A Bronze-Age ship that sank around 3,300 years ago has been discovered on the Mediterranean Sea floor, along with its cargo of hundreds of intact jars that once stored merchandise. Located around 90 kilometers (56 miles) off the northern coast of Israel and at a depth of 1,800 meters (6,000 feet), the ancient vessel is the oldest ever found in the deep sea.Until now, all shipwrecks dated to the Bronze Age – which began a little over 5,000 years ago – had been discovered in shallow waters close to the shoreline. For instance, the world’s oldest known sunken vessel is located just off the coast of the Greek island of Dokos and is thought to have met its end around 4,200 years ago.As a result, “the academic assumption until now was that trade in that time was executed by safely flitting from port to port, hugging the coastline within eye contact,” explained Jacob Sharvit, Head of the Israel Antiquities Authority Marine Unit, in a statement via email. “The discovery of this boat now changes our entire understanding of ancient mariner abilities: It is the very first to be found at such a great distance with no line of sight to any landmass.”“To navigate they probably used the celestial bodies, by taking sightings and angles of the Sun and star positions,” he said.The ship and its cargo were spotted during a routine seafloor survey by a major natural gas exploration and production company. After mapping the site, the firm confirmed that the boat was between 12 and 14 meters (39 to 46 feet) long and was loaded with hundreds of Canaanite amphorae.Two of the many Canaanite jars found onboard the sunken ship.Image credit: Emil Aladjem, Israel Antiquities Authority“The vessel type identified in the cargo was designed as the most efficient means of transporting relatively cheap and mass-produced products such as oil, wine and other agricultural products such as fruit,” explained Sharvit. The presence of such a sizable booty hints at “significant commercial ties” between whichever country the ship came from and the ancient Levant, he added.At this stage, little is known about the vessel’s origin or history, although Sharvit says that “the ship seems to have sunk in crisis, either due to a storm or to an attempted piracy attack – a well-known occurrence in the Late Bronze Age.” Fortunately, the boat’s resting place at the bottom of the deep blue has protected it from waves, currents, and divers, all of which impact and damage shipwrecks in shallow waters.As a result, the ship’s body has remained well preserved for almost three-and-a-half millennia, with its wooden beams safely buried in the sediment on the ocean floor.“There is tremendous potential here for research,” said Sharvit. “The ship is preserved at such a great depth that time has frozen since the moment of disaster.”

We often take it for granted that animals can be smart. Corvids have distinct cultures, can cheat death, and will hold a grudge. Elephants refer to each other by name. Dogs will throw children into rivers to score a tasty snack. You know – normal signs of intelligence.But still, you probably wouldn’t want to hire, say, a monkey to do statistical analysis. Unless, that is, you’ve read a new paper from researchers out of Paris and Marseille, which claims to show that baboons can understand scatterplot graphs and extract information about the statistical trends shown within.“Humans are known to perform remarkably well at tasks involving statistical evaluations of their environment, an ability with clear evolutionary advantages,” reads the paper, currently available as a preprint – that is, not yet peer reviewed.“They correctly estimate the probability of the occurrence of events drawn from given distributions; they can recognize and learn statistical regularities in both linguistic and non-linguistic stimuli,” the authors explain; “they can extract the average of many different features such as color, orientation or size from large datasets of items, a set of skills that has been called ‘ensemble perception’.”And, turns out, we’re not the only smart monkeys out there. “For instance, chimpanzees can make probability judgments based on several proportional ratios,” the authors point out, while “long-tail macaques can infer simple heuristics, capuchin monkeys can make probabilistic inferences, and baboons can learn spatial statistical contingencies.”But can they do what humans do – perform ensemble evaluations on a given dataset? To find out, the researchers taught a group of 23 Guinea baboons to associate the various qualities of scatterplots – their noise level, whether the trend was increasing or decreasing, that kind of thing – to certain geometric shapes. It was, basically, a way for the monkeys to describe what they were seeing to the researchers – akin to a human