Black police chief fired after black leaders — including state senator — were charged with conspiring to damage Confederate monument


The police chief of Portsmouth, Virginia, was fired Monday after two months on paid administrative leave following a controversy in which police charged local black leaders — including a state senator — with conspiring to damage a Confederate monument during a protest in June, WAVY-TV reported.

What are the details?

At the June 10 protest in Portsmouth, demonstrators damaged Confederate statues as part of a nationwide wave of racial justice protests in the wake of George Floyd’s death — and one Portsmouth demonstrator was seriously injured after a toppled, beheaded statue fell on his head.

In August, city police charged Democratic state Sen. Louise Lucas — Virginia’s most senior black legislator — and 18 other plaintiffs, including a school board member and members of the local NAACP chapter and the public defender’s office, with conspiracy to commit a felony and injury to a monument in excess of $1,000, NBC News reported.

Greene, who is black, said Lucas and others “conspired and organized to destroy the monument as well as summon hundreds of people to join in felonious acts,” the network added.

NBC News, citing the police version of events in a probable cause summary, reported that Lucas was with a number of people who were shaking cans of spray paint, and she told police they were going to vandalize the statues “and you can’t stop them … they got a right, go ahead!”

More from WAVY:

We asked Greene whether she would argue there were political and city leaders that wanted the monument to be defaced, to which she nodded her head “yes.” We also asked whether she believed they didn’t want her to pursue charges in connection with the monument vandalism — also a “yes.”

But on Monday, the charges against Lucas and the other black leaders were dismissed.

The Portsmouth Commonwealth Attorney’s Office said there was “no proper evidence” to support the charges that the plaintiffs’ actions “rise to the level of felony destruction of property or conspiracy,” NBC News reported, citing a dismissal motion.

A judge also questioned why police went around local prosecutors to bring charges, the network said, adding that city leaders questioned Greene’s involvement in the Confederate protest investigation due to an unspecified conflict of interest. Local activists and clergy leaders called for her resignation or firing, NBC News added.

The dismissal drew praise from Democrats who condemned the charges, the network said:

More from NBC News:

Lucas’ office could not immediately be reached for comment. The Virginian-Pilot of Norfolk reported that she said dismissal of the case “gives people hope” that “when they come to these courtrooms that they will be treated in a fair and just manner, even though you may have a rogue police department who intends to criminalize the justice system against people like me.”

WAVY said Greene was placed on leave in September with pay — and then on Monday she was fired. A city spokeswoman declined to tell NBC News if Greene’s firing was connected to the charges filed against Lucas and that other black leaders.

Prior to her firing, which took place during a 15-minute meeting, Greene told the station her hope was for “full reinstatement, because I did nothing wrong.”

After the meeting she confirmed to WAVY that she “was terminated, and I am one less badge and one less gun” — and that she wasn’t given any explanation for her firing or given severance pay. The station said Greene has young children and an elderly parent, and a fund has been set up to help with her expenses.

What happened after the chief’s firing?

Greene held a news conference after the firing and said she’d file a wrongful termination lawsuit against the city, WAVY reported.

“I believe I was wrongfully terminated for upholding the law and being retaliated against for sticking to my sworn oath that I swore to serve and protect my citizens, community and keeping my officers safe,” she said, according to NBC News.


BLM counterprotester who attacked Trump supporter at Million MAGA March reportedly ID’d as journalism student


A Black Lives Matter protester who was filmed punching a Trump supporter in the head at last weekend’s Million MAGA March in Washington, D.C., has reportedly been identified as a journalism student.

Violence erupted in the nation’s capital Saturday when Black Lives Matter and Antifa groups clashed with Trump supporters marching to protest the disputed results of the 2020 presidential election. Graphic videos of multiple attacks in D.C. were posted on social media, including video of a protester running up and punching a Trump supporter from behind at Black Lives Matter Plaza.

