The Hennepin county attorney’s office has ratcheted up Muhammad Noor’s charge. Way, way up:

Prosecutors said Thursday they are seeking to charge Mohamed Noor with intentional second-degree murder in the death of Damond, who the officer shot and killed in July 2017 after the 40-year-old woman called 911 to report a possible sexual assault in the alley behind her home.

“A person acts with the intent to kill not just when they have the purpose of causing death, but also when they believe that their act, if successful, will result in death,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing. “As a trained police officer, the defendant was fully aware that such a shot would kill Ms. Ruszczyk, a result he clearly intended.”

Does that seem a little – excessive?

While the information available via the news media is most likely incomplete at best, the evidence that Officer Noor rolled up to that call intending to rub out Justin Diamond is exceedingly sketchy.

I’m going to speculate – with a certain amount of information behind the speculation – that that’s because the evidence is extremely sketchy.

There is a reason for that.

The prosecutor has to reach a “beyond a reasonable doubt” verdict to convict the former cop. Given the evidence available, that would seem to be exceedingly unlikely.

Which I am going to assume, is intentional. Overcharging the former policeman, fully intending to fail to meet the “reasonable doubt” threshold, leading to his acquittal and freedom, will accomplish the county prosecutors office’s primary mission: look “aggressive” to an angry public, but preserve the prosecutors office’s relationship with the police department.

Because make know mistake – that relationship is more important to the county prosecutor than the lives of any mere peasants.

For The Children

SCENE:  Mitch BERG is out behind his house, turning his city trash barrel right side up, when Avery LIBRELLE turns down the alley, riding a Lime Bike. BERG can’t escape.  

LIBRELLE:  Merg!   It’s time for comprehensive gun control!

BERG:   Of course it is.  Even though none of it can have any effect on gun violence – none at all – and it violates wholesale the rights of the law-abiding.

LIBRELLE:   Hah!   When I heard about Newtown, I stopped caring about your so-called “rights” (makes scare quotes as h…er, sh…er, as LIBRELLE says “Rights”)

BERG:  You did, huh?


BERG: For the children?


BERG: I hear and understand you completely, Avery.  I did the same thing.

LIBRELLE:  Er – wait.  What?

BERG:  When I saw pictures of the Holocaust…:

…and what happens to the children when people lose their freedom…

…even – no, especially their children, then I stopped caring about the emotions of people who put the word “rights” in scare quotes.

LIBRELLE:   (Absentmindedly looks down at the control panel on the bike) – Hey, Merg – I ran out of stored money on this bike.  Give me your credit card.


Snivel Your Sidewalks. I Mean Shovel. Shovel Your Sidewalks.

After seven nastygrams from the City of Minneapolis, Councilwoman Lisa Bender got her sidewalk shoveled by the city, and a $149 fine to prove it.

Bender – a far-far-far left DFLer famous for compelling the City to clear bike lanes in the dead of winter that nearly nobody uses when the weather is gorgeous – reacted with grace and equianimity.

Of course I’m kidding.  She’s accusing the Strib of mansplaining.

Er, manshovelling.

Anyway, she’s accusing the Strib:


Jeremiah Ellison is a permanent city payroll receiver. Er, I mean, city council…well, it’s a distinction without a difference.

Trump Trump Trump!


Dang conservative Strib.

Urban Progressive Privilege:  when everything you do can be defended by citing things your opponents never did.

Birds Of A Feather

I don’t believe in “guilt by association”.

On the other hand, I can sense that an off a lot of Democrats, especially in the Twin Cities, are not going to be especially mortified by this development – which would have been considered comical 30, to say nothing of 60 years ago:

published his essay last week at People’s World, a “daily news website of, for and by the 99% and the direct descendant of the Daily Worker.”” data-reactid=”23″ style=”margin: 0px 0px 1em; caret-color: rgb(38, 40, 42); color: rgb(38, 40, 42); font-family: “Helvetica Neue”, Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.301961); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration: none”>

Communist Party chairman John Bachtell published his essay last week at People’s World, a “daily news website of, for and by the 99% and the direct descendant of the Daily Worker.”

“[L]abor and other key social forces are not about to leave the Democratic Party anytime soon,” Bachtell promised. “They still see Democrats as the most realistic electoral vehicle” to fight against perceived class enemies.

