No, The Protestors Wear Not One Drop of Blood On Their Hands

I'm going to make a very basic distinction here- a mature, adult mind can believe both that Eric Garner and the two NYPD officers shot this weekend were wrongly killed. In fact, I'll make the point a little further- any actually mature, adult mind, SHOULD make that conclusion. In other words, Eric Garner's life mattered, and the "I Can't Breathe" protestors are in the right. Also, in other words, Officers Liu and Ramos were killed by a low-life, and people who are outraged by their death are in the right, too.

There have been a few people who are outraged by Garner, and not by the NYPD shootings, and frankly something is wrong with them. There have been far too many people though outraged by the NYPD shootings, and then try to justify Garner's death. I don't understand that, and frankly I don't want to understand that backward thinking. You don't have to be okay with everything in Garner's life, nor do you have to even convict the police officer who choked him to death in your own mind, to understand the Garner death is unwarranted. Assume the worst here- that Garner was a petty criminal, and that he was selling loose cigarettes- that is not a crime we punish with death in the United States. Surely, once Garner cried out that he couldn't breathe while on the ground, there was good reason to let up on the choke hold he was in. Frankly, we saw the entire incident on video. Garner was upset that he was being bothered by the police officer, but he wasn't threatening anyone in the video. The offense he was being accused of was not a serious crime that would land him in prison. Despite Garner's protests, the officer could have written him a ticket or charged him without the chokehold. It's likely that the officer who applied the chokehold did not mean to cause him long-term harm, let alone death. The entire situation clearly escalated well beyond what was necessary. I do not understand the push to argue the entire incident was somehow "justified."

With all of that aside, this was not a good weekend for race-relations. There are now accusations flying around that somehow the people who protested, chanting "I can't breathe," and wanting justice for Eric Garner, are somehow responsible for, or for creating the atmosphere for, the deaths of Officers Liu and Ramos. I'll leave aside the notion that the "blood is on the hands" of the Mayor for a moment and stick to the protestors. The idea that the protestors are somehow responsible for the shootings of two police officers is preposterous. It lays blame where it doesn't belong, and it ignores the legitimacy of what they are saying.

The gunman was not a protestor. Yes, there were a few violent protestors, as there will be in crowds numbering in the thousands, but most of them were peaceful. The gunman wasn't in New York for any of the protests, and came up from Baltimore the day he committed his horrible acts. He acted alone, shot his girlfriend as well, and basically was just a bad person. He didn't need to have "an atmosphere" of violence. I can't speak to the officer shot in Florida, or the shooter's intentions there, but in this case, trying to tie the shooting of the NYPD officers to the protestors is a stretch of the imagination that goes too far. The protestors are protesting death through civil disobedience, not rioting in the streets and killing people. It's a far stretch to tie them, and their legitimate concerns, to murders.

It's not really any better when people try to blame politicians, as Rudy Giuliani is somehow attempting to with President Obama. That's so insane, it's stupid. While I can understand anger at Mayor de Blasio for appearing to side with Eric Garner against the police officer, even there he did not say anything that would have encouraged this kind of nut. In no way does he have "blood on his hands."

In fact, no one does here. While this is horribly tragic, the people exercising their free speech rights in the streets of New York, people who are airing very true and legitimate grievances with policing in America, are not in any way, shape, or form responsible. Those who say the protestors are in some way responsible operate in a non-reality, with no justice system to speak of. It is correct to protest a system that still has wrongs in it, and still needs more reform. To say otherwise is to be incorrect.

Let me just close with this- there are those asking why the protestors are not protesting the death of the police too. I would tend to agree with that sentiment, as the police deserve the same public support right now. The problem with that line of thinking though is that their killer is dead today, while we are consistently seeing the killers of black and brown people walk free in the end. We see Michael Brown, who woke up on the day of his death having no criminal record, vilified and called a "thug," we are seeing Eric Garner referred to as a "petty criminal," and hear attempts to vilify the Cleveland victims as "dangerous." We're hearing that Officers Liu and Ramos are heroes. They are. We'd like to see these other folks at least treated as human beings though, and not "demons." We'd like to see the grand jury system stop being used to avoid trials by a jury of peers. While we're all mourning the senseless and disgusting murder of two good public servants of the NYPD this week, let's also ask for a little bit of justice to be injected into the justice system.

