Among the more disturbing images to come out of the recent street violence following the killing of George Floyd are those of police officers and white civilians kneeling “in solidarity” with the protesters.
If any of those Americans, black or white, who are protesting the killing of George Floyd are acting in good faith and not in the furtherance of a Leftist agenda, then they are either uninformed or they are being manipulated. Contrary to the narrative being promoted by the Left, the media, and former president Barack Obama, once the respective rates of violent crimes committed by blacks and whites are taken into account, it is clear that police throughout America simply are not killing disproportionately more black men than white men. In other words, the only reason to take to the streets over the Floyd killing is to exploit it to promote Leftist ends.
“You want to burn down buildings? Burn down this f–ing Constitution.”
Before the 1960s, Marxists divided people into capital and labor and posited an unbridgeable gap between the interests of the one and the other. Since then they have divided people into the oppressed (blacks, women, gays, and a host of others) and the oppressors (primarily whites and men), and they have posited the same unbridgeable gap. The viability of the Democratic Party depends on maintaining, and widening, this gap.
This is the context in which the recent George Floyd “protests” need to be understood. According to the Left’s narrative, one echoed today throughout academia and the media, the members of these oppressed groups have been and continue to be the victims of systemic injustice, to such an extent that the legitimacy of the American enterprise itself, including such bedrock elements of that enterprise as individual rights, private property, and capitalism, now stand discredited. So we hear things like this, from former Saturday Night Live and Ghostbustersstar, Leslie Jones, “You want to burn down buildings? Burn down this f–ing Constitution.”
Essential to the Left’s success in fundamentally changing America, and they have been disturbingly successful to date, has been their code of pseudo-morality. (“Pseudo” because it is a morality designed to serve political ends, rather than vice versa.) They care—for the hurt and the lame and the afflicted, but especially for the members of their coalition of the oppressed. Said California Governor Gavin Newsom this week in comments on the death of George Floyd, “We have a country that predominantly values power, dominance and aggression over care, empathy and collaboration.” In other words, too many of us benighted souls do not yet share the Left’s affinity for “care, empathy and collaboration.”
One of the Left’s most reliable tools is guilt. It is a powerful de-moralizer
It is this solicitude for those in need that affords the Left their overweening sense of moral superiority, and which makes their message so seductive to the naïve and the uncritical among us. It is this which provides them a patina of benevolence, and which entitles them to stigmatize anyone as a “hater” who does not share their self-abnegating brand of compassion. And it is this which entitles them to impose their pseudo-morality on the rest of us, and they do mean to impose it, by force when necessary and with ruthless consistency. Remember transgendered men in women’s locker rooms? Or ask Grant Napear, for the last 30 plus years the play-by-play announcer for the NBA’s Sacramento Kings, who lost his job this week for tweeting, “All lives matter.”
One of the Left’s most reliable tools is guilt. It is a powerful de-moralizer, as the kneeling policemen and white civilians attest. By pleading guilty, in effect, to their (imaginary) white racism, and by acknowledging their (imaginary) “white privilege,” the kneelers are sanctioning, wittingly or not, the protesters’ assault on the Constitution, and they are emboldening them and their violent co-conspirators to press ever harder to topple that Constitution.
If there are any doubts about the ultimate, destructive aims of the “protesters,” those doubts are dispelled by the protesters’ explicit desire to “defund” or otherwise disempower the police. The fundamental purpose of government is not to run day-care centers or libraries or to dispense welfare checks. The fundamental purpose of government is to keep the peace; government, in essence, is the police (and the military). There can be only one reason to advocate weakening or disbanding the police, and that is to unleash anarchy.
We are in the midst of a genuine insurrection
In city after city for over a week now we have been witnessing what happens when the police fail to do their jobs. Can any honest, rational person really believe that our cities would be safer if the police were hamstrung further than they already are, or if they were disbanded altogether? The crippling of the police can serve only one purpose, to allow anarchy to rise to such a level as to destabilize the government altogether.
Consider, in this regard, the degree to which Democratic leaders in office have been complicit, either overtly or by default, in the recent mayhem. The top-ranking Democratic leader in the Federal Government, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, has not had one critical word to say about the violence that has been tearing our cities apart. And the chief law enforcement officer of the State of Massachusetts, Attorney General Elizabeth Vaughn, has opined “Yes, America is burning, but that’s how forests grow.”
We are in the midst of a genuine insurrection. The mainstream media are openly and unabashedly on the side of the insurrectionists, as are many leaders of the Democratic Party. One of Mr. Trump’s strengths is that he has been steadfastly and unreservedly on the side of the Constitution. To his great credit he has refused to sanction the insurrectionists in any way, not even by crediting them with good intentions, as political correctness would require of him. It is clear that he understands this is a struggle between good and evil, and that there no longer exists a middle ground on which the two sides can meet. We are long past that.
In Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal, thousands have been taking to the streets to protest the death of George Floyd at the hands of a police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. Canadians might wonder why recent events in Nova Scotia, Canada, did not likewise drive people into the streets.
Back in April, a denturist named Gabriel Wortman, disguised as a police officer, began shooting people at random. Instead of putting out an emergency alert in the style of measures against COVID-19, the RCMP opted for Twitter, not universally used in Nova Scotia or anywhere else.
The RCMP’s deadly delay prompted no mass protests across Canada
The delay allowed Wortman, heavily armed and driving a fake police car, to continue the shooting spree that would claim 22 lives. The RCMP’s deadly delay prompted no mass protests across Canada demanding police reforms and accountability. It was not the first time the vaunted RCMP would act in bizarre fashion.
Back in 2008, Timothy McClean, 22, departed the summer fair where had been working and boarded a Greyhound bus for Winnipeg. Sitting next to him was Vince Weiguang Li, a software engineer who came to Canada in 2001. Li suddenly brandished a knife and began stabbing McLean in the chest before beheading the victim and showing the severed head to terrified passengers.
When the RCMP showed up, they did not break into the bus and take down the killer. Instead they waited outside while Li effectively cannibalized McLean. According to news reports, the victim’s eyes and part of his heart were not recovered, but police found McLean’s nose and tongue in Li’s pocket.
In Winnipeg and across Canada, people did not take to the streets to protest this grotesque lapse by the RCMP. Neither did protests take place when Li was set free in 2017, less than 10 years after he murdered, dismembered and cannibalized Timothy McLean.
