Bernie’s Q&A: Michael Flynn, Polling, Racism, Masks, and more! (7/3) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):

Bernie, as always, thanks for the responses! In a follow up to your comments about the intolerance and authoritarianism of the left, I was wondering if you think the climate they are setting is skewing the current Presidential polling. Specifically, if a stranger called your home today and claimed to be from a polling agency, would you willingly tell that person your political beliefs? After all, who knows who the person really is or what they will really do with that information. Maybe I am being paranoid, but I am positive that if I wrote you in 2019 and said I think the radical left will want to tear down all of our monuments and rewrite all of our history, I would have sounded paranoid then. — Joe M.

You make a very good point, Joe … and it’s not based on paranoia. I do think that some Trump supporters lie to pollsters. Who needs the potential trouble? But I don’t think there are enough people like that to overcome a 14 point deficit in the latest poll (NYT) — if he’s really trailing by 14 points. So yes, I think there are more Trump supporters out there who the polls don’t pick up … but I don’t think there are enough of them, again, if he’s trailing by double digits.

Mr G., Why are our elected officials bending & breaking to the <1% who are demanding societal changes without having to justify their position and articulate exactly what they are asking for? — ScottyG

The 1% making demands for radical change, unfortunately, are backed up by older, more established, more well-off liberal sympathizers — who vote! When those demands encroach on the comfort of those liberals, when the demonstrators protest in suburban neighborhoods, when they take over upper class neighborhoods and not just parts of downtown to further their demands, then the protesters will lose support — and politicians will think twice for “bending and breaking” to their demands.

I’ve often wondered who writes the copy that finds its way into the hands of news anchors. I watch ABC World News Tonight on a regular basis. Watch CNN and MSNBC too. (What can I say – I like torture:) Last night I watched ABC correspondent Jonathan Karl describe the armed St. Louis homeowners as whites pointing guns at blacks. No backstory, just “white vs. black”. This is probably not news to you, but I suspect the “news” media is ‘framing’ news content into a more ‘delicious’ product that draws and retains the attention of its most marketable audience group. The decision making as to what content and backstory finds its way to airtime is an example of pure marketing science – it’s all about the $$. Based on your vast experience, what does the MSM org. chart look like in MSM newsrooms – who sets the standard, who writes the copy? To me, those are the real MSM ‘demons’. It’s worth mentioning that while ABC’s Jonathan Karl was exploiting the white vs. black narrative for the ABC audience, I could tell from the look on his face that he felt otherwise. Have you ever had a reporter tell you that he or she had to report something they believed was BS, but went ahead anyway because it would cost them their job? Wonder how that makes them feel. Caio – Uncle Pete

Hey Pete … If the report is coming from an actual reporter in the field, either he/she wrote the copy or at least co-wrote it with a producer. If the words are coming out of the anchor’s mouth, then a team of writers wrote much of the copy … the anchor also writing some of it.

You have every right to think that the slant given to the story has to do with both political and cultural bias … and the bottom line. Cable opinion shows are aimed at the target audience. So you get non-stop left wing blather on CNN and MSNBC in prime time … and right wing opinion on Fox. As I’ve said many times before: Cable is a business model, not a journalism model. What’s new is that more and more it’s not only cable … as you, Uncle Pete, have noticed.

Finally, no journalist has ever confided to me that he or she had to report something they didn’t believe was factually correct.

As we continue to see white progressives confess and condemn their privilege, is it not time for them to put their money where their mouths and hearts are. As young college students and recent graduates excoriate and seek to demean cops, wouldn’t their tribal screams be that much more sincere and effective if they told good old mom and dad to stop subsidizing their lifestyles and renounced their future inheritances? Or does wokeness mean being hypocritical is permissible provided you can camouflage your privilege? — Michael F.

You’re funny, Michael. The day young, white, privileged twits tell mommy and daddy to cut them out of the will is the same day hell will freeze over. They talk a good game, but don’t count on any of them to put their money where their mouth is.

Any chance that some high-ranking democrat politicians including a certain presidential nominee (and FBI agents like Strzok) might end up in prison for setting up Michael Flynn under knowingly false pretenses? If so, then do you think that would hurt the Dems among the swing voters? I can’t imagine swing voters who may despise Trump personally ever voting for a party that seriously tried to throw out a legitimately elected president through deception and illegal entrapment simply because the Dems did not like the outcome of the election. Do you think A.G. Barr is really going to pursue prison time for what could be a coup by the Dems? At the risk of sounding like I’m repeating a ridiculous conspiracy theory, this one actually seems to carry some weight. Your thoughts are appreciated. Alex Jones Conspiratorial Regards from The Emperor

First, no one’s going to jail before the presidential election. Second, the Durham report will be very interesting … and may lead to criminal charges. Regarding swing voters: One would hope they’d abandon a party that was involved in major league wrongdoing, but I’m not betting on that — not given how much even swing voters detest our president. Stay tuned.

Bernie, do you know why the term fight fire with fire exists? If you don’t do it, you come out looking like conservatives of old that just accepted what ever lie and crap that the democrats bestowed upon them and were afraid to respond for fear of hurting someones feelings. Trump is not afraid to respond. thank God. — Louis R.

I’m not opposed to him fighting back. And I’m no fan of Democrat lies and crap, as you put it. But I’m also opposed to Mr. Trump’s lies and crap. How about you, Louis?

Since the Left is all about changing the names of institutions it claims support, or have supported, white supremacy and/or racism, when will it be time to change the name of the Democratic Party? After all, it was the Democratic Party that supported slavery, supported the South during the Civil War, resisted Reconstruction, invented/supported Jim Crow laws and resisted the 1960s Civil Rights movement. I think if the Left is being honest, it will look at the history of its own party and decide that it is time to get rid of the terms Democrat and Democratic Party since its history is steeped in racism. — Joe

Interesting idea, Joe, but don’t hold your breath. Now, at the risk of starting needless trouble let me point out that they weren’t liberal Democrats who, for example, fought civil rights in the 60s. It was conservative Democrats. So Democrats could argue that conservatives were the ones who were against equality for black Americans. Once you get into a fight like this, nobody comes out looking good.

[Regarding this week’s Off the Cuff]: Since it is almost impossible to have any civil and open conversation with the BLM movement and supporters about race, maybe the only option is to outshout them. And maybe the only way to do that is via the ballot box. If those elected leaders who acquiesce and virtue signal to every unrealistic whim of the current movement are removed, the movement may well lose steam. Maybe then, once law and order are restored and the agitators are kept at bay, maybe then the focus will move from looting, lawlessness, yelling, violence, asinine attack on statues, and instead towards substantive discussions on how to improve race relations in the country. I wish so … but am not that confident in it happening soon. Sigh … — Jim S.