The Post Millennial reported that the assailant in the video is Brittany S. McAlister, 29, of Washington, D.C. McAlister is a student studying journalism at Howard University and also works as a freelance journalist, according to the Post Millennial.

In another incident captured on video, McAlister allegedly kicked an unconscious man after he had reportedly been been sucker-punched by Kenneth Wayne Deberry, 39, who was arrested and charged by police.

According to a news release from the Metropolitan Police Department, McAlister has not been arrested and is not yet charged with any crime, though police say they are looking for the suspect in the film.

D.C. police are asking for help identifying suspects in violent crimes captured on video Saturday.

The Post Millennial reported screenshots of a tweet from the far-left group Refuse Fascism that has since been deleted profiling McAlister, who gave a speech at Black Lives Matter Plaza. McAlister’s social media accounts have been deactivated.

Thousands of Trump supporters had gathered in D.C. for a “Stop the Steal” rally at Freedom Plaza to show support for President Donald Trump as his campaign continues to challenge the results of the election. During the day protests were peaceful. But as night fell, counterprotesters committed acts of violence against Trump supporters. People were attacked from behind, an elderly man was shoved to the ground, a couple was harassed, and others were brutally beaten, with horrifying video of the attacks circulating on social media.

Police arrested at least 21 people in D.C. following these violent incidents.

President Trump weighed in on the violence on Twitter, criticizing D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser for “not doing her job.”

In a statement given to Fox News, Howard University strongly condemned “all forms of violence and abhorrent behavior.”

“The University has stringent policies and procedures in place to investigate potential wrongdoing and will take the appropriate action against any student found to be in violation of our Code of Conduct,” the university said.

Trump’s Top Lawyer Coming for Blood


The media is quick to downplay any victory that the president has concerning the election. They ignore the vast amount of evidence that is showing up, and they indeed are not reporting on the issue. Instead, they are trying to divert attention away from the fact that Joe Biden is about to be exposed as the world’s biggest cheat. The leftist media would have everyone believe that no evidence exists at all. But that is not what Rudy Giuliani is showing.

Trump’s personal lawyer was commissioned by the president to take the lead on the election fight. His mission is to expose the Democrats as being frauds and trying to steal the election of 2020. The media hates this man to the core because they know that he is going to get the job done.

Pennsylvania and Michigan are at the heart of the fight. On the night of the election, it was discovered that hundreds of thousands of votes all showed up at the counting centers with Biden’s name on them. Four different witnesses have come forward and testified that the stories are true. There were just enough ballots to turn the state of Michigan blue.

Giuliani stated that there are 632,000 illegal votes proven to exist in Pennsylvania’s count. All of these ballots were removed from the security envelopes before a Democrat and Republican could verify them at the same time.

The fight leader also has witnessed that he is preparing to speak when questioned about the Dominion software that was rigged to count Trump votes as Biden’s. This issue is so large that it needs to be solved now, or future elections are in jeopardy of being rigged.

Giuliani’s appointment comes on the backend of a few setbacks that Trump had. The idea of being nice in court was not going to make the difference. President Trump needed someone that could take the matter to the judge with force. Many of the setbacks happened by the pen of liberal judges.

Giuliani is a man that is used to going after mafia-style criminals. It stands to reason that he would be the favored choice to handle the terrorist left. Giuliani is the man that is going to put fear into the hearts of those involved in the fraud of 2020.

The media is attacking the man as he digs into the fraud pouring out of the wounds of the Democratic Party. When everything comes to an end, the people who orchestrated the attempted takeover of the American election will be discovered. And they will pay for their freedom.

CNN and the New York Times stated that “Giuliani’s now involvement has ‘vexed’ Trump campaign staffers and the White House.” And other secular media outlets reported without evidence or source that “As the group batted around options before the president, Giuliani interjected and derided them as insufficiently aggressive. Some in the room were taken aback.”

The sourceless attacks by the media are nothing new. They have been doing it against the president for the past four years. Their stories are full of facts that cannot be verified. And when questioned about their sources, the media will deem them as classified and private.

