Democrats Allowing Baltimore To Run Wild

Now that the Democrats, Liberals, Leftists and socialists have demonized the police and blamed them for the civil unrest in Baltimore, we see the result of their folly: a city where the thugs and anarchists are allowed to run wild, where looting and property damage is not stopped but allowed to play itself out. This is the same scenario that has plagued Ferguson and New York City. Blame the cops. It’s not the criminal’s fault. After all they have no jobs, no money, no hope. Stand by and watch them loot and do nothing, that’s the Democrat Liberal modus operandi.

Rush reports:

Here you have a sheltered, protected liberal mayor who’s sheltered and protected on a lot of levels, okay. She’s sheltered and protected because she a woman and maybe sheltered and protected because she’s African-American. She has been given and she’s come to expect different treatment, to be honest, she has.

But now here’s somebody from out of town, got a national guy in town, somebody from Fox News Channel now.  This is not local supplicant, accepting, sniveling, accomplice local media.  This is somebody trying to get some answers here.  The city is on fire, the city is out of control, after we’ve all been told steps were taken to stop this.  It’s getting worse.  Here’s a guy from out of town trying to find out why.

It’s obvious that she has been sheltered in such way that she has not been forced, she has not faced questions like this, and she thinks it’s insubordination for somebody to ask her.  She thinks it’s rude.  She thinks it’s grounds for shutting down the press conference because this guy is not asking questions.  He’s rude.  What that means is, this guy is trying to show me up; this guy’s trying to make me look bad.

No, Mayor, you’ve got that handled all on your own, and so does most everybody else that’s involved in this whole episode.  It’s sad to watch this.  I mean, on the one hand you got common sense over here.  On the other hand, no common sense and no common sense is dominating.  But be honest.  I don’t want to be the only judge here.  Snerdley, the reporter, did he sound rude to you?  Did he sound pushy to you?  Did he sound any way biased?  Did he sound like he was trying to humiliate her?  Did he sound like he was refusing to let her answer?  No, sounded like he really wanted some information, to me.

The community wants the police to get blamed.  The police have been blamed.  Six of them have been indicted on various charges of manslaughter and murder.  That act alone was supposed to quell the riots.  The state attorney went out there and dumped all over the cops, and she spoke right to all the protesters, no justice, no peace.

She spoke their language. She made it plain she was doing their bidding and was gonna do their bidding, even in the courtroom.  It didn’t mollify ’em, did it?  It didn’t mollify ’em one bit.  Because now crime, murder, rampant gunfire is up across the board.  Arrests are down 50%.  The cops have been blamed by the DOJ, by the state’s attorney Mosby, by the mayor, by Al Sharpton, by the media, by everybody who commented, the cops were said to be to blame. And so the police commissioner there has been told by the Department of Justice you gotta pull back because it’s your presence that problem.

The cops have pulled back.  The unrest continues, and it become more intense, and it increases in volume.  The cops do show up now and then.  They don’t answer every call now, arrests are obviously 50% down. But even when the cops show up, they’re not looked at as a positive sign, they’re not looked at as a positive step to stop it.  The cops show up, even now, and they are sounded by citizens. They’re sounded by a mob videotaping them with their phones hoping to get them on tape doing something that they can accuse them of police brutality or whatever.

If you’re a cop in that situation, you’re surrounded and you got 60 cell phones aimed at you, what are you gonna do?  Nothing.  Or as little as you can.  I’m asking you who benefits from this?  I know that sounds like a very, very, very rough question but it’s gotta be asked here because for some reason steps are not being taken to stop this, folks.  Unless I’m missing something.  I mean, I’m not there.  There could be things going on. But if steps are being taken to stop it, they’re pretty ineffective.



What is the problem in Baltimore?  Let’s isolate this down.  Let us strip away all the extra, what’s the problem in Baltimore?  (interruption)  No, no, no.  That’s a reason.  The fact it’s run by Democrats is the reason.  What is the problem?  The murder rate.  The crime rate.  That’s what we’re all talking about, right?  (interruption)  Murder rate, crime rate, out of control.  Indict six cops, blame them, get everybody in town thinking everybody’s fixed this now because these evil cops who are said to be the problem, “Yeah, we’re gonna show them, yeah, for all these years the cops bullying us, yeah.”

