I’m bracing for violence no matter how the election turns out

 ne of the notable and disturbing things about this year’s elections is the feeling that the country is sitting atop a powder keg with a sputtering fuse. I have never seen an election (in this country at least) where there was such a palpable feeling of impending violence as this one. In fact, I have never experienced an American election in which the possibility of political violence was considered to be higher than remote. 2020 is different.

Given the violence that we have already seen from the left this year, I think that if Donald Trump beats the odds (currently 96 percent against him per FiveThirtyEight) and wins a second term that there will definitely be rioting in major cities across the country. The shock and numbness that permeated blue America in 2016 will be replaced with disbelief and anger that will almost certainly spill into the streets.

But it isn’t only the left that is the problem. This year we have also seen a rising tide of right-wing threats and violence. These incidents don’t yet match the scale of Black Lives Matter rioting, but include armed protesters occupying the Michigan state capitol, the Kyle Rittenhouse shootings, a plot to kidnap several governors, and an incident over the weekend in which a convoy of Trump flag-flying vehicles “escorted” a Biden campaign bus down a Texas interstate. Video of the incident shows reckless and threatening driving as well as apparent attempts to ram other cars.

Another video this morning shows Trump supporters blocking traffic BLM-style on the Mario Cuomo bridge between Nyack and Tarrytown, N.Y. to the north of New York City. Trump flags flying, the demonstrators chant “USA, USA” and yell profanities.

This doesn’t feel like America. At least no America that I’ve ever seen. People who lived through 1968 might find some similarities.

The core problem is that both sides have demonized the other to drive up their base turnout. It isn’t enough to call Joe Biden a liberal with bad ideas. He’s a socialist who wants to destroy America. Donald Trump isn’t just a bad president. He’s a racist and a fascist who is destroying the country and intentionally letting people die of Coronavirus.

We need to tone it down. We are all Americans and we all want what is best for our country. We disagree on what is best, but we need to at least start with the premise that the other side is not out to purposely destroy the nation. You can’t find common ground with people who you believe are trying to destroy you, and we desperately need to find common ground and unity.

True to form, President Trump has poured fuel on the fire. The president has claimed for months that if he loses it will be due to voter fraud. Never mind the bevy of polling that shows that the president has been consistently trailing Biden for the entire campaign. These baseless allegations of widespread fraud are turning up the heat and may provide the spark that ignites our national tinder box if the president loses.

While I am concerned about the possibility of BLM-style riots if Trump wins, I’m also concerned that President Trump may not accept the results of the election if he loses. Why? Because Mr. Trump has spent months laying the groundwork to undermine the integrity of the election and cast doubt on its outcome.

Adding to the mix is the likelihood that the election results may not be available until well after Election Day. If exit polls show Trump leading on Election Day but subsequent counting of early votes and absentee ballots shifts the lead to Biden, it is very possible – maybe even likely – that many Trump supporters won’t accept the outcome of the election.

One difference between the two sides is that Joe Biden does not seem to exercise control over many of the people who are likely to take to the streets if Trump wins. In that scenario, the rioters are likely to be more directed by anti-Trump fervor than pro-Biden sentiments. On the other hand, Trump supporters would be very likely to take direction from the president. President Trump’s words matter and he needs to choose them carefully.

In advance of the election, I want to call on both candidates, their parties, and their voters to accept the results of the election, whatever they might be, and to renounce violence. When the results are in, the losing candidate should accept his defeat gracefully and concede.

I hope that I’m wrong. I hope that the aftermath of the election is peaceful and that none of this comes to pass, but at this point, the possibility seems all too real.

Both sides claim to love America. One way to show it is to not injure and kill your fellow Americans and destroy large chunks of your country because you didn’t like the outcome of the election.

Originally published on The First TV

Trump Supporter Killed In Portland

 It was only a few hours after I wrote on Saturday that violence was spiraling out of control and both sides were escalating the situation that a Trump supporter was killed in Portland by leftist rioters. The murder was live-streamed as a convoy of Trump supporters in cars drove through the city, which has been rocked by BLM and Antifa violence for months.