Every fake news media outlet pushes stories that no evidence exists. They tell people that no evidence has yet been found to prove fraud. They will be embarrassed again once the mountain of evidence is exposed, and the country is shown just how crooked the left has become.

There are several states that remain contested. It is in those critical states that the president is focusing his fight. Interestingly enough that these are the same states that stopped counting late into the night. These states had the fake ballots miraculously show up all with Biden’s names on them.

The American people deserve a fair election. The fraud and lies coming from the left will only continue if they are left to rule the White House. President Trump is doing the right thing by fighting for the rites of the people. After all, he was chosen in 2016 because he was a man that could be trusted.

Three more NY sheriffs tell Gov. Andrew Cuomo to get stuffed over his Thanksgiving COVID-19 ban


Another three sheriffs from upstate New York said they won’t be enforcing far-left Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s Thanksgiving coronavirus restrictions on gatherings in private residences, the New York Post reported.

What’s the background?

Cuomo announced new restrictions last week in response to the COVID-19 surge, saying gatherings in the state would be limited to just 10 people, including at private residences.

“New York follows the science,” Cuomo said of his decision. “We know indoor gatherings and parties are a major source of COVID spread. To slow the spread, NYS will limit indoor gatherings at private residences to 10 people. This limit takes effect Friday at 10 p.m.”

But Cuomo didn’t say how the new restrictions would be enforced, leaving those decisions up to local authorities — and Fulton County Sheriff Richard Giardino apparently took the Democrat at his word.

“With regard to the Thanksgiving Executive Order, the Fulton County Sheriff’s Office will NOT be enforcing it against our County residents,” Giardino wrote in a Facebook post.

“Frankly, I am not sure it could sustain a Constitutional challenge in Court for several reasons including your house is your castle. And as a Sheriff with a law degree I couldn’t in good faith attempt to defend it Court, so I won’t,” the sheriff added. “Who and how many people you invite in to your home is your business, unlike outdoor gatherings which may receive a police response if disorderly or other violations of public nuisance laws occur.”

Giardino later added that he trusts his residents to use their best judgment while still urging them to take precautions when around those who are particularly vulnerable to the coronavirus.

Three more sheriffs enter the fray

And now joining Giardino is Washington County Sheriff Jeff Murphy who said there won’t be any Thanksgiving enforcement of Cuomo’s restrictions, the Post reported, adding that Saratoga County Sheriff Michael Zurlo said Monday that goes for his jurisdiction as well.

“I can’t see how devoting our resources to counting cars in citizens’ driveways or investigating how much turkey and dressing they’ve purchased is for the public good,” Zurlo said in a news release, according to the paper.

Erie County Sheriff Tim Howard said his office would also ignore the indoor gathering limit, the Post reported.

Giardino also said in an interview with the Albany Times Union that Cuomo is “scaring the hell out of people.”

“People have common sense. They are not going to jeopardize family members. They are not going to jeopardize close friends. Most people respect the masks,” Giardino added to the Times Union. “Basically, as a lawyer, former DA and judge, if I got brought into court, I can’t justify it constitutionally. The threat is not so great that we should be limiting who they can have for Thanksgiving.”

What did a Cuomo adviser have to say?

Cuomo adviser Richard Azzopardi reacted by saying, “We urge everyone to continue to be smart and act responsibly. We know this makes people unhappy, but better unhappy than sick or worse,” the Post reported.

Megyn Kelly yanks kids out of NYC school over call to reform white children — and now she and her family are leaving the city altogether


Veteran news journalist and media maven Megyn Kelly has pulled her children out of their New York City school and plans to leave the city behind altogether.

Kelly announced the decision after learning that her kids’ school promoted the “reform” of white children in racially biased practices.

Kelly did not reveal the name of the school her children previously attended.

What are the details?