Bachtell, 58, is playing the long political game and he has a strategy, he said.

“First, we are part of building the broadest anti-ultra right alliance possible, uniting the widest array of class (including a section of monopoly), social and democratic forces. This necessarily means working with the Democratic Party,” the communist leader explained.

“Second, our objective is not to build the Democratic Party. At this stage we are about building the broad people’s movement led by labor that utilizes the vehicle of the Democratic Party to advance its agenda,” Bachtell further expounded. “We are about building the movements around the issues roiling wide sections of people that can help shape election contours and debates.”

“[W]e are for building movements in the electoral arena and see engagement in the electoral arena and democratic governance as a vital means to further build movements,” Bachtell also said.

But don’t you dare say the Democratic Party has moved to the left!

‘Splain Me This

Ever wonder what the protcol is for explaining things to women, if you’re a man, without being accused of “mansplaining”?

A professor – I know, contain your shock, right – heard your, er, “plea”:

Er, yeah, Ms. Goodwin. I’m sure you did.

Anyway, here’s the chart.

Apparently in Ms. Goodwin’s world, people grow infallible with experience, and should not be questioned by (male) underlings (no word if it cuts both ways – if a woman with less experience should “just stop talking now” when the guy outranks her?

As Dennis Prager says, it takes an elite education to be this stupid…

A Satirical Proposal. Probably.

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

If Democrats honestly believe in global warming, they should insidt we declare war on Canada so we can shift our citizens Northward to survive the Deluge.
 If Republicans honestly believe in global cooling, they should insist we declare war on Venezuela to shift our citizen Southward to escape the glacier.
Bonus. Both have lots of oil to maintain our lifestyle.  This is what a resilience officers ought to be working on.
Or just invade New York, DC and California to curb the efflux of hot air.

Low Expectations

Democrat politicians tend to talk down to black voters, according to Fox News Fox News Fox News!

Sorry.  I mean Yale:

The team found that Democratic candidates used fewer competence-related words in speeches delivered to mostly minority audiences than they did in speeches delivered to mostly white audiences. The difference wasn’t statistically significant in speeches by Republican candidates…There was no difference in Democrats’ or Republicans’ usage of words related to warmth [the mnemonic for “acceptance or friendliness toward people different than  you” – Ed]. “It was really surprising to see that for nearly three decades, Democratic presidential candidates have been engaging in this predicted behavior.”

Now, we’ve seen these social science polls with amusing (?) partisan results for decades – most of them garbage.  It’s important to know what the methodology that led to the study was:

They designed a series of experiments in which white participants were asked to respond to a hypothetical or presumed-real interaction partner. For half of these participants, their partner was given a stereotypically white name (such as “Emily”); for the other half, their partner was given a stereotypically black name (such as “Lakisha”). Participants were asked to select from a list of words for an email to their partner. For some studies, this email was for a work-related task; for others, this email was simply to introduce themselves. Each word had been previously scored on how warm or competent it appears. The word “sad,” for example, scored low for both warmth and competence. “Melancholy,” on the other hand, scored high for competence and low on warmth.

Participant also completed a variety of measures that assessed how liberal they were.

The researchers found that liberal individuals were less likely to use words that would make them appear highly competent when the person they were addressing was presumed to be black rather than white. No significant differences were seen in the word selection of conservatives based on the presumed race of their partner. “It was kind of an unpleasant surprise to see this subtle but persistent effect,” Dupree says. “Even if it’s ultimately well-intentioned, it could be seen as patronizing.”

Unpleasant surprise.  “Unexpected”, even.



The Sixty Year Old Strawman

Liberal feminists seem to be perpetually lodged in battle with men from the Mad Men generation…

…er, wherever they are:

Feminist author Jessica Valenti was pretty impressed with a piece in Glamour about a woman who has sworn off cooking for men now that her divorce has come through.

It’s Jessica Valenti, so you know it’s not actually “good”.

But you do know it’s wrenched straight from the little box of cultural cliches that no liberal enters an argument without.

Read the whole thing.  Feel better about your own level of intellectual oomph.


Last week, when a middle-aged white man was arrested for waving a gun at some Somali teenagers at a gas station, you could fairly hear the panting fro the anti-gun crowd:  “Please let it be a permit holder!  Please let it be a permit-holder“, they prayed in fractured Unitarian.

