WHY THE CONSERVATIVE RESPONSE TO BREONNA TAYLOR'S DEATH IS, IN FACT, RACIST

 

(Hint: It’s not because it opposes the liberal agenda – it’s because it opposes conservative values.)

The most recent explosion of outrage at alleged police misconduct and inappropriate government response has centered around the case of Breonna Taylor, a black woman from Louisville Kentucky who was shot and killed on the 13th of March. Her death occurred as the result of a raid on her home conducted by Louisville police operating pursuant to a “no-knock” warrant obtained in connection with an ongoing investigation into people other than Breonna Taylor.

 Taylor has since become a symbol of the outrage felt by African Americans at the manner in which they are treated by law enforcement. The latest manifestation of that outrage occurred this week when a grand jury, following presentations by Kentucky prosecutors, declined to indict the officers involved for anything other than a single “wanton endangerment” charge. Even that charge was largely unrelated to the Taylor death, as it was sustained on the basis of shots having gone through the walls of adjoining apartments. This will conceivably make the granting and execution of the actual warrant used to enter the Taylor residence immaterial, which has led to further outrage.

 It would be the contention of critics of the Kentucky authorities that they did not “vigorously” pursue an indictment and that the structured charges that emerged from the grand jury proceedings are far more indicative of authorities trying to cover their ass than pursue justice. As to why this would be their position please google “ham sandwich” and “grand jury”. The City of Louisville obviously thinks there was a screw up here, even if a grand jury seems to be OK with it. They just wrote a $12 million check to Breonna Taylor’s family. Here’s a hint – you don’t usually pay someone 12 mill if you think you did nothing wrong.

 To counter this criticism the conservative “law and order” response has been largely to attack the personal reputation of Breonna Taylor herself – saying things like “she wasn’t asleep”, “she still was talking to her ex-boyfriend – she even bailed him out once”, “she hadn’t worked as an EMT for a while” “even if the warrant was “no-knock” the cops did knock” and so on. I think that last one is pretty unlikely (there are many witnesses who contradict it, the original police statement was the opposite, the behavior of all parties on site make it HIGHLY unlikely that there was an effective announcement of police presence and, most tellingly, common sense tells you that you don’t get a no-knock warrant and then decide “Ah, just to be nice – let’s knock”.

 But look, I’ll concede every one of those statements above to the Breonna Taylor critics – not because I think any of them are particularly important (or true) – but because they do not represent why people are so pissed off at the conservative response to killings like those of Breonna Taylor. I’m not frustrated because in abandoning Breonna Taylor to the same old tactics of tearing down the victim conservatives are so ready to oppose what would be assumed to be the liberal position. No – I’m frustrated because in adopting that approach conservatives have proven themselves racist by so readily abandoning THEIR OWN stated positions.

 How do I know this to be true? – Review the following timeline concerning the events that happened in the 1990’s at Ruby Ridge, Idaho. There is some commentary I’ve put in there to show why I’ve pulled it up.

 Chronology of events in the siege at Ruby Ridge, Idaho:

     * Oct. 24, 1989: Randy Weaver accused of selling two sawed-off shotguns to an undercover federal             agent. (Conservatives have, perhaps rightly, pointed to this as entrapment).

 

1990:

 

* June 12: Federal agents approach Weaver about becoming an informant on other white separatists in northern Idaho.

 

* December: Federal grand jury in Boise indicts Weaver for selling illegal weapons to the undercover agent.

 

1991:

 

* Jan. 17: Weaver and his wife, Vicki, arrested. (See “his wife” as being the equivalent of “ex-girlfriend” as a coercive tactic).

 

* Feb. 20: Weaver fails to appear for trial in Moscow, Idaho. Federal bench warrant issued for his arrest. (The warrant application over states and mis-characterizes the case).

 

* March 14: Weaver indicted for failure to appear at trial.

 

* March 15: The Weavers and their three children begin 18-month sit-in in cabin near Naples, Idaho. Friends keep them supplied; Kevin Harris visits the cabin periodically. Marshals keep the cabin under surveillance.

 

1992:

 

* Aug. 21: Reconnaissance team of deputy marshals unexpectedly encounters Harris, Weaver’s son, Samuel, 14, and family dog. Deputy U.S. Marshal William Degan, Samuel Weaver and dog killed in shootout. Federal, state and local authorities and National Guard troops surround cabin. (Botched warrant, resulting in death of an innocent – sound familiar?)

 

* Aug. 22: Mrs. Weaver, 42, killed by FBI sharpshooter Lon Horiuchi, who also wounds Harris and Weaver. Horiuchi said he fired because he believed they would shoot at a surveillance helicopter. (Again – inappropriate use of force ending in the killing of an innocent person. Admittedly – someone who might have been alleged to be involved in a crime – but agents are not judge and jury – or at least aren’t supposed to be).

 

* Aug. 23: Harris charged with Degan’s murder and Weaver charged with lesser crimes in federal case.