test subject saying “ooh, not much of a correlation here, but generally a negative relationship.”Now, you may not think such a judgement is based on detailed statistical calculations – and it’s not, to be fair – but this kind of intuitive assessment of data actually lines up pretty well with a measure known to statisticians as the t-value. It’s “a summary of several data features,” the researchers explain; “it combines the signed slope (either positive or negative), the level of noise in the dataset (with noisier scatterplots resulting in lower t-values), and the number of points in the graph (the larger the number, the higher the t-value).”Why is that important? Well, it turns out that not only were the baboons able to perform the same kind of intuitive statistical analysis as human adults and children – albeit less accurately, especially on harder tasks – but they did so using the exact same t-value measure.“We found that, if the animals were provided with easily distinguishable response stimuli, they could learn this task,” the researchers report. “Their performance, in the presence of noise, was predicted by the t-value of the scatterplot, the index that a statistician would use to compute the strength of the correlation in the plot.”This isn’t just exciting for fans of baboons and statistics, however. It also has some pretty interesting implications for our understanding of how the brain processes statistical information at all: “this similar behavior, observed in both humans and baboons, suggests that the human visual system, when performing trend judgments over noisy datasets, recycles phylogenetically older brain areas involved in the recognition of the principal axis of objects,” the paper explains.It’s not a new hypothesis, but the addition of more evidence is tantalizing. The idea, basically, is that humans are taking bits of their brain that once were used for lower-level environmental assessments – think: numerical approximation of visual stimuli – and using them for much higher-level calculations that are close enough to the original for the brain to be able to wing it – think: symbolic mathematics. It’s bolstered by the suggestion that the baboons’ weaknesses in more complex tasks may have been due to a lack of cultural context – that is, they couldn’t “see” the data the same way human participants could, but it might have just been that they hadn’t been taught to, rather than the species difference. In any case, there was definitely one way in which the baboons mirror their human cousins in mathematical ability: some of them just don’t have it.“As in humans, sensitivity in the trend judgment task varies among individuals,” the researchers report. “This finding should push animal cognition researchers to always consider inter-individual variability when studying the performance of non-human animals.”The study, which is yet to be peer-reviews, can be found on the biorXiv preprint server.

TikTok is suing the United States government over a new bipartisan federal law requiring it to separate from its Chinese government-controlled parent company. Both the facts and the law demonstrate that the lawsuit should fail. TikTok is basing its argument on false claims that it is a champion of free speech and that the First Amendment of the Constitution protects its legal ties to the Chinese Communist Party.These are lies. The truth is that the First Amendment protects Americans’ right to free speech, not TikTok’s right to be owned by the Chinese Communist Party.ByteDance and the CCP will decide whether TikTok is banned in the United States if they refuse to divest. The decision won’t be the US government’s.TikTok’s cynical claim to champion free speech should fool no one. Chinese law requires the company to follow the Chinese Communist Party’s commands. The Chinese government owns part of TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, which employs a CCP official as its chief censor. TikTok has a documented history of spying, repeatedly lying to Congress, and exploiting American children. The company’s attempt to misuse U.S. freedoms against our national security is clearly disproven by the facts.TikTok’s legal claims are also meritless. The company continues to falsely claim that the new federal law is a “ban.” It is not. TikTok can continue operating in the United States if it’s sold to a company that’s not controlled by an adversary government. But TikTok keeps lying about the federal law because the Chinese government has banned the sale of TikTok’s algorithm as a state secret, which only shows that national security concerns about TikTok’s inner workings are justified.It's true that TikTok has already won some victories in American courts. The company survived an attempt to ban it by the Trump administration