FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Trump and Police Brutality

Every time this writer believes, naively, that the antics of the Trump Administration could not possibly get any worse, they do. President Trump’s speech to the Boy Scouts of America at their annual Jamboree seemed, then, to be the last straw. What could possibly be more inappropriate, damaging, and downright stupid, than telling young teenage boys about his electoral victory, criticizing his predecessor, and rambling about a New York party where ‘the hottest people’ had gathered? The executive of the BSA actually had to apologize to the scouters and their families. This writer couldn’t conceive of anything more bizarre.

But, as usual, Mr. Trump pulled another dysfunctional rabbit out of his tattered hat, and surprised this writer. This time, it was his speech to police officers of the Suffolk County Police Department, in New York. Incredibly, he said this: “When you see these thugs being thrown into the back of a paddy wagon. You just see them thrown in — rough. I said, ‘Please don’t be too nice.’”

White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee cleared it all up for us, when asked about Mr. Trump’s comments after the fact. Said she: “I believe he was making a joke at the time.”

Well, there you are! The U.S. president, widely respected in his own mind, was merely being humorous when telling police officers to be rough with people they arrest. That, of course, makes it acceptable.

The reaction from police organizations across the nation was mixed, and that is beyond troubling. Police departments generally denounced the statements, but police organizations, such as unions, and the group, Blue Lives Matter, did not. Some of those that criticized the statements include the following:

+ Police Department in Boston: Our “priority has been and continues to be building relationships and trust with the community we serve. As a police department we are committed to helping people, not harming them.”

+ New York Police Commissioner James O’Neill seemed shocked. To “”suggest that police officers apply any standard in the use of force other than what is reasonable and necessary is irresponsible, unprofessional and sends the wrong message to law enforcement as well as the public.”

+ Maya Wiley, chairwoman of the New York Civilian Complaint Review Board, responded to the speech as follows: “But for many communities in our city, President Trump’s comments only (stoke) fears of interacting with officers. President Trump’s speech today was shameful, dangerous, and damages the progress our city has made toward improving police-community relations.”

Despite the long history of brutality that so many police departments exhibit, these statements, at least, said the right things, even if they are not practiced.

But what of other police organizations, those that represent the rank-and-file, the cops on the beat, who routinely assault and kill innocent people? These organizations supported Mr. Trump’s comments. We will look at a few statements, and comment on them.

John Becker, of the Suffolk County Deputy Sheriff’s Police Benevolent Association, endorsed the president’s statements. Said he: “For the first time in many years we feel we have a president who supports law enforcement.”

Is not a basic premise of ‘law enforcement’ that a suspect is innocent until proven guilty? Mr. Trump’s words indicate that the suspect is guilty, that the arresting officers can mete out the punishment, and the burden of innocence rests on the suspect.

Stephen Loomis, president of the Cleveland Police Patrolmen’s Association, proclaimed that there is “unwavering” support for Trump from law enforcement agencies throughout the nation. He further said: “Not surprisingly, (Trump’s) comments have been completely taken out of context by the racially exclusive and divisive profiteers seeking to call into question his support of all law abiding citizens and the law enforcement that live and work among them.”

How, one might ask, did ‘racially exclusive and divisive profiteers’ take the president’s statement out of context? Race was not mentioned, and the statement by Mr. Trump was clear. Also, if anything was divisive, it was the president’s statement. And lastly, how will people who are aghast at these statements profit from them?

One further wonders how Mr. Loomis is able to ascertain that ‘all law abiding citizens’ support the president. It seems that many of those citizens are shot and killed for no reason whatsoever by the police. This does not cause their survivors, or anyone throughout the country who cares about fairness and justice, to support ‘the law enforcement that live and work among them.’

The organization, Blue Lives Matter, used Mr. Trump’s preferred method of communication to respond, when it ‘Tweeted’ this, echoing Ms. Huckabee’s statement on the matter: “Trump didn’t tell police to go out & brutalize people as the media would have you believe. It was a joke.”

This writer begs to differ: going out and brutalizing people is exactly what the president told the police to do. Not that they were the very pictures of restraint prior to this speech, but it’s possible that his words will unleash police brutality unlike any seen since the Vietnam War protests.

So there we have it; this writer is once again astounded by the president south of this writer’s Canadian home, to which he fled during the Bush era. And while Justin Trudeu is hardly the epitome of justice and fairness (he’s a common shill for apartheid Israel), he is, at least, not a total embarrassment on the world stage, and has not, and is not expected to, endorsed police brutality.

