I spent all day yesterday watching Attorney General William Barr testify. While it was informative on the cultural divide and differing points of view in this country, I take exception to the parallels drawn between the protests in Lansing Michigan vs Portland Oregon by a certain radical member of the US House of Representatives.
During the hearing, Ms Jayapal (by the way from Washington State) made a statement “But in Michigan when protesters carried guns and Confederate flags and swastikas and called for the governor of Michigan to be beheaded and shot and lynched, somehow you are not aware of that“.
First I would like to point out that Attorney General Barr is the head of the Justice Department of the United States. From my limited knowledge of the law and of the separation of Federal powers versus States’ powers I believe that AG Barr’s (or Justice Department’s) duties is limited to charging those who break Federal Law and not to those breaking State Law. Maybe this is a over simplification, but I think it is somewhat accurate.
So let’s dissect Ms. Jayapal’s statement and ask if Federal Law was violated:
- “Protesters carried guns” – Is it against Federal Law to carry a gun on property owned by the State of Michigan? NOT in this case! It could be against Michigan law but it is not breaking their state law since Michigan is an open-carry state and it is NOT illegal to bear firearms inside of the statehouse in Michigan. It is also NOT against Federal Law as the State of Michigan has jurisdiction over their property not the Federal government. In fact, from a Federal standpoint, the second amendment to the US Constitutions generally allows Americans to bear arms. While the Federal Courts have allowed local jurisdictions to limit that right in specific instances, the State of Michigan has chosen not to at their state capital. So, in my opinion, Ms. Jayapal has no legal argument. In her statement she is suggesting the AG should disregard the US Constitution and Federal Codes and arrest and charge those holding scary fire arms relying on her opinion and not actual state or Federal law. My opinion is that a true patriot respects differences in or a diversity of opinions. Only fascists uses force and feelings to make others conform to their view.
- “Confederate Flags” – Again, is it against Federal Law to carry a Confederate Flag? NO WAY! It may not be politically correct or frowned upon by others but this is America. It is one of our fundamental rights to enjoy free expression of thought and ideas. As for flags, we can even burn American Flags and it is not against Federal Law. We can carry Mexican flags, Chinese flags, Russian flags, LBGT flags, state flags anytime we want. That is the American way and we do it all the time. Ms. Jayapal’s implies in her statement that it was the AG’s duty to arrest and charge those with different political views than her own. In my opinion, this is in conflict with both American rights and ideals.
- “and swastikas” – It is against Federal Law to display or wear a swastika? NO WAY! While I agree that maybe it was a distasteful way to express the protester’s frustration because of the symbol utilized, it is not a Federal crime to display,wear or to protest with a swastika. I would also remind Ms. Jayapal it is also not illegal in America to be a NAZI. Again, it is a fundamental right in America to express our political views, even repulsive views. If Representative Jayapal would have done her homework instead of relying just reports from unreliable sources, she would have seen that the swastikas displayed were on signs suggesting that the Michigan Governor was being a fascist dictator with her shut-down orders. The protesters were trying to compare her orders to the fascist mandates used by NAZI’s in Germany in the 1930’s. Even the Speaker of the House has made similar references to Trump referring to the DHS and US Marshals as his “Storm troopers.” Apparently its OK for Democrats to make references to NAZI’s (although it could be a Star Wars reference) about their opponents but think it is a Federal Crime for anyone to make NAZI (or Star Wars) references concerning a Democrat.
- “and called for the governor of Michigan to be beheaded and shot and lynched – Is this speech against Federal Law? I don’t know the legal answer to this but I think NOT. Why? Well no one was prosecuted when people n NYC’s Central Park depicted beheading President Trump. In fact, my recollection is that these individuals were praised in the media as patriots for boldly exercising their first amendment rights of free speech. If it is not a Federal Crime to advocate that the President of the United States be beheaded, then likewise it cannot be a Federal crime to advocate such for a state Governor. If I am wrong and it is a Federal crime, I would note that the Federal Government has not prosecuted those type of threats against President Trump and again, under our Constitution we expect equal treatment (not selective treatment) under the law which was stated by the AG as his goal: to restore confidence in equal treatment under the law for all Americans.
- Is the Michigan capital building and grounds where the anti-lock-down protest was held on Federal property? NO. I believe it is the property of the State of Michigan therefore, it is Michigan’s responsibility to hold anyone in that peaceful demonstration that might have violated Michigan laws accountable not AG Barr’s duty. As a side note, I cannot find any reports of vandalism, arson or violence, against either lawmakers of the officers protecting the Michigan capital building only references to scary items which were in the lawful possession a few of the demonstrators.
So, getting back to the alleged usurpation of duties by AG Barr, what Federal Law was broken in Lansing that the Justice Department or AG Barr failed to enforce? I just don’t know of any so maybe Ms Jayapal could elaborate because those items she mentioned is really a “nothing sandwich” which appears to distract and imply responsibility to AG Barr where non exists. If Ms. Jayapal believes these should items and actions should be unlawful at the Federal level, then she should introduce legislation in Congress and push to make it so.
In contrast, lets look at Portland where Ms. Jayapal implies that AG Barr has overstepped his duties by sending in US Marshalls and arresting people. It is my understanding that part of the Justice Department duties is to arrest and prosecute people in violation of Federal statues. So is it a Federal Crime to:
- Intentionally destroy Federal Property? – YES
- Intentionally deface Federal Property? – YES
- Intentionally break windows of a Federal building? – YES
- Fire explosive materials (fireworks) at Federal employees? – YES
- Throw kerosene filled balloons in a Federal building and start fires? – YES
- Attempt to set fire to, or to actually set fire to Federal facilities? – YES
- Attempt to permanently blind a Federal employee with a laser? – YES
- Attempt to harm a Federal employee? – YES
- Throw rocks, bricks, water bottles, feces at Federal employees? – YES
- Interfere with the lawful arrest of those committing Federal Crimes? – YES
- Obstruct Justice by shielding or hiding those committing Federal Crimes? – YES
These are all Federal Crimes and we see these Federal crime are being perpetrated nightly in Portland. So I believe that it IS AG Barr’s duty and responsibility to use the police powers of the Justice Department to apprehend and convict those in violation of Federal law and statutes.
In short, what happened at the peaceful anti-lock-down demonstrations in Lansing appears to me to have no comparison to what is happening in Portland. In one case (Lansing) it appears it was a peaceful protest without illegal activity from individuals who view certain actions of the Michigan governor as an overreach and as unlawful. In the other case (Portland) the peaceful protests seem to erupt into nightly acts of theft, vandalism, violence and attacks on Federal property and employees which are in violation of Federal law and statutes.
I think that most honest people would conclude that what happened in Lansing can not be compared to what is happening in Portland. As the Attorney General so eloquently stated in his testimony “Since when is it okay to burn down a federal court“