and more recently won a preliminary legal battle against a state-level ban in Montana. But neither of these cases indicate that TikTok is likely to prevail in a constitutional challenge to the new federal law. The Trump administration sought to ban TikTok in 2020 using a sanctions law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. But IEEPA is outdated and has not kept pace with modern tech threats. It contains an exception that was originally intended to prevent the U.S. government from banning literature.The law was later amended in 1994 — when the internet was in its infancy — in a way that courts have interpreted to cover all data. TikTok was easily able to use this loophole to convince a court that IEEPA couldn’t be used against the company. The case wasn’t decided on free speech grounds. IEEPA was simply the wrong tool for the job and needs to be updated for a time when America’s greatest adversary controls global tech companies.Montana’s effort to ban TikTok was blocked last year by a federal court. Though the court laid out a First Amendment basis for its decision, the outcome rested on the court’s view that Montana’s national security concern was an infringement of federal authority. This sealed TikTok’s victory on constitutional grounds because it led the court to conclude that the ban would fail under any of the relevant standards of scrutiny.That decision also meant that Montana could not meet the First Amendment requirement of “tailoring” — the closeness of the fit between the restriction and its intended purpose — because the court rejected Montana’s security interests. TikTok could not replicate this outcome when challenging the federal law. More relevant is that the Montana court also dedicated part of its analysis to whether Montana’s law left “ample alternative channels of communication.” Startlingly, the court decided that TikTok’s allegedly unique features were sufficient to invoke constitutional protections. The court’s analysis would give social media platforms, including those controlled by hostile foreign governments, a distinctly privileged position in First Amendment jurisprudence, suggesting that any government action that causes such a platform to cease operating may run afoul of the First Amendment regardless of legitimate national security concerns.If future rulings affirm the Montana decision, it would significantly favor social media companies. TikTok probably couldn’t expect to replicate this outcome through successive appeals because this ruling rejected TikTok’s clear national security threats. Congress extensively examined those threats while crafting the new law, which is structured differently. The federal law requires divestment rather than simply banning the app outright as the Montana decision sought to do.ByteDance and the CCP will decide whether TikTok is banned in the United States if they refuse to divest. The decision won’t be the U.S. government's, further reducing the chances that other judges would adopt the Montana court’s conclusions.Ultimately, it’s preposterous that a social media platform controlled and censored by the CCP would be able to neutralize any national security action by claiming it is an “indispensable” provider of free speech. Thankfully, this cynical attempt to denigrate American constitutional freedoms is likely to be rejected in any lawsuit TikTok brings. TikTok’s days are numbered.

My oldest son turned four a few days ago. His younger brother will be three later this year. When we celebrate their birthdays, I celebrate my birth into fatherhood: a new dad, living in Brooklyn, a pandemic daddy — trying to do what’s best for my family. I love my boys and my wife who gifted them to me. But I have thought of abandoning them. If you think it takes a village to raise a child, you better be real picky about who you let into your village. Why? Because single mothers are heroes. And what kind of man would I be to stand in the way of my wife becoming a hero? The best way for me to fight the patriarchy is to stop being a patriarch. Yeah, if I were still living in Brooklyn, that would be the way. But I don’t live in Brooklyn anymore. Oh, my poor wife and kids.This used to be my playgroundBefore the kids, there was Brooklyn Heights. Before COVID, there was Brooklyn Heights. What I miss most about the Heights is walking. My wife and I took frequent strolls through the neighborhood. One Sunday, I think we left the apartment five times to take a different route. When she was pregnant with our first, the further along into her pregnancy she got, the more her pace slowed and the distance we traveled shortened. But any amount of time outside was important. When the weather is right in New York City, you forget about how most of the year it’s awful. With the right amount