The Post Millennial, a Canadian outlet, the New York Times, and CNN have some of the most detailed information on the shooting, but police have released few details even a day later. The confrontation began with a “Trump 2020 Cruise Rally in Portland” that began in Clackamas. Police tried to prevent the Trump-supporters from going downtown, but some vehicles did so anyway. Shortly after, confrontations were sparked between the pro-Trump group and leftists in the downtown area.

Videos of the rally, including one retweeted by President Trump, show trucks flying Trump flags with people in the back, some wearing body armor and gas masks, shooting paintballs and what appears to be pepper spray at pedestrians. Demonstrators on the street hurl insults and burn Trump flags.

It was in this environment that a prominent member of Patriot Prayer, an Oregon pro-Trump group, was killed. The name of the victim has not been released and police reportedly have no suspects. The murder was caught on camera and tweeted by Andy Ngo.

The video shows a quieter street than the scene that Trump retweeted. Someone yells what sounds like, “We’ve got a Trumper over here” and then there are two gunshots. A pedestrian staggers a few steps and then falls to the street. Two assailants run away as a crowd gathers over the fallen man. In the jumble of voices, someone yells, “We are trying to help you” amid cursing.

In a subsequent tweeted video, an unidentified speaker says over a loudspeaker, “I just got word that the person who died was a Patriot Prayer person. He was a f-ing Nazi. Our community held its own and took out the trash. I’m not going to shed any tears over a Nazi.”

While reprehensible, these comments are strikingly similar to the response to the shooting in Kenosha last week. Many on the right celebrated the deaths of two men who were assumed to be criminals and communists. A great many grassroots voices celebrated Kyle Rittenhouse in terms that sounded a lot like the mirror image of the Portland woman’s speech.

None of these killings should have happened. As I discussed last week in my article on Kyle Rittenhouse, there was a chain of events that led to the Kenosha shootings and plenty of blame to go around on both sides. Even worse, politicians on both sides are pouring fuel on the fire with their rhetoric.

As I pointed out over the weekend, violence begets violence. This most recent murder will spark retaliation by Trump supporters. That retaliation will mean that the leftists will require an eye-for-eye. The deteriorating situation means that America could be on the brink of widespread political violence or a civil war.

Rioting is wrong. So is taking the law into your own hands. So is shooting paintballs and pepper spray at pedestrians. As my parents taught me decades ago, two wrongs don’t make a right. The prescription for illegal activity is not more illegal activity.

The country desperately needs state and local governments to rein in the violence. On both sides. Both the rioters and vigilantes need to go home or go to jail. The provocations have to end for the good of the country.

Joe Biden has issued a strong statement, saying, “The deadly violence we saw overnight in Portland is unacceptable. Shooting in the streets of a great American city is unacceptable. I condemn this violence unequivocally. I condemn violence of every kind by anyone, whether on the left or the right.” 

More elected officials should follow suit. We need statesmen who will put country over party, stand up, and hold everyone accountable rather than pointing fingers at the other side and justifying their own side’s excesses. A joint statement by Donald Trump and Joe Biden condemning violence and calling for calm might go a long way.

That approach would require a consistent message from both sides, however. Too many on both sides are still stuck on stupid and rationalizing why only the other side is to blame. That means the violence will continue.

Originally published on the Resurgent

 search

close

SHARE

• send
• print

August 29th, 2020

Violence Spirals As Both Sides Escalate

For citizens to take up arms to police the streets both undermines the rule of law that they claim to be upholding as well as inviting escalation and retaliation.

by David ThorntonRead Profilearrow_right_alt

Gage Grosskreutz holds a pistol immediately after being shot by Kyle Rittenhouse in Kenosha, Wisc. in this screen shot from @MrAndyNgo's Twitter feed 8/27/20

One of the most disturbing things about the Kyle Rittenhouse saga is the evidence it provides that both sides are escalating the battle in the streets. Often lost among the discussion of Rittenhouse’s actions is the simple fact that at least two people among the rioters were armed. If right-wing vigilantes and militia members are going to open fire on demonstrators then it is very likely that the demonstrators are going to start shooting back. Without some sort of de-escalation, we may be very close to literal war on the streets of some cities.