I’m with you, Jim, regarding the ballot box being the antidote to chaos. But … I’m not at all sure the anti-chaos segment of our population would win. I’m not sure there’s a silent majority. If there is one I’m not sure Donald Trump is the person to lead the movement. Voters will have to decide if they want Democrats who are mostly silent about the anarchy … or Donald Trump who has caused more than a little chaos himself since he became president. This is one of those times I wouldn’t bet a nickel one way or the other.

The amount of vitriol being allowed to spew forth unabated for policemen and women is regrettable and unbelievable. Reminds me of members of the military coming home from Vietnam 50 years ago. Do you think this will spawn a similar “thank you for your service” movement in the future? — Steve R.

Good question, Steve. In the midst of the anti-military blowback during Vietnam, I didn’t see the “Thank you for your service” reaction coming. So who knows if what we’re seeing now will spawn something similar. But 50 years ago there was a silent majority. They didn’t hate the military. As I’ve said before, I have no idea if there’s a silent majority out there today. If there is, we may very well get a “Thank you for your service” follow up. If there isn’t, then maybe the progressives have won the culture war. And if that’s the case, don’t expect any thank yous for police officers.

Study after study has made it increasingly clear that one of the easiest and most effective weapons against the spread of COVID-19 is simply wearing a mask when you’re around other people. Yet, wearing masks has turned into some kind of culture battle, with probably half of the country thinking there’s no point to them, or that wearing them somehow compromises their freedoms. Do you think things would have been different (with the coronavirus spreading slower) if Trump (and Pence for that matter) had stood up for, and worn, masks months ago, instead of the president and people in the conservative media poo-pooing the idea? — Ben G.

You’re right, Ben … wearing masks has become part of the culture battle. Everything, it seems, is political and part of the culture battle. But if the president had worn a mask months ago … yes, I think more Trump supporters would have joined in. And that might have indeed slowed the spread of the virus. The idea that wearing or not wearing a mask is political, is also pathetic.


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.

Bernie’s Q&A: Stewart, Baier, Bolton, Wallace, and more! (6/26) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Another note: Due to a scheduling issue, next week’s Q&A will be moved from Friday (7/3) to either Saturday (7/4) or Sunday (7/5). Thank you.

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):

You and I remember the 60’s. I marched for civil rights and I tried to March with the Anti-war movement but believe the leaders where communists. Not what I wanted. But there is different Air about what’s going on today that I didn’t feel in the 60’s. I don’t believe it’s about change and I believe it has a deeper direction. What’s your gut? — Tim H.

I’m with you, Tim. Today’s revolution is rooted in authoritarianism. Only certain views are acceptable. Only certain opinions will be tolerated. Maybe nostalgia ain’t what it used to be, but the demonstrations of the 60s were marked by idealism. Today’s revolutionaries, I’m sure, also see themselves as noble idealists. But they won’t be happy until you lose your job because of something you said or did … yesterday or 25 years ago. They’re intolerant. As for the deeper direction:  I think the demonstrators of the 60s — except for the left wing radicals — wanted reasonable change. Today’s demonstrators, many of them anyway, want to fundamentally change America. Count me out.

Has there ever been a more idiotic phrase than “white silence is white violence?” Or is it just another cute phrase to batter others into submission and conformity? — Michael F.

Let’s see if I understand this: If you say the wrong thing, you’re one of the bad guys. If you say nothing, you’re also one of the bad guys. Having the wrong opinion is a form of violence to these geniuses. Keeping your mouth shut is also violence. Heads they win, tails we lose.

Mr. G, Are Republicans & Trump now paying the price in being accused of causing mass racial divide because they did not do enough to point out the Obama administration’s failures at healing (and yet some say even stoking) racial division? — ScottyG

I don’t think it would have been smart to talk too much about Obama. He was and remains very popular — much more popular than our current president. I don’t like Donald Trump but I do not think he’s a racist. I think some on the left believe he’s a bigot, but others will call him anything — including a Russian agent — to bring him down.

In a recent interview, Jon Stewart was asked about how he used to have friendly (though somewhat pugilistic) discussions with foils like Bill O’Reilly on his show. Stewart (surprisingly in my view) said it was probably the “worst legacy of The Daily Show.” He said it was hard to resist the urge to eviscerate people like O’Reilly, and called his friendly tone with such individuals “the part of it that I probably most regret.”

As someone with his own history with Stewart, what are your thoughts? Thanks. — Ben G.

So Jon Stewart now believes that being friendly was what he regrets most. What a load of sanctimonious crap. If you have a guest on your show, you have an obligation to be at least civil. Does Stewart think he should have hammered O’Reilly — for his left wing cause? Does he think O’Reilly would have folded? Or was he afraid that O’Reilly might have verbally kicked his rear end if Stewart was unfriendly? Jon Stewart, like so many other lefties, was on a mission … to spread the liberal gospel. He had O’Reilly on for crass business reasons: to hopefully win over some of Bill’s audience. Now he’s regretting it? Screw him!

In regard to the Bubba Wallace story, why didn’t someone step up and say what it was? A garage pulldown, it was obvious, every garage had one. No one on any pit crew knew this? In my opinion, NASCAR decided to just let it play out to show how “woke” it is. They knew pit crews knew what it actually was. Damn, this crap needs to stop! I’m so tired of some people and corporations kissing BLM’s ass. Loved your “Off the Cuff” comments Bernie, in addition to the woman you spoke with, I often wonder how much of a silent majority is out there. Those who would never say out loud, or to a pollster t,hat they’re voting for Trump… but don’t do so in fear of being ostracized. — John M.

You raise an interesting point, John … one (because I’m not a NASCAR fan) I hadn’t thought of: that the pit crew should have known this right from the jump that the “noose” was a garage pulldown. If you’re right, then your supposition is also interesting: that NASCAR let it play out to show how woke they are. I hope you’re wrong … but I fear you may be right.

