Posted on 10/02/2014 6:40:32 AM PDT by Kaslin
News cycles come and go. And with lapses in Secret Service protection for President Obama and the first appearance of the Ebola virus in the U.S., it seems like ages ago since protesters were clashing with police in the streets of Ferguson, Missouri. But here's guessing it will become a potential election changer in some states by November.
The case in which an African-American man, Michael Brown, was shot and killed by a local policeman in August is filled with conflicting stories as to whether Brown was threatening the officer or trying to surrender.
But one thing is for sure: There are plenty of entities examining the situation closely. That includes a grand jury in St. Louis County, the FBI and the U.S. Justice Department. Notwithstanding a few dust-ups and what appears to have been an unrelated and non-life-threatening shooting of an officer there recently, all things Ferguson have been unusually quiet in recent weeks.
Almost certainly that quiet will not last. The best guess is that in a matter of weeks, we will see one of several scenarios take place.
The first would be a decision by the grand jury to indict police officer Darren Wilson. The indictment might stifle more outcry over the incident, or it might not. Consider that the prosecutor in the case has reportedly chosen not to push any specific charges, but instead has chosen to let the grand jury determine what, if any, crime has been committed. It's possible that even an indictment, particularly one viewed as too lenient, might not be enough to deter serious outrage among civil rights leaders. Or a murder indictment might incite more discontent by validating the earlier concerns of protesters.
The second scenario is that the grand jury decides to hold off on an indictment until later, perhaps after the November elections. That would present an opening for civil rights leaders and political types to ramp up their angry rhetoric toward the authorities involved. While the prosecutor has suggested that he will finish presenting evidence by mid-October, the grand jury has until January to decide what, if anything, to do.
Then there is the matter of the Justice Department. Some believe the decision by the soon-to-resign Attorney General Anthony Holder to stay in office until his replacement is named will delay any civil rights-related investigation into the Ferguson Police Department. Others believe Holder will want to see that the issue is dealt with while he's still on his watch. That would allow for a late October or early November hint, or even a forceful declaration, that a pattern of civil rights violations by the Ferguson police exists.
Virtually every scenario leads to the same likely result. By election time, Ferguson will be back in the news and could possibly be evoking a new round of protests and high emotions.
Whether any of that would be justified or not remains undecided for now. But we know that many of our nation's top African-American leaders, including the attorney general, have reflected upon the difference with which blacks, and in particular black men, are treated by law enforcement and other authorities. It is a topic that can quickly get the attention of African-American voters. And those voters and their turnout in this election season are critical to any hope Democrats have of holding onto control of the U.S. Senate. In states such as North Carolina, Georgia, Louisiana and Arkansas, a stronger-than-usual turnout of African-American voters could take states once handicapped to go Republican in 2014 and hand them to Democrats, or at the very least throw several contests into post-General Election runoffs.
Racial politics is a tricky thing to deal with. I learned long ago that it is nearly impossible to judge how those of other races and ethnicities feel about their lives or how they are treated.
What is not hard to figure out is that the sticky situation in Ferguson has not gone away and may play a critical role in the upcoming elections.
As we’ve heard countless times by now, airstrikes alone will not defeat and destroy ISIS. And after more than 230 of them, it’s seems, the group “remains a very potent force,” Admiral John Kirby told reporters this week.
But they have forced the Islamic militants to change their tactics, Admiral John Kirby told reporters this week.
As of Tuesday, the U.S. and its coalition partners had conducted nearly 310 air attacks on Islamic terrorist targets, more than 230 in Iraq and 76 in Syria, a Pentagon spokesman said.
And while the air campaign has forced the terrorists to change their tactics, "We still believe ISIL remains a very potent force," Admiral John Kirby told reporters on Tuesday.
"Yes, they're blending in more. Yes, they're dispersing, and yes, they aren't communicating quite as openly or as boldly as they once were. That's a good thing, because if they aren't operating as freely, then they aren't as free to achieve their goals.
"That doesn't mean ISIL doesn't still pose a threat. It doesn't mean they aren't still trying and in some cases succeeding at taking and holding ground. No one said this would be easy or quick, and no one should be lulled into a false sense of security by accurate airstrikes. We will not, we cannot bomb them into obscurity."
The "most significant pressure" on ISIS/ISIL willcome from Iraqi and Kurdish ground forces, who are "doing better," but are not "perfect."
Kirby warned reporters against thinking that air strikes will have an immediate strategic effect. "This is going to be a long struggle," he said. And he urged "a sense of strategic patience about this entire effort."
"This group will adapt, and we're going to have to adapt right along with them. And air strikes alone, you're just not going to bomb them away. It's not going to happen like that."
Kirby, asked about reports that Islamic fighters have come within five miles of Baghdad, said it's nothing new: "We have consistently seen them pose a threat to the capital city." Kirby said U.S., along with Iraqi security forces, "are trying to push them back," and "we're going to do what we can to help Iraqi security forces maintain control of the capital city."