To be strictly correct, the rioters may already be shooting. As I noted a few days ago in my article about the Kenosha shootings, the video shows muzzle flashes before Rittenhouse opened fire. It isn’t clear who fired these shots, which apparently were not aimed and may have been directed into the air, but it is likely that they came from someone in the crowd of protesters. The bottom line is that there were multiple gunshots in addition to the shots fired by Rittenhouse.

It is also possible that the shots were fired by some other group such as the Boogaloo Bois. Back in June, several Boogaloo members were arrested at a BLM protest in Las Vegas with full gas cans and Molotov cocktails. In May, another Boogaloo member was arrested for the shooting murder of a security guard in Oakland during a protest. A second security guard was wounded in the attack. The Boogaloo, which is a far-right anti-government movement, was also present in Kenosha and could have acted as a provocateur.

It isn’t difficult to see where things are headed. Guns have been present and now pandora’s box has been opened with an incident that left two protesters dead and a third wounded. Rightly or wrongly, the demonstrators will believe that the right-wing counter-demonstrators are out for blood and respond accordingly.

Guns will become more common among the violent demonstrators. Long before the Kenosha shootings, I had already seen many social media posts that allege that Antifa members have been training with guns. Whether that was real in the past or not, it is likely to become a self-fulfilling prophecy for the future.

In opposition to the rioters, we have right-wing vigilantes and militia groups, who themselves are often breaking the law. Although laws vary by state and locality, Wisconsin’s self-defense law allows the third-person defense of property only in certain circumstances. Among those is the requirement that the “3rd person whose property the person is protecting is a member of his or her immediate family or household or a person whose property the person has a legal duty to protect, or is a merchant and the actor is the merchant’s employee or agent.” It is not legal for militia members or concerned citizens to unilaterally decide to defend property without any legal authority to do so.

Wisconsin also stipulates that “person who engages in unlawful conduct of a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense.” An exception to this rule is when the person “reasonably believe[s] that he or she is in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm,” but even then the person must not use deadly force until he “reasonably believes he or she has exhausted every other reasonable means to escape from or otherwise avoid death or great bodily harm at the hands of his or her assailant.”

These self-appointed protectors of neighborhoods in which they may not even live have also disobeyed orders from the police to disperse. The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel references a post by Kevin Mathewson, “commander” of the Kenosha Guard, which seems to exist primarily on Facebook. Mathewson admits that officers have told his men “go home under threat of arrest… in the past.” When asked about deputizing civilians to assist police, Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth told the Wisconsin Examiner it would represent an “immense” liability to have untrained and deputized civilians working alongside officers.

Yet Mathewson and others reject the law enforcement requests that they stand down, saying, “But by definition, we don’t need the government’s permission. We don’t need to be told — we can do it. In fact, the Constitution tells us we can do it. And the Second Amendment was put in there for instances like this — when we’re at war and under siege.”

As we have seen, state law indicates that Mathewson is wrong. Resisting lawful orders to disperse and illegally acting to defend property that doesn’t belong to them is just as much a violation of the law as what the the violent mob is doing. Rationalizing the situation does not change the law.

Finally, it is a failure of government that has allowed the situation to escalate in the first place. Too many governors and mayors have looked away from the violence and destruction of property. One of the most important functions of government is to protect its citizens. In too many cities, that has not been happening, which leaves a vacuum for militia groups to fill.

Too often, local police are overwhelmed by brawlers on both sides and just step back, as they did in Portland last week as Proud Boys and other right-wingers battled leftist demonstrators. Many on both sides are looking for trouble and increasingly they are finding it.

To me, the best solution seems to be the riot-control trucks from “Soylent Green.” Scoop up the demonstrators indiscriminately and cart them off to the hoosegow. The rowdies on both sides need to be removed from the streets.

Failing that, if local police departments cannot control the situation, mayors and governors need to call out the National Guard to pacify their cities. If mass arrests need to be made and water cannons need to be used to bring things under control then so be it. Americans should not be brawling in the streets like brownshirts and communists in Weimar Germany.

But the riot-control must come from state and local governments. For citizens to take up arms to police the streets both undermines the rule of law that they claim to be upholding as well as inviting escalation and retaliation. For the federal government to step in undermines the Constitution and federalism.