of sun, air, and humor, you can even forget that you’re living through a pandemic. “I can’t believe you’re bringing a child into the world during a plague!” one might say. Well, can you think of a better time to repopulate the Earth? We brought our son home from the hospital — normally they hold mommy and baby for 48 hours, but with COVID-19 creeping around, they were released 24 hours earlier than usual. In the days following his birth, we made sure to continue our walks. We had a third wheel now to slow us down, but he was in a Doona: an infant car seat that also transforms into a stroller. So, with alternate side-parking rules suspended indefinitely and no telling what future mayoral decrees would bring, we were ready to collapse the stroller, strap it into the backseat of our Honda, and hightail it out of the city if we felt the heat around the corner. One morning on our way to the Promenade, my wife and I noticed that the gate to the Pierrepont Playground was chained shut. Sure, our son was too small to play on any of the equipment. But even though we sometimes felt like we were the last people on Earth, we knew that wasn’t the case. There were other children out there — stuck indoors — because good people “followed the science” and closed down the monkey bars. The playgrounds were finally reopened in late June, with dog parks to follow. I sat on a bench outside the Pierrepont Playground one afternoon with my son in my arms. The playground was filled with kids of all ages and adults wearing face-coverings. Inequality is real! I thought, looking at the adults. Some parents aren’t wealthy enough to afford au pairs from Europe, so they have to settle for nannies from Central America.Orange you glad I didn't say 'Trump'? An old woman sitting on a bench next to ours got my attention. She was in love with my son, she said, and wanted to take him home. It would be easy to go down the creepy path — go down that way if you want to — but that’s not what this was about. This woman was in her 80s and had been locked up inside her home for the past few months. It would drive me crazy, I know, but she was all there. COVID-19 really had it out for people her age — and I’m sure she knew that — but the playgrounds were open again. It was perfect outside. And she had just met a gorgeous lil baby named Andreas. I noticed she wore her blue surgical mask around her neck and had a hardcover book with her. I was maskless too and asked her what she was reading. It was "Fear: Trump in the White House" by Bob Woodward. Oh no! I thought. Please don’t let this be the last book this woman reads before she dies! (Let my book be the last book she reads before she dies.) No, I hadn’t read the book — and I still haven’t — but I had spent years watching people allow Donald Trump to consume their lives. Funny people stopped being funny and started being “brave.” Entire personas online centered on being blocked by the 45th president of the United States. And somehow Trump was responsible for, among many things, the nation’s mental health crisis, lack of sex, and at least one hurricane. At Aretha Franklin’s funeral service in 2018, Michael Eric Dyson took the opportunity to destroy Trump. “You lugubrious leech,” he said. “You dopey doppelgänger of deceit and deviance, you lethal liar, you dim-witted dictator, you foolish fascist.” I found it unfortunate that Dyson chose to hammer Trump at the funeral for the Queen of Soul. What was also unfortunate was that he used the word “doppelgänger” incorrectly. Doppelgänger is an apparition or double of a living person. It’s not an apparition or double of an idea. So, something like “deceit and deviance incarnate” would have been correct. Or, if you’re going for rhythm and meaning, something like, “You insipid incarnation of deceit and deviance ...” I think that would have gone well with Dyson’s “orange apparition.” While Dyson was applauded for destroying Trump, the president was the real winner. The man managed to crash the celebration of one diva’s incredible life without even being there. If Trump was the “orange apparition” of which Dyson spoke, you can blame Dyson’s own words for summoning it. When it comes time for my funeral, it better be all about me.Happy feet I spoke with the old woman on the bench for some time. I could tell it had been awhile since her last conversation with someone. It was like that with a lot of people coming out of lockdown. Before I left, I wanted to give her a hug — but I knew letting her hold my son would mean more to her. I couldn’t do that though. Not because of social distancing. But because my wife and I had a whole roster of quarantined loved ones who had yet to hold our baby. It wouldn’t be right. So, I asked the old woman if she would like to touch my son’s feet. Without