The taxpayers of Minneapolis will foot a $152,000 bill for security services given to three members of the City Council who received death threats following their calls to defund the police in the wake of George Floyd’s death. According to an investigative report by the local Fox 9 news outlet, the three council members, Andrea Jenkins (Ward 8), Phillipe Cunningham (Ward 4), and Alondra Cano (Ward 9), were granted a security detail shortly after Memorial Day, which cost the city about $4,500 a day and ended on June 29. Two security firms Aegis and BelCom were reportedly hired because police officials were overwhelmed with security needs following George Floyd’s death in police custody and the demonstrations that ensued for weeks after. “This security service was intended to be temporary and bridge to other security measures implemented by council members themselves,” a City spokesperson said. The City Council does not need to approve any expenses unless they exceed $175,000. The costs were therefore approved by City Coordinator Mark Ruff. “The contracts are within existing department budget limits,” the spokesperson said. “The contracts will not impact future tax rates,” they added. The Mayor’s office could not be reached for comment, but a spokesperson for the City said that the cost of the security detail a day, was roughly the same for the taxpayer as Minneapolis Police Department services. The threats on the council members’ lives were reportedly made after all three members were outspoken about defunding the police. The largely White police force has had a difficult time in gaining the public’s trust, and a proposal to defund the police and replace the force with “a department of community safety and violence prevention” is being reviewed. A public hearing has been scheduled for Wednesday for members of the community to ask questions or voice their concerns. According to a Fox 9 news report from earlier this week, 150 Minneapolis police officers are seeking disability for post-traumatic stress following the George Floyd protests. A total of 25 police officers have quit since the demonstrations and an additional 25 have sought extended leave.
This is so rich.. These idiot Minneapolis council members had personal security AFTER they pandered to the defund police mob. They probably don’t realize the breathtaking hypocrisy of that. But, hey.. They’re liberal Dems. So, I’m repeating myself. As for that comment about the mostly white police force there.. Yeah? And? Therefore what? The Chief is black. And, he’s a standup, good guy trying to do the right thing in his city, in spite of the idiocy and lack of support from those fools on the city council.
President Bill Clinton pardoned his own brother for felony distribution of cocaine. And a key witness in the Whitewater scandal for which he and Hillary Clinton were under investigation. And three others convicted in independent counsel Ken Starr’s probe. And Marc Rich, in what was a straight-up political payoff. And his CIA director. And his HUD secretary. And eight people convicted in an investigation of his Agriculture Department. No surprise there: The Clintons and their supporters then, like President Trump and his supporters now, regarded the special-prosecutor probes into the administration as witch hunts. Clinton also commuted the sentences of convicted terrorists, some of whom hadn’t even asked for clemency. Shameless as he was, though, even he couldn’t bring himself to pardon Oscar Lopez Rivera, the defiantly unrepentant FALN leader. President Obama took care of that. Obama also commuted the sentence of a U.S. soldier who passed top-secret information to WikiLeaks. He pardoned his former Joint Chiefs of Staff vice chairman, who’d been convicted of making false statements about a leak of classified information to The New York Times. And when he couldn’t get Congress to amend federal drug laws the way he wanted them amended, Obama used the pardon power to slash hundreds of sentences, under an executive initiative later sharply criticized by the Obama-appointed Justice Department inspector general. That doesn’t even account for the Obama administration’s penchant for making sure things never got to the pardon stage by distorting the law to give Hillary Clinton — the same Hillary Clinton who was nearly indicted in the aforementioned Clinton-era scheme — a pass, asserting executive privilege to obstruct the Fast and Furious investigation (for which Obama’s attorney general was held in contempt of Congress), ignoring his CIA director’s spying on the Senate Intelligence Committee, and turning a blind eye to the abuses of power and obstructions attendant to the scandal that engulfed his IRS. So, as abuses of the pardon power go — and they do go — I can’t get too whipped up over President Trump’s commutation of Roger Stone’s 40-month sentence for non-violent criminal obstruction of a bogusly based and ridiculously over-prosecuted investigation.
Agreed.. As many of you know, one thing we love to point out here at The Daily Buzz is the breathtaking hypocrisy of Democrat politicians and their willing accomplices in the dominantly liberal mainstream media. This whole hand-wringing by them over President Trump’s recent pardon of Roger Stone is such an example. Where was their collective outrage when Presidents Clinton and Obama gave some of the pardons mentioned above? Nowhere, of course. What a bunch of self-righteous, self-serving, political hypocrites! Anyway, … former Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York Andrew C. McCarthy is the author of that piece. Andrew led the 1995 terrorism prosecution against Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman, and is a respected attorney and former federal prosecutor. He’s also the author of “Ball of Collusion: The Plot to Rig an Election and Destroy a Presidency.” To read the rest of this article, click on the text above. Thanks Andrew!