Read More

Lay Off the President

It appears that the President is facing some serious criticism on the left for his speech last night. They are mad that he "didn't give the speech they want him to." President went out and addressed the nation after a national event, an event he was uniquely suited to speak on, and gave what I found to be an appropriate message. He appealed for calm and non-violence. He urged respect for our legal system. He urged our police officers to respect the rights of the people, even as he acknowledged their importance. He called the events a tragedy, and quoted from the parents of the victim. What he did not do is go out and rail against our courts and grand jury system, hammer police officers, or rip the prosecutor. He couldn't have. He shouldn't have.

The President was appropriately calm and gave the right message. I know, some on the left want him to be a radical, and go out there and call for massive change within our society. I'm glad he's not a radical, and I recognized that he never was from the start. There are certainly changes that need to be made in light of the events of Ferguson, and other events in recent months, but last night was a time for him to play healer-in-chief. He did that well. He's the President of the United States, not some rag-tag professional protestor. Urging respect for the rule of law and peaceful protest is exactly what he should be doing, not inciting a riot to appease people that are going to criticize him anyway.

Read More

Dear Ferguson (Part 2)

It's been twenty-four hours, and I think now I have my thoughts on Ferguson, Michael Brown, and Darren Wilson a little more put together. After a day, some of the raw emotion wears off, and you're left with the reality of the situation.

I start by thinking back to the moment itself- why? Why did Michael Brown, a kid who had no prior record of trouble with the cops, and who had only committed a petty theft (not the "thug criminal" his detractors like to point out), feel that he should disobey Officer Wilson, and have an altercation with him? What made him feel so negatively toward that cop? By extension, why did Wilson fear Brown? Why, after having shot him twice, did he feel the need to shoot him again? Yes, Brown was a big kid, and yes Brown had an altercation with him already, but let's not pretend he's an NFL Defensive End or something. He was a twice shot, big kid. It's obvious to me that Brown felt extremely negative towards the police in Ferguson, something that didn't randomly just turn up in that one child on that one day. It's also very clear to me that Wilson felt extremely negatively towards the local youth, something born out in his testimony to the grand jury too. Whether Wilson is guilty of murder or not, there are bigger problems in Ferguson.

It's also clear to me that the prosecutor did not want this case from the get-go, and only took it to a grand jury because of public pressure. Charitably speaking, I imagine a prosecutor who has a good relationship to the police in the county, and once he saw some of the evidence knew that taking this to trial would end in an embarrassing loss, and a loss of the good will he had with police. A less charitable view of this is that he just threw the case because he was pre-disposed to side with the cops. I've never seen a prosecutor present both sides of the story at a grand jury, and i'm sure the same courtesy would not have been put forward if the shooting was the other way around here. I do get that the case was not winnable with the evidence they had, but the prosecutor doesn't have to be the one out there defending a grand jury clearing a suspect, and it looked really bad.

And even so, even if the case had no chance, we have to examine the fact that this keeps happening. It happened to Trayvon Martin. It happened to Michael Brown. Unarmed, young, black men are killed by armed men, and then the law finds them to have been the aggressor, and clears their killers. There are some awful racial stereotypes out there about black men, and clearly those stereotypes make black lives less safe within our society. Even beyond these cases, Eric Garner died of a heart attack during a physical altercation with police in Staten Island that both appeared unnecessary, and was prompted by Garner's "non-compliance" in the words of the cops. Why is it that black men are considered so threatening? Even beyond that, it feeds into why we had militarized police in Ferguson to respond to the initial angry protestors. It's very clear that this paranoia by law enforcement escalated a situation that should have never been this tense. It really is time for a discussion of how largely "white" people feel about black people.

It's also time for a conversation inside of the Democratic Party about race relations and police. We had State Senators who were African-American on TV last night criticizing the "party," and clarifying that they meant the white leadership (namely the DA and Governor), for not caring about Michael Brown and African-Americans at-large. There is a huge divide within America's left about the relationship of African-Americans and police, and how to bridge it. On a basic policy level, going along with Republican law enforcement ideas, such as mandatory minimum sentences, the "War on Drugs," and the militarization of police, has left a major constituency of the left feeling isolated and alone in their dealings with police. That surely can't continue.

