder-for-hire although, curiously, he was never charged or prosecuted for it at trial (and the allegations were dismissed with prejudice by a U.S. District Judge in 2018).

On May 29, 2015, now-retired Judge Katherine Forrest sentenced Ulbricht on five counts, all nonviolent. Her judgement for this first time, non-violent offender: two life terms, plus 40 years without parole!

That sentence amounts to two death sentences, plus 40 years.

At first glance, given the government’s charges and allegations and some media coverage, some may assume that Ulbricht’s sentence was reasonable.

However, having overseen and conducted investigations such as these, the more we examined the overall case — the allegations, the trial, and end result — something just didn’t add up.

If Ulbricht’s crimes really warrant life in prison, why was Blake Benthall — arrested on the same charges as Ulbricht for running the larger copycat Silk Road 2.0 — released after two weeks by the same people who prosecuted Ulbricht?

Why were two corrupt federal agents at the core of the investigation (with unfettered access to Silk Road) aggressively hidden from Ulbricht’s jury?

Why were the largest Silk Road drug sellers sentenced to 10 years and less?

And if there were any tangible evidence that Ulbricht planned murder-for-hire, why didn’t the government charge and prosecute him?

Surely, we’d know all this and more, but no - nothing.

Additionally, based on the prosecutors’ claims, surely, there would have been a two-mile line out of the courthouse of crime victims ready to testify against Ross Ulbricht - but there were no victims at the trial either.

Ross Ulbricht was handed three death sentences, essentially for being a reckless young idealist who had the audacity to use his genius to create a vehicle where others engaged in illegal Internet sales (primarily of cannabis) undetected by the authorities.

No victims were ever named at his trial. He was never prosecuted for causing death or bodily injury to anyone.

Let us say it again. As a first-time, non-violent offender, Ross Ulbricht was given two death sentences, plus 40 additional years.

According to a recent report from the United States Department of Justice, more than half of violent offenders serve less than three years in prison.

The average prison sentence in America for a convicted murderer is 16.5 years.

Convicted rapists serve on average 9.8 years, and violent crimes like robbery, or the taking of property by force or the threat of force, the average time is 4.7 years.

In far too many cases, violent repeat offenders are under-sentenced while nonviolent first-time offenders like Ross are grotesquely over-sentenced.

Ross Ulbricht’s sentence is also an example of how wildly unfair sentencing disparities can be for offenders with similar charges.

While Ross was sentenced to die in prison, every other prosecuted Silk Road defendant received far lighter prison sentences ranging from a high of 10 years to a low of 17 months.

His case may very well be the most glaring example of how broken and deeply dysfunctional our criminal justice system is.

In our American justice system, the underlying philosophy behind sentencing someone to prison is that that the punishment should fit the crime. The United States Constitution guarantees every American equal protection under the law.

But in the case of Ross Ulbricht, who never committed a violent act and who was never convicted of any previous crime, that constitutional guarantee of equal treatment under the law — and that idea that someone should only do the time that fits the crime — is a big lie.

Prominent legal experts who support Ross’s release from prison have expressed the view that the circumstances involved in his case raise serious fourth and sixth amendment constitutional issues, particularly that of using allegations that were never proved in a court of law to support an unreasonably harsh prison sentence.

In fact, in 2018, 21 highly-respected organizations spanning the ideological spectrum joined in support of Ross’s efforts to raise these constitutional issues before the Supreme Court. These organizations include, but are not limited to, Law Enforcement Action Partnership, FreedomWorks, American Conservative Union Foundation, Cato Institute, Human Rights Defense Center and National Lawyers Guild.

Now 36, Ross begins his eighth year in prison.         He has been a model prisoner throughout his years of incarceration, teaching classes and tutoring his fellow inmates. He follows the rules and has never received a disciplinary infraction. Ross has expressed remorse and accepted responsibility for his actions.

He is the son of a loving mother of modest means who has relocated her home several times to be near the prison where her son is incarcerated.

We have each, in different ways, witnessed firsthand how unfair and dishonest our criminal justice system can be. Both of us have been the beneficiaries of President Donald Trump’s compassion.

Commissioner Kerik was granted a presidential pardon, while Gov. Blagojevich had his 14-year prison sentence commuted.

We both join over 350,000 people who have signed their names to a petition to President Trump supporting Ross Ulbricht’s release.

More than 250 organizations and prominent people from all across America — from the legal community, business community, religious community, education community, the media, Hollywood, current and former legislators, and human rights activists, have all spoken out in support of this clemency effort.

