Karmelo Anthony Supporter Reportedly Fired as Other Backers Face Backlash Over Verdict Remarks

A parole supervisor reportedly lost her job and university professors publicly challenged the verdict, blamed the victim, which seems par for the racist course.

Judge John Roach Jr. is standing firm on his call to keep cameras out of the Karmelo Anthony murder trial. Anthony, convicted of fatally stabbing Austin Metcalf, is appealing his reasonable 35-year sentence. The judge brushed off any nonsense about personal connections to Metcalf's family and made it clear that a fair trial was the only thing that mattered, even as the usual suspects scream about racial dynamics.

Karmelo Anthony's fans are still out there melting down over his conviction and sentencing for murder.

Anthony was found guilty and hit with 35 years on Tuesday, June 9, for stabbing 17-year-old Austin Metcalf to death at a Frisco, Texas, high school track meet last year.

His supporters insist the convicted killer was just defending himself when he plunged that knife into Metcalf's chest.

One of those supporters is Donna Robinson, a parole supervisor with the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. The Dallas Morning News reported that a Facebook comment cost her the gig. Addressing comments about the sentencing, she wrote that "Anthony would be protected in prison, adding she didn't care about the victim's family's loss," according to the outlet.

Fox News Digital also reported that Howard University professor Stacey Patton penned an opinion piece on her Substack titled "Dear Jeff Metcalf: Your Son Is Dead Because You Failed to Teach Him That Black Boys Have Boundaries," which basically pins the blame on the dead kid.

Another backer, W. Burlette Carter, professor emerita of law at George Washington University, took to X after the verdict to air her grievances.

She made a post on X that said, "Karmelo Anthony was entitled to a jury of his peers. He did not get that. On that ground alone, he is entitled to a new trial. Minorities are not interchangeable. The prosecutor’s reported proffered reasons for striking all black jurors, that they were teachers, appears to be pretext. Anthony needs a new lawyer on appeal and in a new trial."

Anthony's trial featured jurors who are fellow U.S. citizens, also known as a "jury of one's peers." In all criminal prosecutions, the U.S. Constitution says the accused has "the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed."

Thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

Iran Signals ‘Mass Sacrifice’ By Dusting Off Saddam-Era Participation Trophy While Trump Deal Is Already “Largely Negotiated”

TEHRAN—In a bold diplomatic masterstroke, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reminded the world that his country is totally ready to throw another generation of young men into the meat grinder, just like the good old days, all while Trump’s team casually confirms the deal is basically done.

The remarks came as President Donald Trump said a deal with Tehran is "largely negotiated" but warned the U.S. could walk away entirely if the mullahs keep cosplaying 1982.

Pezeshkian invoked one of Iran’s strongest wartime symbols on May 24, signaling Tehran’s ironclad resolve to maybe, possibly, kind of fight the U.S. and Israel if they absolutely have to, according to a counterterrorism expert who sounded very impressed.

While Iran signaled broad agreement with Washington on some points, it emphasized that a final deal is not imminent because nothing says “serious negotiation partner” like publicly hyping up mass human sacrifice right before signing the paperwork.

In an X post marking the anniversary of the 1982 recapture of Khorramshahr from Iraqi forces during the Iran-Iraq War, Pezeshkian said, "Khorramshahr today is Iran, the Persian Gulf, and the Strait of Hormuz," adding that "resistance, self-sacrifice, and repelling aggression are rooted in the culture of this land."

Analysts claimed Pezeshkian was deliberately invoking one of the deepest ideological touchstones of the Islamic Republic, you know, that time they spent eight years and a million lives to win back one city from Saddam.

"This is the Iran-Iraq War reference, and the timing is the point," said Dr. Omar Mohammed, director of the Antisemitism Research Initiative Program on Extremism at George Washington University.

"This is one of the Islamic Republic’s foundational mythological moments, civilian resistance, mass sacrifice, repelling an ‘aggressor army.’ Roughly what the Great Patriotic War is to Russia. The rhetorical move is the extension," Mohammed told Fox News Digital.

"He’s mapping the 1980-82 defensive-war frame onto the current confrontation: Iran attacked by an aggressor, ordinary citizens (‘battle-untested but brave’) expected to stand and fight, with ‘resistance, sacrifice, repelling aggression’ cast as the cultural default mode."

Some of the phrasing, Mohammed said, also evokes volunteer and Basij fighters versus a professional invading army — or as the rest of the world calls it, “the Iranian business model.”