I'll just never get the people who support Darren Wilson. I won't second guess the grand jury (based on what they saw, I understand their stance), but the man has something wrong with him. His stereotypical speak about Brown as a "hulk," his negative feelings towards the community he served, even his boasting in his first interviews that he would "do it again" all are signs about this man. Is he guilty of murder? Based on the evidence, probably not. This isn't some zero sum ball game though. Even if Wilson was not guilty of a crime, this is not the outcome we desire as a society. Stealing a pack of cigars should not be a death sentence for an 18 year old kid with no prior record, just because he lives in what we deem a "tough" town. Relations between the town and the cops shouldn't be so bad that this happens. Wilson might find it acceptable to "do it again," but it is most certainly not.

I have to confess that I can't believe this guy wasn't at least bound over for trial. Neither can the National Bar Association. At some point, you can empathize with the actual protestors out there, because it really doesn't make sense at all. I can understand why they fear that their lives matter less. There's a legitimate problem in this country that people of color don't think the law represents their needs and interests, or that their lives matter the same. Certainly we can't leave a chunk of our citizens out there living in this condition.

None of this should be confused with me supporting the rioting and looting that did go on last night. A body was found shot up in a car in Ferguson, the only death that I know of, but the burning of cars and businesses in Ferguson had no place in a civilized society. There should be prosecutions where possible. Let's not overstate that issue though. Ferguson has a little more than 21,000 people in the town, and well over 20,000 of them were in their homes last night, while a few hundred were peacefully protesting near municipal buildings. There were legitimate grievances, being aired by legitimately upset people. A few hundred troublemakers at most, some of them not even from Ferguson, some professional protestors, caused the scenes that Fox and others gloriously covered.

What happened in Ferguson is awful. A child was killed by a police officer, and the community does not believe it was justified, even though the courts do. This is a problem. This is a big problem in this country. You can mock it and focus on a messed up convenience store, or you can realize that the problem is much more serious than that.

Read More

President Obama's Statement on the Ferguson Ruling

Read More

McCulloch's Statement

Read More

Dear Ferguson

As I write this, the streets of Ferguson are under siege between protestors, cops, and simple trouble makers. It's disheartening to watch. Some of these people in the streets are genuinely upset with what happened. In fact, most of them are. A small group is out there to cause problems, and rip a whole community apart. It's sad.

First, to the broader event itself- Michael Brown being shot isn't an isolated incident. It is, for the sense of the law, but make no mistake, everything that happened here is part of a larger issue. Michael Brown's attitude toward that cop, according to testimony, was a product of his perception of how the officer would treat him. Darren Wilson's decision to shoot him, out of fear for safety, was a product of his perception of Brown and the situation. That protestors poured into the streets was surely about more than one incident, and more so a product of an overall environment that was unhealthy. The scenes of militarized cops was also a product of perceptions from a broader feeling amidst the community. In short, Ferguson has a race problem, in it's government and police force, and in it's community. They don't trust each other, and that is unacceptable. With that said, the problem lies on the side of the government there. That must be fixed, by mobilization of the public to the ballot box.

To the incident itself though- it is not a matter of the police force on the whole, or a matter of Michael Brown as a kid. An unarmed 18 year old kid was shot by an armed officer of the law. The victim's color did not matter legally, but it absolutely matters to the situation. Unfortunately, there is no way to make everyone accept the legal justification here. You can't. Some people are just going to believe what they believe. That's it.

My personal feeling is that Darren Wilson was probably never going to be convicted. I also think he should have been indicted. Based on the evidence submitted, it appears that the most plausible, consistent witnesses were the ones who said Brown charged Wilson. I'm not going to get into calling some people liars and other people not, however just the fact that we're talking about different accounts means Wilson was going to win at trial. Even more important though are the forensics. The forensics pretty much made a conviction impossible. If there was blood in the car, it's pretty plausible to say the officer was in an altercation with the victim when he first shot him. Reasonable doubt would have been easy. Now I would love to know why we never heard exactly why Wilson felt threatened (and won't), as I would think that intent matters here. With that said, I want to know that for my own purposes, not for the purposes of guessing the jury's final verdict. With the evidence, and inconsistency in it, Wilson was never going to be convicted of a crime.