The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution expressly prohibits punishment that is too severe for the crime committed. It characterizes it as cruel and unusual.

Our nation extols the ideal of justice for all. But Shakespeare reminds us that there is no justice where there is no mercy, and Ross Ulbricht’s case shows us that there cannot be justice for all when there is cruel punishment for some.

We respectfully ask that President Donald Trump do what only he can do: grant Ross Ulbricht clemency, to right this wrong, and end one of the greatest travesties of justice in American history.

Rod Blagojevich served as the 40th Governor of Illinois.

Article courtesy of Newsmax

As New York City’s 40th Police Commissioner, Bernard Kerik was in command of the NYPD on September 11, 2001, and responsible for the city’s response, rescue, recovery, and the investigative efforts of the most substantial terror attack in world history. His 35-year career has been recognized in more than 100 awards for meritorious and heroic service, including a presidential commendation for heroism by President Ronald Reagan, two Distinguished Service Awards from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, The Ellis Island Medal of Honor, and an appointment as Honorary Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire by Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Commissioner Kerik hosts a weekly radio show, Behind the Badge, on 77 WABC Radio New York.

COVIDGATE Attack on Informed Consent

By Michelle Malkin

Patient rights and bioethics are impossible without truly informed consent. This fundamental concept has vanished from public view faster than paper towels and toilet paper from your grocery shelves. Informed consent matters more than ever because we are entering the most coercive era of medical tyranny in human history.

If the public health-industrial complex gets its way, you may not be able to work, travel, shop or go to school without proof of a COVID-19 vaccination. Who needs government to do the mandating when corporations, airlines and educational institutions will do all the dirty work for Big Brother? The unthinking surrender of our autonomy to global pandemic blackmailers is horrific. Can you really offer voluntary and thorough consent at "warp speed" with a figurative gun to your head?

Fact: Our right to self-determination cannot be protected if doctors fail to disclose all risks of treatments. The same holds true in medical research.

Ask yourselves this: In what sane world would we allow children as young as 11 to obtain the COVID-19 vaccine without parental approval — as the Washington, D.C., council decreed last month — while scientific experts are warning us that the adult subjects of COVID-19 vaccine trials were themselves inadequately told of the risks that the jabs "could worsen disease"?

Yes, you read that right. A review of COVID-19 vaccine protocols published in the October issue of the International Journal of Clinical Practice determined that an alarming phenomenon called "antibody-dependent enhancement" — which could worsen COVID-19 — "was obscured" by vaccine manufacturers. Timothy Cardozo of the New York University Langone Health and Ronald Veazey of the Tulane University School of Medicine concluded that the vaccine-enhanced disease risk "should have been prominently and independently disclosed to research subjects." The reckless omission "obviate(ed) truly informed consent."

Indeed, vaccine researchers hid the ADE risk "last or next to last" in their clinical trial consent forms and downplayed the risk as "theoretical," when evidence of the risk is in fact "non-theoretical" and "compelling." Burying adverse effects in the fine print is standard operating procedure for Big Pharma. It's exactly what they'll do with the package inserts for the shots, too. Speaking of which, did you know that the FDA's draft list of "adverse event outcomes" for COVID-19 vaccines includes: stroke, convulsions/seizures, transverse myelitis, encephalitis, narcolepsy and cataplexy; acute myocardial infarction; autoimmune disease; Kawasaki disease, Multisystem Inflammatory Syndrome in children, arthritis and joint pain; myocarditis/pericarditis, venous thromboembolism, other acute demyelinating diseases and death?

I'm sure D.C. grade schoolers will understand all that and be able to fathom the impact of Big Pharma's immunity from vaccine lawsuits. For true informed consent, they must also be made aware of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program's payouts to the vaccine-injured of more than $4.4 billion since 1989, not to mention boning up on the 30 different genetic mutations of SARS-Cov-2 and the troubling "inflammatory component" identified as "intrinsic to all mRNA vaccines." The kids also can't be fully informed without knowledge of the adverse outcomes reported by trial volunteers on Facebook, where screenshots I obtained showed members complaining they were "unable to lift anything" after their jab, experienced arm pain for several weeks, felt like they were "beaten with a baseball bat" and endured hours-long vomiting.

