Labels Matter

On Sunday, John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog about the double standard used in reporting protests.

The article notes:

The Left has a rather schizophrenic attitude toward protests and demonstrations. Some are wonderful, like the George Floyd riots, which were not, in fact, protests at all. Or like arson and other destruction committed at pro-life facilities. Others are detestable, like the Dutch farmers’ protests, or the French “yellow vests,” or the Canadian truckers. Some protests, too, can only be ignored, like when hundreds of thousands of pro-life citizens show up for their annual march in Washington.

Currently the Left is “demonstrating” against the Supreme Court justices who concurred in the Dobbs decision. A few nights ago, as Scott has noted, left-wingers harassed Justice Brett Kavanaugh and other diners at the Morton’s steak house in D.C. Liberals viewed this effort as a triumph–Kavanaugh reportedly had to exit out a back door–and a pro-Democratic Party organization is now offering cash bounties to anyone who sees a conservative justice out in public in time for a flash mob to assemble.

When asked about such tactics, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was nonplussed. These are peaceful demonstrations, she replied, the very essence of democracy!

Creating an intimidating environment for political opponents is a sign of a tyrannical government. Protesting political figures at private locations that have nothing to do with their jobs is a form of intimidation.

The article concludes:

And, of course, all of this discussion takes place in the context of at least one assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh, the same man who was falsely and relentlessly smeared by the Democratic Party during his confirmation hearings. I think the leaders of the Democratic Party are well aware that their over-the-top attacks on conservative justices, and the kinds of harassment we have seen in recent days, are likely to lead to more assassination attempts. I think leaders of the Democratic Party hope that one or more conservative justices will be assassinated while Joe Biden is still (at least nominally) president, so that he can appoint a left-wing successor. I think this is why Attorney General Merrick Garland refuses to enforce 18 U.S.C. § 1507, which bans demonstrations at the homes of judges that attempt to influence their decisions. And I think this is why the Biden administration cheers on the mobs who harass conservatives in public places.

If this assessment seems harsh, ask yourself: what other hypothesis is consistent with the Democrats’ actions?

So, are protests and demonstrations good or bad? I think they are good–that is to say, consistent with our Constitution’s framework of ordered liberty–when they are peaceful (not “mostly peaceful”), when they are conducted in public places with proper permitting, and when they do not explicitly or implicitly threaten anyone. Citizens have a right to assemble peaceably, not to form themselves into mobs. They do not have a right to commit mayhem, to destroy property, or to threaten, menace, or unreasonably inconvenience others. Unfortunately, the “protests” that the Left likes most usually fall in the latter category. Let’s just hope they don’t result in even more catastrophic violence than we have already witnessed.

So far, the violence we have witnessed seems to be mainly on the liberal side–January 6th was not a totally peaceful protest, but did not include lighting fires, burning business, throwing molotov cocktails into police cars, or killing those trying to protect their businesses. If the violence on the political left, including antifa, BLM, etc., is not reined in, I fear that there will be violent pushback from the political right. That is a recipe for the destruction of America.

Illustrating The Current Imbalance In Our Justice System

On February 3rd, The Washington Examiner reported:

FBI Director Christopher Wray claimed the FBI is working just as hard to punish participants in the 2020 George Floyd riots as those involved in the Capitol riot, though neither the numbers nor his own boss’s words seem to back him up.

…Matthew Olsen, an assistant attorney general who heads the DOJ’s national security division, told the Senate in January that DOJ’s investigation into the Capitol riot is “unprecedented.” He also announced that his office had created a new “domestic terrorism unit” and said the Capitol riot is “being investigated as an act of domestic terrorism.”

The Justice Department said in January that at least 725 defendants have been arrested in connection with the Capitol riot and that more than 225 defendants had been charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement officers. DOJ said in February that more than 165 defendants pleaded guilty to federal charges, including 22 felonies.

“The number of FBI [domestic terrorism] investigations over the past two years since March 2020 has more than doubled,” Olsen testified.

…McFadden (Judge Trevor McFadden), in a December ruling, argued there was a “troubling theme” in how prosecutors handled Portland riot cases compared to Capitol riot ones.

“The Government dismissed 27 cases brought against Portland defendants, including five felony cases,” McFadden said. “Dismissal of one felony case is unusual. Dismissal of five is downright rare and potentially suspicious. Rarely has the Government shown so little interest in vigorously prosecuting those who attack federal officers.”

On February 5th, The New York Post reported:

A man convicted of attempting to set fire to a high school during the Black Lives Matter riots in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd has been sentenced to five years probation.

Mohamed Hussein Abdi, 20, was handed the probation sentence in a U.S. District Court in St. Paul, Minnesota, Thursday after pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit arson, according to court documents obtained by Fox News.

Abdi was also ordered to pay just over $34,000 in restitution to Gordon Parks High School in St. Paul.

Court documents state that the sentence was “imposed pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.”

Draw your own conclusions.