Last year in Windsor, Ontario, police claimed to have found the man who killed six-year-old Ljubica Topic in 1971, a cold case nearly 50 years old. Police claimed DNA had finally identified the killer, who was deceased, but declined to release the killer’s name, claiming that would violate the dead man’s privacy rights.
The Prime Minister’s racism failed to spark public protests, but when it comes to blatant racism it’s never too late
That was nonsense, and there was no valid reason to keep the identity secret. Even so, the RCMP, Ontario Attorney General Doug Downey and Premier Doug Ford did not demand the release of the dead man’s identity. The police had probably not identified Ljubica Topic’s killer, but the prospect of fraud did not fuel public protests in Windsor or Toronto.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who felt compelled to speak out on a hijab hoax in Toronto, was silent about the news of the cold case. In 2017, Trudeau gained fame for awarding $10.5 million to Omar Khadr, a Canadian-born al-Qaeda militant who killed an American soldier, Sgt. Christopher Speer, in a 2002 firefight in Afghanistan.
In 2019 it emerged that Prime Minister Trudeau was fond of appearing in blackface and covering the “Banana Boat Song.” The Prime Minister’s racism failed to spark public protests, but when it comes to blatant racism it’s never too late.
In Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal, Canadians can protest in the streets all night long, perhaps singing, “daylight come and me want go home.” Protest is always more valid when it targets people and events at home, rather than some other country.
If all mourners attending George Floyd’s funeral are truly there to pay him their last respects, they should forgo all self-aggrandizing publicity allowing his loved ones to give him the dignified Christian burial he deserves
Publicity seekers will use the sad occasion of the George Floyd funeral for self-aggrandizing publicity—and his bereaved family should not allow it.
Publicity hounds of every color, every ideology should be forced to respect the Floyd funeral.
George Floyd funeral should be all about him and not them
George Floyd’s funeral, intended by his loved ones as his an earnest last farewell, is an occasion where all attendees should only be there to pay their last respects to the man whose death sparked worldwide protests, and to pray sincerely that he Rest in Peace.
In other words, the George Floyd funeral should be all about him and not them.
All potential Scene Stealers like Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, shown in viral videos “sobbing uncontrollably” over the coffin of the man tragically killed while in Minneapolis police custody, should be held at bay.
All egos should be left outside the church door before stepping inside
All egos—including those of election-bound Democrats like Joe Biden—should be left outside the church door before stepping inside.
Past experience has taught us how far political publicity hounds will go in calling attention back to themselves rather than allowing it to focus on the one being mourned.
At the Dec. 10, 2013 Nelson Mandela Memorial, a ‘selfie’ of then President Barack Obama, with then British Prime Minister David Cameron and Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, which went viral over the Internet, was the big takeaway.
The Memorial, held at the 95,000-seat FNB Stadium was only two-thirds full “because of the cold, rain and transport challenges “ (Wikipedia)
Obama selfie that travelled the globe
“Only crass, publicity seeking politicians show their grief with selfies.” (Canada Free Press, Dec. 11, 2013)
“In the Obama selfie that travelled the globe, a sour-pussed Michelle Obama can be seen in the backdrop.
“Another photo depicts Michelle, who changed seats separating her husband from his “new friend” having her hand kissed by Barack Obama.”
All of this during a Nelson Mandela’s official Memorial!
‘Obama Behind Bars in Robben Island Prison’
“A photo of Obama tweeted by the White House on Dec. 5 in response to Nelson Mandela’s death had been taken six months earlier at the Robben Island prison where Mandela spent 18 of his 27 years imprisoned. (CFP)
“You can call ‘Obama Behind Bars in Robben Island Prison’ Obama’s prepper picture.
“While America is being held in an ObamaCare stranglehold, blood pressure shot up when a photo of Obama shaking Cuban President Raul Castro’s hand went viral on the Net yesterday. As that photo was still burning its way through public resentment, came the selfie of Obama with Cameron and Thorning-Schmidt.
“The Obama-Castro handshake photo made room for morons like CNN’s Chris Cuomo to cash in on publicity by declaring that the handshake was really “the spirit of reconciliation”:
“The handshake was obviously a huge moment,” Cuomo said. “But not to be misunderstood, the handshake with Raul Castro, the president of Cuba, we believe was President Obama showing respect to Nelson Mandela and the occasion of today—the spirit of reconciliation”.
There is still time for the family of George Floyd to keep publicity hounds in check at his Tuesday funeral
There is still time for the family of George Floyd to keep publicity hounds in check at his Tuesday funeral.
‘George Floyd will be laid to rest in Houston, Texas. (ABC News, June 2, 2020.)
“Family, friends and supporters of George Floyd will honor his memory in three cities starting on Thursday.
“The first memorial service will be on June 4 in Minneapolis at North Central University’s Frank J. Lindquist Sanctuary, where Rev. Al Sharpton will deliver a “national eulogy” and one of the Floyd family attorneys, Ben Crump, will give a “national criminal justice address.”
“Another memorial service will be held on June 6 in Raeford, North Carolina, the state where Floyd was born, at Cape Fear Conference B Headquarters.
“The celebration of life services will head to Houston, Texas, where Floyd had previously lived, on June 8. A public visitation will occur at The Fountain of Praise on Hillcroft Avenue from noon to 6 p.m. local time.
“A private funeral service will be held at the same location on June 9 at 11 a.m. local time, which former Vice President Joe Biden is expected to attend.”
Meanwhile, If all mourners attending George Floyd’s funeral are truly there to pay him their last respects, they should forgo all self-aggrandizing publicity allowing his loved ones to give him the dignified Christian burial he deserves.
There is a civil war inside the New York Times as is the case in just about every major newspaper. This war is emerging between the young journalists and the 40+ old-wing liberals who have lost their way and surrendered all ethics of what was once journalism. What has changed is that the classically liberal process has transformed from investigative objectivity to always criticizing in public any opposition which in itself requires that one holds certain opposite convictions which means any objectivity has been surrendered. The capacity of reason to determine right from wrong has become biased to one’s own side to prevail and what has been rejected is debate. The substance is never addressed, simply they attack the messenger. There is no evolution of thought or advancement for society through the historical give and take of argument.
