Liberal policing and the thugs’ veto

On Thursday, President Obama interrupted his vacation to address reporters regarding the situation in Northern Iraq and the situation in Ferguson, Missouri. As to the latter, Obama said, in essence, that the liberals had taken charge. Governor Jay Nixon (“a good man,” Obama assured us) was now fully engaged, and Eric Holder was also on the case.

In addition, the Missouri Highway Patrol had supplanted the yokels in the local police force. And they were under the command of Ron Johnson, who grew up in the neighborhood in question and, though Obama didn’t say it, is African-American.

Johnson promptly implemented what Holder described as “a model of community-based policing.” He ordered the police to ditch the armor, put away the tear gas, and park the SWAT trucks. He then joined the protesters. He even commended the Black Panthers and the Nation of Islam for their crowd control efforts.

The result? “Rioting resumed on Friday, with protesters looting stores and clashing with police wearing riot gear and deploying tear gas.” Good thing, the police didn’t ditch these oppressive law enforcement tools.

Meanwhile, Ron Johnson imposed a curfew and Gov. Nixon declared a state of emergency.

Johnson and Nixon remain good liberals, though. They blamed the riots on the release by local authorities of a video showing Michael Brown, the teenager whom the police killed, stealing from a convenience store. The feds also criticized the release of the video.

Apparently, these folks would like to give the mob a veto over what information about Brown can and cannot be made public. Let’s call this the thugs’ veto, invoked in this instance in the hope of concealing thug behavior by Brown.

The feds have taken over the investigation of the killing of Brown. Those invested in the anti-police narrative will be watching the investigation closely.

Will the Justice Department investigate impartially? Or will it be influenced the thugs’ veto to favor a narrative which, ideologically, it already finds persuasive?

I never imagined I would be asking a question like this about the Justice Department, whether under a Republican or Democratic president. But with the race-mongering Holder Justice Department and the Obama presidency, the question arises whether we like it or not.

Responses