What we really need is for our elected officials to rise above the partisan calculations about the election and work together for the good of the country. Our leaders should be calling for peace and calmness rather than stirring up emotions and justifying criminal behavior. Both sides need to tamp down the rhetoric and denounce the violence on the part of their own supporters, not just that of the opposition.

But what are the odds of that?

Originally published on The Resurgent

Both Sides Should Look In The Mirror When It Comes To Political Violence

With two mass shootings within 24 hours, the rhetorical battle lines are once again being drawn. On the one side, liberals are blaming guns and President Trump’s rhetoric while many on the right are trying to shift the blame away from white supremacy and presidential tweets. The truth is that there is more than one cause for the murder spree and both sides share some responsibility for the charged political environment that may have contributed to the killings.

While the motive is not obvious for the Dayton murders, an online manifesto posted to the 8Chan message board prior to the El Paso attack appears to be genuine. The manifesto rails against Hispanic immigrants who the murderer blamed for many of America’s political and economic problems. Unlike many on the right, the author of the manifesto did not distinguish between legal and illegal immigrants.

The racist motive for the murders presents problems for conservatives, many of whom don’t want to acknowledge that people on the right are not only capable of violence but commit domestic terror attacks on a fairly regular basis. Since the news of the manifesto broke yesterday, I have seen at least one right-wing social media user speculate that Antifa was behind the El Paso attack as a way to discredit the right. Based on what I’ve seen online in the past, this sort of reaction is not that rare.

The truth is that white supremacist violence is a growing problem. Domestic terrorist attacks by leftist groups were common in the 1970s. In the 1980s and 90s, these gave way to attacks by foreign Islamic radicals. After September 11, homegrown Islamic radicals launched a wave of attacks. Now, it seems that white supremacists are the up and coming source of violence.

In June, FBI Director Christopher Wray told the Senate Judiciary Committee, “A majority of the domestic terrorism cases that we’ve investigated are motivated by some version of what you might call white supremacist violence.”

Domestic terror attacks related to white supremacy from 2018 and 2019 alone include the murder of student Blaze Bernstein in California, a shooting at a Pittsburgh synagogue, an arson attack at a California mosque, and another mass shooting at a synagogue in Poway, California. If we expand to include other right-wing attacks, we can add a vehicular attack on a New Jersey Planned Parenthood clinic and pipe bomb attacks by the so-called “MAGA bomber” to the list.     

Earlier this week, an FBI bulletin released by Yahoo News detailed concern about  “conspiracy theory-driven domestic extremists,” who might be inspired by such Deep State conspiracy theories such as QAnon. The Q conspiracy theory ties President Trump’s opponents to “a conspiracy involving ‘deep state’ actors and global elites allegedly engaged in an international child sex trafficking ring.” The report notes, “the uncovering of real conspiracies or cover-ups involving illegal, harmful, or unconstitutional activities by government officials or leading political figures” could further incite domestic terrorists.

It’s clear that there is a problem on the right, but the flip side is that the left is all too willing to tar all conservatives with the extremist brush. As Erick Erickson pointed out on Twitter, liberals are quick to label anyone who supports border security as a racist. For many on the left, “common sense gun controls” for many Democrats would amount to near-total bans on privately-owned guns and ammunition. For every liberal who says, “I don’t want to take your guns,” there seems to be one who openly says, “yes, I do want to take your guns.”

https://twitter.com/EWErickson/status/1158048421149847552?s=20

Liberals complain that conservatives won’t have a meaningful discussion or take action on the issue of gun violence, but liberals have shown themselves to be untrustworthy on the issue. The same policy prescriptions are trotted out after each attack. In many or most cases, the policies that the left advocates, such as waiting periods and high capacity magazine bans, would not have prevented the attack.

Even an outright ban on guns would have a minimal effect since there are an estimated 393 million guns in private hands in the United States. A large percentage of those guns would remain outstanding in the case of a gun ban and confiscation as law-abiding citizens suddenly became outlaws. It’s interesting to note that, despite the ratio of more than 120 guns per 100 Americans, the US violent crime rate has been falling since 1993. This has remained true even as the “assault weapons” ban expired and concealed and open carry laws were passed around the country.

