Knee-jerk Narratives: How Do We Get Stories So Wrong, So Often?

Colorado…You probably saw the news.  A patriot rally goer was killed by a local news station security guard at dueling Trump and Antifa events on Saturday.  A photo shows Lee Keltner slap the guard.  The two step apart and a shot’s fired as a pepper spray blast discharges.  

Articles left the impression that the shooter was a neutral figure, connected to the mainstream press—9News of Denver.

Conservative Twitter branded him Antifa but was quickly smacked down by a police statement denying any connection.  However, it was strange timing.  The police established his political non-affiliations before they had even released his name.  That should have been a clue.

Once the shooter was officially identified the next day as Matthew Dolloff, his online preferences for Bernie Sanders, Occupy Wall Street, and anti-Trump rhetoric were exposed.  Perhaps he’s not an Antifa participant but his philosophies were certainly sympathetic. Furthermore, 9News had previously showed support for and was publicly praised by local Antifa.  

As facts continued to emerge, the “neutral press” narrative got murkier.  However, few of these clarifying revelations have been widely reported.

But that’s how our culture works.  Initial false narratives are promoted, long before most of the facts are known, because being first and trendy (not accurate) are the most prized goals in todays social media oriented news industry.  As long as it pays political dividends, a spun-up story can get tens of thousands of postings before anyone realizes they’ve jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Michigan…This happened just last week.  After the “Wolverine Watchman” plot to kidnap Governor Gretchen Whitmer was foiled by the FBI, the governor claimed it was motivated by the president’s rhetoric.  Her accusation made headlines that were dutifully tweeted by Trump’s agitators.  However, videos later emerged showing the head watchman’s disdain for the President, even calling him a “tyrant”—hardly how one describes their inspiration.  Clearly, they weren’t getting their cues from the White House.  Not that there was ever any proof to corroborate Whitmer’s accusation—but now there was actual evidence to the contrary.  

Unfortunately, the initial false narrative got more airplay than the correction—as is typically the case.

Missouri…Remember Michael Brown who, supposedly, tried to deescalate his run-in with police by offering the submissive peace gesture “hands up don’t shoot”?  Well, the case went to a grand-jury and that story was debunked.  Meaning, it never happened.  But how many people, to this day, have you seen imitate this invented narrative as some kind of rallying cry?

Wisconsin…Jacob Blake was painted as a loving father that was only breaking up a fight when he became a victim of police brutality.  Turns out there was a warrant for sexual assault, a broken restraining order, theft, a physical altercation with police, and a weapons possession that predicated the video clip we were shown over and over again.  

Kentucky…For months the story was about a warrant that was served at the wrong house, with no entry warning, and no provocation for the deadly force that led to Breanna Taylor’s death.  Turns out none of those things were true.

Minnesota…We were also told a peaceful George Floyd would be alive today if he hadn’t been suffocated by the police.  Months later it was revealed that the 6’7” man aggressively resisted detainment and had consumed over-dose levels of Fentanyl resulting in catastrophic lung damage. 

And there’s more:

 

Freddie Gray was treated unjustly.  

Christopher Steele was a provider of valid intel.  

Kyle Rittenhouse was a white supremacist.  

Nick Sandmann was a racist aggressor. 

Jussie Smollett was a hate-crime victim.

All of these assertions were unfounded or completely untrue but that didn’t stop them from being widely reported and reposted.  In the age of social media, bad journalism and conjecture can go viral, with millions deceived in a matter of minutes.  I doubt I need to detail all the damage to people and property that’s resulted from such misrepresentations.

We tell ourselves we want facts checked but turn around and post the most salacious tweets we can get our hands on.  We want to “follow the science” one moment but play reactionary zealots the next.  If we don’t truly care about taking the time to get it right how can we honestly expect anyone else to.  

This age of digital instant gratification is seductive and the stakes in today’s cultural and political clashes are high—but our diminished expectation of accuracy is a loss we will regret, as will generations yet to come. 

  

The Black Death: Murder Rates Explode In Wake of George Floyd Protests

  You’ve probably heard this argument many times:  There may be few, if any, unlawful killings of blacks by white policeman that have a provable racial motive, but certain data mixed with commonly held perceptions prove that police killings are the result of a thoroughly racist law enforcement system—and, therefore, blame lies at the feet of everyone wearing a badge.

We’ve seen this mantra heralded by protestors in many places—for many weeks.  Numerous towns and neighborhoods provide the settings for hundreds, if not thousands, of demonstrations that have become the largest anti-police movement in U.S. history.  