As the FDA prepares to meet Dec. 10 to consider emergency use authorization for the Pfizer vaccine, I urge free-thinking Americans to read two expert petitions calling for suspension of all COVID-19 clinical trials in both the U.S. and in Europe. One co-petitioner, Dr. Michael Yeadon, happens to be a former vice president and chief scientific officer at Pfizer Global. He and his fellow signatories warn about the unreliability of rapid COVID-19 testing (RT-qPCR). They also amplify points made in my previous "COVIDGATE" columns about how the clinical trial design does not measure whether the vaccine actually prevents virus transmission or reduction in severe illness or death.

Wait, there's more.

Yeadon and his co-petitioners raised red flags about two additives in Pfizer's vaccine: polyethylene glycol (against which 70% of people produce antibodies that could provoke "allergic, potentially deadly reactions") and mNeonGreen (a bioluminescent ingredient derived from a marine invertebrate "of unknown antigenicity"). They also warn of potential fertility-specific risks involving antibodies against "spike proteins" that could disrupt development of placenta in vaccinated women. It is "unclear," Yeadon and his co-petitioners observed, "what if any instructions/information" that clinical trial subjects received regarding the risks of ADE, allergies, or infertility.

Still more: In response to Part Two of my series on blabbermouth crusaders informally unblinding themselves online, Dr. Peter Doshi, associate editor of the British Medical Journal, told me he is "quite nervous" that zealous research volunteers who believe they got the placebo will engage in "formal unblinding" by bailing out of ongoing experiments to get the vaccine. Thus, "the trials will not contain a placebo arm for enough time to learn where the vaccines can reduce the risk of serious outcomes like ICU use or death - what any real life-saving vaccine should be able to demonstrate."

The more you know, the clearer the choice: Do not consent.

THE BIG PICTURE OR COMPARTMENTALIZATION?

By: Joel E. Gordon

“In order to properly understand the big picture, everyone should fear becoming mentally clouded and obsessed with one small section of truth.” –XunZi

In psychology, compartmentalization is defined as a defense mechanism where someone suppresses their thoughts and emotions. It is not always done consciously, but this can often justify or defend a person’s level of engagement in certain behaviors.

There are serious disadvantages that come with compartmentalization such as becoming disconnected, isolated and emotionally unavailable. And compartmentalizing is often a tool used by individuals who engage in deviant behavior or actions outside decent and acceptable norms.

Can there be benefits to compartmentalization? Yes … A law enforcement officer, for example, may have a family that depends on them at home, but they must rush into life-threatening situations without hesitation. Being able to compartmentalize those two realities is what facilitates the ability to perform under intense pressure.

I believe one of the biggest problems facing our society today, however, is the compartmentalized thinking that we are seeing on a regular basis which is done without regard to how our decisions impact the bigger picture.

Look at all of the negative consequences of police defunding, such as lowered morale and the overworking of our brave men and women through tunnel vision for “reimagining law enforcement” in the name of social justice. Crime rates go up and safety takes an unnecessary nosedive.

COVID-19 shutdowns have largely contributed to business failures, increased rates of unemployment or underemployment, depression, substance abuse and suicide. Did the risks of shutdowns justify themselves through lower transmission rates of this serious illness during this pandemic? There are many schools of thought on this but it has certainly been a hefty price to pay.

Where did all of this limited thought begin? I have witnessed within our educational system the tendency to isolate subject matter so that it stands on its own without a complete view of cause and effect. Too many have been indoctrinated into a compartmentalized way of thinking, and now they as individuals seem truly oblivious to the reality of so many resulting unintended consequences.

In this day and age of specialists and professional specialization, for example, many only are able to focus on a singular area of expertise. Rarely do practitioners see the problem within their specialty as a symptom of a larger problem, making it virtually impossible to see the big picture.

Sometimes this ridiculousness is truly absurd. While general manager of the Alpine Lake Community atop Snaggy Mountain in snowy Terra Alta, West Virginia, I once had a discussion with a resident who was a nuclear physicist by profession and was involved in the design of nuclear power plants. He was complaining about icy roads within the resort over a particular winter (40 miles of roads traverse the 2,500-acre resort and residential community). Terra Alta routinely experiences 200” of beautiful white snowfall annually and even recorded two inches of snow one year on the fourth of July! I found myself attempting to explain the process of melting and re-freezing to him with temperatures above freezing during the day and snow melt re-freezing overnight. I finally said that my then-5-year-old daughter understood taking an ice cube out of a freezer, letting it melt on a counter, and then putting the liquid back into the freezer would create ice. I don’t believe he ever understood what I was telling him. A common sense thought process lost? How scary is it that this man was designing nuclear power plants and failed to understand a simple concept outside his way of thinking?