Regarding this week’s Off the Cuff, you speak of a woman who despises Trump but fears for her country and says that she would consider fleeing the United States and/or possibly voting for Trump if he smashed the rebellion. A couple of things regarding the situation in my opinion:

Don’t you think that perhaps it is best that Trump refrain at this point in time from putting down the anarchists ? In this way, the nation can see how spineless and complicit the Democrats are in allowing their cities to be taken over by thugs and hooligans. Then come election time, Trump can say in all honesty, this is what the Democrats will allow. Biden and the others will allow the rebellious anarchists to destroy our communities and do nothing about it. He can accuse Pelosi and the others of being complicit, and he would be correct. If he sends in the National Guard, that could perhaps cause a bloodbath and you know how the leftists in the mainstream press would spin that. I realize this is a difficult situation, but if the republican states can put down any rebellion in their own areas and only the Democrat states are the ones that are suffering with this nonsense, perhaps that could bring victory to the Republicans. Your thoughts? –“Summer of Love MY REAR END” Regards, From The Empire

But if Donald Trump says “This is what Biden and others will allow” why wouldn’t Democrats fire back:  “This is what YOU did in fact allow!” Wouldn’t that be a problem for the president? That said, it is a tricky situation — because we (I) don’t know how the American people will react to more chaos. Will they blame the Democrats for remaining silent and not forcefully condemning it? Or will they say it happened on Trump’s watch and blame him? If the president sends in the troops and they clear out the anarchists without mass casualties, will he get credit? If there’s a bloodbath, will voters blame him — or the rioters? Saying it’s a “difficult situation” is putting it mildly, Emperor.

After watching the past few weeks of protests and mobs, it seems to me that there are a few forces at work: 1) a sincere desire for better policing, 2) vengeance pure and simple, 3) massive wealth redistribution. It also seems clear that there is extreme hatred for America and American values like free speech and assembly that does not kowtow to the mobs. Appreciate your reaction and also your prediction as to what to expect in NYC and DC on July 4. — Michael

I’m with you, Michael. It’s not simply a desire for better policing. It’s also, as you say, vengeance against a country they just don’t like. Here’s what I don’t know: Whether the American people are as disgusted as we are … or whether we’ve moved so far to the left that they’re on the side of the anarchists. I’m serious about that by the way. I’m sort of hoping the demonstrations move to the neighborhoods where the liberal enablers and sympathizers live. Let’s see how long the enabling continues then. As for July 4 in NY and DC: I expect fireworks. And not only the kind we’re used to on the 4th.

As a resident of a former slave and Confederate state (Texas), I’m in favor of removing local statues and other monuments that honor this cause. The Civil War ended, and we lost (thank goodness). Let’s move on and be modern Texans in a pluralistic, diverse society. I am also very much opposed to mob rule at any time and in any place. As governor, Nikki Haley considered and decided to remove the Confederate flag from the SC state capitol. Here in Dallas, a statue of a Texas Ranger, the subject of which definitely had a less-than-stellar history of protecting minorities, was removed from Love Field by city workers. But these removals were done as a result of dialogue and careful consideration. What right do private citizens have to just topple statues on a whim, committing felonies in the process? And more astoundingly, why do the Democrat politicians allow for this mob rule without prosecution? — Steve R.

First, what right does the mob have to topple statues on a whim? NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER. Second, why do the authorities allow the mob to rule without prosecution? That’s the million dollar question. If you throw a chewing gum wrapper on the street, you’d be in more trouble than these criminals are in. It’s absolutely astounding. And the real danger is … if you can get away with tearing down a statue with no fear of a penalty being imposed, what’s next?

I’m curious if you saw Bret Baier’s interview with John Bolton on Tuesday. I thought Baier was fair (no real objections to his questions), but I was taken back by how hard he came at Bolton (especially in comparison to his interviews with active members of the Trump administration, including Trump himself). It seemed like his goal was to try and discredit (not just challenge) Bolton, though I don’t think it worked. Maybe I’m off base. What do you think? — Jen R.

I came away with the same impression, Jen, but I was not taken back by his style. Baier is an honest journalist, but let’s remember the interview was on the Fox News Channel. The audience doesn’t like Bolton and even Bret Baier is aware of that … and his questions reflected that concern, I believe. Now, Bret might say, the questions were tough but legitimate. Okay. But then, as you point out Jen, why was he tougher on Bolton than on Trump himself? Even the good guys on cable play by cable rules, Jen.

Bernie, what do you think about NASCAR and the “noose” found in Bubba Wallace’s garage at Talladega? A few commentators have said the entire situation shows that there is an unlimited demand for racial tension stories by our media and, thankfully, a very, very limited supply of real stories that fill this demand. I wonder if NASCAR, given the current climate, believed it had to jump to the worst conclusion about the “noose” because if it did not, it would be seen as insensitive. I guess telling people not to jump to conclusions and to wait on the facts is way out of style these days. I guess now it is more hip to let the masses believe that one of your employees (because only employees had access to that garage) would act that way and perform such a heinous act. I guess it is no longer cool to stick up for your brand, or your workers, and tell the Twitter mob to wait for the facts to come out. — Joe M.

There’s a narrative in the liberal media — on all sorts of subjects, including race. And the noose fit the narrative. Just as Jesse Smollett’s BS story fit the narrative. Too many journalists wanted the noose story to be true so they played it up. I’m not suggesting that they should have ignored the story. It was legitimate news. But caution should have prevailed.

Senator Marco Rubio is currently working on legislation to open up the U.S. government’s data records on UFOs. Two questions:

1. Being that our nation is already dealing with a health crisis, an economic crisis, and a race-relations crisis, do you believe it’s a wise move, at this time, for the senator to potentially spur an intergalactic crisis?

2. Do you think this initiative will result in the classified footage of your landmark 1987 interview with space alien, Oderus Urungus (at Area 51), finally seeing the light of day?

Thank you. — John D.

Great questions, John. On the first one, I think it’s just the right time to spur an intergalactic crisis. It would take our minds off the other crises. And, as everyone (apparently except you) knows: We’d kick the alien asses. We’re Americans, John D — you might want to remember that.

As to your second question, about my landmark interview with Mr. Urungus. We made a deal at the time (over a hamburger and fries) that the interview would not be made public until American voters elected a president who campaigned from a basement in Delaware. So the interview may finally be seen soon.


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.

Bernie’s Q&A: Bolton, Durkin, My Favorite Interviews, and more! (6/19) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s Note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):

As a Trump supporter I am concerned about some of his tweets. I hope he stays out of the Seattle protests. I think he should let Governor Inslee and Mayor Durkin stew in their own leftist juices. What I fear is that if he sends in the military, the protesters will provoke a shooting and we could have another Kent State situation. What do you think? — Vic P.

I don’t believe he’ll send in the military. He talks about it … he’d like to do it … but he won’t. As much as sensible Americans hate what they’re seeing in Seattle, it would be a bad political move for the president.