Journalism has lost any degree of modesty about the likelihood of any comprehensive moral and political view triumphing so decisively that competing views vanish or shrink to the furthest margins of a free society. Indeed, journalism has become just personal propaganda. Once upon a time, journalism was a noble cause for it was about a practical and functional form of truth that may not be even absolute or philosophical, but it was the pursuit of the truths that impacted our society. It was once perhaps a lofty goal that began with the professional discipline of assembling and verifying facts as was the case with the legal and political professions.
But journalists, have succumbed to bias and no longer try to convey a fair and reliable account of their events. FAKE NEWS has simply become a platform for personal bias warranting no further investigation. Journalism has digressed to nothing more than standing on a soap-box at Speaker’s Corner in Hyde Park, London. Journalists are no longer transparent about sources or methods so audiences can make their own assessment of the information.
Journalism’s first loyalty was to citizens not to Governments nor to their Editors
The larger truth, over time, will always emerge which only exposes the sad state of journalism when we so desperately need a trusted voice. As citizens have been turning more and more to news sources on the internet rather than TV or newspapers which seem to be the mainstay of the older generations. Back in 2008, 31% were relying on the internet. By 2013, 55% of Americans relied on TV news.
The Washington Post still displays its motto – Democracy Dies in Darkness. The refusal to simply report the news objectively is killing our Democracy as well as our freedom. This COVID nonsense is all about control. The fact that 100,000 people have died as a percent of the population is 0.0003%. The worst flu season in recent years was 2017-2018 where there were over 48.8 million illnesses, more than 22.7 million medical visits, 959,000 hospitalizations, and 79,400 deaths. We did not have social distancing, shut down all sports, plays, theme parks, and art theatre, nor did we destroy the economy. None of the mainstream press has even dared to question if what has taken place was an over-reaction.
As the generations shift, this election Joe Biden looks like he will not even last for a second term assuming he remembers his own name. This is the last hoorah for this generation of the ’60s. This is the same in the media. We are at a generational crossroads and what lies ahead is something far different than what the older generation expect.
Yesterday the new black panderers organized a million Antifa march with the Black Lives Matter crowd in Washington DC. Unfortunately, they fell approximately 990,000 people short of the million person goal; only about 10,000 marchers present.
The window of exploitation & opportunity is closing even faster than we expected.
Not surprisingly the media hyped the thousands that did attend resulting in a skewed reality that was/is disconnected from the actual result. In media you would think there was a massive alignment of social interests. However, if you look at the reception rate for the message, there’s a big disconnect.
Again, as previously noted, the downstream reception rate, the people who receive the message, take action on the message and/or join in the amplification of the message; much like the protest attendance rate, was very small considering the scale of the push.
We can debate what is creating the disconnect, but the chasm is undeniable. People are just not as organically tuned-in as the media would have you believe they are. The efforts of the social influencers are not yielding results; and you can see this reality in the way the media is increasingly desperate to keep pushing the messaging.
“Defund The Police” is not working outside the most severe leftist woke groups.
Perhaps people are burned-out with the constant demand for outrage; or perhaps people have caught-on to the manipulation. I’m not sure what specifically is driving the lack of engagement; but people are just going on with their lives while the constant drumbeat of shouting voices is being blasted at them. The drumbeat is loud, perhaps one of the loudest ever, but the drumbeat is also astroturf and not organic. This appears to be part of the reason for the disconnect.
You could hold a free pizza party in DC on a weekend day and get more attendance than yesterday’s audience. The Philadelphia march was large but fizzled quick. The New York march fizzled even faster… folks are simply moving on. This has to be very frustrating for the astroturf organizers. They have every corporate and institutional apparatus in alignment right now, but there’s a shortage of people purchasing the program.
If you only looked at mainstream media you probably wouldn’t notice it; but if you dig down beyond the parts that are being forcibly pushed to “trending” status by the social-media engineers you’ll quickly see the facade. It’s a Potemkin narrative.
Here’s where it gets really interesting. The designers of the movement have been clearly following a script and a schedule. After we watched the Ben Crump interview last week the schedule was clear. The national script was supposed to culminate in coordination with the Floyd funeral schedule. However, funeral #2 (Saturday) was a total flop.
Joe Biden is heading to Houston Texas for funeral #3. A viewing on Monday and the final funeral/memorial service on Tuesday. Biden’s attendance was predictable; however, even that is now sketchy and shows evidence of campaign failure:
(Reuters) – Democratic U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden will travel to Houston on Monday and meet with the family of George Floyd, two weeks after Floyd’s death in police custody triggered nationwide protests over racial injustice, aides said.
Biden is expected to offer his sympathies to Floyd’s relatives and record a video message for the private funeral service scheduled to take place on Tuesday in Floyd’s hometown of Houston, two aides said. He is not expected to attend the service to avoid any disruption to mourners that could be caused by his Secret Service protective detail. (read more)
Ignore the silly ‘secret service’ justification for not attending the service on Tuesday. The campaign should be embarrassed for even attempting that. If there was political value in the appearance, the campaign would shove his ass in the room. “secret service disruption”? Too funny. Laugh-Out-Loud, child’ please. As if the DNC would care about disrupting funeral services when there are votes to be gained. That’s precious, right there.
James Clyburn is the ringmaster.
Clyburn is working with Sharpton, Crump, 2-J’s and the new black panderers to position Biden for maximum racial grievance and political value. Funeral disrupting? Again, too funny.
So, despite the fact he is literally there, in Houston, meeting the family for the first time at the end of a week-long national tour; Joe Biden is going to “record a video message” Monday to play at the funeral Tuesday? Weird.
Either: (A) Joe’s backsliding on the cognitive issues again and they need to control the optics of speech via editing; or (B), the video is needed because the campaign needs something, anything, to extract from the event that can be used to stir up the AME church network later on; or (C) part of the pre-plan has failed to come through; or (D) All of it.
[I vote “D”]
The Clyburn plan; and please don’t forget James Clyburn is the campaign manager and in total control of every aspect of everything; would likely have Biden meeting up with Obama and Bush in Houston. The optics of ‘national healing’ and ‘political unity’ only made possible by Joe Biden was the goal.
The three panderers seated at the front of the final farewell show is the best optic; and most useful for corporate media to shape and push. Everything was going in that direction until today. Doing something less than optimal politics means something has changed.
Maybe the private polling around four funerals and a national grievance tour has shown signs of backlash. Maybe the lack of organic interest has rung some alarm bells.