During Monday’s broadcast of her podcast, “The Megyn Kelly Show,” Kelly said that she received a letter from the administrators of her two young sons’ school that detailed a plan to implement an extreme racial social justice agenda in the school.

“It’s so out of control on so many levels, and after years of resisting it, we’re going to leave the city,” Kelly admitted. “We pulled our boys from their school, and our daughter is going to be leaving hers soon, too. The schools have always been far left, which doesn’t align with my own ideology, but I didn’t really care. Most of my friends are liberals; it’s fine. I come from Democrats as a family.”

Kelly added, however, that the final straw was when she found out that the administration was peddling concerning sentiments about how white children are “left unchecked and unbothered” in their schools, homes, and communities.

“I’m not offended at all by the ideology, and I lean center-left on some things, but they’ve gone around the bend,” she insisted. “I mean, they have gone off the deep-end. The summer in the wake of George Floyd, they circulated amongst the diversity group — which includes white parents like us; there are people who want to be allies and stay attuned to what we can do — an article, and afterward, they recirculated it and wanted every member of the faculty to read it.”

Kelly recalled that the article asserted that white children are inherently racist.

According to Kelly, a portion of the article — which appears to have been written by Nahliah Webber, executive director of Orleans Public Education Network in June — said, “There is a killer cop sitting in every school where white children learn. They gleefully soak in their whitewashed history that downplays the holocaust of indigenous native peoples and Africans in the Americas. They happily believe their all-white spaces exist as a matter of personal effort and willingly use violence against black bodies to keep those spaces white.”

“As black bodies drop like flies around us by violence at white hands, how can we in any of our minds conclude that whites are all right?” the article added. “White children are left unchecked and unbothered in their schools, homes, and communities to join, advance, and protect systems that take away black life. I am tired of white people reveling in their state-sanctioned depravity, snuffing out black life with no consequences.”

The article continued, “Where’s the urgency for school reform for white kids being indoctrinated in black death and protected from the consequences? Where are the government-sponsored reports looking into how white mothers are raising culturally deprived children who think black death is okay?”

“Where are the national conferences, white papers, and policy positions on the pathology of whiteness in schools?” the article said. “This time if you really want to make a difference in black lives — and not have to protest this s*** again — go reform white kids. Because that’s where the problem is — with white children being raised from infancy to violate black bodies with no remorse or accountability.”

Anything else?

A portion of Kelly’s podcast appeared on Twitter Monday, captioned, “‘After years of resisting it, we’re going to leave.’ @MegynKelly describes why she pulled her kids out of their NYC schools — and she, @GlennLoury and @Coldxman Hughes discuss how ‘woke’ leftism has taken over schools.”

(H/T: The Daily Wire)

Horowitz: This fall’s biggest crime is Thanksgiving


Thanksgiving and Christmas might be canceled for the first time ever by tyrannical governors and mayors, but they won’t cancel the weekend shootouts that are increasingly victimizing children in major cities. Those shootings tend to be the worst over holiday weekends. Yet, in what has become the ultimate dystopian governing outcome, our elected officials are criminalizing life itself while greenlighting violent criminal activity.

Yesterday, the Philadelphia mayor announced with the flick of a pen that all indoor gatherings would be canceled for the remainder of the calendar year. This includes school, most church services, stores, recreation, and even inviting other people to your own home for the holidays! At the same time, as Philadelphia approaches record homicides for the year, nobody is canceling gang gatherings. In fact, thanks to the jailbreak policies, some of which were put into place because of the virus itself, there is no deterrent against crime. Crime is an essential service in these cities.

Last week, Fox29 reporter Steve Keeley reported that a total of eight children had been shot in numerous violent incidents throughout Philadelphia since last Sunday. So far, there have been 435 homicides this year in the City of Brotherly Love, a 39% increase over last year and the most since 1993. The city officials claim to protect children by shutting down their schools for a virus that doesn’t really harm them, but what they are failing to do is protect them on the streets from gang bullets that don’t discriminate based on age or immune system.