As we continue moving forward, if we can open our minds to the bigger picture in the world around us, I believe that bad decisions and injustices will be difficult to come by. If we can just stop compartmentalizing thoughts, we can improve our lives and livelihoods as we work toward the common good. Let’s all reflect on moments in our past and current experiences, as it would behoove us to identify how we ourselves compartmentalize.

As we move into 2021 and beyond, it’s time that we all work to see the big picture.

Children Suffer Without Strong Families

By: David Willoughby

The word “change” has been pounded into our brains and seems to rule the headlines. Protesters, politicians and the media are all screaming for “change”. But exactly what kind of “change” are people looking for?

I know … an end to “systematic racism and police brutality within the criminal justice system”. That seems to be at the top of the “change” list. But should it be? According to the people I have interviewed, racism and police brutality are not the biggest threat to the Black community.

Don’t get me wrong, we have all seen videos of police officers abusing their power. This is wrong and these officers must be disciplined. That absolutely does NOT mean that all police are racist or abuse their power. The vast majority of police are not racist and take great pride in protecting the very communities in which they work. That needed to be said.

Let me get to my point.

As a former youth corrections officer (YCO) for the Milwaukee County juvenile detention center, I was often staffed in a unit where every single child being held was African American. Most children, who are picked up and brought to the facility, are African American. This bothered me. So, I started to ask questions and conduct research as to why? Were the police targeting African Americans? That seems to be a common idea in many African American communities. Or are they targeting law breakers, regardless of color?

I developed good rapport with most children, which didn’t take long because many craved the opportunity to simply talk with someone who cares. Let me tell you something, these kids spilled their guts to me. I found myself teary-eyed on more than a few occasions because of their circumstances.

In October 2018, I was chosen to attend a two-day “Juvenile Corrections Officer Conference” in Central Wisconsin. Social workers, youth workers, counselors, community program staff, law enforcement officers, school administrative and support staff, juvenile court personnel, probation and parole staff, corrections officers, attorneys and others from around the state were in attendance.

Guest speakers talked about their programs and how they related to the juvenile justice system. I learned a lot about different resources, but I was anxiously awaiting to hear from someone with real solutions. At one point, a female social worker from Milwaukee, got most of the audience to repeat the following phrase several times: “Kids aren’t the problem, racism is the problem.”

Towards the end of the conference, about 20 young adults, ages 19-23 (mostly African American) who personally experienced juvenile justice took the stage. They talked about their experiences within the system. Then, the moment which I had been hoping for finally happened …

The host of the conference asked them: “What did you need, as a juvenile, that would have would have kept you out of the system?” Overwhelmingly, they responded: Support. Each one stated that they came from broken families where dad wasn’t present, or mom wasn’t present, or both parents were not present.

Not one person on the stage said anything about racism, or police brutality. I quickly looked around the room for the speaker that had everyone chanting “Racism is the problem.” I didn’t see her. Too bad.

Out of wedlock birthrates for African Americans in the U.S. is rapidly approaching 80%. Pre 1960s, the rate was closer to 20%. Research has shown that children raised without both parents’ involvement are more likely to drop out of school, exhibit behavioral problems, end up in the criminal justice system, suffer unemployment and are at greater risk of substance abuse. Without both parents’ support, kids are five times more likely to live in poverty and commit crime, nine times more likely to drop out of school and 20 times more likely to end up in prison. Don’t believe me? Look it up, or visit your local juvie and conduct your own research. I’m confident the results will be the same for you.

The biggest threat to the Black community is not racism or police brutality. However, the voluntary abandonment of children by their fathers in Black America just might be. Some Black men have abandoned their moral and financial responsibilities and children who are our most valuable resource pay the price. Ultimately … the community suffers.

We need dads to step up. We need strong Black families to produce and raise strong children. The answer is not always “racism.” Rather than de-funding or disbanding our police departments, how about we get to the root of the real problem? Kids need fathers and a strong family to teach them to stay out of trouble and out of the criminal justice system.

I am ready for “change” and want to help. Let’s make Black families strong again.

How to Get the Most from Your Officers

By: Lt. James Rotundo

The age-old question when it comes to leadership is how do leaders get subordinates to fall in line and do the things they want them to do? The answer is simple.

You never will.

You will never please everyone who works for you.