CNN held a “Town Hall” Sunday evening with the four black female mayors of Atlanta, San Francisco, Chicago & D.C.. conducted by a black female moderator. I tuned in to try and gain some better understanding of the issues and their responses to current events. Honestly, it turned into a one-hour pat-each-other-on-the back session, void of tough questions on why these mayors have made the decisions they have. No question on why they initially allowed violent protesting and looting. No questions on what they are doing about true black male crime statistics especially to the Chicago Mayor… No hard questions on the hypocrisy of allowing mass gatherings during their own Covid restrictions. I tried, but I was let down again trying to get a fair perspective. So what’s a caring citizen to do, and where do they go to maintain a balanced perspective? — ScottyG

It was on CNN, right? And you’re surprised that it was a love fest? CNN lost its way a long time ago. As to where to go to maintain a balanced perspective: Not cable TV in prime time. I’m anxiously waiting to see if Fox let’s John Bolton on to talk about his book. I bring that up because CNN doesn’t have a monopoly on agenda driven news coverage. I used to write about media bias. It’s gone way beyond that. To not ask the questions of those mayors that you posed, Scotty, is an absolute disgrace, which has become par for the course at CNN.

I’ve been reading up on “White Privilege”, which I guess has been preached as dogma on college campuses for quite awhile. “Critical race theory” has me pegged as racist because of my original sin of being born with my dermatologic affliction of skin color consistent with my Caucasian ethnicity. It doesn’t matter, it seems, what I’ve done or said or thought about anybody in my life. And if I should protest that I have never uttered the N word my entire life, loath those that do, do not socialize with or work with those that do, have worked and socialized with black americans my entire life, and am NOT a racist, that apparently just proves that I’m a racist.

It reminds me of the old test for being a witch……recant being a witch and confess or we will dunk you until you drown, in which case that proves you were a witch. BRAVE NEW WORLD, indeed, where the woke masters have no tolerance for counter-revolutionaries or those who aren’t sufficiently educated as to their abject immorality and depravity of thought; they must shut up or recast their thought patterns in the new language of truth. I am angry and sick at heart for what I fear my grandson, who is 3, faces when he enters the education propaganda mill in another few years. Does he come home and tell me that he feels sad because his skin is white and he was born a racist? Not to mention all the other thought-crimes that he can be guilty of?  — John F.

George Orwell wrote about this kind of double-speak nonsense. We’re living it. I’ve often wondered how the son or daughter of a white anglo-saxon coal miner in West Virginia has white privilege. The progressives are taking over the culture. And name-calling is just the beginning.

Bernie, I am assuming (perhaps incorrectly) that in various parts of America people on the street are being approached and asked/told that they need to take a knee to show/prove that they are on board with Black Lives Matter. Do you have any advice as to how someone who does not support the defunding of police or does not view America as systemically racist should respond? On a related note, can you imagine NYC ever getting back to “normal” in terms of one’s ability to walk in Times Square or elsewhere without the risk of being “confronted?” Obviously the point re NYC can be equally applied to many other large cities across the country begging the question how all of this will impact tourism by those who do not support some or all of the leftist platform? — Michael F.

How to respond? Don’t get into a discussion with the mob because it’s a losing proposition. But even more important, don’t give in to the mob. Don’t say things you don’t believe just to make some kind of peace. As for New York: Things can change if New Yorkers elect someone like the city’s former mayor Rudy Giuliani. He cleaned things up — and it can happen again. But not with a progressive mayor. New Yorkers elected Bill de Blasio. Let them figure out their next move.

I’m fearful of losing my country to the violent anarchists, not because they are brilliant, but because those in corporate America, academia, and politics are actually caving in to the demands of the woke cry bullies! Since they’re tearing down statues and demanding buildings be renamed, I suggest that the Dems dismantle anything connected to FDR since he forced Japanese Americans into internment camps. Next let’s tear down statues of MLK Jr. and Malcolm X since both of them belonged to religions that condemned homosexuality as sinful and immoral. While we’re at it, let’s condemn Barack Obama because his wife Michelle is friends with that war criminal George W. Bush. What do you think would happen if someone echoed my suggestions to the anarchists? I’m being snarky, but I’m sure you get my point.

One more question: if someone as simple as me can easily see what submission to the anarchists will lead to, then why can’t the enablers like the liberal Democrats & professors & corporate heads see that their own heads are on the chopping block? — “Tear down the Sacco & Vanzetti Statue!” Regards, from the Emperor

Actually, Emp, your suggestion to tear down statues that honor liberals and progressives, may be snarky but it’s really a good one. To be clear, I don’t want to see those statues torn down but I do want to see someone make the case that you just made. If I’m the one who does that you’ll know where I got the idea. Good writers borrow. Great writers steal.

The liberals enablers of the authoritarian left go along with the anti free speech movement because they don’t believe that submission to the mob will ever affect them. More proof that they may have high IQs but are both pathetically delusional and at times, not too smart.

Dear Bernie, Recently many workplaces have had moments of silence, interfaith services and kneel-ins to recognize the murder of George Floyd and others by police. Is this appropriate for the workplace or is this something that is best left to off-work hours? — Peter

If management at a private company wants to give employees the opportunity to take part in the kind of demonstrations you outline they have the right to do it. As for your question about its appropriateness: I’m okay with it Peter as long as attendance is not mandatory. Reasonable people may disagree on whether such demonstrations are best left to off-hours work. But my concern is that those who don’t want to take part may incur some form of punishment — even if it’s not immediately obvious. They may also be ostracized by fellow employees. As long as there are no repercussions meted out to those who refrain from kneeling, etc … it’s something I could put up with, even if I’m not wholeheartedly for it.

If someone believes that America was conceived in sin, has been rotten to the core from its inception, is unwilling to support free speech for those who civilly and honestly disagree with their viewpoints, and is willing to excuse or justify rioting and violence, can they simultaneously claim to be a proud American who loves their country? I believes this goes to the core of the issue for those who beat the “systemic” racism drum. — Michael

I don’t think they’d say they love this country. They might love an America where there is absolutely no racism, no pollution, to poverty, no income inequality, etc … but they don’t love the America we live in today. And as I say, Michael, I don’t think they’d be ashamed to admit that.

There’s lots of irony/hypocrisy in watching liberals swoon over John Bolton, after vilifying him for years, because he’s now dishing on Trump. At the same time, Politico’s Tim Alberta (who’s no liberal) made this valid point on Twitter: “[Bolton] headlined every right-wing gathering; appeared on every Fox News show; wrote op-eds in conservative publications; raised millions for GOP candidates; was exalted as a voice of integrity, authority, honesty. And now he is the enemy—because he spoke ill of the dear leader.”

Regarding what Bolton wrote: while his accounts of Trump are damning, they’re unfortunately not surprising nor uncharacteristic of what know of Trump, or what we’ve heard him say with our own ears. Even giving Xi Jinping a verbal blessing to build concentration camps (which is truly sick) is consistent with other instances of him condoning the horrific behavior of authoritarian regimes.

Some on the left are criticizing Bolton for not speaking up during Trump’s impeachment, but do you think Bolton’s testimony would have compelled even one other GOP Senator to vote to convict? I don’t. I’m not sure anything would have. — Jen R.

I’m with you, Jen, 100 percent. Expect no consistency on political matters from either side. They throw their so-called values over the side to either excuse anything and everything Donald Trump does — or to condemn him no matter what. I find both sides lacking in anything resembling integrity. In the case of Bolton on Trump: You’re right. Nothing that’s come out so far is surprising. If he had written that Donald Trump offered to pay some dictator to endorse him, I wouldn’t be surprised. And if Bolton had spoken up earlier, nothing would have changed. Nothing. We’re on the same wave length Jen.

Which person was your most favorite interview (I know that’s probably a tough question)? — Ben G.

I know you asked for one favorite, but like potato chips, I can’t have just one. So here it goes, Ben:

I like Charles Barkley and Shaquille O’Neal a lot. Both are honest and don’t beat around the bush. You ask them a question, you get a straight answer. That’s not always the case.

I liked my college classmate Jim Valvano, who I interviewed when he was coaching basketball at North Carolina State. Off camera I told him about the time I hit the rim with my knuckle while grabbing a rebound during a pickup basketball game at Rutgers — a game he was watching from a few feet away. Let’s just say his recollection was different from mine. More precisely, he had absolutely no recollection of my jumping ability. And after I finished telling him the story, he told me I was full of you know what.

I also interviewed several people with serious physical disabilities. They didn’t see themselves as victims.  Both went on to achieve great things. They were Kyle Maynard and Jen Brinker. You can look them up.

And one more: Ansar Burney, a human rights activist who helped free thousands of young boys from slavery in the United Arab Emirates. They had been brought in from very poor countries and forced to become camel jockeys, a very dangerous business. If a boy died because he fell off the camel and was crushed under its hooves, he was shipped home in a box. If you have HBO, you might want to go to On Demand and find the story.

I’m sure I’m leaving a few more out. Apologies.

So, an ANTIFA like group [maybe all ANTIFA] has taken over six city block’s in downtown Seattle, and roused the cops out of the precinct that was situated within that six block area. What I find really ironic is that they have set up borders and have armed guards patrolling them. Anyone wanting to enter must be approved before they are allowed to do so. Gee, where have I heard that before? Oh yeah, at our southern border which the Left has been fighting against for years. They have a large list of demands too numerous to list here, one involves abolishing the police department. Continuing, the Governor was asked what he thought of a group taking control of part of the city and he acted like he had never heard about it. The Mayor on the other hand, when asked by Chris Cuomo at CNN what she thought about it and how long she thought it might last, replied “Maybe it will be a summer of love.” Even Cuomo had to look at her like “Have you got all your marbles, lady?” Initially, I was feeling badly for the citizens of Seattle but hey, you do reap what you sow. They put these uber liberal clowns in place. BTW, this stopped being about George Floyd a week ago, this is the anarchy many have predicted would come sooner or later from the uber radicals in this country that do want to make it over in their likeness. So how do we fight it when the local leaders are OK with it? — John M.

First, John, your analysis is spot on. If the mayor won’t fight it and the governor won’t fight it … let’s see how far the anarchists go before the liberals who pay taxes in that liberal city and state demand an end to it. What if six blocks is just the beginning? At some point, the political cowards will either show backbone and send in the cops, or the anarchists will be in charge. It can go either way, John. Really!  Check out my Off the Cuff this week on this subject.


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.

Bernie’s Q&A: NYT vs. Tom Cotton, Joe Biden, Chris Cuomo, and more! (6/12) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s Note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):

I am stunned by Joe Biden saying between 10 and 15 percent of the people in America are not very good. That equates to about 35M to 52M people. Will a statement like that help in bringing people together? Or would it contribute to the opposite? — Ray K.

Biden’s comment may bring back memories of Hillary’s basket of deplorables, which didn’t do her a lot of good. But let me ask you a question Ray: What percentage of Americans do you think are bad people? My problem with Biden’s comment wasn’t that he was totally wrong — there is some percentage that are bad. My problem is that I suspect the entire group he targeted were Americans who support Donald Trump. Are they really the only bad ones in this country? What about the looters? Do they count in Joe’s calculation? What about young men who shoot and kill other young men in places like Chicago and Baltimore. Are they bad people in Joe’s world?

If there are so many false narratives out there, and misreported and misinterpreted facts, such as the statistics behind unarmed black deaths vs all other police related deaths and then silence when there is black on black death & cop killings; who then is failing the country by not providing the truth required to quell these false narratives and subsequent consequences?

Both the current rioting and the Covid situation have significantly damaged this country and innocent lives based on a lot of misinformation. Who is really failing us? — ScottyG

Good question, Scotty. The media are failing us. Their agenda doesn’t included real statistics about rogue cops killing unarmed black men. That percentage is very small. But you’d never


know that by watching CNN or MSNBC. Journalists also fail us when they interview activists who say things that are provably wrong, but the reporter just sits there like a potted plant and doesn’t challenge the false information. Politicians are also failing us. They just say what will help them win re-election. Not many are speaking truth to power. Activists want to defund or flat out eliminate police departments. Cowardly politicians say good idea. I’ve had enough! All of this has me searching for mindless television at night. I can’t take the BS anymore.

Seems to me that if Trump wins in November we will have more violence and riots in the big cities (possibly even before the election too as a warning to scare people). If Biden wins, do you see the Dems being magnanimous or viewing the results as a mandate to go further left. If police forces in blue areas are emasculated what happens to enclaves like Beverly Hills etc ? — Michael F.

If Biden wins he will cave to the hard left. He doesn’t strike me as a strong guy with real convictions. If Trump wins you may very well be right about more violence and riots. The left is on a new kick to defund the police. But as you rightly ask, what happens when the thugs go after homes in Beverly Hills? What happens, Michael, is that the same lefties who don’t like cops, will demand police protection.