According to Philadelphia police, they have solved fewer than 30% of homicides and just 16% of non-fatal shooting cases this year. Yet Mayor Jim Kennedy and other liberal executives across the nation now want to use the dwindling police resources to patrol stores, restaurants, and perhaps even homes for violations of the COVID cult rituals. As Fulton County, New York, Sheriff Richard Giardino said in response to a similar order issued by Andrew Cuomo, “We have limited resources and we have to set priorities, so obtaining a Search Warrant to enter your home to see how many Turkey or Tofu eaters are present is not a priority.”

Our government is now ensuring that our own homes are no longer our castles, while the public streets become the private fiefdoms of gang members, released criminals, and BLM rioters. The Philadelphia mayor titled his new royal edict “safer at home.” Well, the science behind lockdown has proven as ineffective in keeping people safe from the virus as weak-on-crime policies have been in protecting people from violence.

Philadelphia is home to Larry Krasner, the most vocal of the Soros-backed “justice reform” district attorneys, who has made a name for himself by refusing to prosecute what he deems “low-level” offenders. However, his definition of low-level includes repeat offender gangsters who have a history of gun violence. While holding people up at gunpoint is low-level in his mind, I’m sure celebrating Thanksgiving with relatives or not covering one’s lungs with a cheap Chinese mask, in his estimation, will be treated as high-level crimes that are prioritized for prosecution.

It appears that the Left wasn’t serious about abolishing the police after all. They want the police around – just not to protect us from criminals. They want them to treat everyday Americans, perhaps even in their own homes, as criminals. For example, in Atlanta, with rising crime and police on defense, nearly twice as many officers retired this year as last year, leaving Atlanta police with the lowest number of officers on the streets in two decades. With police being criminalized, murder is up 40% this year from the same point in 2019 in this once safe city. A similar trend is playing out in Minneapolis, Seattle, and other large cities where police are faced with a thankless job. In all those cities, the mayors are issuing stern warnings to grandmas who host Thanksgiving, but not to the violent street criminals.

Criminals have nothing to fear from the police, but we must fear them and the police. Officials will take away our guns used for self-defense while ignoring the gun felons.

In the Minneapolis suburb of St. Cloud, Roberto Williams, 35, was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm after accidentally shooting a 5-year-old boy to death. In case you thought this was a decent human being who just experienced a tragic accident, Williams was convicted of robbery in Illinois in 2003 and of unlawful possession of a weapon in 2005, 2010, and 2017. Williams also had outstanding charges for first-degree robbery, with a trial set for January. Despite all those gun charges, he was allowed to remain free to allegedly kill this boy. But fear not, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz is keeping kindergarten boys safe by keeping them out of school and wearing masks.

Nearly every time you see a heinous crime committed, just realize it’s almost always done by a repeat offender who is out of prison. Remember the man caught on video horrifically attacking a Trump supporter in D.C. on Saturday, which led to the victim being knocked out and stomped on the ground? Kenneth Wayne Deberry was arrested for the assault and also for felony possession of a weapon. It turns out he was a convicted child sex offender out on the streets. Don’t hold your breath waiting for him to serve hard time even after this attack. A man caught not wearing a mask in D.C. (unless at a BLM riot) is more likely to face swift prosecution than someone like Deberry.

Revolutions were fought over a lesser degree of perfidy, betrayal, and dystopian governance than we face today from the ruling class. In the Declaration of Independence, our Founders repudiated King George for callously disregarding their security on the western frontier while infringing upon their own liberties. Yet the disregard for security and infringement upon liberties at the hands of King George was nowhere near as severe as the amalgamation of those twin vices today. Perhaps the best way to rectify this coup against our Constitution is to host a Thanksgiving “tea” party to remember the civil and religious liberty history behind the story of the Pilgrims and the founding of this country.