A liberal orthodoxy that needs to be shattered is that gun control is equivalent to crime control. Mass shootings seem to occur almost randomly around the country. They have occurred in states with strict gun controls such as California and New York and they have occurred in permissive states such as Florida and Texas. They have even occurred in military and government facilities where personal weapons are prohibited.

Mass killings are also not limited to AR-15s and similar types of semi-automatic rifles. The murderers have used various combinations of rifles, shotguns, and pistols. In other cases, killers have also used weapons such as bombs made from pipes and pressure cookers, knives, machetes, nerve gas, swords, and even a baseball bat to commit mass murder.

One of the few types of gun control that might be effective is red flag laws. Since many murder sprees have been committed by people with long histories of mental illness, some states are passing laws that allow temporary confiscation of guns owned by people who are deemed to present a threat to themselves or others. However, the potential for abuse and the deficit of trust between gun owners and the left presents a problem here. Earlier this year, police killed a Maryland man who had committed no crime as they attempted to serve a red flag order.

Rather than guns being the problem, weapons are merely a symptom of a problem with the human heart. The violence problem is related to a number of evil thoughts and desires such as greed, racism, the desire for political power, or the belief that one is a holy warrior or an instrument of divine judgment.

It is a defect of one’s humanity to possess the desire to gun down innocent people in cold blood, but it doesn’t mean that the person is crazy. The murder plot might be a calculated desire to incite a race war, as Dylann Roof intended to do, or it might be a desire to defend one’s country against its enemies, as Cesar Sayoc’s attorneys claim. Maybe the shooter bought into a conspiracy theory like Pizzagate or QAnon or maybe they blame their own misfortunes on people who look or talk differently.  

Sometimes underlying prejudices can be ignited by claims from political leaders, which brings us back not only to Donald Trump but to opposition leaders as well. Yes, President Trump says many irresponsible things and, yes, he should tone down his rhetoric. The president has demonized immigrants as violent criminals, whipped up fear of migrant caravans prior to last year’s election, and railed against both Democrats and his own Justice Department as corrupt Deep State enemies of America. It isn’t hard to imagine that this sort of talk could inspire someone who is already on the brink of violence.

But it isn’t only Donald Trump’s rhetoric that is a problem. Claims that Trump is a stooge of Russian President Putin, that he is a fascist, that he is a white supremacist, and that he will refuse to leave the presidency after his term is up are all examples of things said by the left that could incite violence from Trump opponents. It should not be forgotten that it was only two years ago that a radicalized Bernie Sanders supporter nearly killed a handful of Republican senators as they played baseball.

The truth is that both sides are guilty of overheated rhetoric as they attempt to drive their respective bases to the polls. What often motivates voters is the fear that the other side will win and destroy the country rather than the hope that their own side can implement good ideas. Instilling fear requires a scapegoat, but when people, either individuals or an ethnic group, become the object of fear, that fear can lead to violence.

Currently, the national political climate seems to be a tinderbox around which warriors of the two parties are constantly dropping sparks and red hot coals. It’s a wonder that we haven’t experienced more political violence in recent times than we have. Both sides are more than willing to point the finger at the other when violent attacks occur, but if we really want to make America better, both sides need to look in the mirror.

Originally published on The Resurgent

The 'Trump Bump' In Political Violence

In the wake of a string of political violence that includes attempted mail bombings and what is believed to be the worst attack on Jews in US history, many are charging that President Trump is responsible for the uptick in violence. President Trump obviously never instructed his supporters to bomb or shoot his political opponents so the question is how much responsibility the president bears for the recent violence. The answer, if we are honest with ourselves, has to be “some.”

This isn’t to say that Donald Trump is legally responsible for the actions of overzealous political supporters. There is a well-established legal test to determine whether someone has incited violence. The Brandenburg test created by the Supreme Court holds that incitement requires “producing imminent lawless action.” Even hate speech is protected by the First Amendment.