Now, with that said, I'm not totally clearing the prosecutor. First, I think many of his critics are playing into local politics. Robert McCulloch has been St. Louis County District Attorney for a while, and yes, he's pro-cop. Most DA's are. He's also being attacked in no small part for backing a white candidate against the African-American County Executive in this year's primary. So yes, that's a defense of him. I won't defend the case though. He failed to get an indictment on a cop for shooting an unarmed teenager, and that is partially because he was overly balanced in presenting his case. I wonder if the average African-American in St. Louis who shoots someone will have ALL of the evidence presented to a grand jury by a prosecutor. Seriously, he presented evidence helpful to the defense in his presentation. I do see why a prosecutor would rather lose at the grand jury by presenting too much evidence against a cop, rather than prosecuting them and losing. That's not an excuse to do it. He bungled the case, a case in which he probably could have received an indictment, if not a guilty verdict.

Tomorrow, opinions on this awful situation will largely fall along partisan, racial, ideological lines. If you watched FOX, and watched people looting the Ferguson Market, you'll talk about "thugs" and "criminals." If you watched MSNBC, you'll hear about "protestors." Let me say this- a kid was killed. That kid was black. He was killed by a white cop. No verdict will change the suspicions and real issues we have in our society over issues just like this. Many will believe the fix was in. The fact is, young black men have to worry about being shot by a police officer a lot more than I do. Whether Officer Darren Wilson should have been tried or not for killing Michael Brown was left to the grand jury, and I'd like to believe they did their job well. That's not the point though, because many people are where they started the day on this issue, because of what they perceive here. That is the problem, and that needs to be addressed. We need equal justice, and a lot of people don't feel they got it here, and a lot wouldn't have if the shoe was on the other foot. It's bad for America to let this continue.

Read More

An Exceptional Nation Sometimes We Are Not

J. Edgar Hoover sent this to MLK Jr. 

I love living in America. We enjoy one of the highest standards of living in the world, free speech, countless entertainment options, a better job market than we get credit for, a minimum wage most would die for, housing options, and all the other luxuries of our nation. In short, the United States of America is an incredible nation, the best nation, and I love it here. With that said, such an exceptional nation is not exceptional by birth-right. It's exceptional for doing exceptional things. Today, two stories really drove home to me how low our lows can be.

First, was this story on J. Edgar Hoover trying to get Martin Luther King Jr. to kill himself:

The New York Times Magazine on Tuesday published an uncensored copy of the 1964 letter, which Yale historian Beverly Gage stumbled upon in the National Archives. Here's Gage on the letter's origins:

When the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. received this letter, nearly 50 years ago, he quietly informed friends that someone wanted him to kill himself — and he thought he knew who that someone was. Despite its half-baked prose, self-conscious amateurism and other attempts at misdirection, King was certain the letter had come from the F.B.I. Its infamous director, J. Edgar Hoover, made no secret of his desire to see King discredited. A little more than a decade later, the Senate’s Church Committee on intelligence overreach confirmed King’s suspicion.

The letter repeatedly calls King a "fraud" and makes reference to what is possibly a recording that accompanied the letter, purporting to show evidence of "all your adulterous acts, your sexual orgies extending far into the past."

Has there ever been a more vile, disgusting human being to serve this country than the former FBI Director? I don't know. He's certainly not a good example of our nation being exceptional.

Then, there's this story of the UN Committee on Torture investigating us:

At the start of a two-day hearing, Alessio Bruni of Italy, one of the panel's chief investigators, told the high-level U.S. delegation that it must answer for alleged violations ranging from CIA rendition at so-called black sites to police brutality and Guantanamo Bay conditions. He asked what concrete measures have been taken to implement President Barack Obama's "clear" directives against torture.

A day earlier, the committee took private testimony from death penalty experts, anti-torture activists, former Guantanamo Bay detainee Murat Kurnaz and the parents of Michael Brown, the victim in the Ferguson, Missouri shooting case that has riveted a nation. A decision is expected later this month about whether Ferguson Officer Darren Wilson, who is white, will face criminal charges for fatally shooting Brown, 18, who was black and unarmed.

Former detainee Kurnaz and Brown's father, Michael Brown Sr., were scheduled to speak to reporters at the United Nations in Geneva later Wednesday.

The U.N. Committee Against Torture, which has 10 independent experts, is responsible for reviewing the records of all 156 U.N. member countries that have ratified the U.N. Convention Against Torture, which also prohibits all "cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

Mary McLeod, the State Department's acting legal adviser, conceded the U.S. record since the 9/11 attacks "did not always live up to our own values," including those it is obliged to uphold under the treaty, which took effect in 1987. The United States signed on to the treaty in 1988 and ratified it in 1994.

What can I say America- sometimes it's not beautiful. 

Read More