Translation:
It's possible that even an indictment, particularly one viewed as too lenient, might not be enough to deter riots and looting.
This crap is history...if it even ranks that high.
What do they mean about an indictment viewed as too lenient? Meaning if he is not indicted for first degree murder, but for some lesser charge?
Can somebody tell Sharpton and Jackson that we don’t do lynch mobs in this country, that there is due process, a system to review cases which come up, etc. ?????
Hey Matt, flash message for you, it has not gone away because it has not gone away. In case you missed it, some shooting and riots continue. If the grand jury comes back with a no bill as has been alluded to in the press yesterday, it will look like a combination Watts, Detroit, and Newark all rolled up into one nasty event. Obola is doing what he can do to delay the finding till after the election or the dems are cooked, well done, as to just medium well now.
Those who practice “racial” politics will vote the same way regardless ... Dem. The only difference I can see in light of Ferguson is that more might be motivated to go out and vote, but I would think it would primarily be in the Ferguson area. Those folks couldn’t be bothered to go out and vote in folks who represent them (from a race perspective) in their own city politics so I don’t see them voting in the midterms. If anything, I’m MORE motivated to vote to turn the Senate so perhaps people like Holder, who play the race card, try to divide the country and instigate unrest, don’t get confirmed. Then again, I have very little faith in the Repubs via GOPe to do what is right for the country.
Tweet: "Not enough evidence to indict Wilson."
*famous dead horse
This story is pretty much dead no matter what the grand jury does.
The video of him robbing the old Asian man undermined the dude's victim appeal. They didn't drop him as a cause right away because they were mid-bottle toss and because flatscreens.
Nobody will even remember his name in two months.
What pie-eyed myopic nonsense.
The whole peice is a setup for this line: “Whether any of that would be justified or not remains undecided for now.”
Wow, how insightful.
The fact is, the dhimmicrats are at the epicenter of any discontent among the gimmedats. The question is whether the gimmedats, who have so ably burned out their own situation will now burn out their own government.
It has been the strategy of the DNC to agitate Ferguson in order to rally the Black vote and excite the Dem base for election turnout purposes.
That's what this has been about from almost day one and why it turned violent and still simmers. After the November elections, except perhaps locally, this will fall off the edge of the earth news-wise as things will mysteriously and suddenly die down once the DNC shock troops are withdrawn.
The Dems are trying to leverage this into another James Byrd chain dragging incident for cheap political gain.
What should really happen is that there should be a bank of writers writing articles accusing Holder of resigning because he realized his efforts to stir up trouble in Ferguson post M. Brown have been entirely race based and are not only baseless but fraudulent, and he now realizes that without any such indictment, Ferguson will riot again and he, Holder will be blamed.
And tell, me, who gives a crap if the article is right or wrong? Publish it anyway. Oh, there would be consequences? This matters?
He was a representative but quit when he got too liberal for his district. Now he pontificates in the local paper and on the web.
I don't particularly trust his analytical abilities. He might be right . . . but even a stopped clock, etc.
Ferguson is going to take a back seat very soon now, to Ebola.
‘what appears to have been an unrelated and non-life-threatening shooting of an officer [in Ferguson] recently’
How does the author figure it’s unrelated? The police have been vilified and demonized nonstop since this happened, from the highest levels of government on down. How can the shooting of a Ferguson police officer be totally unrelated to the climate of hatred toward the police that the race baiters have ginned up?
& btw, what’s the big deal about ‘non-life-threatening’? Why is this underscored? Does the author think it’s not so bad to shoot police, as long as you don’t kill them? Or is he saying that winging a police officer doesn’t count in a scenario in which a young man has previously been killed? I.e.: no eye for eye, so therefore it’s trivial/in the noise.
Weird article. I didn’t care for it at all.
I suppose they could, but Sharpton and his ilk won't care. To them the riots sound like "Ka-ching!"
The overwhelming amount of the American people/voters are convinced that Michael Brown is nothing other then a would be cop killer, thug, druggie, criminal!!! If African-Americans have any street smarts at all, they will not play the “race” card gig before the November, 2014 mid-term elections!!!
If they do...it will not help or aid their misguided hate campaign at all!!! In fact...it will create a massive political backlash!!! Face it......folks.....Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown are just plain thugs raised without real or concerned paretal guidance. Folks it’s a culture change needed within the African-American communities!!!
African-Americans are badly adrift at sea, with out a paddle, without a single decent leader to guide and counsel them...starting with their Muslim brother, POTUS Obama....who has already thrown them under the bus...too many times to count!!! Go figure!!!
Has anybody suggested the girl just made it up...hey man I have a friend on the Grand Jury and they tell me this....
NOO not on the internet, could not happen
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