What is legal is not always responsible, ethical or smart. This is especially true when the speaker is the president of the United States and wields a “bully pulpit” that addresses millions of supporters. While the president has not called for his supporters to directly confront his critics (at least not since the campaign), he has contributed to the atmosphere of anger and distrust that permeates American politics.

Over the past few months, a pattern has begun to emerge. That pattern consists of people on the right side of the political spectrum launching attacks on people and organizations that President Trump has demonized. In Pittsburgh, the murders were not only directed at the synagogue’s worshippers because they were Jews, but also because they were thought to be pro-immigration.

The murderer wrote on Gab, a social media site frequented by the alt-right, that Jewish efforts to help refugees were “sugar-coated evil.” One of the last posts made by the shooter referenced the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, HIAS, saying, “HIAS likes to bring invaders that kill our people. I can’t sit by and watch my people get slaughtered. Screw your optics. I’m going in.”

Although the killer claims that he did not vote for President Trump, who he called a “globalist,” there are similarities in the anti-immigrant postings between the two men. President Trump tweeted last June, “We cannot allow all of these people to invade our Country.”

The Pittsburgh murderer used the same militant terminology for illegal immigrants. Six days before his killing spree he wrote, “I have noticed a change in people saying 'illegals' that now say 'invaders.' I like this.”

The shooter’s concern that “my people” would be “slaughtered” hearkens back to the President Trump’s claims that illegals are violent criminals and the Administration’s decision to emphasize murders committed by illegal immigrants. Despite these claims, there is no statistical evidence for a violent crime wave by illegal immigrants.

Similarly, President Trump’s rhetoric on the news media can be linked to attacks and threats in the real world. On numerous occasions, Trump has called the media “the enemy of the American People.” The idea that the media is an enemy has led to action by his supporters on at least two occasions.

The Florida mail bomber dubbed the “MAGA Bomber,” is now infamous for sending bombs to CNN and Democrats, who President Trump and other Republicans have likened to an “angry mob.” Less well known is the case of another Trump supporter who was arrested in August for threatening to kill employees of the Boston Globe. The man used the familiar phrase “enemy of the people” in his threats and accused the paper of “treasonous and seditious acts” after it asked papers around the country to share its op-ed criticizing Trump’s rhetorical attacks on the press.

It should be clear by now that words matter and when the president tells his supporters that the media is the enemy and that migrants are invaders, some of those supporters take him seriously. If enemies and invaders are trying to destroy America while you are trying to “Make America Great Again,” the logical next step for some listeners will be to destroy those enemies before they can destroy America.

President Trump doesn’t even seem to believe all of his own rhetoric. After pledging to “lock her up,” Trump declined to have the Justice Department investigate Hillary for a myriad of alleged crimes from murder to aiding the Russians in the election and selling out America’s uranium supply. Less than a month after the 2016 election, Trump said that she had suffered enough.

This isn’t to say that Donald Trump is the only offender. There are many on both sides of the political spectrum who make comments that are just as bad – or worse – as what President Trump says. The difference is that they are not the president, who is supposed to be the leader of all of the American people as well as the person responsible for upholding the rule of law. Additionally, few have a following as large as President Trump or one that inspires such quasi-religious devotion.

With great power comes great responsibility. Unfortunately, Donald Trump has not shown himself to be capable of handling that responsibility. The failed MAGA Bomber had not yet even faded from the headlines when the president tweeted this morning that “The Fake News Media” is the “true Enemy of the People.”

The man who threatened Globe employees, the MAGA Bomber, and the synagogue mass murderer made their own individual choices to kill and threaten their fellow Americans. Donald Trump didn’t tell them to do what they did, but neither is the president entirely blameless. Trump was elected president amid a fear that Democrats and immigrants are violent criminals who are destroying the country. He has made a conscious decision to continue with the heated rhetoric in order to urge the base toward the polls in yet another most-important-election-of-our-lifetime.

There is no sign that either President Trump or the Democrats have any plans to ease up on the divisive words that that are intended to pit Americans against each other. If the country longed for an uniter after the divisive Obama presidency, it is clear that Donald Trump, who brings more of the same identity politics, is not that man.