Once you understand this leadership fact, you will have clarity and can reward the ones who deserve rewarding. When great leaders find that, say, 95% of their subordinates fall in line, it becomes a downfall to focus solely on the 5% outliers. Build upon strengths and the outliers will eventually fall in line, too.

Of course, leaders constantly face challenges. There will be subordinates who feel slighted. There will be subordinates who feel forgotten about. There will be subordinates who will be jealous of other officers’ accomplishments or accolades. But this doesn’t mean you can’t obtain great and worthwhile work from everyone. Let’s have a look at some good and bad motivational techniques you can employ to get the most out of your officers. In this article, I encourage you to question yourself, and some of your go-to motivational techniques. Leadership can be a part science and part art.

Fear: You could choose to motivate with fear and instill a feeling of worry of sanctions such as losing their job, writeups or tongue lashings to make your subordinates fall in line and do the jobs you tasked them to do. I want to stress that this is by far the WORST way to motivate anyone. You will get the bare bones from your officers, as well as create an atmosphere of upset and angry people. In fact, you will see a dip in production; a rise in sick time usage, and overall fewer officers will perform the job to the best of their ability. Sure, tasks will be completed, but at what cost? Everyone knows the consequences of not doing our job. It doesn’t need to be held over their heads like a guillotine. Quite honestly, the ones who choose this route of motivation do this because they were never skilled enough to be a leader in the first place to understand what this would do to the work force.This motivational “technique” is plain wrong, incredibly insensitive and a recipe for complete departmental collapse.With your officers on edge all the time the effect could cause arguments between them lowering morale. On the other hand, officers might band together ... for a vote of no confidence against you.

Money: Ah money, the great motivator! Or is it? You could pay them more money to do a certain job you tasked them to do. The problem with this is that after a while, they will want more money to do the exact same job. If they don’t receive the pay raise they think they deserve, then production will surely decrease. Pay should be fair and equitable considering the task at hand, but not the sole motivator. In private sector careers, money could serve as a better motivator in the form of sales commission and bonuses, but in a public sector career such as law enforcement, the option to pay more is solely in the hands of the governing body. Even in private sector jobs that use this technique, problems could arise such as employees fighting between themselves for a sale. In a perfect world, if the right motivation is implemented correctly, job performance will rise exponentially and pay will rise with it.

Positioning: The act of putting your officers in certain positions and specialties they want to and should be in. This is my personal favorite motivational technique that is often overlooked by many leaders. How do you find out what your officers want to do? Just ask! It’s a simple concept, but many bosses simply don’t take the time to ask their subordinates what they want to do. Why? Because they are the boss and they think know better. But therein lies the problem. Most officers with some time on the job know what part of policing they enjoy more and are better at than other parts. Officers will flourish in positions and specialties they like and are important to them. When someone is excited about the specialty they are in, they tend to learn more about it. Their work will be better because of it. This, on a department-wide level, raises the bar of the department. Encourage officers to share their knowledge with other officers. Informational emails to the department from these officers could help serve as quick reference to officers in the field. Promoting this, officers will gain confidence in each other, in turn creating an environment of much higher morale and less mistakes.

An issue that could arise with this technique is the fact that in many departments these jobs are at a premium. Not everyone who wants to solve major crimes in the detective bureau, or wants to only write summonses in the traffic enforcement squad, or longs for the days they could ride around with a beautiful German shepherd with a K-9 sticker slapped on the door as their first choice, will be able to be assigned to those limited positions. Those officers will have to express their desire to work in another specialty, but should be considered when training is offered, and a position opens up in their most desired choice. While the limits of the amount of positions creates a problem, it also offers an opportunity for officers to work harder in their assigned field as a way to prove they could be a fit in their most desired field, when the spot is opened up. It also offers opportunities for you to create new specialties the department may have been lacking. An added benefit to this is that officers will feel heard and know where they fit in the bigger picture of the department.

Officer/Leadership Development: This goes hand in hand with positioning. Give your employees and leadership the tools to prosper. With your officers in positions that are important to them, they are going to need the education and support to help them do their job. Enroll your officers in classes and allow them to suggest classes they wish to take. It is a significant factor in motivation for your officers to be confident in their knowledge of their tasks in this ever-evolving career.