Alas, they were denied:

Investigators with the Eden Prairie Police Department applied for a warrant to search Johnson’s property and motor vehicle last week.

The application said investigators have learned Johnson applied for and was granted a firearms permit to purchase in 2011, but as of last week, he does not have a permit to carry in Minnesota. The application also states that he was the suspect in a 2011 assault in which an individual alleged Johnson threatened him with a knife and a gun.

But that case was cleared exceptionally due to lack of victim cooperation.

Now – we can allow for the fact that there is going to be some “he said / they said” in a story like this.  But if this story is accurate, it’d seem Johnson is qualified to be a great example of how not to use a firearm in lawful self-defense (emphasis added)

According to the application, several of the teens reported seeing Johnson pull out a black handgun during the altercation, and begin waving it around during an incident captured on both surveillance video and cell phone video. One reported he felt threatened and believed Johnson was going to begin shooting at him…He too reportedly recorded part of the incident on his cell phone. The application states that video does not show Johnson removing or displaying the handgun, but that he can be heard yelling at the group of teens.

“Just give me a reason,” he can allegedly be heard to say. “Just give me a god damn reason.”

If you’re asking them to give you a reason, a jury’s gonna look at that “immediate danger of death or great bodily harm” requirement for a self-defense claim, and laugh out loud with the judge’s tacit blessing.

But – let’s watch for Nancy Nord Bence and Erin Maye Quade to claim he is a permittee.

Rena Moran And The Pro-Mutilation Lobby

In the last session, legislation that would have added penalties to parents for subjecting their daughters to “female circumcision” – more accurately called “genital mutilation” – passed by a near-unanimous margin in the House, but stalled in the Senate.  The DFLers who opposed the bill carried out the wishes of the far-left “there are no bad cultural traditions in a multicultural society!” crowd, who believe that further regulating the practice of forever crushing a young female’s chance of enjoying sex would keep families from going to the doctor, lead to troubles with immigration authorities, and push the barbaric practice even farther underground.

Not sure I remember having the same deference to Christian parents who were also snake-handlers.  I’ll have to look into that.

The practice is illegal in Minnesota – but taking children to one of the 23 states where it’s not is currently a loophole under Minnesota law.

Mary Franson, the author of the last bill, is back – and pushing it into the face of the multi-culti majority in the House:

Rep. Mary Franson, an Alexandria Republican, said Friedman’s ruling underscores the need for her bill, which passed the House 124-4 in 2017, but never got a vote or hearing in the Senate in the 2017 or 2018 sessions. The Michigan case was the impetus for her bill.

“I will never stop fighting for the safety of little girls, and will keep working to put an end to this barbaric practice and punish parents who subject their daughters to these horrors,” she said in a statement.

Franson is asking for hearings on the bill with the House Health and Human Services Committee.

The committee is chaired by Rena Moran – one of the four DFLers who voted against the bill in the house during the last session.

So the question becomes:  will Rena Moran be standing up for the rights of parents to mutilate their children?

Enemies Of The People (Who Get Killed By Copycat Attacks)

Study indicates a correlation between media coverage of mass shootings, and more mass shootings:

Our findings consistently suggest a positive and statistically significant effect of coverage on the number of subsequent shootings, lasting for 4-10 days. At its mean, news coverage is suggested to cause approximately three mass shootings in the following week, which would explain 55 percent of all mass shootings in our sample. Results are qualitatively consistent when using (i) additional keywords to capture shooting-related news coverage, (ii) alternative definitions of mass shootings, (iii) the number of injured or killed people as the dependent variable, and (iv) an alternative, longer data source for mass shootings from 2006-2016.

Watch – pointing this out will be labeled as “Putting a Chilling Effect on Free Speech (for the media)”.

A Plug

I’ve been reading “The Girls Are Gone”, by my old friend and former NARN co-host Michael Brodkorb and Allison Mann.

Do I recommend it?

Why, yes I do!

This case goes over so much material near and dear to my heart – family court reform, the bizarre “Judicial Election” cult in Minnesota, Michelle MacDonald in general – that I really can’t stop reading.

Michael may be a polarizing figure – but he’s done yeoman’s work covering this case.   The story is very very worth a read.

A Brief Absence Of PC Misery To Us, One And All

Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Before “A Christmas Carol,” the holiday of Christmas in the English-speaking world was nothing to get excited about.  The important event in Christianity was rising from the dead, at Easter.