From one day to the next, you have to ask yourself, “what the ****.” We have had over a week of rioting and looting,with perhaps more to come, and what do we hear out of the Progressive Left: defund the police, some calling for doing away with police all together, leave policing to community groups. Yeah that’ll work! And how about those who have said the burning and looting might be just what was needed?!! The AG of Massachusetts actually said a good burn might be the purge this country needed. When leading law enforcement officials are saying things like that, I mean, are you kidding me? And finally, all that said, you have to wonder who would want to be a cop these days? Mediocre pay, treated like dirt. Can you imagine how the NYPD felt knowing that all the people they arrested for looting and vandalism would be right back out on the streets within 24 hours thanks to NY’s “bail reform laws”….book em and release em, no bail involved. Every time I think Trump is doomed and can’t win in November [much of it of his own doing ] when I hear things like this it gives me hope that the average Joe&Jane would not at all be happy with the the way the Dem’s have moved further to the left with their policies. Less police, no police, seriously.???? — John M.

Let me address your last point, John — about the average Joe and Jane out there. I’ve wondered if there is a new Silent Majority out there. I honestly don’t know. If there is, it will help Trump. But if we’ve moved left as a country, if more and more Americans think the country is fundamentally racist and so excuse rioting, say hello to President Biden. To me, this is the big political question of the moment: Does the Silent Majority exist in America today?

The police are always in the news. There are lots of good cops and a few bad cops. I’m a white guy – sort of – Italian, and I’ve been all over the world, many times, for work and pleasure … to the EU, all over Asia, Mexico, and the rest of the third world … and stopped by the police numerous times for numerous reasons. I smile. I ask questions in a respectful way. I have nothing to hide. I live through it. My advice to anyone of any color … if the police ask you to do something … do it, respectfully. If they say, “Stop!”, then stop. If you don’t, then all bets are off (serious implications). If the “request” is not appropriate, there are scores of ways to complain, however, “Just do it”. My two cents. — Mike S.

My feelings precisely, Mike.

A few quick points/queries: how long before God Bless America and The Pledge of Allegiance will effectively be banned? If The Democrats could rewrite the Constitution, what would they add or eliminate? Or does it not matter so long as you have the “right” judges? Will Keith Ellison try the Minn. cops just before the Nov elections? Finally, have the past 10 days proven that violence works and the threat of violence (or the occasional “boisterous protest” ( gotta be PC) ) can be used from time to time to keep issues alive and keep certain groups more engaged? — Michael

Regarding your first question … if the left takes control of this country, there’s a good chance they will impose speech codes. They are the biggest single threat to freedom of speech. Will they ban God Bless America or the Pledge of Allegiance. Let’s just say they sure as hell won’t encourage either.

Violence, I’m afraid, does work … in that it gets the attention of the media and politicians. But not in a good way. They give lip service to saying rioting is bad, but their emphasis is on the conditions that supposedly led to rioting and looting. You’ll never hear any liberal journalist state what to me is obvious: Some people just plain like breaking windows and stealing stuff. They’re not doing it because they’re oppressed. They’re doing it because they like sneakers and Rolex watches — especially when they’re “free.”

Quick question on journalistic ethics (since I honestly don’t know the answer): Let’s say you’re asking someone questions for a story, and the person is giving you all kinds of newsworthy information. Then, the person suddenly says, “That’s all off the record, by the way.” From a journalist’s perspective, is it really off the record, or does that person need to tell you beforehand that it’s off the record? Thanks! — Tom R.

The person must tell you beforehand that what he or she said is off the record. Otherwise it’s not. That said, I’m sure it doesn’t always work that way. If the source has given the journalist good information in the past, it’s not likely the journalist will risk losing the source over a failure to say, “This conversation is off the record.” Also if the source says something that might hurt a cause the journalist agrees with — that too might lead to keeping the conversation off the record. But as a general practice: The ground rules have to be established before the interview starts.

I find the article you wrote on Monday, at this time, a distraction. To me it is just like when white people throw the Black on black crime card up. Yes there are problems in the back community. But why does no one ever talk about white on white crime? People kill and harm people in their own communities. Let see the numbers across the board. I am sure you will see they are all within a few percentage points. My other problem is that your article and many people ignore the steps that are taken locally in Chicago to curb this trend. It may not be perfect. But to imply that nothing is being done, or that the communities don’t care, is wrong. But if you are not in the community, how would you know? And don’t get me started on systematic policies that have broken up the black family. Why cant we give the current movement time to breathe. Pun intended. — Douglas S.

Hey Douglas … my point is that elite white liberals — in order to show their good racial manners — will lament white on black crime but virtually ignore black on black crime. And it makes me wonder: Don’t those lives matter … or is homicide only an issue when the victim is black and the perpetrator is white?

Isn’t the sad fact that the leading cause of death among young black men is homicide a legitimate topic to write about — at this time or any time?

I defer on these matters to Shelby Steele who has written extensively and eloquently about white liberal guilt. He’s far more blunt than I’ve been. He’s black.

I wasn’t saying that nothing is being done. My complaint is with elite white liberals — not people in the community trying to do good. I never said those communities don’t care. So your point that I’m not in the community isn’t relevant.

I hate what that white cop did to George Floyd. But I also hate the mayhem that has become all too routine in parts of Chicago. And as a journalist, I lament the fact that 85 shootings in one weekend and more than 20 deaths isn’t big news. Re-read what Lee Habeeb says about that. Thanks, Douglas — and feel free to let me know what you think of my Off the Cuff this week on the subject of “systemic racism”.

What are the facts and your opinion on what just happened at the New York Times? I’m referring to James Bennett’s resignation as its editorial page editor. And what about the publisher, Sulzberger – does he have blood on his hands as the woke are eating their own? — Steve R.

What happened at the NY Times is this: The children at the newspaper of record threw a temper tantrum because the read an op-ed they didn’t agree with … and the so-called grownups, instead of telling these snowflakes to grow up, caved … and agreed that the Times had made a terrible mistake. And Bennett resigned or was forced out. This is what’s been happening on college campuses for a while now. The liberal authoritarians are on a roll. Kind of like the French Reign of Terror without the guillotines — yet.

Dear Bernie, CNN’s Chris Cuomo was “unknowingly” caught in the background of his wife’s online Yoga video… naked. Him, not her. Given Cuomo’s high opinion of himself and the shape he’s in, along with his flare for Reality TV-style broadcasting (like that staged “emerging from the basement after covid” silliness), what do you think the chances are that this incident was not “accidental” at all, and that it was a publicity stunt for his show? — Bruce A.

I have absolutely no idea. But that’s not to say you’re not onto something, Bruce.