Republicans put Facebook and Twitter to the question on censorship and the future of social media


Senate Republicans grilled the heads of Facebook and Twitter at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on big tech censorship in the 2020 presidential election Tuesday, calling into question the tech companies’ content moderation policies and threatening government action to end perceived bias against right-leaning points of view on their platforms.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey faced questions on their content moderation enforcement, on examples of apparent bias against President Donald Trump’s supporters and conservatives, and what the role of government should be in regulating social media platforms. Republicans came prepared with specific examples of censorship, asking about the suppression of the New York Post’s Hunter Biden reports, about social media posts challenging the official results of the presidential election being flagged as misinformation, and more.

Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Facebook and Twitter’s content moderation enforcement has convinced him to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, a federal law that protects internet companies from being liable for content posted on their platforms by third parties.

Citing the suppression of the New York Post’s articles, Graham accused Twitter and Facebook of exerting “editorial control” over the paper.

“What I want to try to find out is, if you’re not a newspaper at Twitter or Facebook, then why do you have editorial control over the New York Post?” Graham said during his opening statement.

“They decided, and maybe for a good reason, I don’t know, that the New York Post articles about Hunter Biden needed to be flagged, excluded from distribution or made hard to find. That to me seems like you’re the ultimate editor,” Graham continued.

“The editorial decision at the New York Post to run the story was overridden by Twitter and Facebook in different fashions to prevent its dissemination. Now if that’s not making an editorial decision, I don’t know what would be.”

Whether Facebook and Twitter make editorial decisions by moderating content on their platforms is crucial to the debate on how government should regulate big tech. If these social media companies are providing platforms for people to use, then they are protected under Section 230 and they can’t be sued, for example, for slanderous content posted by a third party that appears on their website. However, if they are making editorial decisions about the content they host on their websites, then Republicans argue they are behaving like publishers and as such would not be protected by Section 230.

Questions for Dorsey from Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) focused directly on this distinction, citing Twitter’s misinformation label on tweets about voter fraud as an example of an editorial action that would suggest Twitter is behaving like a publisher.

Cruz asked Dorsey directly, “Is Twitter a publisher?”

“No, we are not, we distribute information,” Dorsey replied.

Reading from Section 230, Cruz defined a publisher as “any person or entity that is responsible in whole or in part for the creation or development of information provided through the internet or any other interactive computer service,” then asked Dorsey if Twitter acted as a publisher by censoring the New York Post.

Again, Dorsey said Twitter is not a publisher but that it has policies and terms of service that users agree to abide by with enforcement action taken against users who violate the agreement. But Cruz accused Twitter of applying its policies “in a partisan and selective manner,” criticizing Twitter for enforcing its “hacked materials” policy against the New York Post but neglecting to do so against other news outlets that reported news obtained from “hacked materials.”

Continuing, Cruz said Twitter has a “star-chamber power” over speech on its platform and accused the company of making “publishing decisions” by putting warnings on statements about voter fraud that state, “Voter fraud of any kind is exceedingly rare in the United States.”

“That’s taking a disputed policy position, and you’re a publisher when you’re doing that,” Cruz charged.

Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) also raised concerns about what he called Twitter and Facebook’s “distinctly partisan approach” to moderating content on their websites. Citing about an incident in October when Twitter locked U.S. Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Mark Morgan’s account, flagging as hate speech a seemingly benign tweet about how new wall on the southern border “helps us stop gang members, murderers, sexual predators, and drugs from entering our country,” Lee asked why the tweet was censored.

“We evaluated his tweet and we found that we were wrong. … That was a mistake; we reverted it,” Dorsey explained. But Lee expected this answer.

“What we’re going to see today is that mistakes happen a whole lot more, almost entirely on one side of the political aisle rather than the other,” he said before turning to Zuckerberg and asking why Facebook “stunningly” took almost two weeks to unblock an advertisement from the Susan B. Anthony List that a third-party fact-checker mistakenly said was “partly false.”

