Breaking. In a statement this morning DoJ has done the following:
Department Of Justice Identifies New York City, Portland And Seattle As Jurisdictions Permitting Violence And Destruction Of Property
Identification is Response to Presidential Memorandum Reviewing Federal Funding to State and Local Governments that are Permitting Anarchy, Violence, and Destruction in American Cities
The U.S. Department of Justice today identified the following three jurisdictions that have permitted violence and destruction of property to persist and have refused to undertake reasonable measures to counteract criminal activities: New York City; Portland, Oregon; and Seattle, Washington. The Department of Justice is continuing to work to identify jurisdictions that meet the criteria set out in the President’s Memorandum and will periodically update the list of selected jurisdictions as required therein.
“When state and local leaders impede their own law enforcement officers and agencies from doing their jobs, it endangers innocent citizens who deserve to be protected, including those who are trying to peacefully assemble and protest,” said Attorney General William P. Barr. “We cannot allow federal tax dollars to be wasted when the safety of the citizenry hangs in the balance. It is my hope that the cities identified by the Department of Justice today will reverse course and become serious about performing the basic function of government and start protecting their own citizens.”
Criteria for evaluating each city is below:
* Whether a jurisdiction forbids the police force from intervening to restore order amid widespread or sustained violence or destruction.
* Whether a jurisdiction has withdrawn law enforcement protection from a geographical area or structure that law enforcement officers are lawfully entitled to access but have been officially prevented from accessing or permitted to access only in exceptional circumstances, except when law enforcement officers are briefly withheld as a tactical decision intended to resolve safely and expeditiously a specific and ongoing unlawful incident posing an imminent threat to the safety of individuals or law enforcement officers.
* Whether a jurisdiction disempowers or defunds police departments.
*Whether a jurisdiction unreasonably refuses to accept offers of law enforcement assistance from the Federal Government.
* Any other related factors the Attorney General deems appropriate.
The statement then goes on to provide details justifying placing New York, Portland, and Seattle in this category.
Clearly Trump continues to take the initiative in the leadup to the election.
Oakland, Calif should be on the list.ReplyDelete
Seems I’m going OT a lot here lately, but this American Thinker piece “Do Democrats Really Believe Biden Is Winning?” by William Gensert is a quick and worthy read for anyone who has a few minutes to spare.ReplyDelete
Back to being on topic, though, if we actually do get a justice confirmed and Trump re-elected, I hope the Court will address the issue of any and every district judge being able to paralyze the Executive Branch at the drop of a hat. Otherwise, the actions taken by Barr you present above, and countless other necessary actions, will continue to be shot to pieces before even getting off the ground.
Good move in short term. Long term, however, will result in fiscal crises in these cities as tax base shrinks and funding dries up. I firmly oppose any federal bailouts for these anarchists. A plan is needed, though, for the eventual collapse. We cannot allow American cities to go Mad Max or Mogadishu. A federal takeover may be needed at some point with local government suspended until Constitutional order is restored.ReplyDelete
Evidence continues to accumulate, suggesting that there will be no comeback for these cities. Dems are destroying them.Delete
Each of these cities had a fiscal crisis prior to the riots, and even before Covid, but it is much worse now.Delete
Very little push back by the Demer Rouge. Seems their to busy setting their hair on fire over RBG's replacement. Priorities.ReplyDelete
I think I am beginning to see a grand strategy for this week leading up to the first debate. Trump is a master of chaos, according to his critics. They are not 100% off-base, but it's more that he is a master at multi-tasking so he uses that to his advantage. This is the week to throw out everything and the kitchen sink. RBG's death occurred on a timeline he could never plan, but works into his strategy.Delete
How do you overwhelm a mentally challenged elder? You confuse them. You come at them with so many things from so many directions that it brings out their frailty. It would be elder abuse if Biden were not running for president.
A person with a normal level of stamina would have a hard time keeping up with all the issues. Biden would have to be spending countless hours between now and the debate to strategize how to tackle it all--there will be no time for him to rest.
I went on this tangent because you drew attention to the Dem's inability to handle anything more than RBG at the moment. Now imagine an elderly man with an early form of dementia doing it....I think we will see what that looks like in the next debate.
"spending countless hours between now and the debate", unless he has Wallace in his pocket, to e.g. tip Biden off on how questions will go.Delete
I'd have hoped DJT would drive a harder bargain, on who would moderate debates.
In JFK's day, there was a panel, not one prima donna.
Maybe they should include Minneapolis.ReplyDelete
Not yet, Trump is trying to win Minnesota.Delete
Rather O/T, but important to the (1619) intellectual context, fromReplyDelete
"The “paper of record” has also taken to quietly altering the published text of the project itself, after one of its claims came under intense criticism....
Whatever the exact occasion for the changes, the Times did **not disclose its edits** or how they obscured one of the most controversial claims in the entire 1619 Project. They simply made the problematic passages disappear, **hoping that nobody** would notice."
This is the civil rights era all over again. You might say that the federal government has no right to step in when states and local authorities ignore their obligation to protect their citizens, but that's the same argument that "state's rights" advocates used to try and stop the feds from protecting blacks who lived in their jurisdictions.ReplyDelete
Those local governments cannot or will not protect the civil rights of their citizens. What we've determined in the past is that if this gets too extreme, the feds are historically justified to step in.
I'd say that the Jake Gardner situation is an example of the civil rights at stake here. Self-defense is a civil right. The justice system is a monopoly based on the idea that the laws will be enforced. Instead, we have rioters released by the D.A.'s, who then attack and destroy both people and their property, and people who defend themselves from the attacking mob are themselves the target of an indecent rush to prosecute by the same justice system that caused the problem through their neglect. Ordinary people are caught in the gears and crushed.
Barr sees all this, and he sees that these things are happening because the DAs are being used by Soros to foment revolution.Delete
Why wouldn't Ron Johnson or Chuck Grassley or Lindsey Graham subpoena George Soros (an American citizen) to testify about his charitable activities?Delete
Seems long overdue that Congress and the American people heard directly from George what he's been up to.
> Why wouldn't Ron Johnson or Chuck Grassley or Lindsey Graham subpoena George Soros (an American citizen) to testify about his charitable activities?Delete
Well, wasn't there a post on this very blog on how testimony compelled by congress destroys possible court cases?
Do you think there is a plausible criminal case against Soros? On what basis? Not that I would in any way object...