We know, of course, that Catholics hyped Christmas in pagan lands to compete with the winter solstice, adopted the Tanenbaum as the Christmas Tree, and somehow conflated the stories of King Wenceslas, Bishop Nicholas, Father Christmas and Kris Kringle into Santa Claus, made famous in America by the Coca Cola advertising campaign.

It’s our last surviving holiday.  Easter is too Christian, Fourth of July is too jingoistic, Halloween is offensive to Wiccans, Thanksgiving – don’t even get me started on cultural genocide.  Christmas – with Frosty and Rudolph and the Grinch – brings back childhood memories of a time when there was magic in the world and if you could stay awake late enough, you’d see Santa with your own eyes.

That’s why Christmas decorations appear in the stores before Halloween, why Christmas sales make or break retailers, and why Christmas credit card debt is the leading cause of family stress leading to February bankruptcies and divorces . . . we’re desperately trying to hang onto one thin sliver of happiness, one day of relief from the endless grinding politically correct bullshit all the rest of the year, trying to escape the lives people lived before “A Christmas Carol.”

The capacity of the American Left to impose misery on their fellow humans – and to get their little dollop of joy from it – may be the thing that bothers me the most about progressives; see also Public Radio’s six week long annual litany of holiday miseries that commenced on Friday.

Spree Shootings: Burying The Lede

Last month, we covered the story of an attempted mass shooting at a Kroger in Louisville, KY.

The article I wrote was based on media reporting that said that the killer told one of his victims “whites don’t kill whites”.   The killing was later ended by a good guy with a carry permit.

As John Lott points out (in an article I’ll be revisiting later this week), the media left out a key fact of the story:

National media outlets such as ABC and NBC covered the attack, noting that the alleged gunman told another white man that: “Whites don’t kill whites.” It sounded as if the gunman was merely reassuring a bystander that he had nothing to worry about. But reporters left out the crucial first part of the quote. The killer said: “Don’t shoot me. I won’t shoot you. Whites don’t shoot whites.” The other white person was pointing a permitted concealed handgun at the killer.

The killer ran, murdered another (black) woman, before being engaged by Dominic Rozier, a good guy with a gun and a family to defend.

There’s a lot of other good stuff in the article; more later this week.


History Never Repeats, Usually

2018:  “Nobody wants to take your guns.  We just want commonsense gun safety laws”
— the ruling party

1994:  “Nobody wants to murder Tutsis.  We just need commonsense Tutsi control”.
— the ruling party

1931:  “Nobody wants to kill all the Jews.  We just want commensense Jew control”
— the ruling party

1915:  “Nobody really wants to kill Armenians.  We just need commonsense Armenian control”
— the ruling party

1867:   “Nobody wants to decimate the Indians and expropriate their land.   We just need commonsense Indian control and land management”
— the ruling party

Tyranny never comes to your door in a T-shirt saying “Hi! Ask Me About The Benefits Of Having Your Freedom And Humanity Crushed!”.


Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

A lousy $12 bucks an hour for unskilled labor during the Christmas rush?

I thought Target was a progressive company. Why do they hate poor people and want them to die? Fight for 15!

Why, it’s almost as if nobody who knows the faintest thing about business actually believes that $15/hour crap.

When You’re Making Your Weekend Plans

My band, “Elephant in the Room”, is playing Friday and Saturday nights at the Eagles in Stillwater.

We’ll be playing from 8 ’til midnight.   We’re a classic rock band that does stuff from the ’50s through the ’90s.   And it features our “new” lead singer, former NARN producer Tommy, who can do Led Zeppelin ,Guns and Roses and the Offspring with style.   Seriously – this isn’t your grandpa’s Elephant in the Room.

It’s a fun room, excellent food, drinks aren’t too expensive, and we have a lot of fun playing the joint!

My Question

Will the social justice police finish eating each other

“The Vagina Monologues,” once a cutting-edge cry of feminist liberation, is headed to the campus forbidden zone . . . because it excludes women who don’t have vaginas.

Seriously: The Women’s Resource Center at Eastern Michigan University just stopped productions of Eve Ensler’s 1994 play for its lack of trans-sensitivity, as well as its supposed overall lack of diversity and inclusion.

…before they take the rest of society down with them?

A Man Needs A Woman Like A Fish Needs A Bicycle

The primary assumption of radical identity feminism is that womankind just doesn’t need men.

The revolution in, for lack of a better term, “sex robots”, might promise to flip that assumption on its head; men might just as well do without women:

The average single man paying attention to contemporary social fashions will struggle to understand the new rules of meeting, courting, or having sex with women. Something as banal as trying to converse with a woman wearing headphones is now often considered harassment. A man’s chances of mating success increase when he approaches many women, but so too do his chances of a gaining reputation as sexist, exploitative, or immoral. To take a fraught example, how does a man know that a woman is genuinely consenting to sex? A lack of ability to pick up on cues can incur catastrophic costs.

Men high in conscientiousness, who are sensitive to social disapproval but who nonetheless have difficulty reading subtle social cues, could make good husbands for women. These men are unlikely to want to take the risk of approaching women. As substitutes like sex robots and virtual companions become better and cheaper, they will monopolize the attention of such men.

Think of an introverted engineer with Asperger’s syndrome who wasn’t sure how to broach a conversation with a woman back in 2015 and definitely isn’t sure how to do that in today’s climate. In 10 years he could have a beautiful robot companion (indeed, he could have one that could emulate the experience of having sex with dozens of different women) that has a lower barrier to entry than the mating market and that keeps him satisfied enough to remain a happy bachelor. Some woman misses out on a conscientious guy with a good income who might not know exactly how to respond when she says “nothing’s wrong,” but will definitely keep the cars tuned up to get the kids to their mathematics championships. The world might miss out on his sons and daughters and their analytical approaches to some of the world’s problems.

I’m always going to prefer the real thing, speaking for myself – but the fact that this spectre makes all the right people feel panicky…:

Plus: “Underpinning feminist anxiety is the specter of female replaceability. Having long been concerned with governing male desire, the feminist project now faces the possibility of being routed around. Men can build alternatives to a sexual market that has been made less navigable because of ideology. Substitutes are built and bargaining power dissipates. Sex robots are to gender politics as scabs are to labor relations.”

…makes me smile.


Joe Doakes from Como Park emails:

Once someone has been given a White House press pass, they have a First Amendment liberty interest in keeping that pass. Under the Fifth Amendment, that liberty interest cannot be taken by the government without due process of law including notice and an opportunity to be heard. Taking it without the hearing causes irreparable harm to the person whose rights were violated; hence, Acosta gets his badge back.

1977 case provides precedent. Here’s the case.

The judge followed the law correctly but the law is stupid. The First Amendment right to speak your mind doesn’t require a White House pass, else everybody from every newspaper down to the Roseville Review would be entitled to one and how could you decide who gets into the building? Entering the White House must be a privilege, it cannot be a right, regardless of your job, and that’s outside the control of the courts. Any why should freedom of speech be limited to credentialed journalists? Why don’t the guys at Powerline have White House Press Passes – they did more investigative reporting on Ilhan and Ellison than any other media in the Twin Cities this election cycle.

Trump’s administration is working on standards of conduct to decide who gets ejected from press conferences. That’s a mug’s game, it plays into reporters’ hands and leaves the final decision in the courts where Trump has no control.

Two possible solutions:

Announce we’ll move the press conferences to a different, larger, modern building with seating for every journalist who wants to attend, as soon as it’s built, probably on the site of a former football stadium to accommodate all comers. For fairness to the journalists presently excluded for lack of space, no press conferences will be held until the new facility is built. Meanwhile, every newsman will be given notice we intend to revoke their White House press passes on the grounds it’s no longer necessary for them to enter the White House to have access to the press conference. Give selected leaks to selected favored journalists until the stadium is built. Sorry, CNN, no leaks for you.

Option B: hold a press conference tomorrow, announce at the beginning that we welcome back Mr. Acosta, and in deference to the judge’s decision, he gets the first question. Okay, second question, I see the reporter for Fox News here, but your organization joined in the lawsuit to insist Mr. Acosta be able to ask questions, so i’m giving your time to him. Jim, what’s your second question? Okay, third question, I see the reporter for the New York Times here, your organization also joined the lawsuit insisting Mr. Acosta ask the questions, so Jim what’s your third question? Okay, that’s all the time we have for today. Thanks for coming.

Joe Doakes

Ever notice how “Journos” only care about their freedom of speech?