“I’m not familiar with the details of us re-enabling that ad … it’s possible that this was just a mistake or a delay,” Zuckerberg said.

“I appreciate your acknowledgement of that the fact that there are mistakes. As I noted previously, those mistake sure happen a whole lot more on one side of the political spectrum than the other,” Lee said. Noting that more than 90% of employees at both Twitter and Facebook donated to Democratic candidates, Lee wondered aloud if those political biases affect the apparent one-sided nature of big tech’s “mistakes.”

Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) picked up this line of questioning, inquiring about the political leanings of Facebook and Twitter employees and asking if it’s possible there’s “systemic bias” within these companies.

“I do think it’s undisputed that our employee base, at least the full-time folks, politically would be somewhat or maybe more than just a little somewhat to the left of where our overall community is,” Zuckerberg said, acknowledging that his company likely leans farther left than the average American Facebook user.

Zuckerberg did point out that it employs 35,000 content moderators in locations around the nation, not just in Silicon Valley, and that it would be incorrect to assume that they all are biased against Republicans.

Dorsey said political biases are not something his company would “interview for” before acknowledging that most people perceive that his company leans left and judge Twitter’s intentions based on that perception.

“If people don’t trust our intent, if people are questioning that, that’s a failure and that is something we need to fix and intend to fix,” Dorsey said.

Sasse did break with his colleagues and express skepticism about having the federal government take action to regulate social media in response to bias.

“I especially think it’s odd that so many in my party are zealous to do this right now when you would have an incoming administration of the other party that would be writing the rules and regulations about it,” he said.

His final question inquired about where Zuckerberg and Dorsey see the future of content moderation going over the next three or five years if the government does not act.

Zuckerberg said Facebook will increase its focus on transparency. He said Facebook has “already committed to an independent external audit” of its content moderation enforcement metrics and suggested that such a review could be part of a government regulatory framework created by Congress.

Dorsey said that a “centralized global content moderation system does not scale” and said tech companies need to “rethink” how they operate content moderation. He suggested a decentralized approach that gives users more choice about how they interact on social media.

“Having more control so that individuals can moderate themselves, pushing the power of moderation to the edges and to our customers, and to the individuals using the service is something we’ll see more of,” Dorsey said. “Having more choice around how algorithms are altering my experience and creating my experience is important.”

Country star Dolly Parton donated $1 million to help fund Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine research


Legendary country music star Dolly Parton was a major early funder of a potentially effective coronavirus vaccine, Rolling Stone reported Tuesday.

What are the details?

In April, Parton announced on social media that she donated $1 million to the Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tennessee, for coronavirus research. Now, several months later, it has been revealed that her donation went toward funding Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine, the second vaccine in recent days to report a surprisingly high success rate against the virus in human trials.

“My longtime friend Dr. Naji Abumrad, who’s been involved in research at Vanderbilt for many years, informed me that they were making some exciting advancements toward research of the coronavirus for a cure,” Parton wrote on Instagram at the time regarding her decision to donate. “I am making a $1 million donation to Vanderbilt towards that research and to encourage people that can afford it to make donations. Keep the faith.”

Speaking with NBC News Tuesday morning after hearing the news about Moderna’s vaccine, Parton indicated she was happy to hear that her donation made a difference.

“When I donated the money to the COVID fund I just wanted it to do good and evidently, it is! Let’s just hope we can find a cure real soon,” she said.

What else?

On Monday, Moderna announced that its vaccine, developed under President Trump’s Operation Warp Speed, turned out a 94.5% success rate in preventing the virus during large-scale human trials.

According to a CNBC report, “The analysis evaluated 95 confirmed COVID-19 infections among the trial’s 30,000 participants.”

“Moderna, which developed its vaccine in collaboration with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said 90 cases of COVID-19 were observed in the placebo group versus 5 cases observed in the group that received its two-dose vaccine. That resulted in an estimated vaccine efficacy of 94.5%,” the report added.