“Time Magazine Person of the Year?” … Wait for it … The Hypocrite. Potus and family, many members of Congress, lots of evangelicals, priests, pastors, reporters, political commentators, CEO’s, Hollywood persona … and I, are all hypocrites. I feel I am an environmentalist. I’m a vegetarian. I live part-time in a spectacularly beautiful part of the world, off the grid – in East Maui, near Hana. On my property, I watch over at least 2000 mature trees in this lush rainforest. I used to feel slightly superior to most of you. I’m not. Far from it. My wife works for a major airline. We fly for free. I fly all over the place, burning up the atmosphere that my trees help produce, as we go. I have more than one home, and more than one car, and not a Tesla to be found. I am in a serious dilemma. You, Bernie, might be one of the few true non-hypocrites out there … or is it, I dare say, unanimous? — Aloha, Mike

You may be a hypocrite, Mike, but life seems pretty damn good. But if you’re troubled by your supposed hypocrisy … here’s a suggestion: Go off to a monastery for a few months; take your wife with you … and leave the house keys under the doormat for my wife and me. Your place sounds pretty nice. Deal?

Your Wednesday Off the Cuff was your best to date. I would like for your thoughts to make it to the minds of most of the people in the USA. How can we help make that happen? — Ival S.

Thanks very much Ival.  But be assured, as a friend of mine put it, there’s a better chance that they’ll join the KKK then go along with my idea.  Put the word out anyplace you can about this website.  The more people who listen and read my commentary, the greater the chance that some of these ideas will catch on. Word of mouth is a powerful force.

I’m hearing that much of the violence and rioting and looting had the hooligans picking up devices that were planted alongside the roads so that rioters could easily use these devices to break into stores and cause damage. I’m also hearing that “white supremacists” have infiltrated the peaceful protesters and deliberately caused mayhem and destruction to denigrate the cause. Is there any evidence that white supremacist groups have been doing this? Or is this a left-wing talking point being used to deflect focus away from anarchist groups such as ANTIFA, whom I believe that left wingers support? Thankfully I can say this (and what I wrote last week) here because the woke crowd has apparently taken over TWITTER. Your thoughts? — “It was our ENEMIES who did it, NOT our ALLIES” Regards From The Emperor

Hello Your Emperorness.  Let me start with your question about weapons planted alongside the road.  Every time I hear that on TV, I become suspicious.  If the reporter knows this, and others presumably know this, where’s the video?  Why aren’t you showing it to your audience?  I’m guessing it’s because it’s a phony story.  Someone heard it and it soon took on a life of its own.  I’ll believe it when I see it.

As for white supremacists infiltrating peaceful demonstrations:  I’m not buying that either.  I think left wing pols and activists planted the story to put blame supposed Trump supporters for the mayhem.

Once upon a time we had editors/producers who checked scripts to make sure the reporter got his or her facts right before putting stories on the air.  Those were the good old days.


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.

Bernie’s Q&A: George Floyd, Mattis, Graham, “Systemic Racism” and more! (6/5) — Premium Interactive ($4 members)

Welcome to this week’s Premium Q&A session for Premium Interactive members. I appreciate you all signing up and joining me. Thank you.

Editor’s Note: If you enjoy these sessions (along with the weekly columns and audio commentaries), please use the Facebook and Twitter buttons to share this page with your friends and family. Thank you! 

Now, let’s get to your questions (and my answers):

Bernie, has anyone you’ve been assigned to interview for Real Sports ever given you a hard time (or even disagreed to talk to you) because of your political views (as expressed on Fox News)? — Ben G.

No.  But I can think of a few who were familiar with those views and were more inclined to talk to me. Sorry, but I can’t name names. Thanks, Ben.

Your response [in last week’s Q&A] to Scotty G was: “If we chose better presidents you wouldn’t need to ask your question.” I concur, yet in the last election the nominees were unpalatable and we are headed to a repeat of that experience, it seems. The system is clearly not giving us choices resembling our best or our brightest! Why would someone qualified run in the current, strident environment? Kavanaugh was crucified; Biden may or may not have done wrong. But the current environment is overwhelmingly toxic. Your thoughts? — Paul M.

My thoughts, Paul, are exactly the same as yours. If a candidate has ever done anything wrong since kindergarten; if he or she ever told an off-color joke; if he ever said to a female colleague, “You look nice” … it’ll be turned into a crime against humanity. Who needs the hassle!

Bernie, what is systemic racism? If it exists is it mostly prevalent in large cities (ie, those run by progressives) where larger numbers of black Americans live? Is systemic racism different than police racism and abuse? Based upon my limited research the term appears to be focused on economic and similar differences ( which clearly exist and may be attributed to historical racist practices). I think it is important to understand what exactly is being argued to figure out how we move forward and craft solutions. The media and the politicians have provided pretty much no guidance or ideas. — Michael F.

I’m with you, Michael. Every time I hear “systematic racism” I wonder if it means racism is in our country’s DNA. If that’s what it means, count me out. I’ve heard the term a lot recently by CEOs on CNBC. But not one anchor asked the CEO: If racism is systematic, tell us how YOUR company is racist. Much of economic inequality in America isn’t based on racism, no matter how many times we hear that it is. It’s based on personal behavior. If kids grow up without fathers, they’re more likely to be poor and get into trouble. That’s well documented. But don’t expect to hear that on the news.

Much has been written about Trump’s hiding out in a White House bunker a few days ago when some rioters got too close. The left-wing media thinks it was cowardly, while the right-wing media thinks it was no big deal. Can we agree that if Obama had done the same thing, MSNBC and CNN would have downplayed it, whilst Rush and the Fox News crowd would have thought it was the worst thing ever? And can we also agree that this hyper-partisanship is exactly what’s wrong with much of the current news establishment? — Joel E.

Yes, Joel, you and I can agree on that — completely. And yes, this hyper partisanship is indeed exactly what’s wrong with much of the news these days. I’ve said that over and over and it’s why I watch less and less cable news. I’m not even sure if it can ever be fixed; it’s so ingrained. I’m with you 100 percent!

We’ve had season tickets for Vikings and Gopher football for decades. We gave them up a few years ago as we just didn’t attend that many games anymore. HD TV, and my age, was a big factor of that decision. I thought ESPN did a great job for National Championship College football game broadcasting on a couple different channels with one providing sideline views and commentary. Just curious after we start to loosen up from the Virus if you see any major changes in how sports are covered in the future? — Tim H.