Fine.  Indict six cops, charge ’em with whatever, quell the riot.  Except maybe the riots don’t continue, but the crime is out of control.  So we have a reporter from Fox News that shows up by the name of Leland Vittert and he wants to ask a question about the murder rate and the crime rate, the crime problem, and the mayor converts it into where he’s the problem.

Leland Vittert is not the problem in Baltimore, and Fox News is not the problem in Baltimore, by any stretch of the wildest imagination.  The reporter’s trying to get an answer.  He was trying to prevent a nonresponsive answer.  You people may not recognize.  This is what reporters used to do before Obama.  And I’m not trying to be funny.  Some of you may be young enough that you don’t really know what reporters used to do.  You may not remember how reporters used to act.  But you ought to see some of the ways reporters treated Ronald Reagan.  And I don’t even want to have to remember the way they treated George W. Bush.

Is crime rising because cops are doing less?  Yes!  Cops are doing less why?  By design!  Because the Obama administration — they’ve said this, folks, this is not me making it up, which I don’t need to do talking about the left.  I don’t do it anyway.  They believe the cops are the problem.  They believe uniformed police automatically trigger criminal behavior in African-Americans because they always have.  Because since the days of yore, since the days way back.  And, you know, it may have been the case in the past on occasion.  Could well be.

But in this case, Leland Vittert is just trying to get an answer that the mayor doesn’t want to answer.  “Is the rising crime rate in Baltimore due to less activity by the cops?”  “Yes.”  “Arrests are down 50%.”  “Would you let her answer the question?”  She doesn’t want to answer that question.  But arrests are down 50%.  That also is by design.  You see, the left believes you get the cops out of the way ’cause just their presence, just the uniform is enough to incite riots.  That’s what they tell you ever since Ferguson happened, it’s the cops, it’s the cops, it’s the cops.

So get ’em out of the way, back ’em off, get ’em out of sight.  That’s how you make a peaceful community, that’s how you get the people who live in the community to start obeying the law is to get rid of the people that enforce it.  That makes sense, doesn’t it?  Get the rules and the enforcers, get ’em off street, get ’em out of sight.  That’s how you get people to obey the law.  That’s what Obama believes.  And not just Obama.  Eric Holder and Loretta Lynch and every other liberal, every other Democrat, this is what they believe.  Cops are the problem.

So the cops have been moved out of the way, and there aren’t any arrests, and when the cops do show up, as a last resort they’re surrounded by a mob videotaping them on their phones.  I should say video recording them.

Obama has already got 25 police departments under the thumb of the federal government.  Cleveland is the most recent.  It was it was during the campaign of 2008 now, I remember, that Obama proposed a civilian security force, and he compared it to a national version of the military.  He pointed out that he can’t use the military for local police forces, but maybe we should create a civilian security force.  He was talking about a national federal police force.  He didn’t use that terminology because people would have revolted at that but he’s thinking — maybe not.  The way they’re going about it tier taking over via these consent decrees from the DOJ.  It’s basically blackmail.  You want money from the government to help run your police department?  Well, you gotta accept our guidelines on how you’re gonna do your jobs, and they’re all accepting, because they’re being forced.  St. Louis, Ferguson, Baltimore, Cleveland is the latest, Oakland, Newark.  I mean, there’s 25 of them now that are actually have been taken over by guidelines from the DOJ to run these local police departments.  I find it just all happening right there in front of our faces.

2 thoughts on “Democrats Allowing Baltimore To Run Wild

  1. She didn’t answer the question because she already knew the answer. The city is in anarchy and the political leaders in Baltimore and D.C. are allowing it to happen. I think the remaining cops in Baltimore should relocate or find another profession and leave these politicians to their own devices.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s