There’s been almost constant hostility towards officers at many of these events.  Black officers are mocked for their physical features and accused of being race traitors.  Female officers are sexually harassed and taunted about being raped as crowds chant “kill a cop”.  The chaos is backdropped by fires and buildings covered in graffiti that exhort the assassination of police by car, or gun, or any means necessary. Jeers of nazi, fascist, pig, and murderer fill the air as melees of physical attacks are carried out by extremists.  Beatings, blindings, spitting, throwing projectiles, and blasting with explosives make up the thousands of assaults on police.  Adding insult to injury, a massive “defund” push has left police short-handed and special units disbanded.  Now they’re less effective, more vulnerable, and quite frankly, less willing.

Still, the most underreported and troubling aspect of these protests is they monopolize law enforcement staff and resources, making police less active in their jurisdictions which emboldens violent criminals.  When their focus should be on troubled neighborhoods, it’s, instead, drawn towards nightly protests that often take immense amounts of manpower to manage potential hostilities.  Because of these tactics the police in many cities are a shadow of what they were just a few months ago and urban communities, many black, have suffered a huge increase in murders.   

The following is an attempt to quantify this surge in three cities:  Oakland, Washington, and Chicago—using two methods.  The first method, takes black homicide totals of the month before the George Floyd protests became prominent and compares them to the month(s) that came after.  The second method, compares the month(s) at the height of the unrest to the same month(s) in the previous year.  

Not all the raw data is conveniently laid out on-line.  For instance, the amount of black murder victims in DC and Oakland by month couldn’t be found.  So, the total homicide amounts had to be tabulated from police reporting and then the average percentage of black victims from previous years was applied to arrive at those figures.  Admittedly, there’s room to quibble over some of these numbers but the trends are unmistakable.

Oakland, CA:  Here was the most severe uptick in black murders out of the three cities.  May 2020 saw 32 black murders—four of those (12%) on May 31.  The George Floyd killing happened in the latter part of the month with Oakland’s first protest held on May 29, 2020.  Then June produced 57 black murder victims while July shot up to 66.       

In comparison to 2019, all blacks murdered for the entire year totaled 56.  

Let that sink in.  

The two months immediately following the initial George Floyd protests, June and July of 2020, each saw a higher number than all twelve months of the previous year—combined.  That is nothing short of staggering.

Washington, DC:  This is the city out of the three with the smallest increases.  The district’s law enforcement apparatus has a large federal portion, as one would assume, and that division of power was on display throughout the protests.  Arguably, this allowed municipal officers to more typically monitor the city.  After the initial eruptions, the first few weeks in June saw relatively few arrests at protests that regularly featured high profile politicians.  But as the month went on the tenor of the demonstrations began to match the chaos seen elsewhere.

There were 13 black murders in June of 2020.  July saw 24.  The previous year July had 16.

These are fairly small numbers, but the contrast is clear—by either comparison—July 2020 is the outlier.

Chicago, IL:  The Chicago Tribune has an excellent database for tracking homicide data.  It’s much like the Washington Post’s police shooting database in terms of filtering.  This allows for entirely precise data.  

May of 2020 had 56 black homicides.  June had 73 and July had 75.  In 2019, June and July had 42 and 39 respectively.  

In all three cities, once vitriolic protests laden with arrests became the norm, police attentions shifted from struggling neighborhoods and black murders spiked.  Whether compared to previous months or previous years, the dramatic increases are undeniable.

Elsewhere, the news is equally daunting.  Los Angeles saw homicides increase 250%, while New York, a city where 96% of gun violence targets blacks, experienced a 350% jump in weekly shootings.  Scores of municipalities tell similar stories.

Just from the three featured cities alone (Oakland, Washington, and Chicago) their combined increases show an additional 104 black murders compared to the preceding month and 170 added black murders in contrast to the identical months in 2019. 

These cities represent 3.9% of America’s 98 million city dwellers, but when this sample is applied to the entire nationwide urban population it translates to an average of 3,368 additional black murder victims. 

To put that number in perspective, that’s a Tulsa every three days for nine continuous weeks.  The Klu Klux Klan lynched roughly the same amount of blacks over a period of 86 years.  BLM and their allies reached that milestone in two months.  

That’s a lot of George Floyds.   