Personally, I’ll be glad to hit the road and actually talk to people face to face. But in some cases, perhaps to save money, we’ll see more interviews done long distance, via Zoom or whatever. Other than that, I don’t see any major changes. Play by play announcers will be in the arena or stadium and anchors will have analysts in the studio sitting right next to them. There may be something I’m not thinking of, so we’ll all have to wait and see. But, again, I don’t see any major changes post-coronavirus.

MANY people in the right-wing media (along with Trump) are slamming the mainstream media for reporting the “fake news” that protesters in front of the White House were pushed back with TEAR GAS prior to Trump and his people walking across the street for his Bible-holding photo-op in front of St. John’s church. The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway has led the charge on this supposedly false story, pointing to a statement from the U.S. Park Police that includes this sentence: “No tear gas was used by USPP officers or other assisting law enforcement partners to close the area at Lafayette Park.”

Just one problem. All of these “fake news” decriers are refusing to acknowledge the USPP sentence DIRECTLY BEFORE THAT: “…officers then employed the use of smoke canisters and pepper balls.”  The phrase “tear gas” is a colloquial term that describes a variety of eye/nose irritating crowd-control agents… including pepper balls.

In other words, the mainstream media had it right, the USPP is drawing a distinction without a difference (probably to save some face), and Trump’s media defenders are playing a semantics game to mislead their viewers/listeners. Do you think that’s a fair assessment? — Jen R.

I’ve wondered about that very point, Jen … whether they really did use “tear gas” but we’re just calling it by some other name. So yes, I think your assessment is fair. And the bad news is that conservative commentators won’t make the point that you just made. If the left says it’s daytime, the right says no it isn’t. And the same nonsense goes in the other direction.  I’m so fed up with this I can’t see straight.

A little over a week ago Democrat mayors and governors had their constituents on lockdown. Some had their throats on their necks with their draconian edicts. People were told not to walk on dry sand, some were arrested for playing ball with their kids in a park, for trying to open a salon,etc,etc all in the name of protecting them from the killer COVID-19 virus. So apparently we must assume the virus is no longer a threat because over the last five days these very same mayors and governors have stood by and watched hordes of people walking side by side, no social distancing, many looting stores with little or no impunity [but you better not try and open your business] in one case the man with perhaps the most draconian edicts, LA Mayor Garcetti [don’t walk in dry sand, only wet sand, no sunbathing on the beach] today walked among the protestors, knelt with them, and held their hands. Please, don’t anyone try and tell me that Politics didn’t play a big part in all of this. So if there is a surge of new Corona deaths will Trump be blamed for them as well? — John M.

I talk about this very thing in this week’s Off the Cuff. Check it out. You give enough reasons, John, for the American people one more reason not to trust politicians. They’ll arrest you if you open your hair salon too soon. But do nothing when you burn down a police station. How can we take these clowns seriously? Now let’s imagine that there is a surge in new virus deaths. What will liberal pundits and pols say about that? They may indeed find a way to blame Donald Trump. But what if there’s no surge?  Then did we go through this lockdown for nothing? And how will those same liberals who demanded we all stay home deal with that?

Bernie, did you read Gen. James Mattis’s statement condemning Trump as “the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people—does not even pretend to try. Instead he tries to divide us”?

Lindsey Graham went on Fox & Friends the next morning, saying that Mattis is buying into an unfair “liberal media” narrative. I’ve noticed this a lot. If someone more identifiable with the right than the left criticizes Trump, the president’s defenders accuse that person of just being duped by the liberal media. I’ve even seen some say that about you, which is insane considering that you’ve been calling out liberal media bias for decades.

What are your thoughts on the Mattis statement, and also Graham’s? Thanks. — Greg

Hey Greg. I think Gen. Mattis is on to something. Our president is content if his base loves him. He’ll soon find out that his base won’t be enough to win re-election. Every now and then he says the right thing, so let’s give him credit for that. But by and large, I agree with the general.

You’re right about how Trump supporters accuse conservatives of being liberal dupes if they criticize the president. Lindsey Graham is up for re-election and despite the fact that South Carolina is a red state, if he doesn’t kiss up to President Trump’s most loyal supporters, they won’t vote for him on election day.

Let’s just say there aren’t a lot of profiles in courage out there. There never are. But in the age of Trump, there are hardly any on the right. No matter how loyal they’ve been, if they cross the president even once he’ll publicly humiliate them. Such is his nastiness. And so, they’re afraid to speak up against even his most outrageous comments and actions. And if he loses, that nastiness will be in the single biggest reason.

Editor’s Note: This was a very long question that I trimmed down significantly (though it’s still long). A friendly reminder to questioners to try and make your questions relatively brief. Thank you.

First, I’m glad the cops involved in George Floyd’s death have been fired and that former Officer Chauvin has been charged.

Second, I read an essay by a black college professor (I don’t remember his name, but I know he’s been lauded by leftists) who intelligently articulates the various reasons WHY black people (especially young black men) are fearful and hostile towards white police officers. This was inspired by an incident where he was walking to his class to teach, and he was stopped by the cops because he fit the description of a man who burglarized a white woman’s home. He was tempted to resist, fearing he’d be mistakenly identified by the white woman, and end up dead. However, the cops did not rough him up or threaten him; they were professional. He believes it might have been because an elderly black lady witnessed the encounter.

I think he makes some valid points in his essay regarding the encounter, but I have a problem with liberals who are gushing over what he wrote. Statistically, I believe black people make up approximately 12% of the U.S. population, but are responsible for [a disproportionate] of violent crimes (leftists will accuse me of racism for pointing this out).

Given the statistics, many white Americans are often cautious (and yes, fearful) when encountering groups of young black men. (And whenever a white person attempts to articulate WHY he/she is often fearful of young black men, they’re IMMEDIATELY labeled as racists.)

My question: What makes the professor’s fears any more valid than those of the white people I described?

You are a reasonable and intelligent man, Mr. Goldberg—sadly I think your Q&A forum is one of only a handful of places where I can safely bring this up. I would really value your thoughts on this. “Can’t we all just get along?” Regards—From The Emperor

There are certain things we’re not supposed to say in polite company. And it’s something you’ll never get from liberals in the media. But you are on to something. The reason a white person might cross the street when 5 black teenagers approach … but not cross the street if the kids were white … is because there’s a better statistical chance that the black kids will cause trouble. Let’s be clear; In any given case, the black kid may be the good guy and the white kid might be the thug. But young black males commit a disproportionate amount of street crime. So just as some black people might fear white cops … so too do some white people — and black people! — fear young black males. I wish it weren’t so. But crossing the street doesn’t mean you’re a bigot.


Thanks, everyone! You can send me questions for next week using the form below! You can also read previous Q&A sessions by clicking here.