waiting for her to answer, I took off his socks and put them in my pocket. I held him in front of her, and she took his feet, one in each hand. She was gentle. She wanted to take him home. It’s amazing how much joy one baby’s existence can bring into the world. I thanked her and brought my son back home to our one-bedroom apartment. From time to time, I think about that old woman. My son has grown a lot since then — he’s been walking longer than he crawled — but his feet still have that ridiculous baby magic to them. I’m fortunate to have them nearby. During the plague, I became a pandemic daddy, lost my job, buried a friend, was labeled a “far-right radical,” then unlabeled, went a little crazy, sold an apartment in BK, and bought a house in the sticks. While I worked on my book, my family was unable to live in that house in the sticks, because it had been gutted and made unlivable — a full reno. So, we were crammed in with my in-laws, while I hoped to finish the manuscript before our new baby arrived. Yeah, my wife was pregnant again — we were taking this repopulate-the-planet thing seriously. And in the months following the birth of lil brother, I was gonna need more happy baby feet. I’m a comedian, after all, and was trying to figure out my future prospects. While the pandemic and the responses to it hurt far too many people, I am one of the fortunate ones. I grew — as a husband, a father, and a comedian. Some days I feel like an outlier. Because those who went insane under Trump have stayed insane. (Privilege) check, please! If Trump broke you, Biden can’t fix you. Even though we moved out of Brooklyn Heights I kept my account on the Nextdoor app, so I can check in on my old neighborhood. It feels like I’m stalking an ex-girlfriend whose life is getting worse and worse without me in it. I read that there’s a “Parking Menace” on one block, hogging multiple spots, and a “Phantom Sh**ter” on the other, who marks his territory on the sidewalk. A spotted lanternfly was spotted in the ‘hood and an unleashed pit bull, too. Concerned residents are asking questions, like how to deal with homeless men chasing after you; when, if ever, to call the police on a person of color; and “Public Shaming Etiquette” when it comes to masks. I am happy to be out. If you think it takes a village to raise a child, you better be real picky about who you let into your village. What’s clear is that the same people who ruined Facebook are ruining Nextdoor — s***ty people who take pride in not living their lives and do all they can to inject themselves and their strain of politics into yours and mine. You do not want these people giving your eulogy. A flier taped to a lamppost near the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway was promoting a community get-together — catered by Bakers Against Racism. According to Dr. Ibram X. Kendi, author of "How to Be an Antiracist," you’re either an anti-racist baker or you’re a racist baker. There is no such thing as a “not-racist” baker. Keep that in mind the next time you’re buying a black-and-white cookie from that spot in Carroll Gardens. I got an email from a local restaurant my wife and I used to frequent. It reads in part (emphases mine):Now as we more actively pursue the imperfect work of unpacking our own privilege we are revising our sense of purpose in the face of systemic racism and white supremacy. This is work we have supported over the years, but we haven’t been sufficiently resolute in prioritizing antiracism as a practice. We are grateful for the Black activists and our colleagues of color whose efforts have built the framework for becoming more effective allies. Bro ... I thought. You’re a restaurant. I know it’s hard enough to run a business under normal conditions. Imagine trying to do it during a pandemic with government-mandated lockdowns and Kafkaesque regulations. So many restaurants were hurting. Some managed to eke out a few more months of hurt before closing for good. But “prioritizing antiracism as a practice” and the other woke boilerplate I highlighted above aren’t the ingredients to help a restaurant achieve what should be its primary goal: to make food people will pay to eat. The last time my wife and I ate at this place, I don’t remember if the dishes were sufficiently anti-racist, but I do remember them being more than sufficiently salty. You’re not going to make a dent in systemic racism and white supremacy with all that sodium. (Although you might raise the blood pressure on what’s left of your primarily white bougie clientele.) Whatever your activism is, nobody wants to be force-fed it. Especially if it’s a humorless, joyless, anti-life dish that sucks the taste out of everything. But if you’re looking to add some flavor back in, become a dad. And stick around.