Perhaps the American people seeing thousands of people protesting while they cannot hold funerals for their loved-ones, open their businesses. or attend their own churches has found its way to the attention of those who review optics. Dunno, but something’s up.
The earlier racist comment by Joe Biden about if you don’t support him “you ain’t black”, could very well be a much bigger issue than the alliance is willing to admit. That would not surprise me at all…. Combine that with the ridiculous “Defund The Police” nonsense, and there’s two big roadblocks to any organic mass political movement.
Even limo-liberals eventually wonder: if you take away the police, who is Karen going to call when she only gets nine nuggets in her 10-piece happy meal?
What is clear, very clear, is the window of opportunity is closing fast; and so far, other than some very woke symbolism, the crew who coordinated this – has gained very little from it.
.
The internal racism within the “people of color” coalition was always the inherent problem for Obama, Eric Holder and Tom Perez (Team BLM), because the Nation of Islam and New Black Panther Party absolutely dislike Latinos.
Latinos lean heavily Christian; while the radical NoI and NBPP elements who agreed to align within the BLM movement are heavily influenced by Islam. This is why there are two internal black coalitions. BLM is influenced by Islam, while the AME coalition is Christian.
The media, especially the political media, are never allowed to talk about the internal ideologies behind the two camps: Team Obama (BLM – Islam) and Team Clyburn (AME – Christian); but the issues are very real and keeping the coalition together is not easy.
Watching Al Sharpton (AME team) deliver his racial narrative to the Minneapolis funeral audience last Thursday, but team BLM removing him before funeral #2 on Saturday in North Carolina, is a reflection of how important and tenuous the dynamic really is.
The BLM foot-soldiers do not like the lack of purity within the Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton messaging. Two-J’s and Sharptongue are both old-school AME members where religious worship kneels at the altar of money. The DNC has the same objective, ergo historically the DNC and AME were in alignment. .
Those behind the BLM network are more ideological and they see the AME’s lust for money as a risk. It’s a weird interplay and ultimately that’s why the two factions keep splitting apart.
Floyd family lawyer, Benjamin Crump, is more AME than he is BLM. Al Sharpton was Crump’s mentor going all the way back to the Martin Lee Anderson case in 2006. But at the same time Crump, Clyburn and by extension Joe Biden, needs the BLM foot-soldiers to drum the social justice message in order to achieve maximum impact.
Bottom line – the Minneapolis opportunists, specifically the Muslim community, will benefit from the current anti-police narrative. The Somali Muslim community wants Sharia-enforcement officers instead of traditional law enforcement. Ergo the Ellison/Omar agenda will benefits from recent events.
However, beyond the local benefit, the new BLM/AME alliance does not seem to be moving the national needle. If you look closely it appears more and more people have caught on to the unspoken and divisive agenda.
The long standing issues between Latinos and Blacks is an important angle to watch; especially with 2020 Democrat candidate Joe Biden going down on his knees in favor of the BLM/AME network.
There is a risk 2020 Democrats might lose more Latinos than they will gain amid blacks.
This type of political calculation based on identity politics always carries a risk. We could be seeing -once again- the outcome of what happens when political ideology intersects with a very divided assembly of special interests.
U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr appears on CBS Face The Nation earlier today to discuss recent events. CBS’s primary narrative engineer Margaret Brennan was determined to advance several false media reports as the attorney general slapped them down.
Ms. Brennan was determined to stay argumentative and combative and was not happy that AG Bill Barr deconstructed her false talking points. The overall agenda for the media this weekend is to enhance a divisive narrative; and Ms. Brennan has her role to play.
[Transcript] – MARGARET BRENNAN: Earlier this morning I went to the Justice Department to speak with Attorney General Bill Barr. In his role as the nation’s top law enforcement officer, he used the full force of the federal government, including agents from the FBI, ATF, Border Patrol, Bureau of Prisons and the Drug Enforcement Administration to assist the National Guard and local police in an effort to end the violence and looting that happened earlier in the week in Washington. Sixteen hundred active-duty troops were also put on standby.
MARGARET BRENNAN: A senior administration official told our CBS’ David Martin, that in a meeting at the White House on Monday morning, the President demanded that ten thousand active-duty troops be ordered into American streets. Is that accurate?
WILLIAM BARR (U.S. Attorney General): No, that’s completely false. That’s completely false. Sunday night–
MARGARET BRENNAN: The President did not demand that?
WILLIAM BARR: No, he did not demand that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: What happened?
WILLIAM BARR: I came over on– on Monday morning for a meeting. The night before had been the most violent, as one of the police officials told us, the DC police, it was the most violent day in Washington in thirty years, something that the media has not done a very good job of covering. And there had been a– a riot right along Lafayette Park. I was called over and asked if I would coordinate federal civil agencies and that the Defense Department would provide whatever support I needed or we needed to protect federal property federal– at the White House, federal personnel. The decision was made to have at the ready and on hand in the vicinity some regular troops. But everyone agreed that the use of regular troops as a last resort and that as long as matters can be controlled with other resources, they should be. I felt, and the Secretary of Defense felt, we had adequate resources and wouldn’t need to use federal troops. But in case we did we wanted them nearby.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So what–
WILLIAM BARR: There was never– the President never asked or suggested that we needed to deploy regular troops at that point. It’s been done from time to time in our history. We try to avoid it and I’m happy that we were able to avoid it on this occasion.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So there were active duty troops put on standby. They were not deployed. The 82nd Airborne was put on standby–
WILLIAM BARR: So the–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –but not sent into the streets.
WILLIAM BARR: Some 82nd Airborne military police were brought into the area. But they were not brought into DC.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. So what part– I just want to make sure that we’re precise here, what part of that conversation, as it’s been relayed to CBS and to other news organizations, is false? Did the President not demand active duty troops? Did–
WILLIAM BARR: Well, your question to me just a moment ago was, did he demand them on the streets, did he demand them in DC? No, we had them on standby in case they were needed.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right. Which they were put on standby. They were not deployed.
WILLIAM BARR: Right.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So in our reporting, we were also told that you, the Defense Secretary Mark Esper, and General Milley, all opposed the idea of actually deploying these active-duty troops onto the streets. Is that accurate?