Don’t misunderstand.  This isn’t some deviation from Black Lives Matter.  This isn’t highlighting organic gang violence or minority abortion rates.  This is precisely about the consequences of the BLM protest movement and namely, their monopolization of police resources, causing the abandonment of black urban America to the wolves.  

There’s some sick irony to the reality that white politicians deprive black urbanites of the ability to carry firearms for protection while discontented white millennials torch minority businesses and decimate police protections in black neighborhoods—all the while, claiming to be the righteous defenders of black America.

Can you imagine the criticism if other protest movements defied their core purpose?  What if the Women’s March encouraged more rape or the Right to Life March caused more abortions?  Wouldn’t that be a newsworthy contradiction?  So, why is there no public outcry for a Black Lives Matter movement that actually accelerates the disposal of black lives?

And even crazier than that, after a death toll that resembles a black 9-11, the left is still successfully projecting their own systemic racism onto local police departments.  But the lesson of three thousand fresh coffins filled with black murder victims is unmistakable:   

The under-policing spawned by the George Floyd Protests is an exponentially greater detriment to Black America.

Portland: Years of Intense Protest Violence

Lately, the dramatic calls for the salvation of Portland protesters from the grips of federal security agents have filled Twitter and Facebook.  A handful of video clips, seemingly, show a new clandestine federal presence that, without provocation, hauls away peaceful protestors, denying them their basic rights. 

More succinctly, the underlying accusation is:  Our tyrant president sent in his storm troopers, illegally commandeering the jurisdiction of the Portland Police—illegally detaining completely innocent protesters—while illegally concealing their own affiliations and identities.

I love it when people that never heard of Federalism before they saw “Hamilton” incorrectly cite the 10th Amendment.  But anyway…I digress.

Could some of these fears actually be warranted?  We don’t really know.  

What we do know is they’re protecting federal buildings.  Is that the federal governments jurisdiction?  Sure would seem like it.  And federal security has been there for years, occasionally confronting riots—long before the president commented about intervening in the current upheaval.    

What about those being detained?  Do we know if there’s probable cause?  Not exactly, but in this environment there’s a lot of surveillance cameras guarding these places. If a crime is viewed and the suspect is walking around during an unlawful assembly—then I can see why they’d get picked-up.  

What about an innocent who just happened to dress in Antifa all-black?  What can I say?  If you dress exactly like the known criminals wreaking havoc—you’ll probably be mistaken for one of those criminals.  Next time grab the khakis.

Concerning the agents identifying themselves, I’ve read there is no such legal obligation federally.  In saner circumstances most would probably be willing to give their information but in case you forgot—53 consecutive nights of riots detracts from the whole “business as usual” vibe.  These officers are targets.  Why would they waste time indulging some BLM Karen, making themselves increasingly vulnerable?  You might think of it as the South Korea sequence in World War Z.  You run out of the citadel—do your thing—and double-time it back before the herd is alerted.  

Regardless, I don’t see why any G-man would risk the liability or the bad press to go to the trouble of dragging in some guy simply because of politics.

But all that aside, the most ridiculous misconception about this story is the notion that Portland’s protest dysfunction started last week with the feds.  Although, there’s some steep competition in recent years for cities that most embrace criminal political expression with Oakland, Berkeley, New York, Chicago, and Seattle coming to mind—Portland is, by far, the heavy weight champion—the daddy long legs—the Big Kahuna of politically fueled criminal protest.    

Maybe that’s because the oldest active Antifa chapter in America is Portland’s own—Rose City Antifa.  Steeped in radicals as one of the whitest and most progressive cities in the U.S., some claim Portland’s Antifa, created in 2007, was a response to skinhead activity in the 1980’s.  Of course, anyone around in 2007 would attribute it’s start to the leftist protest politics of the time, namely opposition to the Iraq war—not pushback on a glorified street gang from decades earlier.

In 2011, the Occupy Wall Street Movement took root and newer radical groups like Antifa cut their teeth.  The Irag War demonstrations were largely global and only garnered 1,700 arrests.  Occupy, however, was almost exclusively in the U.S. and would see 7,700 arrests.  Largely without permits, its participants took over public spaces—parks, bridges, streets—fought with police—ruined local businesses—and never took a day off.  Sound familiar?  They promoted a level of mass vagrancy that still plaques many of our cities to this day.  In Portland alone, the month Occupy started there were 40 arrests.   

