Strangely, the designation of Antifa as domestic terrorists is ignored by both the Trump DOJ and FBI, as well as by police departments across the U.S., especially the Portland PD.
Last Saturday, June 29, in Portland, Antifa terrorists doused independent journalist Andy Ngo with milkshake containing quick-drying cement, viciously assaulted an elderly man with a crowbar, then maced and hit another man (who tried to help the elderly man) with the crowbar.
Now, the violent and lawless Antifa DOMESTIC TERRORISTS are planning to disrupt the July 6 Free Speech Rally in Washington, D.C.
On June 29, 2019, Big League Politics reports that a pro-Antifa individual who calls himself “POUND ON YOUR BOY” threatened to attack attendees of the Demand Free Speech rally on July 6 in Washington, D.C. with “muriatic acid, wax, and balloons”:
“I just want to toss as many balloons of Muriatic acid in the faces as many Proud Boys I can [sic]. I just want to blind as many of you c**k suckers are possible [sic].”
The threats were made on a popular right-wing Telegram channel, which prompted the rally’s co-organizer and chairman of Proud Boys, Enrique Tarrio, to contact the FBI and DHS, who are now planning to provide additional security for the event.
On Tuesday, July 2, News2Share‘s Ford Fischer was invited to the “All Out DC” Antifa group’s “community gathering” on their plans to disrupt the Free Speech Rally. Fischer reported on the Antifa meeting in a series of tweets. He points out that “I believe myself, AP, and Washington Post were in the room but I’m the first/only one to report on this so far.”
Antifa DC began the meeting by highlighting individuals whom they label as “Nazis”, “white nationalists”, “Islamophobes” and “anti-Hispanic” racists: Roger Stone, Gavin McInnes, Laura Loomer, Milo Yiannopoulos, Enrique Tarrio, Jack Posobiec, Mike Cernovich, and Joey Salads.
Antifa DC concluded their “community meeting” with this plan (see below) for July 6.
On that day, Antifa DC will gather around Pershing Park, close to Freedom Plaza where the Free Speech Rally will take place, followed at 6 pm with a “protest” of Free Speech Rally’s after-party, wherever it occurs.
Here’s the video of the DC Antifa’s planning meeting:
H/t Big Lug
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
Political polls are no longer reliable because they are no longer predictive of election results.
The UK Brexit referendum on June 23, 2016, in which 51.9% of those voting supported leaving the EU, was the first sign. 78% of phone polls had predicted that Remain would win; only two online pollsters, Kantar TNS and Opinium, forecasted a Leave victory just ahead of the vote. (Wikipedia)
The U.S. presidential election on November 8, 2016, in which polls had predicted a Hillary Clinton win, was the second sign.
Last Saturday’s Australian federal election is the latest indicator of the failure of polls.
On May 18, 2019, Australia conducted a nation-wide election to elect members of the 46th Parliament: All 151 seats in the House of Representatives (lower house) and 40 of the 76 seats in the Senate (upper house).
Unlike many other democracies, Australia has mandatory voting for all citizens aged 18 and over – or they risk a fine. This year has seen a record 96.8% enrollment rate. In contrast, the voter turnout for the most recent US and UK elections were an estimated 55% and 69% respectively. (BBC)
What this means is that in the case of Australia, the accuracy of pre-election polls would not be affected by voter turnout, which should lend even greater confidence in the accuracy of those polls. As the BBC confidently declared a day before the election:
Australians are voting in a closely-fought general election on Saturday. The poll will decide whether the conservative Liberal-National Coalition wins a third term or is replaced by a Labor administration led by Bill Shorten.
And what were the polls saying?
The graph below shows that although opinion polls have narrowed in recent weeks, the leftist Australian Labor Party still had the edge on a two-party preferred basis on the eve of election day.
The experts also predicted a Labor win:
Professor Sally Young, a politics expert from the University of Melbourne, said there was public cynicism about the major parties, and predicted that the bitter party infighting that led to Scott Morrison becoming PM only last August, was likely to harm the government’s standing with voters. Referring to Morrison’s ousting of his predecessor, Young declared: “They’re sick of the sniping and undermining. Knifing a leader – it never goes down well.”
Young also predicted that climate change would be a key election issue and that the government’s “lack of action on climate change” would be a critical factor in the election.