The importance of your lower-level leadership should not be underestimated. They are your voice and implementers in your motivational program. They should be guided, not just for the position they are in, but for leadership positions to come. Be open to questions and offer advice and provide constructive criticism when needed. They are also the future command of the department, and a delay in a qualified officer filling an open position could cripple a department for a period of time. Once they are trained and have experience of their position as a front-line supervisor, they should begin training with their superior in the position above them. Encourage your leadership to share their knowledge of their positions with their subordinates. Doing this will help tremendously in the event a supervisor misses time for any number of reasons. Also, when the time comes for them to fill the shoes of their supervisor, it’s not overwhelming. The idea here goes past police work and toward future functionality of the department. I see this most helpful when the task at hand goes beyond regular police work and enters budgeting and scheduling.

Motivation of your officers boils down to the kind of business we are in — the people business. Relationships with your subordinates matter. Empathy to their wants and needs that you could provide matters. A clear direction and plan for your employees matters. My last piece of advice is, if you are ever in a bind on what to do to, think about what you wanted when you were the patrol officer with a desire to get the most out of your career. Think about the things you disliked most in leaders you had. Think about the things you loved in other leaders you have served under. Think about the decisions they made that affected you directly and how they affected the officers around you. Don’t forget where you came from. The answers you are looking for are usually in your feelings and knowledge of your past. Look to make the environment of your department a place where officers want to want to come to work, where officers look to each other for the answers to their questions, and where opportunities to grow as an officer and a person are available.

The suggestions above take commitment, it takes trust, and it takes knowing the officers who work for you. Rome wasn’t built in a day, but it sure toppled pretty quickly when its leaders bred low morale in its ranks, became comfortable with the status quo and stopped working toward the future.

Remote Police Training- Value added or a temporary fix?

By Lt. Joseph Pangaro

There was a time when the biggest concern a law enforcement officer had about training was if the instructor would bore then to death with a PowerPoint presentation and a droning voice for eight hours. 

Now, thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic, and its attendant lockdowns and shutdowns of in-person training options, we all get to sit in front of a computer screen for eight hours and do our best not to have our kids or pets walk into the room, or have our spouses yelling on the phone or participating in an online meeting of their own as we try to avoid death by video PowerPoint. The question then is clear; is this new world of remote, online training a value to us or is it just a temporary fix to a challenging situation?

The answer, from what I can see is a very simple … it depends.

It depends on who is doing the training, the topics, and how the classes are taught. All of these individual pieces of the puzzle will determine the quality of the online program, how interesting and engaging it will be and if the vehicle will have any longevity.

Let’s start with the instructor. If the instructor was a boring presenter during live training events, it’s a fair bet to say they will be even worse when it comes to presenting remotely online. That just makes sense. You can make lemonade from lemons, but if they are bitter lemons they will be hard to swallow no matter how much you mix them up.

The key here for online instructors to be successful is to always keep the student or audience in mind when preparing the class, using the right equipment to present and choosing the best digital platform to teach from.

My training company, True Security Design / Pangaro Training took this challenge on at the start of the COVID crisis. We saw the coming need for adapting to the changing environment and providing a dynamic alternative to replace the in-person training we have all become used to.

To do that we focused on these points for the instructor:

·      Be energetic and enthusiastic, upbeat and positive.

·      Ensure you engage the at-home audience by including them in discussion and question and answer periods.

·      Create interesting interaction segments in the training so they are not just sitting at home staring at the screen.

·      Make it fun by addressing the new dynamic and asking about any difficulties they are having with the format and explain the situation from the instructor’s point of view as well.  

·      Understand the platform you are using and spice up the presentation with videos, diagrams, pictures and other media to make the program visually stimulating. Being sure you know how to operate the features of the platform is crucial, so you don’t have delays or “dead air” as you flip between media.

·      Conduct a survey after each class to learn how you are being perceived and how to improve your delivery.

·      Take a presentation course if you haven’t already done so.

Next, let’s talk about the equipment we use to present online remote training. The right platform is critical as well as the cameras, speakers and monitors you use so your at-home students can see and hear you clearly. A slow platform or one with only a few features will limit your ability to be creative and make for a boring presentation.

A quality camera with a wide field is important so the audience can see you, your inflection and passion as you teach, just like a live in-person audience can. I use role-playing actors in many of our classes. Good cameras will bring that remote role play aspect to life and make for a good class.

Choose good media to add value to your program. Online remote training is a hybrid presentation that should combine live interaction by the instructor with multi-media to enhance the experience, think of yourself as a TV talk show host, teacher, video producer and director all at once. There are many elements to creating a good class that people will enjoy and learn from.

When it comes to the topics we can present successfully remotely online, we must consider our own abilities to present, our understanding of the material, our creative skills and most importantly our desire to create a great program.