It wouldn’t be an election year without another amnesty scam, and the Biden administration has delivered right on schedule, drafting multiple proposals that would grant legal status to hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens.The plan from the left is simple: Ignore the law and leave the border open while Democrats are in office, then force amnesty programs onto the public to solve the problem they created. Progressives are using open borders to transform the United States demographically and reshape the electorate to their advantage.Criminals should be expelled immediately, but the number of noncriminal aliens who would need to be removed is much lower than most people think.Biden may be unpopular now, but Democrats understand that millions of illegal immigrants crossing into the country under his watch translates into generations of electoral dominance in the future. The disastrous Biden presidency is a sacrificial vehicle designed to deliver permanent left-wing domination. Mass deportation is the only way to undo this subversion of the American electoral system.Mass democracy is a comically easy system to hack. If ruling elites can no longer control the voting patterns of their current population, they simply import a new population that is easier to manipulate.Newly arrived immigrants generally have lower incomes, face a language barrier, and do not have access to an established social network that can provide them opportunities or assistance. This means they are highly reliant on the government and can be manipulated easily by the promise of aid programs and preferential treatment. Illegal immigrants are also less likely to value the shared culture, principles, and history of their new nation, making them the ideal subject for a political movement that seeks to fundamentally transform the United States.Leftists often mock conservatives who frame illegal immigration as a threat to election integrity by pointing out that noncitizens cannot vote, but this is a deeply dishonest argument. Several progressive cities already allow for noncitizen voting in local elections, and there is a clear desire to normalize the idea nationwide.No one is sure how many illegal aliens end up voting fraudulently in presidential elections, but ultimately that is not the most important issue. The major concern isn't about illegal votes in current presidential contests but about the electoral time bomb created by importing tens of millions of illegal immigrants who will almost certainly receive amnesty.The media skillfully parades images of suffering migrants across American television screens. Reporters never ask how those illegal immigrants arrived or why they were allowed to stay, treating the entire situation as a natural disaster requiring emergency measures. The pressure to provide amnesty to illegal aliens who have lived in the country for decades builds while birthright citizenship ensures their children can already vote. Some Republicans foolishly believe they can ingratiate themselves with immigrant communities by providing amnesty, thereby adding tens of millions of overwhelmingly Democratic voters to the rolls.Securing the border is obviously the top priority, but while necessary, it is no longer sufficient. During Biden's tenure, authorities have encountered over 8 million illegal aliens at the border, and that number keeps growing. Several red states’ worth of “newcomers” already reside in the country, and if they stay until they inevitably receive amnesty, Democrats would effectively achieve one-party rule. Politicians should have treated border security with the same seriousness they ascribe to the borders of foreign nations like Israel or Ukraine, but now we must face the reality of the problem before us.Donald Trump has already promised mass deportations during his second term, even considering deploying the National Guard to get the job done. The former president made similar statements in 2016, but he must fulfill this promise if the right wants to avoid permanent electoral irrelevance. While both parties treat the issue of mass deportation as anathema, voters do not share this view.A recent CBS News poll found that 62% of voters favor a program to deport all illegal aliens. That massive degree of support is also heavily bipartisan with one-third of Democrats and 90% of Republicans backing the plan. The same poll also found majority support for local law enforcement officers identifying illegal immigrants for deportation. Mass deportation is a winning electoral issue, and any GOP politician or candidate refusing to support it is either a coward or a sellout to the swamp.The objection from deportation opponents is often that the process would be logistically impossible or brutal and cruel in its execution. This is a strawman. By simply enforcing E-Verify laws, heavily taxing remittances, and denying all government aid to illegal aliens, most migrants would be forced to return to their countries of origin. Free plane rides out of the country would be vastly less expensive than decades of welfare, and we should make self-deportation as simple and painless as possible. Criminals should be expelled immediately, but the number of noncriminal aliens who would need to be removed is much lower than most people think.While I have primarily addressed the very real electoral issues that make large-scale repatriation a necessity, a moral dimension exists as well. The United States is a sovereign nation that belongs to its people; it is not an economic zone to be operated for the profit of the ruling elite. The citizens of this nation have a right to decide who should be allowed to share it with them and who should inherit it when they are gone.The future of our great land should not be decided by soulless politicians who would allow drugs, human trafficking, and violent gangs to flow across the border for their own cynical gain. Donald Trump faces a difficult task, but he must not waver. Mass deportation is already politically popular — the only question is whether Trump will have the courage to act.

Have you ever wondered what our jails and prisons would look like had the Black Lives Matter rioters of 2020 been given the “January 6 treatment”? Well, it’s hard to envision such a parallel universe. We don’t have enough jail cells to house the tens of thousands — if not hundreds of thousands — of individuals who would be languishing in prison for years based on the January 6 standard of justice.Alas, the judges in the D.C. federal circuit court have no standard of justice nor do they appear to possess a conscience.We cannot allow these corrupt judges to hide their blatant perversion of justice forever.On June 21, 2023, nearly two-and-a-half years after the Capitol breach, the FBI arrested New Hampshire grandma Cindy Young. CCTV footage showed her inside the Capitol on January 6, 2021. What was her crime exactly? Reading the FBI complaint reveals no alleged criminal action other than being in the rotunda of a public building. The complaint includes innuendo about Young wearing American flag and pro-Trump paraphernalia. It alleges she was “seen holding a Trump ‘NO MORE BULLS**T’ flag.”According to the FBI’s worldview, that is the crime.In fact, the FBI included this picture from Getty Images on the second page of its criminal complaint, as if it’s somehow damning evidence. Young engaged in no violence. She never even stepped outside the velvet ropes. She has had this prosecutorial sword hanging over her for three-and-a-half years. She’s bankrupt and faces up to four years in prison.Now, try to imagine how many human beings were part of a crowd that engaged in not only disorderly conduct, trespassing, and vandalism, but also criminal mayhem, arson, and murder during the “summer of love” in 2020. That would easily number 100,000 people.The people who engaged in the most egregious conduct during those weeks in the name of “justice” for George Floyd were under-punished and, in fact, benefited from calls for leniency from federal prosecutors.Montez Terriel Lee Jr. was convicted in 2022 of burning down a private business in Minneapolis, resulting in the death of owner Oscar Stewart. Imagine if a January 6 defendant had burned down a part of the Capitol and killed innocent people. Without question, he would be on federal death row right now — and rightly so. After all, Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio is currently serving 22 years in a federal prison for seditious conspiracy, and he wasn’t even at the Capitol. Others who engaged in pushing and shoving with police officers got 12 years, with no prior convictions.But Montez was sentenced to only 10 years, despite a rap sheet that included past convictions for burglary and assault. He’ll be free in less than eight years.Last week, Cindy Young’s attorney, Jonathan Gross, filed a motion to dismiss her case based on selective prosecution. He contrasted Young’s case with Lee’s to highlight the selective prosecutorial tone. Gross noted that, despite the Justice Department's sentencing memorandum showing Lee celebrating the death of an innocent victim, the government attorney called for leniency by invoking Martin Luther King. The lawyer wrote that Lee “appears to have believed that he was, in Dr. King’s eloquent words, engaging in ‘the language of the unheard,’” tacitly excusing his murderous behavior.“The Government’s disparate treatment of January 6 defendants when compared to protestors of different viewpoints is undeniable,” Gross contended. “The Government’s argument boils down to its belief that the standard for selective prosecution is impossible to meet and the Government has unchecked power to decide who to prosecute and who goes free. That cannot be the law in a free country.”Magistrate Judge Michael Harvey summarily dismissed the motion, noting he is “skeptical that such generalized, unsupported assertions” prove selective prosecution.Well, what about the case of Bryce Williams? He literally led the burning of the Third Precinct Police Station in Minneapolis while dozens of cops were trapped inside. They could have easily been killed. He received just 27 months for the May 28, 2020, arson, which should have been charged as attempted murder. Judge Patrick Schiltz excused the man who tossed the Molotov cocktail into the station as a “good person who made a terrible mistake,” adding that it was “easy to understand” why George Floyd’s death had driven Williams to violence.In its sentencing memo, the Justice Department excused Williams’ behavior, partially attributing it to his pursuit of “racial justice” for St. George. “The Government takes Williams at his word and does not believe that he came to the protest to commit crimes or wreak havoc,” referring to the lead perpetrator of a direct attack on an entire police precinct. Williams is already out of prison.Incredibly, only four people were convicted for the attack that involved well over 100 people and did more than $12 million in damages — dwarfing the cost of the entire January 6 riot. Those addicted to selective prosecution and judgment based on political persuasion blithely ignore allegations of a double standard. They don’t see it as a double standard because they believe you are guilty based on your beliefs, regardless of your actions.Both states and the federal government need to strengthen rules overseeing the judiciary in cases of selective prosecution. A jury, rather than a judge, should oversee motions on selective prosecutions. We cannot allow these corrupt judges to hide their blatant perversion of justice forever.

AWKWARD: AOC Flips Out After Nick Fuentes Praises HER for Being More America 1st Than 99% of Republicans

Thursday Morning Minute