"Invoking the strait inside a wartime-mobilization frame, even rhetorically, is a deliberate signal, not throat-clearing," he added.

"The Khorramshahr frame is the deepest register the regime has. It’s what they reach for to signal existential war, not a managed crisis."

Mohammed explained that Pezeshkian’s X post is framing the current confrontation from the presidential account to send a "high-stakes message."

"It’s also a tell on internal posture: Khorramshahr, in short, means ‘we are being invaded and we will not negotiate,’" he added, “unless the deal is really, really good and Trump throws in some sanctions relief and maybe a new soccer stadium.”Sources say the tough talk is playing beautifully on Iranian state TV, where viewers are encouraged to cheer loudly while quietly hoping their kids don’t get volunteered for the next glorious mass sacrifice.


Thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work and you don't need to purchase anything to do so. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. And finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

Justice Alito rips Jackson a new one over 'utterly irresponsible' solo dissent

Justice Alito and DEI appointee Jackson

Justice Samuel Alito just unloaded on Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson's latest solo dissent, and he didn't hold back on Biden's autopen D.E.I. appointee.

Alito's concurrence, joined by Gorsuch and Thomas, said Jackson's rhetoric "lacks restraint." He torched claims that terminating temporary protected status for Haitian migrants was driven by racial bias against non-white immigrants. 

No, wait, this time it was even better: Alito ripped into Jackson's lone dissent in the high-stakes Louisiana redistricting fight on Monday, labeling her arguments "baseless and insulting" after the Court moved to fast-track its recent ruling ahead of the 2026 midterms.

Writing in a concurring opinion joined by Justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, Alito directly slapped down Jackson, declaring that her "dissent in this suit levels charges that cannot go unanswered."

"The dissent goes on to claim that our decision represents an unprincipled use of power," Alito wrote, adding that that was a "groundless and utterly irresponsible charge."

This latest clash just underscores how isolated Jackson has become on the bench, mainly because she isn't the brightest woman, [whatever that is, I'm not a biologist] on the SCOTUS bench. She didn't just split from the conservative majority; she went rogue from her two liberal colleagues too, who refused to sign on to her rant. Jackson unloaded on the Court for supposed overreach, continuing her habit of solo dissents where the Biden pick blasts every big majority decision that happens to go the way of President Trump and the Republicans.

In Monday's unsigned order, the Court cleared the way for Louisiana officials to quickly redo their congressional map, a move expected to boost Republican representation in the state ahead of the midterms.

Alito pointed out that dragging out the 6-3 ruling from last month, which tightened up Section Two of the Voting Rights Act by calling out Louisiana's map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander, served zero practical purpose. Jackson's excuses for delaying the landmark decision were "trivial at best" and "baseless and insulting," he said.

"The dissent accuses the Court of 'unshackl[ing]' itself from 'constraints,'" Alito wrote. "It is the dissent’s rhetoric that lacks restraint."

Jackson had clutched her pearls, warning that the Court's action risked meddling in an active election and creating the "appearance of partiality," all while ignoring the voting and legal mess already happening in Louisiana.

Legal watchers noted the unusually sharp tone from Alito, figuring it showed some real internal tension boiling over. George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley put it plainly: "Justice Alito had had enough." Professor Turley explained that Alito shredded Jackson's lame 32-day procedural objection, calling it a "trivial" nitpick that put form over substance, especially since nobody asked for reconsideration. It would have meant waiting around for no reason while the other parties had urgent need to get the map finalized.

He added that Alito was particularly fed up with Jackson's "unprincipled" smear against the Court. The whole thing stems from the standard 32-day procedural window before a judgment drops to lower courts. Alito made clear that rule is flexible and mainly exists for rehearing petitions, which weren't coming here anyway.

Now Louisiana is in full scramble mode to roll out the new map, with ballots already mailed and the primary on pause. 

This decision will ripple across the country as other states scramble to get their own maps in order for the upcoming elections.

Thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. Finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.

Tweet

500 Mental Health Professionals and Academics: Remove Anti-Semitic Professor

More than 500 mental health professionals and academics have urged George Washington University (GWU) to remove "decolonial" psychology professor Lara Sheehi from her duties while an investigation is taking place over allegations she discriminated against Jewish students and tried to sabotage their careers.