WILLIAM BARR: I think our position was common, which was that they should only be– be deployed if– as a last resort and that we didn’t think we would need them. Every– I think everyone was on the same page.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think that the President has the authority to unilaterally send in active-duty troops if the governors oppose it?
WILLIAM BARR: Oh, absolutely. The– under the anti-Insurrection Act, the– the President can use regular troops to suppress rioting. The Confederate– the Confederacy in our country opposed the use of federal troops to restore order and suppress an insurrection. So the federal government sometimes doesn’t listen to governors in certain circumstances.
MARGARET BRENNAN: The last time that this has happened was the L.A. riots in 1992 when the governor of California asked for active-duty troops.
WILLIAM BARR: That’s correct.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You’re saying your understanding and the law, as you interpret it and would support is that the President has the ability to put active-duty troops on American streets, even if governors object?
WILLIAM BARR: It’s happened numerous times. And the answer to that is yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You would support that?
WILLIAM BARR: Well, it depends on the circumstances. I was involved in the L.A. riots and the Rodney King matter. We tried to use non-military forces. I sent two thousand federal law enforcement officers out there in one day, but it was overwhelming. And the National Guard couldn’t handle it and Governor Pete Wilson asked for federal troops.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And he asked for them.
WILLIAM BARR: Yes.
MARGARET BRENNAN: That’s a key distinction.
WILLIAM BARR: Or he approved the use of federal troops, but those troops were on standby as well.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Because I think a number of people would be surprised to hear and it’s been reported that you opposed sending in active duty troops on principle. You’re saying you would support it?
WILLIAM BARR: As a last resort.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So in this Monday meeting with the President, when the Defense Secretary, who has now publicly said that he opposed using the Insurrection Act, you said what to the President?
WILLIAM BARR: I don’t think the Secretary of Defense said he opposed it. I think he said that it was a last resort; he didn’t think it was necessary. I think we all agree that it’s a last resort, but it’s, ultimately, the President’s decision. The– the reporting is completely false on this.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you believe there is systemic racism in law enforcement?
WILLIAM BARR: I think there’s racism in the United States still but I don’t think that the law enforcement system is systemically racist. I understand the– the distrust, however, of the African-American community given the history in this country. I think we have to recognize that for most of our history, our institutions were explicitly racist. Since the 1960s, I think we’ve been in a phase of reforming our institutions and making sure that they’re in sync with our laws and aren’t fighting a rearguard action to impose inequities.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you think that’s working?
WILLIAM BARR: I think– I think the reform is a difficult task, but I think it is working and progress has been made. I think one of the best examples is the military. The military used to be explicitly racist institution. And now I think it’s in the vanguard of– of bringing the races together and providing equal opportunity. I think law enforcement has been going through the same process.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you think there should be some tweaking of the rules, reduced immunity to go after some of the bad cops?
WILLIAM BARR: I don’t think you need to reduce immunity to– to go after the bad cops, because that would result certainly in– in police pulling back. It’s, you know, policing is the toughest job in the country. And I– and I, frankly, think that we have generally the vast, overwhelming majority of police are good people. They’re civic-minded people who believe in serving the public. They do so bravely. They do so righteously.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But the bad cops.
WILLIAM BARR: I– I think that there are instances of bad cops. And I think we have to be careful about automatically assuming that the actions of an individual necessarily mean that their organization is rotten. All organizations have people who engage in misconduct, and you sometimes have to be careful as to when you ascribe that to the whole organization and when it really is some errant member who isn’t following the rules.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But doesn’t the opening the pattern-or-practice investigation into a place like Minneapolis where there are questions about the broader issues with policing, it wasn’t just the one officer, wouldn’t that answer that question?
WILLIAM BARR: Well, that’s exactly the reaction that I think has been a problem in the past, which is it just, again, just reacting to this incident by immediately putting the department under investigation doesn’t necessarily result in– in improving the situation. But I would say that in the first instance, the governor has announced an investigation of the police department. The governor, Governor Walz, a Democratic governor, is investigating the police department. The attorney general of– of Minnesota is looking into the police department. We stand ready to act if we think it’s necessary. But I don’t think necessarily starting a– a pattern-or-practice investigation at this stage is warranted. Another thing is we have to look at some of the evidence. I mean, people, you know, the fact is that the criminal justice system at both the state and the federal level moved instantaneously on this. And we moved quickly with our investigation. But we still have to look into what kind of use of force policies are used in that department, what the training has been and things like that. That’s not something we can do overnight.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Coming up after our break, the attorney general tells us about the forcible clearing of Lafayette Park ahead of the President’s visit there on Monday. Also, I want to make sure to note that CBS News stands by our David Martin’s reporting. And we want to clarify here that the Secretary of Defense Esper does oppose the Insurrection Act. You can hear for yourself.
MARK ESPER: I do not support invoking the Insurrection Act.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’ll be back in one minute.
(ANNOUNCEMENTS)
MARGARET BRENNAN: And we’re back now with more from Attorney General William Barr.
MARGARET BRENNAN: I want to ask you about some of the events of the week. On Monday, Lafayette Park was cleared of protesters. You’ve spoken about this. The federal agents who were there report up to you. Did you think it was appropriate for them to use smoke bombs, tear gas, pepper balls, projectiles at what appeared to be peaceful protesters?
WILLIAM BARR: They were not peaceful protesters. And that’s one of the big lies that the– the media is– seems to be perpetuating at this point.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Three of my CBS colleagues were there. We talked to them.
WILLIAM BARR: Yeah.
MARGARET BRENNAN: They did not hear warnings. They did not see protesters–
WILLIAM BARR: There were three warnings.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –throwing anything.
WILLIAM BARR: There were three warnings given. But– but let’s get back to why we took that action. On Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, okay, there were violent riots in– at Lafayette Park where the park police were under constant attack at the– behind their bike rack fences. On Sunday, things reached a crescendo. The officers were pummeled with bricks. Crowbars were used to pry up the pavers at the park and they were hurled at police. There were fires set in not only St. John’s Church, but a historic building at Lafayette was burned down.
MARGARET BRENNAN: These were things that looters did.
WILLIAM BARR: Not looters, these were– these were the– the violent rioters who were dominated Lafayette Park.
MARGARET BRENNAN: But what I’m asking about–
WILLIAM BARR: They broke into the Treasury Department–
MARGARET BRENNAN: –on Monday when it was a peaceful protest.