The news of its success rate followed similar findings from Pfizer’s vaccine trials, which announced Nov. 9 that its vaccine has shown to be 90% effective against the virus.

Both companies have heralded the results and promised to produce tens of millions of doses of the vaccines for deployment in the United States by the end of 2020 and potentially more than 1 billion doses globally by the end of 2021.

The reports marked major breakthroughs in the fight against the novel coronavirus that has plagued the world for the last year after first being discovered in Wuhan, China. In all, the virus has infected over 50 million people globally, killing more than 1 million.

Bill Gates compares people who refuse to wear masks amid COVID to nudists who won’t wear pants in public


Billionaire Microsoft founder and climate activist Bill Gates has compared people opposed to mask-wearing to nudists who refuse to wear pants in public.

What are the details?

As highlighted by Business Insider, Gates addressed the coronavirus pandemic and the wearing of masks as a prophylactic against infection on his brand-new podcast with actress Rashida Jones.

During the exchange, Gates told Jones that he simply doesn’t understand why some people are so opposed to masks.

“The idea that somebody’s resisting wearing a mask, that is such a weird thing to me,” he told Jones during “Bill Gates and Rashida Jones Ask Big Questions.”

“What are these, like, nudists?” he added. “I mean, you know, we ask you to wear pants, and no American says, or very few Americans say, that that’s, like, some terrible thing.”

Jones responded, “If you want to get back to normal life any time sooner, wear a mask, or don’t wear a mask, and stay home. But, like, to ask for both things feels like you just want things to be better, and they’re not, so you kind of just have to deal with what it is.”

Gates and Jones also spoke with Dr. Anthony Fauci during the premiere episode and discussed a potential vaccine rollout.

“One of the things we’re dealing with is a degree of essentially fatigue that people have about going through this,” Fauci said during the interview. “It’s amazing. It’s almost like a distortion of time, Rashida.”

He continued, “I want to tell people, ‘Don’t give up. This is going to end. Science is going to help us with a vaccine and therapy, and if we pay attention to the public health measures, we can gain control of it. The thing you don’t want to happen is that people said, ‘I’ve done this so long. I’m tired of it. The heck with it. I’m just going to go out there and do what I want to do.'”

Support for stricter gun laws falls to lowest point since 2016; backing for handgun ban falls to near record low


With all the civil unrest that plagued the country over the last year, support for instituting stricter gun laws has dropped, while support for making gun laws less strict has seen a bump. And support for a ban on handguns has fallen to nearly record-low levels.

As Americans watched neighborhoods burn, business suffer looting, protesters demand that we “defund the police,” and fellow citizens hit with violence from rioters and other criminals, they made their way to gun stores, hoping to add another level of security for themselves and their families.

And as a result, the nation has seen a surge in gun sales the last few months, with gun sales shattering records this summer.

In early October, Rasmussen revealed that 22% of gun-owning households said they had added at least one firearm to their arsenal since the start of violent anti-police and Black Lives Matter protests.

When those factors are combined with the absence of a mass shooting in the U.S. this year, it likely comes as no surprise that Americans have grown significantly less supportive of imposing stricter gun laws.

A new Gallup survey posted Monday showed that a shrinking majority — 57% — of Americans support calls for stricter gun laws, which is down seven points from last year and down 10 points from 2018.

The share of U.S. citizens who want guns laws to be made less strict moved up from 4% in 2018 and 7% in 2019 to 9% today.

The percentage of voters who believe gun laws should be left untouched grew from 28% last year to 34% this year.

When broken down by demographics, the widest difference of opinion is found, unsurprisingly, between political parties, with the gap between gun owners and non-gun owners coming in second.

  • 85% of Democrats want to see stricter gun laws imposed, while 22% of Republicans feel the same.
  • 72% of non-gun owners support stricter gun laws, while just 26% of current gun support such a move.

Gallup also reported that support for a ban on handguns in the U.S. has fallen to a near record low of just 25%. The previous record low was 23% in 2016.