Occupy Wall Street continued until it was overtaken by Black Lives Matter.  Both movements brought assaults, riots, and arrests.  But for Portland neither would match the vitriol and criminality seen in the Anti-Trump protest age.  The following is a list compiling all of the mostly illegal and often violent demonstrations and counter-protests that embroiled Portland from late 2016-2019:

WARNING:  Some links contain bad language and violence.

—November 10-12, 2016—Election Protest—Two freeways blocked along with downtown streets.  A man was fatally shot.  Police were assaulted.  113-120 were arrested.  1.5 Million in damages and police overtime.  

—November 14, 2016—Student Walkout—Bridges clogged.  Verbal Altercations.

—November 21, 2016—Student Walkout Part 2—Three arrests of Portland Resistance leaders that are affiliated with Antifa.

—January 20, 2017—Inauguration Day Protest—Five arrested for disorderly conduct.  One arrested on a weapons charge.

—January 25, 2017—Anti-Police Protest—14 arrests.  An intersection and a train were blocked by Antifa.

—January 29-30, 2017—Travel Ban Protests—A man was beaten to the point of losing consciousness and was treated for a concussion at a local hospital.  The train was shut down.  Bags and traffic were diverted.  

—February 20, 2017—Anti-Trump March—Seven arrests.  Additionally, six juveniles cited including a 14 year-old.  The charges ranged from disorderly conduct to resisting arrest.

— April 29, 2017—Free Speech March—Led by Patriot Prayer.  The first pro-Trump demonstration.  Inspired by the cancellation of a local bipartisan parade after an organizer received threats, as well as recent Antifa violence in Berkeley, CA.  Like all such events, Antifa staged a counter protest.  Three counter protestors were arrested for assaulting an officer, weapons, and criminal mischief.  

—May 1, 2017—May Day—25 Arrests including disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, rioting, assaulting police, and arson.

—June 4, 2017—Trump Free Speech Rally—200 counter protestors detained for several hours.  14 arrested, mostly Antifa.

—June 30, 2017—Freedom March—No Arrests.  Politico released an article that day entitled, “How Liberal Portland Became America’s Most Politically Violent City.”

—August 19, 2017—Solidarity With Charlottesville—Two bridges blocked.  No permit.

—September 10, 2017—Patriot Prayer—Nine arrests

—October 11, 2017—ICE Protests—Six arrests.  Blocked a bus.

—November 4, 2017—Refuse Fascism Rally—No arrests.  First pro Trump led counter protest.

—June 3, 2018—Anti-Police Protest—Four arrests.

—June 30, 2018—Patriot Prayer Rally—Nine arrests.  Four injuries.

—August 4 2018—Gibson For Senate Freedom March—Four arrests.  Three Injuries.

—October 2018—Antifa and Black Lives Matter Block Portland Intersection—Altercations and vehicle damage.  Police don’t intervene.

—November 17, 2018—Him Too Rally—Six arrests

—June 29, 2019—Multiple Events—Three arrests.  Eight injuries including a local journalist that suffered brain damage.

—August 17, 2019— End Domestic Terrorism Rally—13 Arrests.

This three year period saw a few non-criminal protest days but they were rare.  Almost uniformly, these demonstrations or their counter protests were unlawful at the start since proper permits were never obtained.  Riot police were always present and necessary.  The costs attributed to property damage, police overtime, incarceration, court appearances, medical treatment, and disaffected commerce ran well into the millions.  With so much talk these days about defunding police, I’m sure Portland wishes they could get those funds back.  

Most of these protests saw violence and nearly every time it started with Antifa and it’s allies.  There wasn’t a single instance that an opposing demonstration wasn’t counter protested by Antifa, usually causing altercations.  Whether the target was local law enforcement, the feds, journalists, or an opposition group—Rose City Antifa always found someone to fight with.  They were, and still are, good at finding enemies—ICE, Homeland Security, Portland Police, the Mayor, the Police Chief, Patriot Prayer, corporations, skinheads from 40 years ago, or whatever president happens to be in office.  There’s no shortage.    

The current spate of largely criminal protests in Portland began May 29 and has continued every day since then.  I can only imagine the number of assaults, the level of destruction, and the costs to the city.  

Stepping back, its easy to see the big protest trends of the 21st Century.  The Anti-War Movement led to Occupy Wall Street which led to Black Lives Matter which led to The Anti-Trump Movement which led back to Black Lives Matter.  Not to mention the Womens Marches, Climate Change Protests, Gun Control rallies, and Immigration demonstrations that were squeezed in between.  It almost seems like there’s a contrived effort to apply constant protest pressure on our country.  

Regardless, its clear that nearly a decade of radical tactics, refined by Portland’s extreme political environment, have infinitely more to do with the city’s political dysfunction than a handful of feds that went on the offensive—just last week.   

     

DIY: Do Your Own Math on Racial Bias

Can systemic racism be found in data related to fatal police shootings?  Along with anecdotal evidence, many have based widespread protests on the premise that it can be found in the stats.

But have you seen the unvarnished numbers from their sources?  Instead of blindly following the interpretations of activist leaders, Facebook warriors, or corporate newsrooms; try crunching the data for yourself and arrive at your own conclusions.  

Here’s three resources widely used to make racial bias determinations:

1. Washington Post Police Shootings Database 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/investigations/police-shootings-database/

Started in 2015, this database documents police shooting numbers of all types, collecting information from news articles, social media entries, and police reports.  It has nine search filters with numerous selections that allow for literally thousands of variations.  This is where calculations would begin—with fatality totals for whatever stipulations are applied.  

2. US Census Data

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/US

To make accurate comparisons it’s necessary to give full context to the database numbers.  The most common of these contextualizations is to determine the rate of occurrence in each demographic by compensating for the difference in population.  Pretty basic but I would remind you that in many racial groupings “White” includes hispanics, as well.  The census has that number at 76.5%—along with a number that is “White/Not Hispanic”  which is 60.4%.  These numbers are often confused, but it’s safe to assume most are looking to make a non Hispanic, Black and White comparison.  In which case, these numbers show that Whites have 4.6 times the population of Blacks.

3. FBI Homicide Offender Data

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pages/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-3.xls

The second step to contextualize the data is to determine the frequency of “high stakes” interactions between the demographics and police.  More frequent deadly scenarios in shared proximity raises the amount of opportunities, which increases the chances for fatalities.  There are several metrics that could be used to determine such frequencies but “Homicide Offender” statistics seem effective in quantifying interactions in “life and death” circumstances—where it’s reasonable to expect fatal force to be more common.  Just like with the Census data , “White” numbers include Hispanics and, in this data set, have to be manually deducted if you’re comparing Blacks and Caucasians, which is what most mean when making a Black and White comparison. 

Crunching The Numbers…

Now that we’ve identified the three sources, here’s an example of how to calculate the data.  We’ll use simplified, made-up numbers and generic demographic category names.  So, when you make your own calculations they won’t be biased by anything written here.  

Let’s say…last year “Group A” experienced 10 unarmed police shooting fatalities and “Group B”  experienced 20.  In our list of three resources these numbers would come from the database in section one.

Group A    10

Group B    20

Now we need to inform these numbers by expressing  the difference in population using the data from the census numbers.  Since the “Group B” population is, hypothetically, 4x as large as “Group A” we enter that variable and compare the difference, giving us the proportional rate of police shooting fatalities.

Group A    10 x 4 = 40

Group B                  20   

Difference 2:1

This shows that “Group A” is twice as likely to be shot and killed by police.  This is where most, especially in the media, stop calculating because the math supports their “unfairness” narrative.

However, desiring the full picture, we’ll also need to account for how many opportunities exist for police shootings to occur in each of the two groups.  I realize this is nuanced for some, but we’ve already accounted for the amount of police actions in the first section.  So, we also need to account for how often members of those groups are available to be affected by those police actions.  In anything, odds dictate that more chances produce higher likelihoods.  

To ascertain the frequency of these opportunities in each group we’re using fictional Homicide Offender data.  “Group A” commits 2000 annual homicides—“Group B” 1000.

Group A    2000 

Group B    1000

But once again we have to return to the Census data in section two to determine the rate—using our simplified factor of four to account for population difference.

Group A    2000 x 4 = 8000

Group B                      1000

Difference 8:1

This shows that “Group A” is eight times as likely to be present in a homicide interaction as “Group B”.  What that means is “Group A” is extraordinarily more likely to interact with law enforcement in “live or die” scenarios.

What this hypothetical example concludes is:  Although Group A is twice as likely to be fatally shot by police, they are also eight times as likely to commit murder—linking them with a much higher probability of police shootings simply because of exponentially more opportunities.  

Do the math for yourself.  Plug in the values and draw analytical conclusions.  But please do all four of the calculations.  If you stop at the first two then you’re only solving half the equation.  In an era where facts are being called racist we need the rationality of science more than ever.  Good luck.