WILLIAM BARR: I’m going to– let me– let me get to this, because this has been totally obscured by the media. They broke into the Treasury Department, and they were injuring police. That night–
MARGARET BRENNAN: Sunday night?
WILLIAM BARR: Sunday night, the park police prepared a plan to clear H Street and put a– a larger perimeter around the White House so they could build a more permanent fence on Lafayette.
MARGARET BRENNAN: This is something you approved on Sunday night?
WILLIAM BARR: No. The Park Police on their own on– on Sunday night determined this was the proper approach. When I came in Monday, it was clear to me that we did have to increase the perimeter on that side of Lafayette Park and push it out one block. That decision was made by me in the morning. It was communicated to all the police agencies, including the Metropolitan Police at 2:00 PM that day. The– the effort was to move the perimeter one block and it had to be done when we had enough people in place to achieve that. And that decision, as I say, was communicated to the police at 2:00 PM. The operation was run by the Park Police.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Mm-Hm.
WILLIAM BARR: The Park Police was facing what they considered to be a very rowdy and a non-compliant crowd. And there were projectiles being hurled at the police. And at that point, it was not to respond–
MARGARET BRENNAN: On Monday, you’re saying there were projectiles–
WILLIAM BARR: On Monday, yes, there were.
MARGARET BRENNAN: As I’m saying, three of my colleagues were there.
WILLIAM BARR: Yeah.
MARGARET BRENNAN: They did not see projectiles being thrown–
WILLIAM BARR: I was there.
MARGARET BRENNAN: –when that happened.
WILLIAM BARR: I was there. They were thrown. I saw them thrown.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And you believe that what the Park Police did using tear gas and projectiles was appropriate?
WILLIAM BARR: Here’s– here’s what the media is missing. This was not an operation to respond to that particular crowd. It was an operation to move the perimeter one block.
MARGARET BRENNAN: And the methods they used you think were appropriate, is that what you’re saying?
WILLIAM BARR: When they met resistance, yes. They announced three times. They didn’t move. By the way, there was no tear gas used. The tear gas was used Sunday when they had to clear H Street to allow the fire department to come in to save St. John’s Church. That’s when tear gas was used.
MARGARET BRENNAN: There were chemical irritants the Park Police has said–
WILLIAM BARR: No, they were not chemical irritants. Pepper spray is not a chemical irritant. It’s not chemical.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Pepper spray, you’re saying is what was used–
WILLIAM BARR: Pepper balls. Pepper balls.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, and you believe that was appropriate. What I want to show you is what a lot of people at home who were watching this on television saw and their perception of events. I want you to see what the public at home saw.
PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: I am your president of law and order and an ally of all peaceful protesters. But In recent days, our nation has been gripped by professional anarchists, violent mobs, arsonists, looters, criminals, rioters, Antifa and others. A number of state and local governments–
MARGARET BRENNAN: So while the President is saying that he appreciates peaceful protest, around the same time, this crowd–
WILLIAM BARR: Well, six minutes– six minutes difference there I would say.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Right, around the same time the area is being cleared of what appear to be peaceful protesters using some force. And after the speech is finished, the President then walked out of the White House to the same area where the protesters had been and stands for photo op in front of the church where the protesters had been. These events look very connected to people at home. In an environment where the broader debate is about heavy-handed use of force and law enforcement, was that the right message for Americans to be receiving?
WILLIAM BARR: Well, the message is sometimes communicated by the media. I didn’t see any video being played on the media of what was happening Friday, Saturday, and Sunday–
MARGARET BRENNAN: But– but this confluence of events–
WILLIAM BARR: All I heard– all I heard was comments about how peaceful protesters were. I didn’t hear about the fact that there were hundred and fifty law enforcement officers injured and many taken to the hospital with concussions. So it wasn’t a peaceful protest. We had to get control over Lafayette Park, and we had to do it as soon as we were able to do that.
MARGARET BRENNAN: So you understand how these events appear connected? The timing of this–
WILLIAM BARR: Well, it’s the job of the media to tell the truth. They were not connected.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, this is what I’m asking you. Did you know when you gave the green light for these actions to be taken that the President was going to be going in that very same area for a photo op?
WILLIAM BARR: I gave the green light at two o’clock. Obviously, I didn’t know that the President was going to be speaking later that day.
MARGARET BRENNAN: You had no idea?
WILLIAM BARR: No. No, I did not.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Do you see–
WILLIAM BARR: The go ahead was given at two o’clock. And to do it as soon as we were able to do it, to move the perimeter from– from H Street to I Street.
MARGARET BRENNAN: We’re both Catholic. I know you’re observant. You’re a devout Catholic. Archbishop Gregory of Washington condemned what happened by gassing peaceful protesters.
WILLIAM BARR: There– there was no gas.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is– is doing– is what we saw there doing what you meant when you were on that call with governors and you said to dominate the streets?
WILLIAM BARR: Mm-Hm.
MARGARET BRENNAN: Is that what law enforcement is supposed to be taking away from this?
WILLIAM BARR: No, on the contrary. My point to the governors and what I was saying was that it’s important when you’re dealing with civil disturbances to have adequate forces at hand and out.
President Trump was slammed by two US Defense Secretaries over threats to use Fed intervention against George Floyd riots. Current Sec. Defense Esper and former Sec. Defense Gen. Jim Mattis both hit Trump for referencing the Insurrection Act. Mattis, in midst of widespread looting, violence and murder, still blithely supports “protests” with Obama. The sly retired general even cited Nazis. Is Mattis a fair and unbiased warrior-king? Actually, Trump notedhis Dem Party leanings, before parting ways over the Iran Treaty. But the goal here is to humiliate Trump to cripple him during the Floyd riots so American Social Justice triumphs and Joe Biden prevails.
Defense Sec Esper: More Woke Than Rip Van Winkle?
By televised speech, obtuse Defense Sec. Esper rejected Trump’s threat of the Insurrection Act against urban rioting. Criticizing Floyd’s death, Esper stated the military opposed racism. But what of violence and deaths across America? Why publicly air opposition to Trump? Finally, don’t threats work better without stating they are unavailable? It’s unseemly for Esper to oppose Trump publicly. Amazingly, Esper claims the US Military exists to wipe out all hatred. Really?!!