Citing unnamed “experts,” the BBC said that Morrison’s minority government “fears losing votes to more socially conservative minor parties and independents” in the northern state of Queensland, and is particularly vulnerable in Victoria in the south, where the “progressive” electorate had delivered a resounding victory to Labor in a state election five months ago.
Despite the polls and experts, and in spite of Morrison’s minority coalition government being consistently behind in the polls for the past three years, the government won a third term against the Labor opposition. As Wikipedia puts it:
The result of the 2019 election was in stark contrast to the aggregation of opinion polls conducted over the period of the 45th parliament and the 2019 election campaign. Apart from a few outliers, Labor had been ahead for the entire period, by as much as 56% on a two-party-preferred basis after Scott Morrison took over the leadership of the Liberal Party in August 2018—although during the campaign, Labor’s two-party estimate was between 51 and 52%.
During the ABC’s [Australian Broadcasting Corporation] election coverage, election analyst Antony Green stated “At the moment, on these figures, it’s a bit of a spectacular failure of opinion polling.”—with the election results essentially a mirror image of the polls with the Coalition’s two-party vote at around 51%.
CNN calls the election “a stunning turnaround after every opinion poll over the campaign pointed to a Labor victory. Analysts are now saying Labor lost an ‘unlosable’ election.”
To add insult to injury, not only did the leftist Labor Party lose the election, the formerly minority coalition government led by Morrison actually picked up the net two-seat swing it needed for a majority government. (ABC News)
Readers of FOTM had commented that they no longer answer phone polls. Nor do I.
We no longer respond to political polls because of our correct perception that, like the MSM, pollsters favor Democrats and are hostile to conservatives. I suspect also that many who still respond to polls don’t give honest answers, which is a prudent behavior given the many real instances of conservatives being publicly assaulted, denied service by businesses, and having their food and drinks contaminated by servers. See, for example:
America’s colleges and universities are awash with Leftism. In the case of the University of Arizona (UA) in Tucson, a public, i.e., taxpayer-funded university, its president defended and protected students who harassed, stalked and publicly berated invited U.S. Border Patrol agents, calling them the KKK and “Murder Patrol”.
It was only when Judicial Watch, the Washington, DC-based citizen watchdog group, made a formal complaint that UA President Robert C. Robbins finally relented and acceded to having the students be “formally investigated” for potential violations of the UA Student Code of Conduct.
On March 19, 2019, as part of University of Arizona’s Career Day, two U.S. Border Patrol agents were invited by the university’s Criminal Justice Association to give a class presentation.
Student William Hertel took the brief video below of a group of students chanting “Murder Patrol! Murder Patrol!” outside the open door of the classroom in which the agents were giving their presentation. Incredibly, Hertel, a delicate snowflake, blames the agents. He uploaded the video to YouTube on March 19, with this comment: “My class had to evacuate our class because of these two [Border Patrol agents]. We legit felt uncomfortable having class as this happened.”
As recounted by Judicial Watch, during the Border Patrol agents’ presentation, a student named Denise Mureno-Melchor, a Mexican-American studies major, disrupted class and yelled “Murder Patrol” and profanities in Spanish at the agents, likening the agents to the notorious hate group Ku Klux Klan. Shouting “Murder Patrol!,” she followed the agents for nearly a minute as they walked down a hallway and outside the building to the parking garage. In a video, recorded on her cell phone, Mureno-Melchor proclaims that there are “murderers on campus” as the camera pans on the two Border Patrol agents. “We have the KKK and their supporters here at the U of A,” she says, referring to fellow students in the classroom.
As Judicial Watch puts it:
[U.A. President] Robbins, who earns more than any other university president in Arizona history ($988,000 a year), initially protected the student who harassed and stalked the federal agents. He also seemed more concerned with comforting illegal immigrants on campus than confronting the wrongdoing. In the first statement addressing the ruckus, UA’s president assured that “the university will always protect students’ confidential information, including their immigration status.” Robbins goes on to write that “all members of our campus community should be able to engage with a variety of viewpoints and positions and express themselves as well. That requires we respect others’ right to speech and that they respect ours.”
Judicial Watch held Robbins’ feet to the fire, calling on him to do his job as president by enforcing the Student Code of Conduct. The complaint listed the specific policy that Mureno-Melchor’s behavior appeared to violate, Policy 5-308 of UA’s code of conduct, which clearly states the following: “The educational process is ideally conducted in an environment that encourages reasoned discourse, intellectual honesty, openness to constructive change, and respect for the rights of all individuals.” Judicial Watch’s complaint further points out that the same policy also defines code of conduct acts demonstrated by Mureno-Melchor. The acts include but are not limited to: endangering, fabrication, stalking, causing reasonable apprehension of harm or engaging in conduct or communications that a reasonable person would interpret as a serious expression of intent to harm, unauthorized presences, engaging in discriminatory activities, including harassment and the commission of any offense prohibited by state or federal law or local ordinance.
Under pressure, Robbins changed course days later.He apologized to the U.S. Border Patrol for the student’s atrocious behavior, sources inside the agency told Judicial Watch. Then he got the campus police to do its job. “The incident between the protesting students and the Criminal Justice club members was a dramatic departure from our expectations of respectful behavior and support for free speech on this campus,” Robbins writes in an a follow-up announcement posted on UA’s website. “University police determined today they will be charging two of the students with interference with the peaceful conduct of an educational institution, a misdemeanor.” The student club and the federal agents invited by the students should have been able to hold their meeting without disruption, Robbins writes. “Student protest is protected by our support for free speech, but disruption is not.”
In a vicious attack on free speech last week, three University of Arizona (UA) students were arrested and charged with criminal offenses for verbally “disrupting” a career fair featuring US Border Patrol agents.
Denise Moreno Melchor, a 20-year-old University of Arizona student, alongside fellow students Mariel Alexandra Bustamante,22, and Marianna Ariel Coles-Curtis, 27, have all been charged by the UA Police with a Class 1 misdemeanor for “interference with the peaceful conduct of an educational institution.” In Arizona, a Class 1 misdemeanor is the most serious misdemeanor offense. It is punishable by up to six months in jail and three years’ probation, along with a $2,500 fine plus surcharges.
UA’s police will also conduct an investigation to uncover more potential criminal violations. Additionally, UA’s Office of the Dean of Students will finally review the students’ potential violations of the Student Code of Conduct, which could result in academic sanctions.
H/t Big Lug
Better than Drudge Report. Check out Whatfinger News, the Internet’s conservative frontpage founded by ex-military!
On Monday, April 1, 2019, at a Starbucks coffee shop on California Ave. in Palo Alto, California — home to Stanford University — a woman with Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS) went berserk at a 74-year-old man because he was wearing a MAGA (Make America Great Again) hat.
The woman, Rebecca Mankey, repeatedly screamed at and publicly shamed the elderly man.
The victim, Victor, who wants his last name withheld, tells KTVU Fox2:
“This woman came over and not only started screaming at me, she turned to the Starbucks audience and said, ‘Hey everybody come here! This guy’s a racist! This guy hates brown people!’”
The Daily Mail reports that Victor said the woman also called him a Nazi, which is ironic because Victor is Jewish and was wearing a yarmulke under his MAGA hat.
The woman, Rebecca Mankey, took a picture of Victor inside Starbucks and posted it to her Facebook page (which is now deactivated), with a tirade, calling on others to confront Victor if they see him.
Mankey was employed as an office manager at Gryphon Strings, a guitar sales and repair shop.
Store owner Richard Johnson, who has been a friend of Mankey since grade school, saw Mankey’s Facebook post and promptly fired her. In a statement, Johnson said:
Gryphon does not believe anyone should be harassed or subject to hate speech no matter their beliefs. Music has historically been something that has brought people of diverse socio-political backgrounds together. We would like to make it clear that the opinions expressed and actions taken by the employee are not indicative of how we conduct ourselves at the shop and we hope we can continue to serve our customers across the country respectfully and universally as we have done for nearly 50 years. We’ve always felt that Gryphon was the equivalent of kind of a musical town square for the community. And we welcome people of all views.
According to KTVU, Mankey’s defenders blamed Victor’s MAGA hat as the ignition source for the conflict. Palo Alto police say Victor has not contacted them about what happened and therefore, they don’t have proof of a crime. Mankey did contact the police department, alleging she’s received threats because of her social media posts.
Mankey should be charged with hate crime and elder abuse.
Rebecca Anahid Mankey, aka Rebecca Parker and Parker Mankey, 46, lives in Palo Alto (as she herself said). She has a B.S. degree from San Jose State University, and some graduate training in accounting. Although she is a public bully, she has taken down all her social media accounts (Facebook, LinkedIn, Flickr).