Conducting a crime scene investigation course can be very difficult to pull off remotely online because of the hands-on nature of the crime scene work we are trying to teach. Things such as latent fingerprint dusting and lifting, evidence identification and recovery, crime scene photography and interview skills are difficult enough to teach and present live and in-person and almost impossible via a remote online program, but it can be done if you plan and execute it right.

The key is understanding how to make the students feel connected to the program, how they can participate in any skill development from their home and have success at it.

Here are a few planning items to do a class like this:

·      Provide a written guide for each skill taught in the form of a manual or booklet that the student gets before the class to become familiar with the skill.

·      Provide a list of materials the student will need to gather before the class, so they are ready to go on class day. These should be things like fingerprint kits, lifting tape and items to dust (Soda cans or envelopes etc.).

·      Be prepared to spend time with each student as they practice a skill remotely, that means having things for the other students to do as you work your way through the class.

·      Consider how many assistants you need to do this and if you can use “breakout rooms” on the platform you chose.  

·      The use of role players and how they will interact with the students, as a group or individually.

These things take a lot of prep work, but if you give them the due diligence they deserve, even a difficult class like crime scene investigation can be taught remotely. Besides, that might be the only way we can teach this for a while, so finding creative ways to teach is the goal and responsibility of the instructor.

And finally, for this piece let’s talk about how we teach remotely. Making the topics engaging and valuable takes effort on the part of the instructors. We have to look at this as an opportunity to continue to provide the officers we serve with quality training that will make them better at what they do and better able to serve the public we all sworn to serve.

Being an engaging personality can be confused with being funny or entertaining. Those aspects are important for a good presentation, but they should not be the main focus. Passion is the thing that makes a remote, online training program successful. Passing on our knowledge, skill and experience can come through in-person or remotely if we are genuine in our desire to teach.

Since this COVID era began, we have taught over 300 remote students in groups of 15-25 at a time. We are at the beginning of this new world of training and I have decided that it is an important process for law enforcement and many other industries for that matter. I took my energetic and passionate live performance to the remote world and so far it has worked. 

We conduct surveys after each class, and so far the reviews have all been great. The students say they have been engaged and felt like part of a real class. That is not easy to do, it takes all of the energy I can muster each and every class, but it is worth it. If you are going to conduct remote training or send your officers to remote training you should consider the positive aspects and how it will help your officers and agency.

Chiefs have said that COVID lockdowns aside, they like the idea of remote training because their officers don’t have to travel, they aren’t on the road for hours driving to and from a class, and they still get the training they want their officers to have. The students have said they like remote training for the same reasons and many of them have taken the training from the comfort of their own houses.

As I see it, remote training will be with us in law enforcement for a long time after the COVID threat passes us because it is the wave of the future. We are all online and living in a digital world. Police training is vital for the officers and the communities we serve. Bringing it to them in a convenient way like remote, online training is innovative and serves us all very well.

It all depends on how it is delivered, who is delivering it, and what we want to get from it. Using the guide points I listed should help you going forward to create great training or find a great trainer for your officers.  Either way, remote online training is the new paradigm and we should all embrace it!

THANK YOU FOR SAYING I’M ONE OF THE GOOD ONES, BUT I’M NOT THE ONLY ONE

By: Deon Joseph

In recent Facebook posts, where I try to bring logic and reason to an emotionally charged issue, I usually get this response “Yeah, but you are ONE of the good ones.” or “You are one of the rare ones.” I truly appreciate the love and complements. I really do. But the fact is there are thousands of us. They may not be as vocal or well known, but throughout my career, I have worked with some of the most caring police officers to ever wear our badge.

After a civic leader dehumanized my fellow officers, I tried everything in my power not to respond. But when I looked back on my 25 years of service. I thought about the incredible men and women I have worked with in three parts of the city I serve.

I thought about my early years. My training officer was a white man who was loved by a black community in Venice. He was almost worshipped there for his dedication and fair treatment of them. He is the man who showed me that you don’t have to be an asshole to be a cop. And that people of color understand we have a job to do, but just want us to treat them with respect when we do it. His name was Bill.

Another training officer, a thin white woman from the LBGTQ community who in the heat of a tense moment with a violent mentally ill person three times her size, told me not to shoot the woman, who wrestled with her over a large knife she tried to kill herself with. She did everything she could not to shoot her, though she had every right to and should have, especially after her gun fell out. She spared her life nearly at her own expense. Her name was Vicky.

Then there was a Black training officer who defused incidents by his mere presence. He was professional and respectful. Before you called it de-escalation, we called it verbalization (it’s nothing new, most of us have been doing it). He was a master at it. His name was McCool.

Another white training officer had a suspect cursing at him when he showed up, but had them laughing in tears by the time he was done booking them. His name was Officer Goode. He used humor to diffuse situations and never lost his temper.

I then came to Skid Row, and worked with a cop nicknamed Batman. Who showed me that my muscles would not save me when dealing with troubled communities but respecting them, while at the same time taking no shit from them, would. He taught me to slow down and talk to people even at their worst. His name was Officer Greg Bateman.

A classmate of mine of German descent who wore her heart on her sleeve, who prior to me making my mark on Skid Row, laid the foundation for an initiative that would save countless lives among the homeless. She never sought honor or recognition. I learned from her to come from the heart. Especially if it was made of gold. Her name is Kathy. She also helped veterans and held community meetings with the homeless in the street.

Two Black officers who made 257 felony arrests in one year, they took guns and large amounts of drugs from Skid Row hotels and still had the respect of the community. They were Officers Fierra and Prude.

An East Side detail officer and his entire unit, who had the worst job in the city, trying to improve the quality of life in Skid Row with impossible odds. Everywhere I patrolled all I could hear from the community was “Where’s Earl?” “Is Earl here today? Please tell him we said hello.” His name was Officer Earl Wright Jr.

I then worked one of the most dangerous areas in the city for a year. I was a juvenile investigator. People were dying nightly from gang violence. While some of the hardest-working officers on Central Avenue were trying to stop the constant bloodshed, I was partnered with two Hispanic officers who took me under their wing at one of the worst times of my life personally and we rescued more missing children than I could count. They were Officers Juan and Frank.

I came back to the Row again, and became a senior lead. There I worked with an officer who helped families in the projects get financial assistance. His name was Officer Mike Fernandez.

As time passed, I found my own calling. I helped house homeless people, mentored children and tried to empower homeless women on Skid Row, while simultaneously reducing crime using my heart more than my handcuffs, and helped make a place no one thought could ever be safe, safer. When I began losing the battle, 50 of the hardest-working men and women I ever saw helped bring sanity to a place that could easily be compared to Dante’s Inferno.

A legendary foot beat officer named Lenny stood on one of the most corrupt blocks in downtown and warded off drug dealers, and violent criminals by his presence alone. No officer stayed dedicated to the Main Street beat like Junior Davis did. The community loved him and they still miss him to this day.

Another incredible SLO who is trying unique and dynamic things to bring communities together in love and peace is a blonde white office named Julie Nony. Her ideas to build trust are incredible.

Several Black officers have taken mentorship to a new level, as they created a mentoring program and football camp for at-risk youth in one of the most dangerous parts of the city. The Watts Rams to this day are exposing Black youth to the reality that they can rise above adversity and live their dreams

Another white police officer who always finds a way to save the lives of people of color. Whether it’s stopping a woman from being strangled to death or delivering babies in the street, this man has a fire in him to help people. I’m proud to call Officer Popham a brother in blue.

Several patrol officers who embraced community policing over three years, rescued children and kept the dam from breaking in Skid Row as the unit assigned to that area was depleted due to injuries. Officers Linnear, Tapia, Brunsen, Hernandez, and another who later promoted and went to South LA and earned the nickname Dr. King for how he championed of a community in south LA. His name is Sgt Delano Hutchins.

My twin brother Cleon Joseph was in charge of a community relations office. He reinvigorated his unit to buy into dialogue with the community.

And currently, I work in the greatest senior lead office in the city, with twelve of the greatest officers, who drop everything with their busy schedule to engage in Trust Talks with the homeless community and open their hearts to them.

I can go on and on. These officers from all walks of life and so many others go above and beyond for their community with no desire for recognition.

Before any civic leader dehumanizes us to pander to people, they should open their minds to the reality that we save far more lives than we take, and share that with the public. Build more relationships than we break. We are not what you say we are.

If you told the public about us, maybe they would know that the honorable rule is just that, that they do not have to fear us when something happens hundreds of miles away and that most of us are doing the right thing.

Yes I acknowledge there is a negative exception, but that’s in any profession. Don’t ask me to judge you by the content of your character (which I always will no matter what), then turn and dehumanize me based on our surface.

If today’s media showed you the thousand of officers who care just like I do, you wouldn’t be so quick to judge us all when a select few fail us all.