Every week on Monday, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher's Forum, short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture, or daily living. This week's question: Whom is responsible For The Riots In San Jose? Why?
Stately McDaniel Manor : Who is responsible for the San Jose riots protesting Donald Trump? I don’t pretend to have any inside information on this, but one can make reasonable judgments based on media accounts. The media have made much, including photos and video, of protestors burning the American flag, waving the Mexican flag and assaulting blonde women. The fact that the media are reporting this at all must mean that the amount of American flag burning and anti-American hatred displayed is of unprecedented and epic proportions. From the available images, one could reasonably believe the protesters are of Mexican, or at the very least, Hispanic, descent.
Also according to media reports, these ”protestors” are motivated by what they believe to be Donald Trump’s desires regarding illegal immigration. In essence, they absolutely do not want to experience the professional, efficient enforcement of American immigration law, just like Democrats.
Let’s put aside, for the purposes of this discussion, the fact that few things make Americans want to deport illegal immigrants--or Democrats--more or faster than seeing them burn the American flag while waving the flag of the nation they fled. It is this sort of thing that causes reasonable Americans to reasonably ask: “If you hate America so much, why did you come here?” And “So, does this mean you don’t intend to fully assimilate into American culture? Is that what you’re trying to say?” Some might even add: “If you learned English, you could just say it instead of burning American flags.”
Who is behind it? Who stands to benefit from it? Democrats, and other racist organizations like La Raza (The Race). I rather doubt that the Border Patrol Agent’s Union is a sponsor, nor is the NRA, the Republican National Committee or the Trump Campaign.
What’s that you say? Trump could be sponsoring the violence as a ploy to turn the public against Hillary? We know the Democrats do stunts like paying protestors, illegally coordinating with all manner of prohibited organizations beneath the radar, and even trying to manufacture astroturf protests (OK, raising the dead to vote Democrat is a pretty neat trick too), but there is, as yet, no evidence that Trump does the same, and the RNC is too afraid of Democrats--they’re more afraid of Trump--to even think of that kind of dirty trick.
Thus far, I’m not seeing any middle class white family men burning Mexican flags at Hillary rallies, or assaulting blonde women at those rallies, an event about as likely as a joint protest by Bigfoot, space aliens and the Loch Ness Monster. Until then, one need not be Sherlock Holmes to figure out who is involved.
The Glittering Eye: There's a lot of blame to go around. First and foremost the "protesters" who go out with the characteristic radical's objective of provoking a response are to blame because people should be held responsible for their actions. Then the few Trump supporters who "sucker punch" or pepper spray "protesters" because they shouldn't respond with violence and they're providing the protesters justification.
Donald Trump because when you go out of your way to speak provocatively it's not surprising when people are provoked. Police officers who aren't enforcing the law because they're not doing their jobs. Democratic pols who aren't condemning violent protesters. Republican and Democratic pols who've accepted illegal immigration with a wink and a nod for decades. Mexican pols who've treated illegal immigration as a safety valve and primary economic policy for so long they now think of it as a right.
I'll stop now not because I'm running out of people to blame but because I'm tired of typing.
JoshuaPundit: Let's start by using reverse logic, a favorite tool of mine to figure out whom we can't blame.
The San Jose police basically stood by and watched a mob of people violently assault Trump supporters who were peacefully exiting a political rally. Their logic, as voiced by San Jose's police chief Eddie Garcia was that protecting citizens whom had a constitutional right of freedom of speech and freedom of assembly from assault by as violent mob would have been 'bad police tactics' because it might have angered the mob even more, and we can't have that now can we? Unsaid, of course was 'hey, after all, these are just a bunch a racist Republicans. Who cares what happens to 'em?' Well not quite unsaid, since that is essentially what San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo told the AP while blaming Donald Trump for the violence, saying “At some point Donald Trump needs to take responsibility for the irresponsible behavior of his campaign."
Need I mention that San Jose is a very left wing, totally Democrat run Bay Area city? That it's a sanctuary city for illegal migrants?
So, is what happened in San Jose the fault of any of the above? Well, the police were obviously following orders not to lean heavy at all on the protesters, and they obviously got those orders from Chief Garcia...who serves at the pleasure of the mayor and the city council, whom obviously gave Chief Garcia his orders on how the police should conduct themselves. Cops have jobs, families to support, and pensions to protect, and that usually means that when you get an order, you obey it for the most part. In this case, they obviously just followed orders, including Chief Garcia.
Is this Trump's fault? Controversial as some of what he says might be, it is all constitutionally protected speech, and there's a slew of Supreme Court decisions to support that. Likewise, you can't blame his supporters, who were violently attacked as they were peaceably leaving the area for simply exercising their constitutional right of freedom of assembly.
What about the mayor and the council? Tempting as it is, these are relatively small fish in the turgid swamp that is now the Democratic Party. Of course they obviously played an enthusiastic part, especially the mayor. But that part was obviously that of messenger boy. Who was it further up the food chain whom orchestrated this? Cui bono, who benefits?
Let's look at the message what happened in San Jose is sending and see if that sheds any light:
- Political street violence is perfectly acceptable with minimal cost to those whom commit it as long as it's aimed at the Right.
- You go to a Trump rally at your own risk. And cities that allow the Trump campaign to book venues for their rallies can expect the same bloody mess. Better to simply deny permits to the Trump campaign and avoid all that, isn't it?
- The Left has free rein to turn the GOP's Cleveland convention into a maelstrom of riots and chaos, all of which can be featured on national TV. After all,Cleveland is also a Democrat run city.In fact, plans for bringing in additional police from out of state were recently torpedoed because the city of Cleveland refused to pay for worker's compensation insurance for the additional police. Rest assured that the Cleveland police will get orders similar to the ones the police in San Jose received.
It's pretty obvious who benefits.
Well, there you have it.
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council, and the results are posted on Friday morning.
It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere, and you won’t want to miss it.
And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter..’cause we’re cool like that, y'know?