While Democrats and media pundits pounce to decry the Betsy Ross flag as racially problematic — with one even likening the symbol to Nazi swastikas — the very same flag flew prominently during then-President Barack Obama’s second inauguration ceremony in 2013. The reminder that the flag was displayed during Obama’s inauguration came amid the controversy from Nike halting the release of shoes bearing the flag, which flew during the Revolutionary War. The company worried that the flag could “unintentionally offend” people, after controversial football player Colin Kaepernick expressed concern over the design, claiming it recalled the slavery era and has been appropriated by white nationalists. The controversy quickly worked its way into the national political bloodstream, with some Democratic presidential candidates siding with Nike. President Trump’s campaign fired back by noting the flag’s otherwise broad appeal. “Democrats running for president have officially lost it. Beto & Castro strongly imply that the Betsy Ross flag is a symbol of hatred. Do the rest of the Dems agree? Pictured here, of course, is the notorious flag prominently featured at President Obama’s 2nd inauguration,” tweeted Tim Murtaugh, director of communications for Trump’s 2020 re-election campaign. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s son, also mocked those suddenly criticizing the flag, tweeting that “weird that no one had a problem with The Betsy Ross Flag when it flew over Obama’s inauguration.” Liberal pundits and 2020 presidential candidates alike jumped on the controversy, with former HUD Secretary Julián Castro saying he was “glad to see” Nike removed the shoes over the “painful” symbol that he compared to the Confederate flag. “There are a lot of things in our history that are still very painful,” Castro told CBS News. As an example, he cited “the Confederate flag that still flies in some places and is used as a symbol.” Former Texas Rep. Beto O’Rourke, meanwhile, also gave thumbs up for Nike’s decision, noting that “white nationalist groups” have “appropriated” the Betsy Ross flag, without providing evidence.
One thing we love to do here at The Daily Buzz is to show the brazen hypocrisy of the left. This story is an example of that. Colin K., and all of these Dems never had any problem with the so-called “Betsy Ross” American flag when it hung behind then-President Obama at his 2nd inaugural in two prominent positions. in fact, it’s never been an issue at all! But, when Trump became President, suddenly it became a symbol of slavery and white supremacy; both of which are factually, historically inaccurate and simply ridiculous. Then again, the left isn’t interested in facts or history. They’re just interested in dividing America, and history revisionism to serve their liberal, anti-America agenda.
California Lt. Governor Gavin Newsom (D) wants to lead a fight against gun ownership–yet has spent millions of taxpayer dollars to surround himself with armed security. Breibart News previously reported Newsom’s belief that the Paris attacks would have been worse if citizens had been armed for self-defense. He told HBO’s Bill Maher that the whole idea of a good guy with a gun stopping a bad guy is “mythology.” Newsom’s exact words on Maher’s show, Real Time, were: “I just simply, this sort of mythology, the guy with the gun that’s going to come save the day, I mean, so right out of the movies, sort of this gun-slinging fantasy. The reality is, it’s most likely to create more harm, more damage, more lost lives in those circumstances.” Rewind a few years to Newsom’s tenure as Mayor of San Francisco. He was mayor from 2004 to 2011, and toward the end of that time–on July 7, 2009–reports emerged that Newsom had spent “millions” surrounding himself with armed security. Moreover, those “millions” came out of city funds–otherwise know as taxpayer monies–which paid for the police detail from which protective services were rendered. NBC Bay Area reported Newsom’s security spending as follows: How much does it cost to protect the mayor of a major metropolitan city? In Los Angeles, about $450,000 a year. In Houston, about $339,00 a year. In San Francisco, anywhere between $1 and $72 million. [On July 7, 2009] SF Appeal revealed…the budget for Newsom’s personal police bodyguards comes out of the San Francisco Police Department’s Investigations Detail, which boasts a $72.9 million budget. So, depending on how you look at it, Newsom’s protective detail cost at least seven figures–money few average citizens would have for personal self-defense. Then Newsom was elected to the position of Lt. Governor in 2010, and assumed that office in 2011. And the very next year, in July 2012, the Los Angles Times reported that the cost for providing security for Lt Governor Newsom was up nearly $30,000 above what it had been for his predecessor. According to the Times: The state spent $93,379 through May in the just-completed fiscal year on CHP protection for Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who took office at the start of 2011. The amount is up from the $65,954 spent in the previous fiscal year, the first half protecting Lt. Gov. Abel Maldonado, and the second half protecting Newsom. The Times inquired whether the elevated price for armed security was the result of Newsom taking “a CHP officer…to the taping of his weekly hour-long talk show, ‘The Gavin Newsome Show,’” but Newsom’s spokesman said they do not discuss details related to security. Here is the bottom line: Newsom does not think allowing average Americans to be armed for self-defense does any good. In fact, he thinks “it’s most likely to create more harm, more damage, more lost lives in those circumstances.” But he had no problem spending millions to surround himself with armed security as mayor and to increase expenditures for armed security by $30,000 once he became Lt. Governor. Maybe it is time for Newsom to live up the standards he wants to force onto average Americans and forgo the confidence derived by having guns around for self-defense. Talk is cheap–perhaps Newsom can lead by example, disarming his security detail and going through a few days thinking about how citizens feel when state and local governments disarm them via myriad gun control scenarios.
Gavin is your typical, self-righteous, sanctimonious, anti-gun, extreme, limousine liberal who is spectacularly hypocritical. He doesn’t want you or me to be able to protect ourselves with our Second Amendment rights. BUT, he’ll spend MILLIONS of our hard-earned taxes for HIS personal protection and his ARMED guards. Then, he’ll go on some late night show and say he’s not carrying any guns. What a brazen hypocrite. It truly is breathtaking. But hey folks.. This is what these liberal elitists are like. They have NO shame. What a tool..