 

* Aug. 30: Harris surrenders.

 

*Aug. 31: Weaver surrenders.

 

* Sept. 17: Weaver pleads innocent to aiding in Degan’s murder.

 

*Sept. 18: Harris pleads innocent to murdering Degan.

 

1993:

 

* April 13: Jury selection begins for the murder-conspiracy trial of Weaver and Harris.

 

* July 8: Jury acquits Weaver and Harris in the slaying of Degan. Harris acquitted on all four other charges. Weaver convicted on two minor counts. (Harris claim of self-defense is upheld, in that charges have been dropped against Breonna Taylor’s boyfriend the same can be assumed there as well).

 

1995:

 

* August: Justice Department agrees to pay Weaver $100,000 and each of his three daughters $1 million to settle claims stemming from standoff. (Again, just sayin’, you generally don’t see that many zeros unless there was wrongdoing.)

 

* Sept. 12: Citing his right against self-incrimination, Horiuchi declines to tell U.S. Senate about how he killed Mrs. Weaver. (In the Taylor case the grand-jury record has been sealed).

 

* Sept. 26: Harris tells Senate that law officers fired first.

 

1997:

 

* Aug. 15: Justice Department decides against prosecuting senior FBI officials for alleged cover-up that followed siege. Department’s two-year criminal investigation reaffirms 1994 decision against prosecuting Horiuchi. (In the words of a famous Marine – “Surprise, surprise, surprise”).

 In fact, there are a huge number of similarities between the two events – beginning with the fact that the “war on drugs” is very similar to the ATF pursuit of weapons caches in terms of justifications for governmental overreach. I’m not going to get in to the merits of the case, but the right wing has long pointed to the use of overly broad warrants, in the hands of armed, aggressive and overzealous agents, which needlessly involve innocent third parties, followed by after-the-fact justifications and payoffs - as the real reason why there was an outbreak of violence in places like Ruby Ridge, Waco and, ultimately, Oklahoma City. They state, correctly, that they are not advocating or excusing such violence – but, they also say, “what can you expect when continually faced with an oppressive government willing to bend their own rules”?

 Every single one of those elements is present in the Breonna Taylor case as well. Police investigations into low level crimes were used as justification for ridiculously over the top warrants (why the hell would you need a no-knock warrant to bring in a twenty-something nurse trainee?), which led to events spiraling out of control, which led to deaths, which led to pay-offs, which led to a failure to indict in instances where charges would ordinarily be expected. My God, the two sets of events line up nearly perfectly. There must be some difference between the two that has kept the right wing from adopting the cause of Breonna Taylor. What might that difference be? What is different between Breonna Taylor and Vicki Weaver? What COULD it be? Anything come to mind?

 Anything?

 Oh yeah – that.

 Conservatives have claimed that if there was an actual case that showed police REALLY were acting improperly, that governments REALLY were papering over race-based screw ups, that people were REALLY dying because of systemic malfeasance - sure, they’d be the first to condemn what went on. But George Floyd was on angel dust, Rayshard Brooks was running away with a taser he had stolen, Jacob Blake had a knife under the front seat of his car, there was no way to know Kyle Rittenhouse had just shot three people… Excuse after excuse after excuse.

 But, with Breonna Taylor, here’s a case where the elements all line up perfectly with the type of activity where, when it was a white person who was the victim – it became a conservative cause célèbre – a reason for outrage - but let a black person be at the other end of the gun…

 Well, not so much.

 Conservatives – Breonna Taylor was your chance to show that your objections to the criticisms levelled against the law enforcement structure were not race-based, were, in fact, color blind, not color coded. That the set of rules you wanted to live by were applied equally. That those cases cited above – well, those weren’t irrational excuses, they were logical conclusions. Instead, you turned to the same old “blame the victim” approach – and you f*cked it up yet again.

 I’m not anti-police. Some of the people closest to me are members of the law enforcement community. Some of my most diligent readers spent their entire life’s career in uniform. My thing is – I can’t believe it is in the best interest of either the police, or, in a larger sense “law and order” to avoid the fairly obvious conclusion that there is a problem here. If every couple of years (more recently, months) cities explode because of yet another killing – something needs to change. Not EVERY victim can be wrong, not EVERY allegation can be unfounded, not EVERY statistic can be mis-leading, not EVERY shooting can be justified. It is time to face facts.

 However, instead of facing facts, conservatives (or, perhaps more accurately, those who follow the lead of the current resident of the White House) create fables. Those fables lead conservatives away from those things that used to be their most cherished values - the values that led them to say they faced the world realistically, and that it was the liberals who were living in the world of make believe. Instead, now we get fables. The fable of anarchy. The fable of BLM agitators. The fable of how calling out the National Guard is the best way to deal with this, rather than just a short term means of sweeping it under the rug.

 The fable of Donald Trump.

 The fable that, somehow, Breonna Taylor deserved to die because she just didn’t open her door in time.