Making the Killers Pay for What They've Done

WASHINGTON – Have you been following the massacres in America? It would be difficult to miss them. By the time I finish this column, and you have read it, maybe another 20 Americans will have succumbed to mass murder. There is, in a country composed of a mix of practical people and idealists, the urgent felt need to do something to end the killing. We are today stuck on the idea of gathering up all the guns, though that is no solution at all. How are we going to gather up some 400 million guns? Other solutions strike me as equally far-fetched.  I heard a learned man last week on National Public Radio come up with a learned idea. He said that America is a "visual culture." Thus, we should produce graphic pictures of the carnage caused by bullets when fired at massacres, such as those visited upon Uvalde, Texas, and Buffalo, New York. Well, we are not, strictly speaking, a visual culture. Consider how much music we consume. Are we a musical culture? Pictures of little children with bullets tearing their bodies apart are, according to this learned man, going to encourage the citizenry to some sort of miraculous action against the perpetrators of such atrocities. I have my doubts. Americans are already aroused and active all across the country, and they have not found a way to dissuade mass murderers. I do not have a solution to the problem, but I do have a suggestion that might deter some of these homicidal maniacs. It must all be very exciting to a psychotic loner who reaches for a gun to stir up his community, as was done in Texas and New York recently. But that will be his last moment of excitement ... forever. Imagine how painfully dreary his life will be if he is apprehended, or perhaps he has already been apprehended. How dangerous his life will be in the company of killers at a maximum-security penitentiary. How there will be no way out of it for him. His meals will be dictated until he dies; so, too, his sleep and his recreation. He will have no freedom forever. He will either be executed or serve a life sentence. What I am suggesting is that we journalists change the way we compose our stories about mass murderers. Rather than say a suspect faces life in prison without parole if convicted, we should add what that means. I have never spent a minute in prison, but I can imagine what it is like. Mr. X will face a life with his food served to him at a particular time, and it might not be to his liking. He will go to sleep at a particular time, which will not be of his choosing. He will awaken at a particular time, again not of his choosing. He will exercise in the yard at a particular time, and my guess is that this is his most dangerous time. Then there are the long dreary hours of solitude. Frankly, Mr. X, I would prefer the electric chair if it were offered to me. If we really are serious about eliminating gun violence, we have got to get serious about general violence. That will not be easy, for our whole culture is riven with violence. One sees it in children's cartoons. One sees it in prime-time television entertainment. One sees it in "road rage." One even sees it in politics. In our last series of primaries and the 2020 elections, I noted it in the Democrats' resort to the F-word. It is everywhere, and very few commentators want to comment on it. What are you going to do, close down Hollywood? Detumesce the Big Apple? Tell Beto O'Rourke he has to submit his public statements to the Thought Patrol? The violence we see in the streets is only the most obvious manifestation of the violence that is all around us. Yet, there is no reform organization that has been established to lessen the violence. Mothers Against Drunk Drivers is fine and even noble, but how about Mothers Against Violence in Our Entertainments, our schools, and all around us. How about Mothers Against the Walt Disney Company? My suggestion is to remind people of where these mass murderers are going to end up if they are not killed in the act. It will be no fun. Yet, it is only a suggestion on how to deal with one form of violence. There are many more out there.  Glory to Ukraine!

'First YouTubers in China' Say SnapChat Uses a CCP Propaganda Map

Two YouTubers described as 'China's first' called SnapChat out for seemingly bowing to Chinese propaganda on Taiwan in a recent podcast. Matt Tye and Winston Sterzel, "were the first YouTubers in China," according to their podcast description on Apple Podcasts. They were also longtime residents of China. But they left China after the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) targeted them, and now host The China Show podcast (formerly ADV Podcasts). This week, Sterzel and Tye called out SnapChat for what they said was an instance of kowtowing to Chinese propaganda. Tye and Sterzel explained that the “nine-dash line” is superimposed by China over a section of sea and territory that they claim is theirs, including Taiwan. The CCP began claiming a couple years ago that it found this border line on an ancient map and that it gives them absolute right to claim the area as their own, the hosts added. “China has a hissy fit if you don’t have this absolutely ridiculous nine-dash line on [maps],” Tye said. Tye then discussed a SnapChat image he said was sent to him by a friend living in Taiwan, a “friend spread” map on which SnapChat users identify their friends’ locations. The map had the same arbitrary border outline, he said.   Tye explained how offensive the line is not only to Taiwanese but to other Asian people, like Filipinos, who have been unfairly subject to China’s unjust territorial claims. “Who are you trying to capitulate to?” Tye said of SnapChat, noting that the app is not allowed in China, while it is legal in Taiwan. “That’s absolutely immoral, SnapChat,” Sterzel said.  Tye said that, on his American version of the SnapChat map, the nine-dash line did not appear.  “We’re in a situation where they’re trying to hide it from you in other countries that they’re using this nine-dash line,” which sends the message to the Taiwanese people that “Communist China owns you, a democratic free nation,” Tye said. Sterzel wondered if the same line is included in SnapChat’s versions for the Philippines and other countries targeted by China, promising follow-up research. “Taiwan is separate,” he clarified, adding that Taiwan has never been ruled by the CCP. As Sterzel said, if SnapChat really is using a Chinese propaganda map in Taiwan and not elsewhere, “SnapChat has to change.” Conservatives are under attack. Contact SnapChat here and demand Big Tech be held to account to mirror the First Amendment. If you have been censored, contact us at the Media Research Center contact form, and help us hold Big Tech accountable.

Rough Day? Karine Jean-Pierre Flubs Basic Questions About Biden’s COVID Diagnosis

Thursday wasn’t supposed to feature a White House press briefing due to a presidential visit to Pennsylvania, but President Biden’s positive COVID-19 diagnosis meant Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was thrown before the press corps and, like most stays, she stepped on plenty of rakes. Over the course of the briefing, she failed to answer and scoffed at basic questions about how the President contracted the virus, whether she herself is a close contact, and why the administration has kept Biden’s personal physician from reporters. And worse yet, the questions came from reporters across the ideological spectrum.     The hits came early from a reporter in the Associated Press seat, who had perhaps the most benign question of the briefing: “Where exactly was the President infected?” COVID-19 coordinator Dr. Ashish Jha was puzzled, saying “I don’t think we know” before letting Jean-Pierre step up. By step up, we meant step in it with an exceedingly bad response, stating in part that “I don’t think that matters” as “what matters is we prepared for this moment.” TheGrio’s April Ryan had a question from the left, demanding to know whether there will be “a push to tell people to start wearing the masks indoors, especially as the President now, we see, has COVID.” The Washington Post’s Ashley Parker was also in this camp as she inquired about “[w]hat precautions did you take for the person who filmed” a short video of President Biden on the White House balcony updating the public on his positive test. Jean-Pierre actually answered this question well, saying the person “wore an N95 mask,” was six feet away from Biden, and that it was safe because it was taped outside. Going back to the nonsensical answers, The Wall Street Journal’s Catherine Lucey drew out a rather silly response when all she wanted to know was Biden’s testing regiment. As if she were reading liberal talking points about abortion, Jean-Pierre suggested it was no one’s business to know because it’s private: “[I]t is between — it is between him and his personal doctor on that protocol. He has a regular cadence.” Surprisingly, CNN’s Jeff Zeleny returned to Jean-Pierre’s response to the AP (click “expand”): ZELENY: Karine, if I could ask you, you said it doesn’t matter where he got it. But how can it not matter where he got it if that is something that, of course, is involved in contact tracing? This administration is taking it very seriously. How can it not matter — JEAN-PIERRE: I think what I — ZELENY: — where he got it? JEAN-PIERRE: — what I was trying say is: What’s important now is that he has mild symptoms, is that he is working from — from the Residence on behalf of the American people. That’s our focus. Look, we knew this was going to happen. As Dr. Jha said, you know, when he was — when he joined me at the briefing — in the briefing room not too long ago, he said this is — this is — you know, everyone was — at some point, everyone is going to get COVID. What is important is to make sure that you have — you get the treatment that is — that we have provided for folks, whether it’s get — make sure you get vaccinated, make sure you get boosted and — and then we have Paxlovid that is made available because of this President, so what I am trying to say is: The moment that we’re in right now is what matters as we’re talking about the President and his treatment and how he’s feeling and how he’s continuing to work on behalf of the American public.  Lefty reporter Eugene Daniels of Politico had another basic question that left the press secretary stumped as he wondered why she wasn’t considered a close contact of Biden’s. Jean-Pierre brushed it aside, claiming she was only with Biden for less than 15 minutes on. Moving to more usual suspects, Fox’s Jacqui Heinich called out Jean-Pierre’s evasiveness towards an earlier question as to whether Biden himself was recently deemed a close contact of someone who had a positive test (click “expand”): HEINRICH: And then, can you just confirm for us that there were no positive cases around the President in the last couple of days or that he was not a close contact of anyone who was positive? JHA: I think you’ve answered this, but feel free. JEAN-PIERRE:  Yeah, I’ve already answered. HEINRICH: I don’t think we got an answer. JEAN-PIERRE: Either — no, I did. I answered it.I told you what our protocols are and we have said — HEINRICH: But it wasn’t a “yes” or “no.” JEAN-PIERRE: I — I told you what our protocols were and as we have been committed since the last July, we disclose when the President or one of the — or one of the four principal is a close contact of a staff who tested positive as defined by the CDC. This is defined, again, by the CDC. Or when he tests positive, as we are doing today and being very transparent about that. HEINRICH: Are we supposed to assume then, because we didn’t hear from you, that that’s a “no”? JEAN-PIERRE: That’s not what I’m saying. I am saying that we — when there is a close — when there is a close contact to the President, we actually give that information out and we actually share that individual, who’s a staff member, if they have tested positive. That has been — that has actually been our — our protocol since past — this past July, so a year. HEINRICH: So we didn’t receive anything like that, so am I to assume that there is — there was nothing that happened, there was no positive case where the President was a close contact? JEAN-PIERRE: Yes, you’re — you’re safe to assume that because that’s what we have been committed to doing since the last July, which is about a year ago. Real Clear Politics’s Philip Wegmann circled back to questions from the AP and CNN, making clear that while Biden’s health does come first, it’s still important to investigate whom he might have contract the virus from. “[T]he President travels, right? He travels a lot. He engages with a lot of people,” she said in part. National Journal’s George Condon elicited perhaps the most heated answer as he slammed the refusal to make White House physician Dr. Kevin O’Connor available for questions, noting Jean-Pierre and Jha haven’t seen Biden or treated him. After Condon said a refusal to make him available “would be the least transparency of any White House in 50 years on a presidential illness,” an irked Jean-Pierre declared that she would “wholeheartedly disagree” because they’ve behaved “very differently than, I would argue, than the last administration and I am happy to have that conversation with you.” To see the relevant transcript from the March 21 briefing (including great queries on masks and the presidential line of succession), click here.

Pages