To say that this writer is an example of white privilege would be an understatement. He does not, therefore, have to worry excessively when travelling in the U.S. that he will be brutalized by the local police because a tail light on his car has burned out. But for millions of people who are minorities, or even white but living in poor neighborhoods, fear of the police can only be healthy.  Mr. Trump’s words have made a bad situation worse.

Where it will end is anyone’s guess. What Mr. Trump will say next to cause chaos, division and turmoil in the country can’t possibly be anticipated. One waits in trepidation for the next speech, and the next presidential ‘tweet’.

More articles by:

Robert Fantina’s latest book is Empire, Racism and Genocide: a History of US Foreign Policy (Red Pill Press).

September 20, 2018
Michael Hudson
Wasting the Lehman Crisis: What Was Not Saved Was the Economy
John Pilger
Hold the Front Page, the Reporters are Missing
Kenn Orphan
The Power of Language in the Anthropocene
Paul Cox – Stan Cox
Puerto Rico’s Unnatural Disaster Rolls on Into Year Two
Rajan Menon
Yemen’s Descent Into Hell: a Saudi-American War of Terror
Russell Mokhiber
Nick Brana Says Dems Will Again Deny Sanders Presidential Nomination
Nicholas Levis
Three Lessons of Occupy Wall Street, With a Fair Dose of Memory
Steve Martinot
The Constitutionality of Homeless Encampments
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
The Aftershocks of the Economic Collapse Are Still Being Felt
Jesse Jackson
By Enforcing Climate Change Denial, Trump Puts Us All in Peril
George Wuerthner
Coyote Killing is Counter Productive
Mel Gurtov
On Dealing with China
Dean Baker
How to Reduce Corruption in Medicine: Remove the Money
September 19, 2018
Bruce E. Levine
When Bernie Sold Out His Hero, Anti-Authoritarians Paid
Lawrence Davidson
Political Fragmentation on the Homefront
George Ochenski
How’s That “Chinese Hoax” Treating You, Mr. President?
Cesar Chelala
The Afghan Morass
Chris Wright
Three Cheers for the Decline of the Middle Class
Howard Lisnoff
The Beat Goes On Against Protest in Saudi Arabia
Nomi Prins 
The Donald in Wonderland: Down the Financial Rabbit Hole With Trump
Jack Rasmus
On the 10th Anniversary of Lehman Brothers 2008: Can ‘IT’ Happen Again?
Richard Schuberth
Make Them Suffer Too
Geoff Beckman
Kavanaugh in Extremis
Jonathan Engel
Rather Than Mining in Irreplaceable Wilderness, Why Can’t We Mine Landfills?
Binoy Kampmark
Needled Strawberries: Food Terrorism Down Under
Michael McCaffrey
A Curious Case of Mysterious Attacks, Microwave Weapons and Media Manipulation
Elliot Sperber
Eating the Constitution
September 18, 2018
Conn Hallinan
Britain: the Anti-Semitism Debate
Tamara Pearson
Why Mexico’s Next President is No Friend of Migrants
Richard Moser
Both the Commune and Revolution
Nick Pemberton
Serena 15, Tennis Love
Binoy Kampmark
Inconvenient Realities: Climate Change and the South Pacific
Martin Billheimer
La Grand’Route: Waiting for the Bus
John Kendall Hawkins
Seymour Hersh: a Life of Adversarial Democracy at Work
Faisal Khan
Is Israel a Democracy?
John Feffer
The GOP Wants Trumpism…Without Trump
Kim Ives
The Roots of Haiti’s Movement for PetroCaribe Transparency
Dave Lindorff
We Already Have a Fake Billionaire President; Why Would We want a Real One Running in 2020?
Gerry Brown
Is China Springing Debt Traps or Throwing a Lifeline to Countries in Distress?
Pete Tucker
The Washington Post Really Wants to Stop Ben Jealous
Dean Baker
Getting It Wrong Again: Consumer Spending and the Great Recession
September 17, 2018
Melvin Goodman
What is to be Done?
Rob Urie
American Fascism
Patrick Cockburn
The Adults in the White House Trying to Save the US From Trump Are Just as Dangerous as He Is
Jeffrey St. Clair - Alexander Cockburn
The Long Fall of Bob Woodward: From Nixon’s Nemesis to Cheney’s Savior
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail