There Is A Big Difference

I want to make something clear. There has been an attempt by left-wing media and Democrat politicians to twist the meaning of the call to defund the police and try to intimate that conservatives calling to defund the Federal Bureau of Investigation is the same thing and I am not going to let them get away with it. I find it incredible and disingenuous for these cop-hating people on the left to suddenly leap to defend the FBI after years of attacking the courage, commitment, honor and sacrifice of local police. Some even went so far as defending the Black Lives Matter calls to abolish local police and without any evidence to support the lie that cops are racist.

A recent news report points out that, “Congressman Jim Jordan and other Republicans used to be hysterical about defunding the police. Gone are the days in which Republicans whine hysterically about Democrats and the drive to defund the police.”

I am one of those people on record for calling that the FBI not just be defunded, but abolished. Now let me make the case and explain the difference.

First, it is important to distinguish between the two entities. The FBI is not a police agency. They are an investigative agency. Other than a few who work on task forces with local police, the overwhelming majority of agents are information gatherers. They don’t make arrests without the permission of a United States Department of Justice attorney. Their reports are not heavily scrutinized before going to a grand jury looking for an indictment. From the onset of an arrest by local cops, every aspect is reviewed along the way. Any slight misstep with the arrest or in collecting evidence will get the case thrown out before it ever sees the inside of a courtroom. There is a distinct difference. More on that later.

Additionally, FBI agents do not keep the peace, patrol neighborhoods or come into contact with citizens on a daily basis. The FBI gets to operate in anonymity. They get to hide what they are doing behind the label of their work being classified as top secret or confidential. They don’t wear body cameras that are used by media to know exactly what they are doing 24-7. My point is not to summarily dismiss what their role as information gatherers is, but do not ever mistake or compare what they do as policing. It’s not. It’s not even close.

Back to my previously mentioned comment about FBI agents not having everything they do in investigations being closely scrutinized. I have detailed instances as to why it should be more than just defunding the FBI before today. In one previous column here I wrote, imagine the NYPD, Chicago Police of the LAPD being accused of a long-standing pattern of breaking their own rules on investigations, illegally using informants and undercover agents to spy on politicians, journalists and religious leaders who are engaged in constitutionally protected activities. Let’s say that a local police agency was found to be engaged in the unauthorized use of physical surveillance on people not accused of a crime in 28, yes 28 cases in a one-year period. And what if a local police agency audit found that its department broke its own rules 747 times on sensitive intercepts of electronic communications and that corrective measures did not stop the illegal activity? To be more specific, that is a violation of the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. And not one person in the FBI was held accountable.

The American people have no use for a law enforcements agency that operates illegally or in the shadows. At the end of the day, all a law enforcement agency has is its integrity. With the awesome power and authority the FBI possesses, they can ruin and destroy lives. Once they have you in their crosshairs, they force you to plea bargain mainly because you run out of money trying to defend

yourself. I know people who this has happened to. Local police don’t have that kind of authority. Everything that a local cop does is scrutinized. They can’t classify their work as top secret. They don’t get to heavily redact reports they have to release through the Freedom of Information Act or at the exculpatory phase of due process.

People have asked me if calling for abolishing the FBI is too extreme and what we would replace the FBI with. The FBI has become a corrupt runaway bureaucracy. Their behavior has become reminiscent of the Nazi’s Stasi or brownshirts. They do not feel accountable or answerable to congressional oversight. Every time Director Christopher Wray appears before a congressional committee to testify and the answers would embarrass the Bureau, he cites confidentiality and that the release of that information would compromise national security or an ongoing investigation. It’s a lie. Congress is our watchdog on these unelected bureaucracies.

The FBI has a culture problem, and it has been corrupted to the point of not being worth being saved. Simply changing directors hasn’t helped change the Bureau’s out-of-control culture. Agents are coming forward as whistleblowers to detail the culture of corruption. They are telling of being met with retaliation internally for doing so. The FBI culture of corruption is anathema to a functioning republic. It is a threat to the very democracy that many Democrat politicians like to talk about. This is beyond a one-off or a few bad apples. It is agency-wide. It’s up, down and across the spectrum. It is beyond fixing. It’s time to abolish it. Start over. We won’t miss much in the interim. In fact, we will be more secure in our our persons, houses, places and effects as written in the U.S. Constitution.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Moving Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

THE MISSING PIECE

With crime and violence rates surging all across America, people are in search of ways to stem the record number of murders, aggravated assaults (non-fatal shootings) robberies, auto thefts and carjackings. The number one solution being offered to this by policy makers is to throw money at it in the form of social engineering projects like so-called second chance programs, job training and behavior modification programs for career criminals. These are not novel, never-before-tried efforts. These are the same old attempts that have never had much impact previously.  They instead are the same warmed-up leftovers from the past rebranded as new and improved. Renaming something that did not work before gives it no better chance of working the second time around.

Public safety is the first and highest priority of all levels of government. Federal, state and local governments have a vested interest in reasonably securing the personal safety of citizens. A long time ago, we allowed the individual citizen to provide for their own safety. Citizens were their own arbiters of how to carry out justice. People at one point in our history then agreed to turn this over to the government for more consistent and just application of the law. From that point forward, turning our safety over to the government made a crime a violation against society, not the individual. The government would handle this through state prosecution of criminals. It generally works. At least it did up until recently.

The leftists have co-opted our criminal justice system and have bastardized the law. They have decriminalized unlawful behavior that we once considered abhorrent and unacceptable in a civilized society. This same insidious bunch convinced many that our criminal justice system was inherently racist. They refer to jails and prisons as oppressive and with a hidden objective of enslaving black people. It is called the new Jim Crow.

As if that wasn’t bad enough from outside the criminal justice system, now they have infiltrated inside the system.

As you know, the criminal justice system is composed of four elements. It starts with the police who begin the process by an arrest, then it moves to the prosecution stage, then onto the courts. The final player in this system is corrections. In order for this process to be successful in keeping society safe, the entities involved have to each perform their role competently and consistently. It doesn’t solely matter how many people are arrested by police. At any point in this process, an arrestee can be processed out of the system for any number of reasons. I have no problem if there is a better more reasonable way of dealing with an arrest short of a criminal charge being issued and/or a person being sentenced to jail or prison. It’s not a rubber stamp. Prosecutors and judges do have discretion. That discretion currently is being abused. This has turned into a one-size-fits-all. Criminal history no longer matters. Career criminals are given the same leniency as a first-time offender. Even if a person is charged with an offense, there is an over-reliance on probation with no time served. Additionally, serious charges are watered down to misdemeanors and other included charges are dropped in exchange for a plea bargain. These options create what we call the revolving door of criminal justice. Repeat criminals are not deterred from engaging in the same behavior if they are not adequately punished for their criminal behavior. They see that the justice system will not adequately stop them, so they conclude there is no incentive to stop.

The biggest area of the failure of the criminal justice system today is in prosecution. In order for a system to work, each component therein must do its part. I like to use the analogy of a car engine. Let me ask you what the most important part of a car engine is. The answer is the part that isn’t working, because if any one part of the engine isn’t working, the car won’t start of run properly. We’re seeing that with the prosecutors offices all across the United States. Here is some stunning data to emphasize how bad things have become.

Several years ago, billionaire socialist businessman George Soros started a project to weaken America by attacking our criminal justice process. He spent millions on an effort to elect state prosecutors and district attorneys who are called woke. They ran on platforms of pledging to not charge criminals. This is their idea of criminal justice reform. They set policies of no bail for persons arrested even for serious offenses. These two elements have destroyed communities’ efforts to keep crime under control. They have been on this jihad for several years now. We are seeing the success of their mission to weaken America. 

New data is rolling in on several Soros-supported state prosecutors’ efforts to live up to their campaign promise of going soft on crime. A study done by the Manhattan Institute shows that 69% of criminal cases reviewed for prosecution by the New York City prosecutor’s office have been tossed out. This is up from 44% in 2019. They refuse to issue charges. Let that sink in. Sixty-nine percent. At the same time the study points out that felony arrests by police have fallen by 14% when shootings rose by 102% and murders rose by 51%. To deny a correlation here is to deny reality. There is no doubt that police have become frustrated with the prosecutor’s office not charging suspects. Why should they bother?  And it is not only in New York. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, a news report details that 60% of felony cases that are forwarded for prosecution are not charged. Additionally, 80% of misdemeanor charges are dropped. The elected district attorney, John Chisholm, another woke politically active prosecutor, has previously professed his allegiance to decriminalizing unlawful behavior. All of this is anathema to what was being done to control and prevent crime in the ‘90s. Order maintenance strategies were enacted that had all four components of the criminal justice system working together and complimenting each other. Arrests were up, as were prosecutions. Courts handed down longer periods of confinement and guess what? We experienced historic record lows of crime and violence. Imagine that.

This version of a criminal justice system is broken. The broken part of the engine is at the prosecution stage. Until that part functions properly, nothing that the police do will control prevent and deter crime. This philosophy by prosecutors basically eliminates the courts and corrections phase. These cases never see the inside of a courtroom or end up before a judge although courts have become dysfunctional too. The ironic part of all of this is that prosecutors’ offices are asking for more money in their budgets whining about a lack of resources.

 Somebody in a legislative body that approves budgets or in the media needs to ask the question begging to be asked. More money for what?

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Brooke Jenkins: A San Francisco Treat?

I don’t want to get too excited too soon, but several news stories out of San Francisco could indicate a pendulum swing out of the district attorney’s office with the election of Brooke Jenkins to lead the prosecutor’s office. You may recall the food dish called Rice-A-Roni-the San Francisco Treat commercials. That jingle came to mind when reading about the new DA in San Francisco. She was elected after the disastrous reign of Chesa Boudin, the cop-hater extraordinaire who was swept into the district attorney’s office with the help of George Soros, who funded progressive prosecutor candidates all across the country who campaigned on using the office as a platform for political activism. Boudin then set about creating policies that would go soft on career criminals and instead emphasized the targeting of law enforcement officers for malicious prosecution.

Some background on Jenkins is noteworthy. She was appointed interim district attorney by liberal San Francisco Mayor London Breed in 2022 after former DA Boudin was successfully recalled. There is no doubt in my mind that the ultra-lefty liberal Mayor Breed chose the centrist Democrat Jenkins because he was undoubtedly feeling the heat from constituents about out-of-control crime that might impact his own re-election bid. Reports are that Jenkins campaigned for the recall of Boudin after she herself resigned, citing constant chaos and turmoil internally that led to many other assistant prosecutors leaving the office. She ran on a tough-on-crime platform. That usually won’t get you elected in the city by the Bay, but residents have had a change of heart after the failed progressive polices of Chesa Boudin led to a surge in crime that other large urban areas experienced after electing woke chief prosecutors. Jenkins also claimed that she resigned because her then=boss Boudin’s leniency on criminals was making San Francisco less safe.

Her biography indicates that she has an undergrad degree from the University of California at Berkeley, a radical leftist academic institution going back to the ‘60s. She also holds a law degree from the University of Chicago. That is where the infamous Saul Alinsky, author of the primer Rules For Radicals, a book he dedicated to Lucifer (Satan himself), was a law professor. He was a socialist and is considered to be the architect of the modern radical or progressive leftist movement. Think of how many current lawyers have had their minds poisoned by him. The University of Chicago was also where Barack Obama taught law. That gives you an idea of the kind of lawyers that school produces. That school does not produce law school graduates who seek employment at conservative law firms or end up being a balls-to-the wall prosecutor. That is a red flag for me about Jenkins, but I will hold that in abeyance for now.

Several early moves are encouraging, as she reorganizes the office to her liking, and are hopefully an indication of how she will govern the office. According to the Washington Examiner newspaper, Jenkins is described as a “centrist Democrat”. Personally, I didn’t know those still existed as the Democrat Party has been hijacked by the radical left wing fringe of the party. They have excommunicated the centrist wing of their cabal. Only full-throated socialist progressives are allowed. Another encouraging sign is that Jenkins has applied for a waiver to the city’s sanctuary city designation so she can arrest two people suspected of a violent crime who may have fled the country. Currently, city laws prohibit the prosecutor’s office from working with federal Border Patrol officials or from the Department of Homeland Security. Jenkins in a statement said, “We won’t let dangerous criminals evade prosecution simply by leaving the United States.” She continues, “What we can’t allow in San Francisco are for people to commit heinous crimes like murder and child rape and then just be able to flee our jurisdiction and avoid prosecution.” The crime in question occurred in 2009 for heaven sakes. It was for domestic violence murder and the suspect in that case had warrants out for child sexual abuse. Boudin could have gone after that guy, too, but he let his politics get in the way and override what was in the best interest of residents of San Francisco.

That brings me to several cases involving law enforcement officers that caught my eye. A SFist news reports that Jenkins announced that she will be dropping manslaughter charges against San Francisco Police Officer Chris Samayoa in what is described as the first-ever case filed against an officer for an on-duty homicide. The officer had only been on the street for four days when he fired shots at a suspect during a carjacking incident. Jenkins said of this case that, “It appeared that the case was filed for political reasons and not in the interest of justice. I cannot pursue this case out of political convenience. Given the conflicts that have arisen, the evidentiary problems and the complete lack of good faith surrounding the filing of this matter, we cannot ethically proceed with this prosecution. Therefore, it is our intention to dismiss the charges made.” That is a wow moment. Many prosecutions against law enforcement today are made to achieve the same political ends: anti-police activism. It is refreshing that this DA, in San Francisco no less, has the courage and morals to put her own political interests aside to achieve the interest of fair and impartial justice. Officer Samayoa is not out of the woods yet as the case has been handed over to the State Attorney General for further review. In light of Jenkins’ strong statement against prosecution, it will be difficult for the state of California to proceed. An attorney for the officer called Boudin’s filing of this case as, “nothing short of reckless irresponsible and politically motivated”.

Another decision by Jenkins is also noteworthy as she reshuffles the priorities of her office. She has cut the number of prosecutors and investigators assigned to a police accountability unit from six down to two. She cut the number of investigators in the unit responsible for investigation police abuse from six down to four. This unit was originally created under former DA George Gascón and was continued under her predecessor Boudin.

Critics of the policy shift in the office of San Francisco district attorney claim these moves signal that Brooke Jenkins will look the other way on complaints of officer misconduct. No, it doesn’t. She didn’t completely shut down the unit. What it signals to me is that in an office facing a surge in street violence and limited prosecutors, she is re-prioritizing her efforts to crack down on career criminal thugs raining holy hell on San Franciscans who have had enough of Boudin’s criminal coddling policies. Jenkins answers to them, not the editorial pages of the San Francisco Chronicle and other left-wing news sources. Her constituents will let her know how they feel about it as she is up for re-election this coming November. I’m betting that they will like a return to law and order and a better quality of life.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

THE LESSON OF MEMPHIS: THE CONTENT OF OUR CHARACTER’S ARE MOST IMPORTANT

I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character. - Martin Luther King, Jr. (1963)

(In my effort to resist any rush to judgment and in the spirit of due process and "innocent until proven guilty" I have been reticent to comment on the Memphis case involving the death of Tyre Nichols as recorded in the viral video beating he received at the hands of five Memphis police officers. As facts continue to be exposed it is my most sincere hope that justice is served for all involved. But the question remains …)

How have we strayed so far away from Dr. King’s wise, open-minded philosophy? The ‘LEFT’ today says we need to hire Black cops to police Black neighborhoods. In reality, color shouldn’t matter … how about hire cops with great moral character? The goal should be good, law-abiding cops — irrespective of race. All five officers charged in the beating and deaths of Tyre Nichols in Memphis are Black, as is Tyre Nichols, but this isn’t about race but rather it is about character and standards.

Did the Memphis PD lower standards to hire these cops for “diversity” and/or because cops are now maligned as “systemically racist” — resulting in early retirements, fewer applicants and therefore lower hiring standards to maintain manpower?

According to a source within the Memphis PD, not all of the five charged officers were hired through the customary PD structured hiring process. City leaders felt the existing process was too strict and kept certain individuals from getting jobs at the department. City leaders then began their own hiring process and pushed new hires into the agency bypassing the rigorous and time-tested background requirements and testing procedures in place at the department in order to fill vacancies. “They would allow just pretty much anybody to be a police officer because they just want these numbers,” said Alvin Davis, a former lieutenant in charge of recruiting before he retired last year out of frustration.

The department phased out requirements to have college credits, military service or previous police work. All that’s now required is two years’ work experience — any work experience. The department also requested state waivers to hire applicants with criminal records. And the police academy even dropped timing requirements on physical fitness drills and removed running entirely because too many people were failing.

Many young officers, before ever working with more experienced colleagues, were assigned to specialized units like the high-crime strike force involved in Nichols’ arrest. It was reported that some young officers who transferred back to patrol didn’t even know some basics such as how to write a traffic ticket or respond to a domestic call. “They don’t know a felony from a misdemeanor,” Davis said. “They don’t even know right from wrong.”

Police Director Cerelyn Davis, who took over in June 2021, has said supervision of less experienced officers is an urgent need, questioning why a supervisor failed to respond to Nichols’ arrest despite a policy that requires a ranking officer to go to the scene when pepper spray or a stun gun is used.

According to an Associated Press report, of the five officers now charged with second-degree murder in Nichols’ beating, two had only a couple of years on the force and none had more than six years experience.

One of the officers was a former tight end on the Bethel University football team and appeared to have had at least one arrest, according to files from the Peace Officers Standards and Training Commission, a state oversight agency. But the date and details of the case had been redacted.

The section for arrests in the agency’s file for another officer who worked at a Shelby County Corrections facility before joining the force was also redacted from the state records. He was sued for allegedly beating an inmate there, which he denied, and the case was dismissed because papers had “not been properly served.”

This is not about training any more than it is about race but it is about character, mindset and decency as prerequisite qualities in the evaluation of those under consideration for hire. At its core it’s not a police culture issue but criminal culture one. By opening the hiring process to those who are potentially a product of the inner-city drug gang culture, where the value to human life is often seen as diminished, it would seem the lower hiring standard increases the chance for bad decisions, incompetence and misconduct.

“I asked them what made you want to be the police and they’ll tell you it’s strictly about the money,” Davis said, adding that many recruits would ask the minimum time they would actually have to serve to keep hiring bonus money. “It’s not a career for them like it was to us. It’s just a job.”

Why the superficial diversity goal of “cops who look like the community,” especially if it means lowering standards? Why should it be a benefit to hire, promote, assign or retain officers from an expanded pool based upon gender, skin color or cultural diversity rather than being based upon candidates of the highest personal character, skill set and potential for success? To maintain integrity and fair and just application of our laws by those given the responsibility for enforcement merit, above all, must be our primary guide.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Memphis Blues

I am on the Board of Directors for the Crime Prevention Research Center, a research-based organization that focuses on crime prevention and how anti-gun policies actually contribute to a rise in crime. The director of the research center is John Lott, a Ph.D specializing in economics. He has published numerous peer-reviewed studies on crime and violence. I mention this to give credibility to his findings. They are free of partisan political findings and that is important to where I am going in this column.

Lott recently published a study that shows that 1% of U.S. counties are responsible for 42% percent of America’s murders. Let that sink in. The study points out that these worst 31 counties, the 1%, are mainly urban centers with about one-fifth of the nation’s population and they alone accounted for 42% of the country’s homicides. There is more. Lott’s research shows that the worst 5% of U.S. counties accounted for 73% of all murders in the U.S. And get this finding. A total of 52% of U.S. counties reported zero homicides. Lott used FBI data and relied on public uniform crime reports to crunch the numbers.

It is safe to say that where the homicides are follows other FBI Part 1 categories of crime. Those would be rapes, aggravated assaults (non-fatal shootings), robberies and burglaries. Add to that a heavy occurrence of cultural rot and dysfunction that contributes to black underclass crime, things like ineffective parenting, absent fathers, school failure and questionable lifestyle choices like young people joining gangs and drug and alcohol use. Then lay over that a soft woke criminal justice system and policies like no bail and an over-reliance on probation and parole instead of using jails and prisons to hold crooks accountable that at least temporarily takes them out of circulation. Most of the violent crime occurs in very localized areas of these counties-that being large cities. This also where a heavy police presence occurs and is required. More police, citizen and criminal interaction will naturally occur in order to keep crime and violence in check for safer neighborhoods. That means more traffic stops, more field interview stops and more arrests. More human interaction leads to the potential for more conflict. Much of the police use of force is the result of someone not complying with an officer’s lawful commands.

Now I am going to bring the Memphis Police Department into this along with every other high-profile police use of force incident-Mike Brown, Eric Garner, Freddie Gray and George Floyd. They are all different but there are some common threads to them. First of all, let’s remove the Memphis police incident involving Tyre Nichols out of this but there too there is a variable about Memphis where we can use the city of Memphis in my thesis. If the other cases are anomalies, then the Memphis case is a super anomalies. Maybe we can even include the George Floyd case as a super anomaly. What I mean by that is you cannot use those as a reason to support the police reform movement. Although the Memphis officers are entitled to a presumption of innocence, those cops appeared to be behaving badly and with bad intentions. In the other cases I mentioned, the cops performed according to law and policy.

First of all, it is important to point out that rarely does a police/suspect criminal interaction or arrest end in the use of force and even more rarely does it end in a use of deadly force. However, every time one occurs, the cop-hating crowd yells for police reform and the Democrats yell for passage of the misguided police reform George Floyd bill that is fortunately stalled in Congress. The things contained in the bill and all the other recommendations at the local level will do absolutely nothing to reform policing because it works on the wrong things. Even police executives get it wrong asking for more money for training and equipment. These are not training issues. These recommendations focus solely on police.

No amount of additional training or resources will change anything about policing, although hiring more police would be a better start.

So why does the change that people call for in policing not result in any real change? We just went through this ritual of trying to change the police during the Obama administration. He convened a panel to make recommendations after the police use of force in Ferguson, Missouri, Eric Garner in New York and Freddie Gray in Baltimore. They produced a set of recommendations called 21st Century Reform of Policing, to make policing better. Nothing changed after these police uses of force. And nothing will. In the problem-solving approach there is this thing called the logic model. It asks 3 questions: Are you working hard? Two, are you working smart and 3 (most critical) are you working on the right thing? The reason nothing changes is because in focusing on police, politicians and cop haters are working on the wrong thing according to the logic model. They may be working hard and it’s questionable if they are working smart, but they are definitely working on the wrong thing.

John Lott’s research mentioned previously is exactly what politicians should be working on. The answer to less police use of force is to enact policies that lower crime rates. Memphis and Shelby County is one of the most violent places in America according to a 24/7 Wall Street survey using FBI data. Here is more sobering data about Memphis. In Memphis, residents have a one in 40 chance of being the victim of a violent crime. The national rate is 1 in 148. In Memphis, crimes per square mile are 156. The national average is 26 crimes per square mile. You can take out Memphis and insert any large city in an urban county like Los Angeles, St. Louis, New York, Chicago, Milwaukee and you will find similar data.

Less use of jails and prisons as a crime control tool has increased violent crime in these areas, as has things like no bail policies and an over-reliance on probation and parole. Woke prosecutors not charging career criminals is causing more crime. Urban pathologies like a broken family structure is causing more crime. More crime increases a higher need for police. More police interaction increases the potential for police to have to resort to using force on uncooperative people. The answer is not to retrain police, it is for elected city and county leaders to enact polices that will get crime under control. That is the heavy lifting for them, however, and so it is easier for them to go for the low-hanging fruit of trying to fix the police.

Memo to politicians: For fewer incidents of police use of force, fix the ghetto. It’s the crime, stupid. Leave the police alone.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

In The News…Again

Periodically there are several newsworthy incidents that occur at the same time that beg for comment and as a result it causes me to cover several stories in the same column. The first such incident might sound familiar.

Los Angeles Police Department Chief of Police Michel Moore is the latest law enforcement executive to capitulate to the cop-hating crowd by issuing a departmental order that bans the display of the Thin Blue Line flag at public events and in police station lobbies. The LAPD joins a growing list of departments whose chief executive refuses to stand strong against an evil movement. Other departments that previously did it include the Milwaukee Police Department, the Niles, Illinois Police Department, the University of Wisconsin Police Department, the Chardon, Ohio, Police Department and the Golden Minnesota Police Department. Yes, here we go again. Wokeness wins out. This is an act of cowardice at a time when morale is at all-time low among front-line officers. Here was an opportunity for Moore to display strength and support for the 9,000 men and women who put on the uniform of the city of Los Angeles to protect and serve. Instead, Moore genuflected and paid homage to a domestic terrorist mob because they claim that the U.S. flag with a blue line as one of its stripes is offensive. My initial thought was who complained and how many people complained and who are they? This is a United States flag we are talking about. The description of the complaint in an article by the news service, NewsNation, was that the flag was, “a symbol of far-right ideology and white supremacism” is repulsive. Moore said that displaying it in the lobby of police stations can be divisive and calls it a tool of extremism. This claim by Moore is putrid.

This is boilerplate language that every law enforcement executive who abandons front-line officers uses in their statement as to why they are banning what is a sacred symbol. They all have said the same thing and used the same excuse. They talk about building more trust between citizens and police. That useless endeavor has been going on since the ‘60s with no marked improvement. There has been no improvement in certain communities because this is a political construct where left-wing agitators don’t ever want trust to happen. It is a perpetual grievance tool.

This flag represents the line between good and evil. It represents the service, the courage, the commitment and the sacrifice officers display when they go out to protect and serve. Many law enforcement executives have forgotten where they came from. This is reprehensible. It’s a disgrace. That thin the blue line is the only thing that protects law-abiding citizens in a civil society. No one else does. Politicians can’t be counted on to be that force.

The people behind this move are nothing more than the mask of Black Lives Matter. Chief Moore associates the flag with the Proud Boys group. He’s lying. That’s a convenient excuse. Moore is unfit to lead front-line officers. He has abandoned the first rule of servant leadership, which is to put yourself second. He should focus instead on lowering crime rates and improving the quality of life in the ghetto that has become Los Angeles. He should focus on getting his officers more resources. But that is heavy lifting. To the officers of the LAPD, know this. Moore doesn’t have your six, as they say. You are on your own.

A second story of a law enforcement agency succumbing to wokeness emanates out of Madison, Wisconsin. A story from a news source Empower Wisconsin indicates that information put out by police about a carjacking incident failed to indicate the race of the perpetrator in the suspect description even though it was known. Department Public Information Officer Stephanie Fryer told Empower Wisconsin that, “it would have to be super descriptive and necessary to solve the crime for race to be included.” What the hell does that mean? She further indicated that including the race in the suspect description could fit so many different people and that it could lead to jumping to conclusions. What? She said that after talking to community activists that the Madison Police Department wanted to be mindful, “that releasing the race of a suspect could lead to targeting of some audiences and people in our community.” What? This is garbage and they know it. Here again I will ask, what community activists. They are nothing more than criminal apologists. Enablers. The same ones who want police defunded, no bail and jails shut down. That Madison police executives are kowtowing to these agitators is downright despicable.

This is ludicrous. You could say the same thing about releasing the gender or height and weight of the suspect or even the clothing. Listing the race among other indicators actually narrows the field of potential people police might want to stop and question. Clothing and facial hair are also important and relevant information to give out not only to officers but to enlist the help of the public in capturing the perpetrator. Now it’s the opposite. Our country is definitely upside down.

This policy actually increases the possibility that cops will be unnecessarily stopping white, Hispanic and Asian people who might be wearing similar clothing that the suspect was wearing. Is that what we want, to be harassing people who definitely weren’t involved? Is that the equity left-wing activists are trying to achieve?

The former police chief from the Madison Police Department, Mike Koval, who is not in favor of the policy, issued the following statement. He said, “Crime fighting, criminal investigations and law enforcement require facts and, often the public’s help. The facts may be inconvenient but in Madison the victims of serious violent crime are frequently people of color and the suspects they describe are just as frequently people of color.” Can I get an Amen please for what former Chief Koval told the news source?

Let me comment on this policy change. Is this about keeping crime under control or is it about social engineering experiments? Do they want to catch crooks or not? Do they want to reduce crime victimization or not? Police officials are always begging for the public’s help in solving crime, but then won’t give them all the pertinent information that is known about suspects by police at the time. This makes policing a one-way street and it makes you wonder why law-abiding citizens should even get involved in helping. And what about identifying the suspect in court? Is the race of the suspect relevant then? Have these idiots thought about the ramifications of these misguided woke policies?

God help us.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Think And Do It Fast

A tragic case that recently occurred in the state of Louisiana serves as a cruel reminder for police officers about their skills necessary in situations that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving. That is language used in a U.S. Supreme Court landmark case Graham v Conner on the use of force. Suffice it to say that when an officer is engaged in a high-speed pursuit, they are attempting to seize an individual making this a constitutional Fourth Amendment issue as well. The reasonableness of the seizure must be considered. Let’s do a refresher because this was avoidable, as a 42-year-old Addis police officer has been charged with multiple counts of negligent homicide and a count of negligent injury in connection with a fatal crash during a high-speed pursuit.

High -speed pursuits are an activity that brings a lot of issues into play. Officers know from their training that they must process a lot of information quickly in their spatial environment. There is an advantage to conducting high-speed pursuits on a rural highway and on a urban interstate because on most interstates and rural highways there are no pedestrians and no cross traffic. Time of day, weather conditions, other traffic in the area are just a few of the things that must be considered. Is the fleeing suspect known or can he be taken into custody at a later time?

Driving a vehicle is a skill. High-speed driving is even more of a skill. A skill is something that has to be continually practiced in order to get good or great at it. Unfortunately, officers don’t get to practice high-speed driving but for a few times a year, usually at in-service recertification. The practice is done on a controlled course. Some agencies use video simulators that are more interactive and lifelike. It is still not enough to do it once or twice a year. To give you some perspective, let’s look at another skill: golf at the professional level. I pick golf for a particular reason. A lot of things go on in a golf swing. There is the backswing, turning of the hips and shoulders while keeping your head down. Then on the forward swing, club head speed comes into play, keeping your head down and bringing the hips back around for the ball strike. All of this has to happen at the same time and in a few seconds. A golfer doesn’t get to think about all of this individually. A golfer has to be aware of where they are on the course. Distance to the hole and where the hazards are in the golfer’s head has to be figured in. Now let me be clear. Before you ask how this has anything to do with what an officer faces in high-speed pursuits, go back to what I said about driving being a skill and that to become proficient at a skill it has to be continually practiced to become not just good but great at it. Most people know who professional golfer Tiger Woods is. In the prime of his career, he was the best golfer on the planet. I use him as an example of being great at a skill. It is reported that at his peak he was hitting 5000 golf balls a day to perfect his skill. Practice, practice, practice your trade. No other professional golfer was doing that, and it is why he was nearly unbeatable. Sure, if a golfer makes an error in the swing, the result is a bad shot. A golfer gets one shot at it. They can’t take bad shots back. There are no do-overs at the professional level. I consider law enforcement officers to be professionals due to their certification and training. They, too, do not get do-overs in those circumstances that are tense, uncertain and rapidly evolving.

This is where an officer engaged in a high-speed pursuit can be compared to any other activity that is considered a skill. To the detriment of our officers, they are not allowed to practice high-speed driving over and over and over. They get one shot at getting it perfect and when they don’t get it perfect, deadly consequences can ensue like in Louisiana. The officer’s actions in Louisiana left two young people dead and another clinging to life after the officer ran through a red light without stopping and struck an uninvolved vehicle as he pursued a fleeing vehicle. The officer was just arrested and charged with negligent homicide. The easy thing to do here is to talk about the terrible loss of life and move on. I won’t do that. That is not second guessing, it’s leadership. Every officer in America needs to be made to stop and think about the ugliness that happened here. Bad and sometimes fatal outcomes have happened before in high-speed pursuits and will undoubtedly happen again. I don’t want it to happen to you or to innocent people driving down the street. So let’s use this as a refresher about high-speed pursuits. Sometimes, catching a fleeing suspect is just not worth it. Sometimes it is better to live to see another day. That is a decision the officer on the scene gets to make. I respect that.

The District Attorney who charged the officer stated that takedown red and blue lights and sirens do not give an officer the authority to run red lights. I’ll add that officers must use due regard for the welfare of others when conducting high-speed pursuits. That means completely stopping at red lights to look for oncoming traffic. They must take into account all the things I mentioned earlier in this column about their spatial environment. I know it’s a lot. The time to think about that is now, not after a disastrous outcome. In other words, what else is going on beside a fleeing vehicle? Like a professional golfer, an officer only gets one chance at getting it right. This Louisiana officer does not get a do-over. Here is the result: This officer’s career is over and he may end up in prison. Two teenagers are dead, and another critically injured. Two families are left to deal with shattered lives.

Agencies all across America need to use this as a case study. Why? Because in the age of budget cuts, the first thing that get axed in budget reductions is usually money budgeted for training. As far as I am concerned, that is malfeasance. In addition to the officer’s life being negatively altered, the city will pay millions in civil damages. Every law enforcement officer and agency needs to think about this today. Let this sink in as you begin your next tour of duty.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

BALTIMORE’S CHANGING OF THE GUARD

By: Joel E. Gordon

I don’t know about you but I am tired of watching government entities seemingly going in two opposing directions at the same time with detrimental results to “we the people.”

For instance, why would the Federal Reserve continue to raise interest rates to dampen the supply of money only to have Congress, at the behest of the Biden administration, pass massive spending bills flooding our economy with extra funds spent spiking inflation even further against a goal of inflation reduction?

A similar phenomenon has occurred in the city of Baltimore. When Baltimore Police Commissioner Harrison was hired on the heels of implementation of a Federal Consent Decree, his primary mandate was one of reform and Consent Decree compliance, not one of crime reduction. As recently as April of 2022, a 10-page policy directive of the Baltimore police was implemented, in keeping with many non-prosecutorial policies of now-former State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby, discouraging officers from charging individuals with lesser “quality of life” offenses.

While allowing for some officer discretion by beat officers, who have their fingers on the pulse of the communities they serve, the directive requires that “Members shall seek and receive approval from a permanent-rank supervisor prior to arresting an individual for a Lesser Offense (unless) specific, time-sensitive circumstances make it not practicable to obtain permission.”

LESSER OFFENSES:

·         Loitering 

·         Misdemeanor Trespassing 

·         Public Urination/Defecation 

·         Disorderly Conduct (including Disturbing the Peace)

·         Obstructing or Hindering an Officer

·         Open Container 

·         Littering

Additionally, Mosby refused to prosecute prostitution offenses and certain drug offenses.

As soft on crime policy reforms took hold in a focus on reform versus enforcement, crime and homicide numbers continued to spike and a shift in political focus emerged.

As a result, newly elected Baltimore State’s Attorney Ivan Bates has rescinded his predecessor’s policy on prohibiting low-level arrests, arrests for prostitution and drug offenses telling police at his swearing-in they always have the right to enforce "any and all laws on the books" & to “use the tools in your toolbox to do the job." Bates said the safety of people who live in the city is paramount, adding that, “We cannot afford to play politics with prosecutions.” His acclamations were met with cheering and applause. While not proposing mass incarcerations, a new era of enforcement and accountability is unfolding.

To complete the changing of the guard, new leadership must be put in place at the top levels of the Baltimore City Police Department with new orders and directives. A new balance between Consent Decree reforms and enforcement of the law and crime reduction must be achieved to best serve the good, law-abiding citizens of Baltimore. The days of many of the unnecessary Consent Decree-driven mandates working against officer and community safety must come to an abrupt end.

To be fair, the political landscape has changed as political constituencies become angrier over violations to their safety. The current police commissioner is being asked to do something that he was not hired to do and seems ill-prepared to achieve. Did anyone really believe that the Federal Consent Decree would be conducive to reduction in crime?

With soft on crime and hard on enforcement Marilyn Mosby out and a more rational Ivan Bates in, the changing of the guard has seemingly begun. As Victor Davis Hanson has said, we must “Change the past to control the present to dictate the future.” How long before Police Commissioner Michael Harrison and his sycophants are replaced to complete a necessary transition? It must be sooner rather than later. Time is of the essence.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Kenneth Walker III: Louisville Slug

The city of Louisville, Kentucky is home to great things and traditions like Churchill Downs and the Kentucky Derby, Mint Julep cocktails, where Louisville Slugger baseball bats are made and it’s the home of boxing legend Muhammad Ali. I have been to Louisville a number of times. It’s a great city. At least it used to be.

Lately, Louisville has been in the national spotlight for some not-so-flattering reasons. The most prominent has been the deadly use of force by Louisville police that led to the death of Breonna Taylor. Although she was collateral damage, it was through no fault of the Louisville police. To refresh your memory, Louisville police were conducting a narcotics-related search warrant on the residence where a known drug dealer was known to live at or stay. The officers had permission from the court to execute it as a no-knock search if necessary. I find it necessary to remind you of these facts because to this day the media continues to put out fake news about this event. The media continues to peddle the lie that this was a botched raid. It was not. They continue to write that police did not knock and that they were at the wrong address. The police say that they did knock and even of they didn’t knock, they had prior consent from a judge to conduct a no-knock if necessary. The media likes to omit that a miscreant inside the residence with Breonna Taylor fired a shot through the door as police were about to enter.

There are some other things that the media continues to promote. They say that the suspect had a permit to be armed. So what? Every concealed carry class in America emphasizes that you have to use extreme caution when shooting at somebody. In other words, know what you are shooting at. Suspect Kenneth Walker III fired shots through a door after hearing the door being breached. He claims he “thought” they were intruders. Police officers were on the other side. Let’s give Walker the benefit that he did not know it was the police. What difference does that make? What if it had been the FedEx delivery person or the landlord? It could have been somebody there for a legitimate reason. Would these shots fired by him have been excused if he killed somebody? I think not. Walker was initially charged with a crime, but those charges have been dropped. A police officer who had outer perimeter containment fired shots into the building after hearing other shots emanating from inside. True, he did not know what he was shooting at other than hearing the sound of shots. He thought officers were under assault. It was a spontaneous reaction. Not smart but hardly a felony. He didn’t get the benefit of the doubt at shooting blindly like Walker III did. The officer was charged with wanton endangerment for “blindly firing 10 shots” into the flat where Taylor lived. His shots did not strike Taylor, but one shot went through a wall and into another occupied building next door. If that is wanton endangerment for blindly firing as the prosecutor pointed out, then why was the charge against Walker III dismissed? The officer was subsequently acquitted by a jury, which he should have been. This was a malicious prosecution by a cowardly district attorney trying to appease the angry mob of cop haters who rioted, looted and set fire to the city for several days. When cops are shot at, returning fire in self-defense is a reasonable response.

But it gets better … or should I say worse.

Recently, Louisville officials settled a lawsuit filed against the city by Kenneth Walker III for a violation of his civil rights. Walker was awarded $2 million as a settlement. That’s right. I did not misspeak. Walker’s reckless actions of firing blindly through a door triggered this whole series of events that led to Breonna Taylor’s death, the charging of a police officer, riots that ultimately ensued and the firing of numerous police officers. And he walks away with $2 million and the dismissal of his criminal charges. This is insanity, pure and simple. What the hell kind of country are we living in? Apparently one where the cops are the bad guys and the criminals are the good guys. This is nauseating. The media continued its false narrative reporting here, too. The Wall Street Journal, usually a reputable source, in its headline wrote that, The City of Louisville has settled lawsuits by Kenneth Walker III, who was there when police fatally shot Ms. Taylor during a raid in 2020. That’s it? Walker was just there? He wasn’t just there. The headline should have been written to say that Louisville settles lawsuit against the suspect who first blindly shot through a door at police, triggering a series of events that led to the death of Breonna Taylor. Why is that so hard for the media to do? Tell the truth. It won’t hurt. The story also points out the case was one of several in 2020 that contributed to protests across the country. Protests? How about riots, looting and burning of businesses owned by people who had nothing to do with the Taylor incident or any other police-related use of force?

After the settlement was announced the city did not respond for comment. Probably out of embarrassment for capitulating to Walker. Walker’s attorney commented that, “While this tragedy will haunt Kenny for the rest of his life, he is pleased that this chapter of his life is completed.” Yeah, I bet he is. He shot at police, got Breonna Taylor killed, got his criminal charge dropped and walks away with $2 million. I bet a lot of criminals today are asking, where does one sign up for that?

Louisville police made some unforgivable mistakes in this incident. Policing isn’t perfect. That is not an excuse. It’s reality. Better supervision would have helped. Walker not firing first would have helped, too. But that officers had their careers ended, the city burned and that slug Kenneth Walker III walks away $2 million richer is the real tragedy here.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Whose Side Are They On?

By: Joel E. Gordon

I am increasingly feeling as though trust in the Federal government and its agencies is like trying to hold on to a debunked once common belief that the earth is flat.

In 1992 congress passed the JFK Records Act mandating the release of ALL documents relevant to his assassination by 2017. It’s now five years past the deadline and 3% of the documents are still secret. Ask yourself, what could be so bad that they still refuse to tell us the truth?

Could it be that in his book They Killed our President Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, the former CIA operative known as “X,” has valid belief in Federal law enforcement involvement in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy? His theories were the basis for Oliver Stone’s controversial movie JFK where it suggests a coup d'état at the highest levels of government, revealing the elite power base he believes controlled the U.S. government, implicating members of the CIA, the Mafia, the military-industrial complex, Secret Service, FBI, and Kennedy's vice-president and then president Lyndon Baines Johnson as either co-conspirators or as having motives to cover up the truth of the assassination. .

In his book, Colonel Prouty backs this belief up with his knowledge of the security arrangements at Dallas and other tidbits that only a CIA insider would know (for example, that every member of Kennedy’s cabinet was abroad at the time of Kennedy’s assassination).

Fast forward to our current era of skepticism over the veracity and motives of current Attorney General Merrick Garland’s Department of Justice. Is there truly a “Deep-State” elite power base controlling the U.S. government? Does what once seemed implausible both past and present now seem to be even more likely?

For example, the United States Secret Service has repeatedly changed its position about whether it is in possession of records related to the investigation of Hunter Biden’s gun, reportedly disposed of in a dumpster in Delaware. The Secret Service suddenly said it now located over 100 records, totaling over 400 pages.

“The Secret Service’s changing story on records raises additional questions about its role in the Hunter Biden gun incident. One thing is clear, Judicial Watch’s persistence means the public may get records that the Secret Service suggested didn’t exist,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

Now the Secret Service is still maintaining no record of visitors to President Biden’s Rehoboth Beach Delaware home? Under what circumstances will they be forced to come clean on that obvious issue which cannot be truthful in the absence of gross incompetence?

I remain curious as to the justification of the FBI raid on Donald Trump’s Mar-a-lago residence over alleged concerns over ‘sensitive’ documents while the property was being protected by the Secret Service. Is it the position of the FBI that the Secret Service was incapable of safeguarding property or maintaining logs of activity at the property?

And what about the 51 former intelligence officials, who sounded the false alarm of “Russian interference?” Using the institutional weight of their former roles affording them security clearances, they signed the disingenuous letter to apparently attempt to bolster the past FBI false hypothesis claiming that material from Hunter Biden’s laptop published by the New York Post “has all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation.”

The Department of Justice and FBI actions pertaining to investigation of President Donald Trump are well documented (FISA abuses, Christopher Steele dossier, etc.) and are ongoing as the search for criminal culpability continues even when based upon debunked ‘evidence’ or potential ‘fruits of the poisonous tree.’ Some of the current ongoing investigations:

· The DOJ’s Mar-a-Lago classified documents investigation

· The Justice Department investigation into January 6

· The Georgia election investigation

· The Congressional Trump tax reviews

Despite past and the numerous already active investigations, in addition to the DOJ appointment of a special counsel, the Jan. 6 select House committee voted to refer former President Donald Trump to the Department of Justice for criminal investigation and potential prosecution for trying to overturn the 2020 election. The criminal referral of Trump accuses him of obstructing an official proceeding, conspiracy to defraud the government, and inciting or assisting an insurrection.

EQUITY: The quality of being fair and impartial

As many obvious criminal actions go unpunished, many times without prosecution, others are targeted looking for charges that could be brought, is it any wonder that a large number of the American public has understandably lost faith in equal treatment and application of the law?

In a culture currently being consumed over EQUITY, where is the justification for these and other actions? Can the DOJ, NSA, CIA, DHS, DOE, Secret Service, FBI and other government agencies be trusted? Is the revelation of accusations of corruption at our highest levels of government clear and convincing to you as being exposed through the Twitter Files and elsewhere? Are the right individuals in charge to protect our freedoms and live up to their sworn obligation to adhere to our Constitution and Bill of Rights? Who is really in charge? Is collusion to suppress truth at unprecedented levels? You decide.

Joel E. Gordon, Managing Editor of BLUE Magazine, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

November 2022 Midterm Election Results Postmortem

Before I go into my analysis of the just-concluded midterm election, although concluded might not be the appropriate term since there are still many races that have not been decided, I have to bring people up to speed on a gruesome statistic. Last week, I saw the latest figure on police suicides for 2022. It stands at 121 according to a Salute the Blue Instagram post. To put this number in perspective, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention says that 13.93 per 100,000 people died by suicide in 2019. The Ruderman Foundation, a philanthropic organization that focuses on people with disabilities, reported that in 2017 the rate of suicide among police officers was 17 per 100,000 people. They have not released an updated report for 2019. That is staggering. I challenge you to name another profession that could have this kind of suicide rate per 100,000 that would escape calls for research to address the crisis or congressional hearings of federal mental health agencies on why they aren’t dedicating research to this phenomenon. Here is something else to ponder. According to a story on this crisis in the USA Today newspaper this is, “an issue that has plagued first responders for years, yet very little has been done to address it.” The story goes on to point out that, “Researchers say they have not seen sufficient efforts and programs aimed at promoting awareness of first responders mental health and preventing suicide.” I point this out because this problem will fade into people’s consciousness if it isn’t kept front and center in the public discourse, and I am going to do my part to keep it there.

Now let’s get into what happened with voters in the midterm elections. For the last six months, you could not escape media coverage of the midterm elections. All the polling about the surge in crime and violence that was occurring mainly in urban centers suggested that this was near the top of voters’ concerns. You couldn’t escape seeing media video of vulnerable human beings being violently attacked by predatory criminals who were left to freely roam subway systems, retail areas and neighborhood streets. These were career violent offenders who continued to evade punishment and even when arrested were quickly freed to continue to engage in their violent behavior. They were the benefactors of what has become over the last few years a lenient criminal justice system. Policies that favored the criminal over the law-abiding were put into place by elected officials, including prosecutors who were elected with the money of billionaire George Soros who financed and put into place an infrastructure designed to go soft on crime. Locking violent repeat offenders away was labeled the new Jim Crow system. What a crock of horse manure. A few of the criminal apologist prosecutors are Kim Fox in Chicago Cook County, former Baltimore County State Attorney Marilyn Mosby, Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon, Manhattan/New York City DA Alvin Bragg and Milwaukee County DA John Chisholm. Even after the surge in violent crime, elected officials in these states foolishly, carelessly and recklessly continued to enact criminal=friendly laws and policies. Let’s look.

The state of Illinois recently passed a law outlawing bail for most offenses, including some violent offenses, even after Chicago experienced increases in homicides, aggravated assaults and most misdemeanors like auto thefts and shoplifting. California recently passed what it called the Racial Justice Act. This bill was signed into law by Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom. The law provides for previously convicted criminals to petition to vacate judgments or reduce charges in cases in which a person’s race ethnicity or national origin played a part in if they were charged with more serious crimes or sentenced more severely than others who were similarly situated. Suffice it to say that just the filing by a convicted criminal, one who already received due process, will be considered prima facia evident of disparate treatment based on race under this act. This is another example of a career criminal escaping culpability.

So, with all of this as the backdrop, then why did that not seem to transfer into bigger Republican wins in the 2022 midterm elections? After all, the Democrats are the party of defund the police and traditionally the GOP has been supportive of police at the state, local and federal level. The answer is, no drum roll necessary, I simply do not know. I won’t sit here and act like I have the answer. I was both surprised, disappointed and disgusted. I can however offer some unscientific guesses. Maybe we have been in this crime surge for so long that it has become part of the urban landscape. People might be numb to it. Maybe voters feel that politicians haven’t figured it out up to now and they won’t. Call it apathy if you will. I call it a quiet resignation. If this is the case, then it is one of the tragic byproducts of the War on Cops.

So, what do we do, where do we go from here? Quitting and giving up is not an option. Not as far as I am concerned. That would be the ultimate insult to those who have given their lives protecting their communities. It would be a slap in the face as well to those who currently serve and protect. We have a saying in this profession that we utter at every line of duty death and during police week in May that, we will never forget. Now is the moment of truth. It’s time to prove it. Keep fighting.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Amid the Insanity: Are chickens coming home to roost?

By: Joel E. Gordon

The inexplicable Pennsylvania vote to elect a diminished pro-criminal candidate named John Fetterman to the U.S. Senate notwithstanding, the unsustainable pro-criminal policies of the progressive left are showing signs that some of those very ideologies may be beginning to falter. I must start by saying that we wish ill will to no one; law, order and safety remain among our top priorities. We in law enforcement have never wavered from that position, but now that some of the biggest contributors to the erosion of our civil society have personally felt victimization, have the chickens come home to roost?

Hypocrisy is evident from sea to shining sea A progressive member of the Seattle Washington City Council who has been a vocal critic of law enforcement amid the "defund the police" movement is criticizing police for not sufficiently pursuing reports of multiple instances of feces being thrown into her yard.

Seattle City Councilmember Kshama Sawant, a self-described socialist, sent a letter to police in Seattle claiming they were "failing to investigate" what she says are six separate instances of a “politically motivated person throwing feces into her yard"

"There is obviously a glaring inconsistency between this approach and the way in which former Mayor Durkan, after a peaceful Black Lives Matter protest was held a short distance from her mansion, was provided with a 24-hour stakeout for a full year," Sawant wrote in her letter, suggesting she deserved police protection as a result of the incidents. "As a socialist City Councilmember who has participated in Black Lives Matter protests, I am being told that my case of six threatening incidents involving human excrement doesn’t merit even a serious investigation, let alone protection."

Did she actually think that her realized wish to “defund the police” would have no consequences? Consequences like fewer officers? And that those they do have left on the force have nothing more important or pressing than to investigate her poop-thrower? Perhaps she should call a counselor or a social worker to handle this?

So-called "squeegee kids" who shake down drivers to pay them for "cleaning" their windshields are becoming more bold, committing crimes such as assault and robbery. This past summer, a Baltimore, Maryland, city man was shot five times and killed by one.

The federal judge overseeing the Baltimore Police federal consent decree called officers and reported that a pair of squeegee workers gave him the middle finger, spat on his car and wrote “racist” in suds on the windows.

No property was damaged, no one was injured, and neither squeegee worker was charged in the incident, according to police. But U.S. District Court Judge James K. Bredar and his wife’s run-in with squeegee workers, and the ensuing police response, has renewed the focus on squeegeeing and raised questions about the necessity of having law enforcement respond to certain situations. Progressives have now called into question Judge Bredar’s suitability to continue ensuring compliance with consent decree mandates now that he has personally felt victimized.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said that she did not regret threatening to punch then-President Donald Trump on January 6, 2021, if he came to the Capitol, “That’s right,” Pelosi told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell when asked to address her comments about Trump on January 6. “I would have punched him out. I said I would have punched him out. I would have gone to jail. And I would have been happy to do so.”

When Pelosi was condoning her willingness to commit an act of violence against a U.S. president, she probably never imagined that her husband Paul Pelosi would become a victim of a violent attack in their family home committed by an illegal alien. While much remains unknown in secrecy about further details of the vicious attack, suffice it to say that it surely must feel different being a willing perpetrator than being a victim.

There are a multitude of other examples of the failure of progressive policies. Since the concept of rights without a view toward responsibility has taken further hold the results have been both predictable and inevitable.

As time goes on and more of the “elites” and their families fall prey to the violence being perpetrated largely due to ill-advised bail policies, release of criminals, illegal criminal aliens running freely at-large and reduced consequences, the return to law and order should progress in a more orderly way. Let’s just pray that, in the meantime, the cost to human life and suffering has as minimal an impact on all of us as possible until sanity returns.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine Managing Editor, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Please Direct Me To The Fainting Couch

News reports emerged last week that a mural depicting the face of George Floyd in my hometown of Milwaukee, Wisconsin was damaged when someone poured gray paint over his face. This story was picked up by other ABC affiliates in different cities across the country including a TV station in Dayton Ohio. Why would anybody in Dayton give a flying you-know-what about this?

Let me unpack this for you. First of all my initial reaction upon hearing this was one of, give me a break, who cares? I, for one, do not. Most readers of my column know my sentiments about Saint George. Yes, he has been elevated to sainthood by liberals, Democrat politicians and most factions of the black community. Why, is beyond me. For liberals and Democrat politicians it is nothing more than moral preening and virtue signaling about racial sensitivity. For the black community it is about the lack of more legitimate role models to exalt and because he has been made into a hero and cause celebre by the pathetic corporate media and black racialists who are exploiting his death for financial and political gain. People like Black Lives Matter founder Patrisse Cullors and the white guy who posed as black for decades, Shawn King. He was another big mouth Black Lives Matter activist getting face time in the media after the deaths of Mike Brown in Ferguson, Missouri and after the death of George Floyd until it was discovered that he was born to two white parents. In fact, it was they who exposed this phony as a fraud. But he was given a pass because his intentions were pure, we are told. Cullors stepped down from the BLM movement but not before taking millions from the BLM fundraising PAC for herself and her family members and recently bought several million-dollar properties for herself. This includes purchasing a million-dollar property in Canada of all places. I was not aware that Canada was a hotbed of BLM activity. She also admitted to using her $6 million property in an exclusive gated community in California for hosting parties. Survivors of Mike Brown, Freddy Gray, Eric Garner and Floyd were not on the invite list. Shawn King, on the other hand, used $40,000 of donated PAC funds to purchase a show dog that he said he needed for protection. I guess the local dog shelter was out of suitable candidates. King, after all, wasn’t going to have a mutt protecting him.

Many cities across the country erected statues and memorials for George Floyd. This is the same criminal creep who did time in prison for a home invasion robbery looking for drugs. During the incident he held a loaded gun to the stomach of a pregnant female threatening to shoot her. Yes, that George Floyd. The same guy who was geeked up on a fatal amount of an illegal narcotic and was trying to pass a counterfeit bill at a store to purchase more drugs when he resisted arrest. No self-respecting city should have erected statues, painted murals or set up memorials for this miscreant.

I want to be clear. I do not advocate for acts of vandalism. The destruction of another’s property is a crime and should be adequately punished. Let’s, however, take a look at other acts of vandalism that have not gotten the same media coverage that those involving Floyd statues, murals and memorials. And I might add incidents that are more newsworthy.

America went through a period when anarchists and BLM apologists declared jihad on America and began destroying symbols of the founding of this country by destroying statues of our founders like George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and American Revolutionary War and Civil War generals and did so with impunity. Basically, the liberal corporate media shrugged their shoulders in reporting it. The attention to it lasted a day or so. Democrat politicians demonstrated tacit approval by their silence. Some even called it democracy in action.

Another comparison in lack of news coverage on vandalism incidents compared to those involving George Floyd is in the area of police precincts and cruisers that have been vandalized. Not much fanfare occurred after these incidents. Here are a few examples. Protestors carrying BLM signs vandalized a California police station in January of 2021. In Davis, California, a police station was spray painted with anti-police sentiments. In Philadelphia, a number of vandalism incidents occurred at a station including damage to three vehicles. In Little Rock, Arkansas, multiple police stations were vandalized. Worse yet, a Little Rock fallen officers memorial wall was vandalized. Spray painted across the memorials was Defund The Police. A San Diego police station reported that for the second time in a week vandals target the station, smashing windows. The personal vehicles of four police officers were targeted and vandalized. A White Oak, Maryland, police station was vandalized when someone shot through and shattered a window of the building. I could list numerous other incidents, but you get my point. And I am not trying to suggest that these are breaking national news stories. For the most part, they are local news stories. Nothing more. Vandalism to George Floyd memorials, however, seem to go beyond local reporting and I am simply asking why? Several major news outlets made a big deal in reporting when a Floyd mural was struck by lightning and destroyed. Really? Who cares? We know why these were reported. Part of it is to stir up racial animus by liberal media. It’s insinuating some racist component where none exists. And why does vandalism to Floyd memorials draw the interest of the FBI but no interest when police stations are attacked? Memo to the FBI: How about a little help finding the perpetrators of attacks against police buildings with the same fervor you do in going after the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers or moms attending school board meetings?

And there is this last lack of vandalism media coverage. Are you aware that there have been over 165 reports of vandalism incidents by pro-abortion activists against pro-life pregnancy centers and churches since the Supreme Court issued the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v Wade on abortion? The interesting thing here is that the perpetrators in these incidents do not hide who they are, often leaving their signature calling card. A group calling itself Jane’s Revenge claims responsibility in many of these attacks. Not a single member of this group has been identified or arrested. The FBI has no trouble identifying members of the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers or the January 6 group who breached the U.S. Capitol, but can’t seem to identify members of Jane’s Revenge? Really? The truth is that they are not motivated enough to find out, just like with attacks on local police agencies. That is disgraceful.

Some criminal acts rise above simple state misdemeanor vandalism. Attacks against government institutions and Supreme Court decisions are acts of domestic terrorism and demand federal investigation and prosecution. Vandalism to George Floyd memorials, however wrong, are not acts of domestic terror. It is time to stop giving them that recognition.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of AmericasSheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Mystery Abounds: The Lunar Effect

There has always been a perception among cops, firefighters and emergency room personnel that there’s more and often stranger crime that occurs on the night of a full moon. Many in the police community have linked specific moons to a rise in aggressive behavior. This belief is so strong that the International Association of Chiefs of Police spent money to commission a study in the late 1970s to find out if there is any scientific evidence to support this belief. They found nothing definitive. If you check with the Department of Justice, you’ll find a half-dozen or so more studies that also point to no precise scientific explanation.

 However, based upon my own non-scientific observations as a police officer, I found that assertions that citizens fight each other on the nights of a full moon and fight the police with greater frequency on nights of a new moon are beliefs with merit. I also found that when the new or full moon fell particularly on any given Friday that this phenomena appeared to be fueled even further.

 While anecdotal evidence points to a connection between the moon and aggression, studies on the topic have often fallen short of being conclusive. Looking into the potential of various aspects of the moon phases and how they affect our bodies and minds, the jury is still out among the scientific community on how or even whether a full moon really makes a difference.

 Miami psychiatrist Arnold Leiber in his book The Lunar Effect proposed that the moon was linked to human behavior by adversely affecting mental and emotional abilities by raising physiologically disruptive ”biological tides” in the body akin to the tides it raises in the earth’s ocean. Other studies have concluded that any increased percentage of aggressive behaviors, crimes and suicides on full moon days may, in fact, be due to “human tidal waves” caused by the gravitational pull of the moon. In some circles, these theories have become a somewhat commonly accepted reasoning on how the mind and body may be physiologically affected by lunar phases.

 The question then remains: Does a full moon contribute to an increase in crime?

 The University of Washington did a study all the way back in 1978 concluding that out of 11,613 cases of aggravated assault in a five-year period, assaults occurred more often around the full moon, and 34,318 crimes in a yearlong period also showed that crimes occurred more frequently during the full moon. Falling short of conclusive evidence of the moon’s influence, this simply added some data for consideration.

 If it’s possible that the lunar cycle affects some people’s behavior, this fact then has implications for the court system. The “full moon” has even been a defense in criminal cases. According to Psychology Today, in 19th century England, lawyers used the defense of “guilty by reason of the full moon” to make the claim that their “lunatic” clients were not accountable for their actions under the moon’s influence, thereby creating what became known as the “Lunar Defense.”

 Cops continue to point to the lunar effect to explain moonlight madness, speculating further that perhaps the moon’s gravitational influence can bring about changes in people who may already suffer from some form of a mental imbalance.

A study done by the University of New Orleans confirmed that cops were among the strongest believers that more crime and trauma occurred on nights when the moon was full. Some suspect the phenomenon is a self-fulfilling prophecy reasoning that law enforcement officers are by nature adrenaline junkies and that the full moon gives officers a reason to investigate things they might usually ignore, thereby explaining any increase in activity. Speculating officers are looking for the evidence that confirms their belief.

So, if you want to determine the relationship between lunar phases, aggression and crime, you’ll just have to look to the high volumes of anecdotal evidence from policemen, firefighters and other first responders along with hospital doctors and nurses from around the world while adding your own experiences to the stories to be told.

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine Managing Editor, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

How You Can Tell It’s Election Season

As voters head into the November midterm elections, crime is one of the leading issues on their minds. Unprecedented levels of violence and disorder in urban areas mainly controlled by Democrat politicians have these voters nervous. I bring up Democrats because for nearly the last decade, it was high-profile Democrat politicians like Maxine Waters, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, Ilan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Ayanna Pressley and Cora Bush who have led the charge in cop hatred and cop bashing. Even Joe Biden stood silently by. His silence was tacit approval. It was this cabal that led the chorus in calls for defunding the police and even abolishing the police, and it has had an impact.

Numerous law enforcement agencies have had their budgets slashed considerably. The LAPD, NYPD, Milwaukee, St. Louis and Chicago Police Departments all suffered millions, tens of millions and in the case of NYPD, a billion dollars in budget reductions, leading to personnel cuts. There is an indisputable correlation that the constant political bashing by these politicians has led to record-setting rises in violent crime in areas that they represent. In other words, the areas that rely on effective policing the most are suffering the most in terms of victimization. Poor people end up being a byproduct of this defunding movement. These are the people these same liberal Democrat elite politicians claim to represent. Really? If that is their version of compassion, then no thanks. They can keep it.

In Milwaukee and Chicago, children struck and killed by gunfire is up precipitously. Auto thefts in Milwaukee are at record levels. To a middle-class family, having their car stolen is not just a nonviolent property crime, it’s a big deal. They often don’t have a second car nor do their insurance policies include a replacement car until theirs is located and returned. A middle-class family’s car is used to take their kids to school, go to a doctor appointment and to the grocery store. Elites like those politicians previously mentioned don’t have to worry about their car being stolen. It’s no big deal, they arrogantly conclude.

Recently Democrat U.S. Rep. Cora Bush was driving in a car in Washington D.C., another area ravaged by violence, and it was struck by gunfire from an errant bullet. She freaked out, saying, “Any act of gun violence shakes your soul”. Oh really, Cori? This is the same woman who called for defunding the St. Louis Police Department, an area she represents. The St. Louis Police Department budget has been cut by $4 million, leading to the elimination of 98 police positions. She went on a CNN program and said she absolutely supports defunding police all the while spending a reported $70,000 for additional private security. When confronted about the expenditure on private security, she asked, “You would rather I die”? She went on to say that, “I have private security because my body is worth being on this planet.” Yes, folks, this is the arrogance of a Democrat elitist. Safety and security for me but not for thee.

People in these crime-ravaged communities endure this kind of random violence on a daily basis. In Milwaukee recently a 12-year-old girl was struck by a bullet in the chest and killed as she helped her mother unload groceries from their car. It was reported that her mother had previously complained to police about stolen cars in their neighborhood. Businesses in Milwaukee are beginning to complain that the crime, violence and disorder are making to hard for them to attract customers. That affects their bottom line. Customers are not going to frequent areas where crime is out of control. And another thing. These businesses employ people, so jobs are lost if they close or move.

So here is my point in setting this background. Most of these same cop-hating Democrat politicians are trying to make voters believe that they never supported defunding the police. I kid you not. They are hoping that voters are either stupid enough to believe them or will have a case of amnesia as they go to the polls to vote. One poll I saw said that 67% of voters going to the polls say that out-of-control crime is the top issue for them. In other words, crime is on the ballot. That is why Democrats are scrambling. They know it’s judgment day. A candidate for the U.S. Senate in Wisconsin, Mandela Barnes, who when in the state legislature supported defunding the police, now says that saying he did is a lie. Unfortunately for him, there is video and audio tape of him saying this. He still maintains he does not support defunding police. Yes, he does. What he means is now that it affects his statewide electability, he wants a do-over.

Here is my message to all these defund the police Democrats seeking election or re-election: You own this. You meant it. It worked. You are not running away from this. I won’t let you. There is ample evidence available of you supporting defunding efforts. All someone has to do is put your name and the words defund the police in a search engine and it populates with major news stories of you saying it. You need to be made to drag this around up to Election Day hung like an albatross around your neck. The Black candidates will try playing the race card to get me to take back what I just said because I referenced “hung around your neck”. Problem is that I am Black, and that dog won’t hunt this time. Not here anyway. It’s our turn now.

Sheriff David Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

BLUE UNITY NIGHT: A Rousing Success!

By: Joel Gordon

The BLUE Magazine and Moment of Silence once again provided for an incredible night in strong recognition of national law enforcement unity just as BLUE Magazine publisher and Moment of Silence founder and Vice President Daniel Del Valle intended. Despite Hurricane Ian, the “Sunshine State” didn't disappoint. On the heels of a nearly cloudless day of sunshine, followed by a clear night, nearly 400 Blue Unity Night attendees converged upon the Signature Grand in Davie, Florida on Sept. 30, 2022, to assemble en masse for an hour of mingling with new and old friends. For starters, the Police Pipe and Drum of Florida along with the Davie Police Department Honor Guard officially kicked off the night of recognition and festivities. And 15-year-old Alyssa Del Valle beautifully sang our national anthem. Master of Ceremonies and BLUE Magazine mentor former NYPD Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik commanded the microphone to introduce our multiple worthy Valor Award recipients who received their honors to much-deserved resounding applause and ovations.

· Claudia Apolinar - Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department

· Emmanuel Perez-Perez - Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department

· Jacob Albarado - Border Patrol Agent, Texas

· Raffaello Cervera – Doral, Florida, Police Department

· Johnny Beautelus – Doral, Florida, Police Department

· Daniel Vilarchao – Doral, Florida, Police Department

Multiple presenters, including BLUE Magazine Editor-In-Chief George Beck, then went on to present the magazine's prestigious Senior Journalist Award earned by BLUE Magazine columnist Kirk Lawless. Law enforcement Leadership and Advocacy recognition awards were also presented:

· Chief Gustavo Medina -Tequesta, Florida, Police Department

· Pastor Paul Beresford – Tequesta, Florida, Police Department

· Joseph Occhipinti – National Police Defense Foundation

· Officer Frank Voce – New York City Police Department

· Chief Joel Gordon – BLUE Magazine Managing Editor

A fantastic meal was served followed by words of wisdom and encouragement that were given by special guests: former ICE Director Tom Homan, Retired Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke and former Maricopa Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio. Musical entertainment then commenced with a lively dance floor and much enjoyment. It was an event for the ages! Thank you to all of our colleagues, writers, editors, officials and law enforcement advocates without whom our efforts would not be possible. Thank you too for the incredible work done by all on staff who were also recognized for working tirelessly to make this event a true success. As the wristbands given to event attendees said #blueunitynight ... STAY IN THE FIGHT!

Joel E. Gordon, BLUE Magazine Managing Editor, is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Utah Sheriffs Executive Board Castrated By Cop Haters

There is a reason that the thin blue line is a symbol for law enforcement. It represents the separation of good versus evil and it is the American police officer that stands in between those two forces to protect the good and fight the evil. The line is thin because there aren’t many of us. It is why we need to have each other’s backs when under attack. Street cops understand this better than anybody.

This profession has been under constant attack ever since Officer Darren Wilson was assaulted by a career criminal named Mike Brown who tried to disarm the officer. This local incident went viral and became the symbol for cop haters all across America under the lie of Hands Up, Don’t Shoot. From that incident forward, this profession that I had been a part of for nearly 40 years has been smeared, lied about, wrongly indicted, suffered deadly ambush attacks, spit on and had rocks and urine filled balloons thrown at them during riots. Calls began from these miscreants to abolish police and defund them. I waited impatiently for someone in a law enforcement executive position to defend the men and women who go out everyday to do the best they can under sometimes impossible conditions to serve and protect their community. When no law enforcement executive stepped up, I decided to. I knew the perils associated with pushing back against this evil force but I had to. I put my own safety and well being aside because I as the top cop in Milwaukee County, sent front line deputies into harms way everyday on a tour of duty. I wanted them to know that if they got into a situation that went to crap through no fault of their own, I would have their back publicly and politically. I don’t expect perfection from them. I do however expect excellence.

Sadly, I didn’t get much help from my fellow police chiefs or sheriffs. I was a man alone but I didn’t care. I found myself in the crosshairs of the cop haters from groups like Black Lives Matter, the NAACP and other nefarious groups using liberal media outlets as the vehicle to attack me. I didn’t flinch.

Ever since I retired, I have stayed with my mission to defend the courage, sacrifice, the integrity, professionalism and the commitment of the men and women in uniform serving their communities. I travel all across their great country speaking to front line law enforcement groups trying to strengthen their resolve and commitment at a time when people are leaving the profession in record numbers. I saw a beleaguered bunch from department to department. I could feel it. I reminded them that but for them, their communities would disintegrate into chaos. Just look at the rising crime, violence and disorder that has a stranglehold on many cities and towns. What many officers tell me is that they don’t have the the support of their law enforcement executives. My support for them has been full throated, unambiguous and unapologetic. Officers know it and thank me for it. I am proud to do it.

The attacks against me continue to this day. Several incidents however cause me to call out the betrayal, the cowardice and caving to the very entities that hate us. You cannot appease Black Lives Matter, the NAACP or Antifa. When you give in to them, they demand more. I saw this happen as some law enforcement executives either sat silent or absorbed the unwarranted criticism of police agencies. I saw a picture of a police chief of a California Police Department marching in a protest holding a sign that read Black Lives Matter. I was disgusted. Abject pandering. Many others got on board in calls for police reform that weaken officers ability to effectively perform their duties and keep them safe.

That brings me to the title of this piece. I want to make it clear that I am not accusing every member in the Utah Sheriff’s Association of what I am about to say. I was invited as the keynote speaker to address the Utah Sheriffs Association conference in St. George Utah. We had a signed contract. The local newspaper took notice and started fanning the flames to have me cancelled. I know how this works. A local liberal media outlet contacts a cop hating group and uses them as a catalyst to start a firestorm by asking them if they have a comment on my attending the conference to speak. The Salt Lake City Tribune then wrote a column blasting the Sheriffs Association for inviting me. They called me controversial and divisive. It’s all boiler plate language used by the leftist media whenever they write about me. They bring up that I refer to BLM as Black LIES Matter and that I call them a hate group. The news story said that in 2015, I called the NAACP nothing more than a political propaganda entity for the left. All of that is true. I have said that and believe that to be the case to this day. I say what I mean and I mean what I say. The news article pointed out that the NAACP state chapter in Utah president Jeanette Williams, told the reporter that she spoke with the sheriff’s association by phone and sent emails to them saying that bringing in David Clarke was the wrong thing to do”. She said she, “was able to have Clarke’s appearance cancelled”. Williams told the reporter that she, “was worried that having a speaker promote views like those held by Clarke to Utah’s law enforcement would damage the collaborative environment she has worked to creat to foster better policing in Utah. Williams said she was appreciative that the sheriffs listened to her concerns. Funny that Williams won’t listen to any of my views. The Utah Sheriff’s Association made a deal with the devil. But they didn’t listen to their membership.

Let me stop there for a minute. The Utah state chapter of the NAACP? Seriously. Let’s do some math here. Utah has a black population of 1.2% out of a total population of nearly 3.3 million people. Even the Asian population is higher and stands at 2.3%. Why is there even a need for the NAACP to have a state chapter in Utah? What do they do? Here are some interesting points about the NAACP. They support abortion knowing that abortion kills more black babies than any other demographic. They oppose school choice even though it is black kids who are trapped in failing K-12 public schools ruining any chance at success in life. They also support defunding police efforts which would harm black communities who need policing the most. The NAACP opposes voter ID laws. Black people when polled support voter ID by about 70%. The NAACP is disconnected from black America. Everything they support is on the Democrat Party agenda. It is why I call the NAACP the propaganda wing of the liberal policy agenda. They are sell-outs. And they claim that former Sheriff David Clarke’s appearance to address the law enforcement officers and executives would be harmful? Really?

The news story goes on the say that neither Cache County Sheriff Chad Jensen, president of the association, nor its executive director Scott Burns, responded to a request for comment. Cowards. The people of Utah and their law enforcement officers deserve to know why they caved, why they folded like a cheap suit, why they didn’t have the intestinal fortitude to stand their ground against the cop hating NAACP. With an opportunity to demonstrate leadership to the rank and file law enforcement officers, they genuflected and prostrated themselves to the demands of a cop hating group. Disgraceful. Total capitulation. How can the executive board of the Utah Sheriff’s Association say that they support the Constitution’s First Amendment free speech aspect by not allowing someone with an opposing view contrary to the Salt Lake City Tribune newspaper writer or the head of the state NAACP to come speak? Opposing views matter. Opposing views are healthy in a constitutional democracy and should be welcome in a free society such a our’s. It is important for me to point out that not all members of the association agree with the decision of their executive board. I received an email from one of the members who wrote, “Many of us attending this conference are thoroughly disgusted with the decision to cancel your appearance. Many of us do not support this decision, one that cancels free speech which is never appropriate and should never be tolerated, but especially because it is based solely on a disapproval of views. We are embarrassed about how you have been treated and wish you the best of luck. God help us if this is to be the future of this country”.

Now that is how you have someone’s back, especially a fellow law enforcement colleague. I feel bad for the officers still serving with this lack of leadership. Let me be clear that I will never stop on my mission to help law enforcement officers. I will use whatever platforms I have to accomplish this. I easily could have move on and enjoyed my retirement but I cannot leave those still serving behind to endure the nonstop cop bashing.

Memo to the president and executive director and of the Utah Sheriff’s Association: You didn’t have my back when you should have. Like the email I received from one of your members said. You should be ashamed. I’ll add, how do you sleep at night? Your front line officers needed you to stare down the NAACP. You blinked instead.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

UVALDE: LEADERSHIP, COMMON SENSE & COURAGE

By: Joel E. Gordon

If Uvalde teaches us anything, it should be that Law Enforcement leaders should be chosen based on their skill set, experience, and leadership abilities during crisis. Not political connections, tenure, or demographics. Agendas need to be apolitical when the shit hits the fan. - Rob O'Donnell via Twitter

The Uvalde, Texas, School District Police Department has received much criticism for its failure to expeditiously stop a school gunman who shot and killed 19 children and two teachers. Texas Department of Public Safety Director Col. Steven McCraw called the response "100% flawed." When speaking to the state's Senate committee, he heavily condemned the response by police. He also said that officers on-scene could have stopped the gunman’s rampage within "three minutes." 'The officers had weapons ... [they] had body armor. The children had none…' “response to the Uvalde shooting was an ‘abject failure,’ as the on-scene commander waited for things like a key “that was never needed.”

Thor Eells, executive director of the National Tactical Officers Association, said, "If you're in a classroom with innocent victims and I know that shots have been fired, I need to engage you.”

“They had the tools,” said Terry Nichols, a former Seguin police chief and active-shooter expert. “Tactically, there’s lots of different ways you could tackle this. … But it takes someone in charge, in front, making and executing decisions and that simply did not happen.”

While investigations are ongoing as to the facts and what could have been done differently at this active shooter scene one thing is certain; moral and procedural obligations and a legal obligation to protect are not one and the same. Criminal charges against police officers who fail to protect the public are rare.

The motto, "To Protect and Serve," was first used by the Los Angeles Police Department in the 1950s and it has been copied by many other police departments and is engrained in the minds of the public. However, what is a police officer's legal obligation to actually protect people? Must sworn law enforcement officers risk their lives in dangerous situations like the one in Uvalde?

The answer is no.

· In a 1981 case Warren v. District of Columbia, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that police have a general "public duty," but that "no specific legal duty exists" unless there is a special relationship between an officer and an individual, such as a person in custody.

· In 2005's Castle Rock v. Gonzales, a woman sued the police for failing to protect her from her husband after he violated a restraining order and abducted and killed their three children. Justices said the police had no such duty.

· Most recently, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit upheld a lower court ruling that police could not be held liable for failing to protect students in the 2018 shooting that claimed 17 lives at Marjorie Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida.

Police do have protocols for dealing with dangerous situations like the ones in Uvalde and Parkland, and these protocols often emphasize the need for police to take rapid action. The International Association of Chiefs of Police says, "Taking action during active shooter incidents, rather than waiting for specially equipped and trained officers, can save lives and prevent serious injuries. Time lost by delayed action is likely to result in additional casualties."

IACP provides guidance on how officers in those situations should assess how to proceed with that rapid response.

And no matter how it is accomplished, it will likely be extremely dangerous and be a risk to officers own lives. But as courts have determined, they have no obligation to do that.

As after-action reviews continue in Uvalde and elsewhere, without any rush to judgment, it is important to note that most officers who I have known and worked with have a strong desire to help protect those in need. Both I and other officers I have known have gone out of our way to resolve threats, avoiding the use of deadly force when possible, often at risk to our own safety.

Preparedness and a balance between officer safety and other necessary actions against attackers to save lives must be achieved. That being said, in an active shooter or in-progress attack situation time is not always on the side of those wanting to protect and deadly force can become necessary to stop a threat to innocent lives which is why training and preparedness is essential now and always. Leadership, common sense and courage must prevail.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com

Crime And Violence Won’t Abate On Their Own

Liberal politicians, their failed urban policies and their accomplices in the media are getting nervous heading into this November’s midterm elections over what impact the surge in crime, violence and disorder will have on their electoral prospects. This will be a great opportunity for voters to express their anger over what is happening on their streets and in their neighborhoods as large swaths of public spaces are under the control of the criminal element. This has happened because Democrat politicians in cities like Chicago. Minneapolis, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, St. Louis and Memphis, just to name a few, literally and intentionally collapsed the criminal justice infrastructure.

The criminal justice infrastructure, as you know, has four main components: police on the front end, prosecutors and courts in the middle and corrections on the end. All four of these components must be functioning together or it won’t work. It doesn’t matter how many people law enforcement officers arrest if most of them escape prosecution. It doesn’t matter how many criminals are charged or indicted if some judge hands down a lenient sentence upon conviction. Example. In Milwaukee recently a 47-year-old man pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl. Upon entering the guilty plea, the prosecutor asked the judge to remand the suspect into custody due to the seriousness of the crime. The judge went against that recommendation and released the now-convicted rapist on a low bail at the request of the defense attorney, “so he could get his affairs in order” before sentencing. That creep a week later went to the home of his ex-girlfriend and strangled her to death in front of her children. See what I mean when I say that if just one part of the system fails, the whole system collapses?

The police are not immune from failing in their responsibility and role, either. Recently, the Milwaukee Police Department announced a policy directive to officers to no longer arrest people on most misdemeanor warrants. They have been directed to issue them a notice to appear voluntarily for a court date. That is anathema to the broken windows theory of policing in addition to going against the laws of human behavior. Just about every person with a warrant out for their arrest knows about the existence of the warrant and did nothing about it. Now that they have been given a piece of paper to appear, who thinks this person will now become an upstanding citizen and appear voluntarily in court on the warrant? In fact, the opposite will happen. Police have sent a signal that they don’t take the warrant that seriously, either. Oh, and another thing: A warrant is a court order that commands a law enforcement officer to take the person named into custody and bring them before a judge. How does an officer get away with violating that court order? This is a slippery slope, folks. Today, it’s not arresting on misdemeanor warrants, tomorrow, it’s not arresting on low-level felony warrants. And another thing: What liability does an agency and city face if an officer has stopped someone who has an active warrant and they subsequently let the perpetrator go and later he or she goes on to commit a serious felony? They had a legal means to get that person off the street, even albeit temporarily, depending on the disposition of the warrant and they did not do so. Not to mention that a thorough debriefing of the arrestee should be conducted as well to determine what other criminal activity they might be involved in or learning information about their associates. This intelligence can be shared with front-line street officers and others investigating unsolved crimes. Most people with outstanding warrants have extensive criminal involvement.

And now a new variable of criminal perpetrators is emerging. Studies are showing that more and more younger people, meaning teenagers as young as 12 and 13 are committing more violent crimes like shootings, carjackings and robberies. That can be interpreted to mean that the next generation of criminals will be coming into adulthood having had an earlier start in criminal behavior and with a more

experienced violent past embedded into their DNA. There are a number of reasons for this younger demographic turning to criminal behavior.

The juvenile justice system is antiquated. Its main goal focuses on rehabilitation, not punishment. In Wisconsin, the major objective of the juvenile justice system is to preserve the family unit by keeping the child in the dysfunctional family when there is no stability or responsible adult in charge. That model was appropriate 25 or more years ago when teens were mainly engaged in nuisance-type behavior like truancy and shoplifting, not the serious crime we see today. Society back then had more intact families, more involved parents, a successful K-12 public education system that actually educated students giving them a solid base going into adulthood and more options than criminal behavior to choose from. Consider today’s urban pathologies like absent fathers, failing schools, questionable lifestyle choices like kids turning to gangs and drugs and you have a volatile mix for the increase of criminal involvement by youths.

This next generation will also enter the adult criminal justice system with the benefit of more lax and lenient attitude. Here is what needs to happen: First, we need to stop with the naïve view that all of these career criminals can be reformed. They can’t. For many, the behavior has become deeply ingrained. It’s a lifestyle. Second, punishment needs to return to its rightful role in corrections. Too much of an emphasis on rehabilitation sends a message that society will not adequately punish criminals for their unwanted behavior. Second chance programs can occur after a period of meaningful incarceration, not before.

It should be evident to any politician and policy maker that the system is blinking red. Crime can be reduced with policy changes. Those effective changes were already in place during the historic record lows in violent and property crimes all across the country beginning in 1990 through the first decade of 2000. We got serious about reducing crime by holding lawbreakers accountable. All four parts of the criminal justice system were working in concert with each other. Police embarked on a strategy of quality of life enforcement. When arrests happened, they led to actual prosecution with bail used to keep the offenders off the streets. Today we have cities that have enacted no-bail policies even for serious crimes and prosecutors reluctant to charge criminals with those crimes. Previously, courts actually sentenced repeat offenders to longer periods of incarceration. Today, we have an over reliance on probation and parole that returns repeat offenders back onto the streets.

We need to stop letting pro-criminal groups influence public policy. They have created an environment that allows crime, violence and disorder to thrive. This has had a devastating negative impact on public life in America. Let’s end the needless death and destruction of American society.

Sheriff David A. Clarke Jr. is former Sheriff of Milwaukee Co, Wisconsin, President of Americas Sheriff LLC, President of Rise Up Wisconsin INC, Board member of the Crime Research Center, author of the book Cop Under Fire: Beyond Hashtags of Race Crime and Politics for a Better America. To learn more visit www.americassheriff.com

Perhaps it’s Time to “Re-Imagine” the FBI?

By: Joel E. Gordon

With all of the accusations of a two-tiered system of justice due to actions and inactions by the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation, the time seems right for a thorough review of these agencies. Even Rochelle Walensky, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) director, admits that there have been MAJOR COVID-19 MISTAKES and has announced plans to restructure her agency although calling it simply a “Reset.” Why shouldn’t the FBI and DOJ admit to errors as well?

The recent raid of President Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence has revealed some interesting oversights with the apparent failure to follow advance independent Taint Team protocols to review documents so that improper seizure in violation of legally privileged communications, such as attorney-client privilege, or other document seizure overreach is disallowed (such as unauthorized passport seizure). The DOJ uses Taint Teams to review potentially privileged material and determine what may be shared with the team investigating or prosecuting a case, and what must be withheld as privileged. In the absence of this filtering process, if prosecutors improperly review privileged communications, that exposure may taint the entire investigation and make prosecutions difficult or even impossible.

The formerly super careful agents at DOJ and FBI — the kind who dot all the i’s and cross all the t’s — apparently couldn’t even be bothered to proofread the name of the home of the president they were planning to raid.

Is this an example of inadequate oversight, corruption and/or acts of incompetence? Reports of FBI requests that video surveillance of the raid activity be shut down, when normal law enforcement transparency policies typically encourage use of cameras, including law enforcement body-worn cameras to remain on, leads to questions of impropriety. At the very least, I find the apparent lack of judgment and intellect on the federal level to be truly astonishing.

The partially unsealed affidavit in application for the Mar-a-Lago search warrant includes part of a letter a Justice Department official sent to Trump's council after that June visit, requesting that the storage room where documents in question were stored be secured.

The letter, part of which is redacted, explains that because “Mar-a-Lago does not include a secure location authorized for the storage of classified information,” the classified documents that have been held there since Trump left the White House in January 2021 “have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location.”

“Accordingly,” the letter continues, “we ask that the room at Mar-a-Lago where the documents had been stored be secured and that all of the boxes that were moved from the White House to Mar-a-Lago (along with any other items in that room) be preserved in that room in their current condition until further notice.”

Not only were documents reportedly secured under lock and key but were part of the protection detail of the president and his primary residence at Mar-a-Lago. Is the FBI suggesting that the Secret Service cannot be trusted to protect property and if so how could they be entrusted to protect life? Is this a battle among the feds, among other concerns?

Isn’t it ironic that the same federal government that is critical of the operations and appearances of local law enforcement agencies born of the 10th Amendment of the Constitution (resulting in numerous consent decrees) has seemingly little to no regard for the appearance of inequities or impropriety in the course of their own operations?

It is shameful for the FBI to fuel the fires of an already untenable situation against law enforcement by risking a stain on the notion that the goal must always be justice for all.

With the admission by Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg that there was FBI influence over social media’s suppression of the Hunter Biden laptop details during election season, the questionable justification and motivations behind the unprecedented raid of an immediate past president’s residence (@ Mar-a-Lago), the appearance of a two-tiered system of justice, FISA warrant issues, the debunked Russia stories and more, is it any wonder that many question the integrity of federal law enforcement agencies?

Where did the deterioration of the FBI’s reputation really begin to accelerate? Highly political operations within the FBI during the J. Edgar Hoover years notwithstanding, the FBI allowing itself to be used to promulgate the anti-piracy warnings and criminality of copyright infringement at the beginning of much video content via the “FBI WARNING” has placed the

FBI front and center promoting what is perhaps the most widely viewed criminal statute in the United States.

Despite its prominent place in the America’s view, the very existence of criminal liability for violating copyright laws is one that has only ever been intermittently enforced. Despite increasingly stiffer penalties, expanded prosecutorial powers and wide public awareness, criminal enforcement for copyright infringement rarely results in serious liability. Does this make the FBI look unserious via a bark with little bite in the eyes of the public? While Hollywood aggressively warns customers of the criminal repercussions for unlawfully sharing a copyrighted work, in reality, governmental enforcement against online copyright infringement is rare. So the next time you see the FBI’s warning label, it should be recognized as a public service announcement on behalf of the entertainment companies rather than a real threat of prosecution from the U.S.’s highest law enforcement agency.

Federal agencies are in desperate need of a makeover, not blanket defunding. We will always need true enforcement of laws in an even-handed and just manner. Political weaponization of law enforcement, as well as use of law enforcement powers primarily on behalf of private industry concerns, however, have no legitimate place in America and our government would be well-advised to be guided accordingly.

Joel E. Gordon is a former Field Training Officer with the Baltimore City Police Department and is a past Chief of Police for the city of Kingwood, West Virginia. He has also served as vice-chair of a multi-jurisdictional regional narcotics task force. An award winning journalist, he is author of the book Still Seeking Justice: One Officer's Story and founded the Facebook group Police Authors Seeking Justice. Look him up at stillseekingjustice.com