The claims against Sheehi, a pro-Palestinian "Arab" woman, were first made public last month in a civil rights complaint by StandWithUs, a nonprofit that fights anti-Semitism and promotes education about Israel.  

The irony is, Sheehi teaches a mandatory diversity course at GWU where she hosted an avowed anti-Semite speaker, which is in the complaint against her. Also, the complaint alleges that she launched a smear campaign against Jewish students and then filed disciplinary charges AGAINST THE JEWISH STUDENTS in retaliation for the Jewish students accusing her of anti-Semitism.

“We call upon GWU to relieve Dr. Sheehi of teaching roles in required courses until this matter is adjudicated,” the letter states. The letter lists Daniel Burston of Duquesne University, Cary Nelson of University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, psychiatrist David. A Sasso, and psychologist Ilene Serline as its principal authors. 

“In light of the online material available, if the allegations against Dr. Sheehi are corroborated in part or in whole, this may also cast doubt upon her suitability to train psychotherapists in general.”

Of course Sheehi denies the students' allegations and wrote an essay in CounterPunch of February 3rd that claims she is being targeted “targeted specifically because I am an Arab woman whose scholarship and activism advocates for Palestinians and, in the process, critiques Israeli settler-colonial apartheid.” 

So she is claiming victimhood like Hamasshole terrorists who kill Israelis, including children, for killing Hamassholes. No other country on the planet takes as much care to minimize so called collateral damage than Israel. 

Leehi also accused George Washington University of lacking “moral fibre” and having “colluded” with StandWithUs and because it opened a third-party investigation of the students’ claims. 

She added that analyzing her Twitter account for evidence of her alleged anti-Semitism is “civilizational and sexist discourse.” It's no different for someone to take the words that anyone says as claiming that is what they are saying. Using the victim card in this instance is not sexist nor is it 'civilizational discourse.'

Lawmakers have also expressed concern about Sheehi’s alleged behavior.

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ), citing the complaint, wrote a letter to US Department of Education (DOE) Secretary Dr. Miguel Cardona asking for the issuance of long promised new Title VI guidance that would protect Jewish and Zionist students from discrimination. 

In December, Biden delayed issuing the regulations, which were first proposed in a directive by President Trump in response to rising anti-Zionist discrimination on college campuses and would apply the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism to civil rights investigations. 

This may be due, in part, to Biden's quiet racist tendencies to Jews. Blacks, and other people of color.

The proposed guidance will not be instituted until at least December 2023, according to a copy of the proposed rule on the website of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

“I have long been a strong proponent of taking all measures necessary to protect students against hate, discrimination, and bigotry — especially Jewish students who face a barrage of anti-Semitism on their college campuses,” Gottheimer wrote. “It is critical that these students not be singled out or made to feel unwelcome, and that universities uphold our values. After a year with historic levels of anti-Semitism, I ask the department to prioritize the rule-making process for Title VI.”

“Professor Sheehi had — and still has — an opportunity to approach this situation by showing a respectful and appropriate concern for her Jewish students,” StandWithUs said on Feb. 10 in response to Sheehi’s essay. “Unfortunately, the shamefully vitriolic and self-justifying remarks she posted suggest no such humility will be forthcoming. Her diatribe makes it even more important that GW and the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights carry out a thorough and impartial investigation into her conduct in the classroom.”

Based on Sheehi's history of anti-Zionist, anti-Semitic rhetoric, she should be found guilty of singling out Jewish students for academic punishment. Do you agree?

Tweet

GWU removes history in its history curriculum

George Washington University is probably going to change its name in the future because they seem to want a divorce from American history. And they may not know it, but a guy named George Washington was an integral part of American history.

The sages of GWU has changed its course requirements for history majors--they no longer offer U.S. history. So students may have to learn about their school's namesake in grade school.

The "university's" history department introduced new requirements with the aim of "giving students greater flexibility" to pursue their interests such as "Climate Change for a Changing World," "Peruvian Forest Basket Weaving," and "Positive Things to Claim About Hamas." 

Requirements were also eliminated in North American and European history along with foreign language.

The school paper GW Hatchet said the changes were motivated partly to attract students to the history department, since it has sucked since 2011 in getting student enrollment.

Katrin Schultheiss, the history department chair, basically said that the school will do cartwheels to get more students to enroll in history, and the best way to do that is to not offer too much history to them. "Whatever they want to do, there's a way to make the history department work for them."


Tweet