…expressing our outrage at what happened, expressing our commitment to the Constitution, expressing our commitment as an institution to—to end racism and hatred in all its forms, and just a general expression with regard to what the department is about.”
GEN MATTIS: LEFTWING CHARACTER ASSASSIN
Gen ‘Cheapshot’ Mattis
Meanwhile, crusty military fossil Gen. Mattis gutshot Trump, claiming constitutional dangers of stateside military action. Yet, his essay is not persuasive. Does Mattis really oppose the US military saving women, children and men from assaults, arson and murder? Why is “allowing protests” the “right” choice when tens of thousands are in danger? Yet despite Mattis’ blase’ attitude, riots are causing “‘the most costly civil disorder in United States history.” With 10,000 arrests, violent attacks and murders, and economic loss in the billions. Mattis calls these a “small number of lawbreakers.”
Riots Continue
Yet, mobs still rage unimpeded across America as looting spirals amidst cityscapes bathed in flames. Frankly, in every liberal led city, the failure to deploy the National Guard has multiplied chaos and damage. But Mattis is dead wrong since the Insurrection Act was used in the Rodney King riots without harm. So if Mattis cares so much about America—Why doesn’t he mention all the national victims, some beaten or shot to death?
Whenever the President considers that unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages, or rebellion against the authority of the United States, make it impracticable to enforce the laws of the US in any State by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he may call into Federal service such of the militia of any State, and use such of the armed forces, as he considers necessary to enforce those laws or to suppress the rebellion.
Mattis Simply Delivers Political Hit
Instead of constitutional crisis, Mattis highlights a policy disagreement, over Trump’s pro- American-safety standard versus Mattis’ Social Justice mirage. In fact, Republicans previously complained of “warrior” Mattis’ real liberalism. He abandons riot victims simply to score points with leftist buddies, like former Chief of Staff John Kelly, who backstabs Trump claiming we must “choose better candidates”—like Obama? Here are Mattis’ words:
I watched this week’s unfolding events, angry and appalled. The words “Equal Justice Under Law” are carved in the pediment of the United States Supreme Court. This is precisely what protesters are rightly demanding. It is a wholesome and unifying demand — one that all of us should be able to get behind. We must not be distracted by a small number of lawbreakers. The protests are defined by tens of thousands of people of conscience who are insisting that we live up to our values — our values as people and our values as a nation.
HISTORY OF SOCIAL JUSTICE
Roots of Woke Culture
So, what are the roots of “Social Justice”? Michael Rectenwald claims in “Springtime for Snowflakes: “Social Justice” and Its Postmodern Parentage”—“Social justice gestated within the university as postmodern theory ruled the roost. It was nursed during the Occupy movement and the Obama era.” And, “Contemporary social justice embodies postmodern theoretical notions as well as the latter’s adoption of Maoist and Stalinist disciplinary methods.”
““Social justice” has been mainly a religious conception, in the sense that it originated in religious circles, underwent a large part of its conceptual development in official statements of religious authorities, and has been adopted most enthusiastically by the members of religious organizations. Since 1931 it has been part of the official teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.”
Hayek: Social Justice is a Meaningless Conception
F. A. wrote The Mirage of Social Justice, arguing Social Justice is an empty phrase. He states, “Everybody talks about social justice, but if you ask people exactly what they mean by social justice, what they accept as justice, nobody knows. I’ve been trying for the last twenty years, asking people ‘What exactly are your principles?’”
Likewise, when America’s highest ranking soldiers attempt to adopt Social Justice, they make a mockery of logic and become asinine public pests demanding all officials adopt their convictions. The US Military would be better served to adopt the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”—except when killing our enemies.
Do you really want America set right side up again? Then prayerfully pry your lazy self out of your recliner, and get to the polls and vote for the people promoting what is right
Remember when the biggest problem we had was the coronavirus? Now America is on fire. Shop and bank windows are getting beaten in. Cars and trucks are tipped over, people are hurt and killed – you name it. All because a bunch of slobs have been convinced they are authentic ‘protesters.’ But they aren’t protesters. They are simply more anarchist ‘shoppers’ with no money carrying sledgehammers. Some are young adventure-hunters who don’t have a nodding acquaintance with any righteous cause. Others are paid to disrupt our country and have no real connection to the act they are allegedly protesting.
Now everything is more out of control than America has ever seen
I was amazed as the virus kept spreading, and nobody much called upon God. A lot of the Christian church was entering into scientific debates with nonbelievers. The rest of the Christian church seemed to be looking to politics to clean everything up. And just as that mess was beginning to look like it might stabilize, some evil demon dressed in a uniform satisfied his twisted anger on a defenseless black man. He had no idea what would ensue. Yet the devil who egged him on knew precisely how strategically this insanity would work in his favor.
Now everything is more out of control than America has ever seen. Don’t try to compare this mess with King’s march from Selma to Montgomery in ‘65, or even when Obama flexed his mob’s muscle in Charlottesville, right after Trump won. It was such a shuck when AG Lynch stepped to her microphone and applauded the Charlottesville debacle as “Americans peacefully exercising their First Amendment rights.” And nobody got it. That was just hours away from the Super Bowl where our black president applauded scantily clad, ‘New Black Panther’- uniformed babes shaking their booties to hot rock. And that was the best our nation could do under his leadership—more senseless trendy conformity.
Now a lot of American cities are being flipped upside down. Most country towns (I am in one of them) have had pitiful little handfuls of ‘protesters’ standing on corners holding up signs and joining in the ‘big city’ festivities. All this nonsense is just as ridiculous as when ‘Billy the Kid’ (Dennis Hopper) said to his buddy, ‘Captain America’ (Peter Fonda) in the now freeze-dried movie, “Easy Rider”—“World aglow, man! World aglow!”
If we owe ‘reparations’ to anyone, it is to our President Trump who has had his entire time in office hamstrung by a bunch of liars with cameras
He was on acid at the time. And most all of us kids—we called ourselves ‘hippies’, back in 1969 when that came out—left the theater to go home to a sweet little house our parents had secured for us to grow up in. I had an apartment that could not be beat. I had a job, so I could afford that. And the following morning we all woke up and went back to our lives as usual. Eventually, we got married, had our own kids, and so on. And while we hippies were chasing sex, peace and street pharmaceuticals combined with rock concerts, budding monsters like Hillary Clinton and, later, Barack Obama, were silently looking on and saying to themselves “They’re losing their minds! And I can USE all this!”
It is real easy to see that—in all the mobs of what the media is calling ‘protesters,’ there is not a shred of authenticity in these crews of fist-swinging ‘shoppers’ who are simply stealing from America. And the celebrities and politicians who are lending their support are merely, once again, riding whatever momentum they can find in the fray.
Okay, so 2016 gave us a president who (if people would open their eyes and notice) the ‘big six’ network news media along with the ultra-money entertainment empire are out to kill. If we owe ‘reparations’ to anyone, it is to our President Trump who has had his entire time in office hamstrung by a bunch of liars with cameras representing a completely entrenched and working worldwide ‘voice’. But you can’t blame anyone but us baby boomers who (present company excluded) allowed a television set to raise their children. And now their children’s children, who were weaned on the likes of HBO, Cinemax, alleged ‘Adult’ viewing, and bedtime stories by Howard Stern as parents were still out partying. So today, the surviving George Bush proudly strides and smiles warmly with the rest of his powerful, like-minded friends who see people as nothing more than numbers in a tumultuous sea of human backs they can ride upon in achieving their dreams. Dummies. Not a legitimate protester in the bunch.
Obama became our first black president, simply because he was black
Obama became our first black president, simply because he was black. He was barely qualified to deliver pizza. Nevertheless, somebody had groomed him for what he is today. And when you criticize anything about the man, you are now instantly labeled a ‘racist’. How stupid. But, get used to it. The once-crucial terms we toss around today have all been thoroughly redefined into nonsense. And the nonsense stands because a very real devil, through a warm television/Internet, has raised up a generation of morons who don’t see straight—even when it means gambling with a life-and-death matter like what we see evolving around us. I mean, everybody was decrying safe borders, until we discovered the worst sorts of diseases could come through those wide-open borders and, just as easily, also came members of drug cartels and criminals seeking new opportunities to grow their businesses in a ridiculously subsidized and law-protected environment.
Tonight I saw Justin Trudeau joining the protesters in criticizing the best president America has ever had. And doubtless he is doing that because his anarchist buddy, BH Obama, and his crew, are looking to drive a stake into the heart of limping America. He needs another cute face to help sell this emerging ‘democratic’ (leftist) takeover. The bottom line is that it is of course a stinking rotten shame that three or four worthless cop uniforms can kill an innocent, gentle black man. And the devil who had them do that knew that this current chaos would absolutely follow (providing the right lies were told and the tempers of a bunch of ignorant minds were stoked into flame just right). Silence and peace are the number one enemies of the devil who knows his time is short. And bloody chaos and fear are precisely the distraction he needs in order to allow evil to thoroughly take root and flourish in this, his last moments in time.
God managed to corner me on the campus of the University of Texas in 1974. I’d had a near death experience as a result of doing speed for a couple of years prior. I don’t know about other people, but it took death for me to process some serious questions and decisions about a future I suddenly realized was not guaranteed. After I had met the real, yet invisible, risen Lord Jesus Christ—-who, 2000 years earlier, gave us an aerial snapshot of all this mess (see Luke 21 and Matthew 24) I was taught about the reality of the spiritual world through an experience with a bona fide satanic cult.
Our country is now being ripped apart by people who receive their training and orders from the droning trash dribbling out of televisions and computer-fed programming by demonic thieves
A lot of social club churches have been plastering “2nd Chronicles 7:14” (dust off your Bible and learn how to use it) on their program covers. And we’ve definitely seen that verse in a few Christian magazines or in memes that Facebook will keep in front of their ‘religious crowd’. But the dying souls who are genuinely lost in the confusion going on around us now won’t pay any mind to the outstretched hands of God. And that’s because second-rate comedians and sold-out ‘scientists’ have helped to drive home the atheist Darwinian lie. And that’s been done well enough to ensure the absolute worst behavior of the several millions of us who no longer know anything about godly fear or how to think logically. Everything is done emotionally nowadays. And rule-keeping, taxpaying conservatives helplessly stand in awe. Our country is now being ripped apart by people who receive their training and orders from the droning trash dribbling out of televisions and computer-fed programming by demonic thieves.
Anybody truly want this stuff to stop? Get on your knees and cry out to Jesus for His help. Do you really want America set right side up again? Then prayerfully pry your lazy self out of your recliner, and get to the polls and vote for the people promoting what is right. This blip in time in which we, for a moment, exist will continue just long enough to get all the people who will, to come into the ‘ark’ of the risen Savior. You should not have to wind up in hell in order to know it is a real place. And the people who have convinced themselves that all people are ‘really good’, and that we should spend ourselves, our talents and our resources for the ‘betterment of our planet’? Well, get used to disappointment. We all should first worry about the wrong that’s in our own hearts. That’s what got us here today.
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. Who will help citizens to uphold this alleged right?
The Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Gary Val Richardson received a fair trial, despite the judge’s wife acting as a sitting member of the jury. Judge Thomas R. Ensor, now retired, jokingly told the other jurors to “be nice” to his wife, juror 25, as his “dinner was on the line.” Both the defense attorney and prosecutor felt that Mrs. Ensor was fit to sit on the jury, but Richardon’s lawyer later said, “I think we’re both afraid to challenge her.”
Despite the conflict of interest, the jury found Richardson guilty and sentenced him to 16 years behind bars. The Colorado Supreme Court upheld that ruling this week in a 6-1 vote as they believed Richardson’s lawyer waived any right to question juror 25 by not objecting during the jury selection.
Justice Richard Gabriel was the only member of the Colorado Supreme Court to question the ruling. “To me, the question is whether Richardson was denied a fair trial when the trial judge sat on a case in which his wife served as a juror and in which the judge told everyone in the courtroom to ‘be nice’ to his wife and then repeatedly reminded everyone of his relationship with her,” Gabriel observed.
The Sixth Amendment should have granted the defendant an impartial jury, but the definition of “impartial” can be manipulated based on the reviewer. The Constitution does not guarantee protection against otherwise basic human rights, further reiterating why the US has one of the highest conviction rates in the world.
I have created this site to help people have fun in the kitchen. I write about enjoying life both in and out of my kitchen. Life is short! Make the most of it and enjoy!
This is a library of News Events not reported by the Main Stream Media documenting & connecting the dots on How the Obama Marxist Liberal agenda is destroying America