As tensions rise, there will be more bloodshed. Radicals from both the right and left will feed on the dire warnings from their respective tribes and take matters into their own hands. Politicians on both sides bear a moral, if not legal, responsibility for the violence.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Mail Bombs Are Just Another Example Of Increasing Political Violence From Both Sides

The big news this week has been the pipe bombs mailed to a number of left-leaning political figures and media outlets. Although none of the bombs has detonated or led to injuries or deaths, the attacks come at a time when tensions are already running high. There is little doubt that the string of attempted bombings will further stoke tempers in an already precarious situation.

President Trump denounced the attacks in a speech at a rally in Wisconsin. “No nation can succeed that tolerates violence or the threat of violence as a method of political intimidation, coercion, or control,” the president said. “No one should carelessly compare political opponents to historical villains, which is done often,” the president continued. “It’s done all the time. “

Trump then turned his attention to one of his favorite targets, which was also a target of the bomber, saying, “The media also has a responsibility to set a civil tone and to stop the endless hostility and constant negative and oftentimes false attacks and stories.

Thus far, political leaders have been quick to denounce political violence from the opposing team but slow to critique their own side. In fact, even though radicals on both sides have carried out attacks on the other, few on each side seem to acknowledge or remember acts perpetrated by their own side. If you have friends on both sides of the political spectrum, as I do, you’ll see posts from both sides claiming that the other side is perpetrating all the violence while theirs is as pure as the driven snow.

Even though no suspect has been arrested in the mail bombings, many on both sides seem to have made up their minds already as to the motive of the perpetrator. Since the targets of the bombs are all people who have been rhetorically attacked by President Trump, it’s reasonable to assume that the bomber is a Trump supporter.

On the other hand, with no supporting evidence at all, some on the right are beginning to make the argument that the bombs are a false flag operation (to use Alex Jones’ favorite phrase) to make Trump supporters look bad. Similarly, in the wake of the Charlottesville car attack, some on the right falsely claimed that James Alex Fields, Jr. was a “radical leftist” and Clinton supporter.

Let’s set the record straight. Both sides have violent extremists and both sides are increasingly violent. James Fields was a white supremacist. James Hodgkinson, who attempted to kill Steve Scalise and other Republican senators, was a liberal Bernie Sanders volunteer. Right-wing activists launched an armed occupation of a federal wildlife refuge and staged an armed resistance to the arrest of Cliven Bundy. Leftist Antifa radicals have rioted in numerous cities. Leftists have used the threat of violence to deny conservatives such as Ben Shapiro the right to speak. President Trump threatened riots if he was denied the Republican nomination. A Trump supporter threatened to shoot Boston Globe reporters because the newspaper was an “enemy of the people.” Liberals have taken to confronting conservative politicians and media figures in restaurants. Right-wingers did the same thing to Nancy Pelosi.

In this age of mass media directed to different niches, the two sides are increasingly separated into camps that have little contact with the other. A recent conservative meme series refers to liberal supporters as NPCs, nonplayer characters, that are faceless, generic subhumans that don’t think for themselves. The left seems to think the same of the right, frequently referring to the president’s supporters as “Trumpbots.” It shouldn’t be surprising that as both sides dehumanize the other, the potential for violence increases.

Leaders of both sides need to come together for a bipartisan statement that rejects the increasing political violence. This needs to be done with no caveats. Republicans and Democrats should both tone down their rhetoric and instruct their supporters to make their voices heard at the ballot box, not in the streets.

If the leaders won’t take this action, it is up to the American people to reject violence. Don’t condone and excuse violent rhetoric or behavior just because it comes from your team. One way to address the problem is to shame people who take part in this sort of behavior. The second Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville was smaller than the first, in part because neo-Nazis from the first rally were publicly identified and shamed online. Perhaps a similar strategy could be used against Antifa and the Proud Boys.

Reject hatred and violent rhetoric online. The anonymous and isolated nature of social media makes extremism thrive. Unlike and unfollow radical accounts and pages. Report users who violate the terms of service and community standards. Point out the hypocrisy of supporting your own side’s violence while condemning the other.

Both sides claim to want to take their country back, but I suspect that the people who really want their country back are the exhausted middle who are tired of the constant crises and outrage-of-the-day from both sides. It is these moderate and independent Americans who decide elections and they can make a difference by rejecting those who condone violence. These are people who can hold America together while politicians and activists try to rip it apart.

Originally published on The Resurgent

Portland Mayor's Weakness Fuels Violence

Ted Wheeler, the mayor of Portland, has lost control. Actually, it would be more accurate to say that Wheeler has ceded control of his city to Antifa with predictable results.

Portland is normally a hotbed of liberalism, but the city has boiled over in recent weeks. The trouble started with the police shooting of Patrick Kimmons on September 30. In the days after Kimmons’ death, Antifa members rallied to Portland to protest. On October 14, Patriot Prayer, a right-wing group with a history of provocative rallies, staged a counter-demonstration that led to violent clashes between the rival groups. Critics charge that Mayor Wheeler contributed to the violence by ordering police to stand down.  

In the Washington Times, Wheeler said, “I was appalled by what I saw in the video, but I support the Portland Police Bureau’s decision not to intervene. This whole incident will be investigated.”

The video that Wheeler referred to was one of several taken by Andy Ngo and posted to Twitter. It showed black-clad Antifa members directing traffic in an intersection and attacking cars while Portland police looked on. The militants reportedly broke the window of a Lexus driven by a 74-year-old man who did not follow their directions.

“This is the kind of street anarchy that routinely happens where I live,” Ngo said.

The Portland violence resembles the Charlottesville rioting from last year. After Antifa descended on the city, right-wing activists staged a “flash march for law and order,” led by Joey Gibson, a former Republican Senate candidate. Gibson’s Patriot Prayer group included members of the Proud Boys, an alt-right group of brawlers founded in 2016. Like Charlottesville, when police stood down, the two groups mixed with explosive results. Proud Boys were also involved in a New York City clash over the weekend.

Oregon Live reported that participants in the street fighting carried bear spray, hard knuckle gloves, knives and firearms. There were no arrests, but riot police reported intervened to stop at least one skirmish by firing pepper balls at the crowd.  

The mayor argued that he would have been criticized no matter how he had handled the Portland mobs. “This is the story of Goldilocks and the two bears. The porridge is either too hot or it’s too cold,” Mr. Wheeler told reporters. “At any given moment in this city, the police are criticized for being heavy-handed and intervening too quickly, or they’re being criticized for being standoffish and not intervening quickly enough.”

The best solution would seem to have been to uphold the law. When two opposing mobs, neither with a permit for a demonstration, are street fighting in downtown Portland, destroying property and endangering citizens, it is the responsibility of the city government and police to take charge of the situation. Mayor Wheeler’s failure to exercise his authority to protect the city directly contributing to the rioting. It was Mr. Wheeler’s initial lack of response to Antifa that led Patriot Prayer to launch their counter-protest.

Portland is a liberal city and Mr. Wheeler was probably concerned that cracking down on Antifa would hurt his political career. Many of the Antifa protesters and their supporters are likely Portland voters who would exact their revenge on Mr. Wheeler at the ballot box. Still, what the country needs desperately at this moment is an act of political courage. Elected officials need to do their jobs and uphold the law, regardless of the consequences and regardless of the political affiliation of the rioters.

The scene in Portland was reminiscent of street brawling between German communists and Nazis in the 1920s. The comparison is especially apt since one of Mr. Ngo’s photos shows the Antifa radicals carrying a Soviet flag. In Weimar Germany, street brawling by party hooligans helped to undermine the authority of the unpopular government.

It isn’t a question of which group is right and which is wrong. Both are operating outside the law and looking for a fight. Allowing paramilitary fighters free rein delegitimizes the government and strengthens radicals of both sides. The city government should be conducting mass arrests of anyone involved in the street fighting and prosecuting them to the fullest extent of the law. If the city government cannot control the situation, they should request assistance from the National Guard.

Mayor Wheeler’s lack of response to the violence in Portland is a show of weakness that will only encourage both groups to further violence. Both sides are undermining the authority of the government and contributing to the general atmosphere of anger and fear that seems to permeate American politics. It is up to civic leaders like Mayor Wheeler to earn their pay and secure their cities.

Originally published on The Resurgent