Opinion

How Are Cops Supposed to Enforce the Law with Democrats (and some Republicans) at the local, state, and federal Levels Setting Such Bad Examples?

I keep wondering what Democrats are teaching our children in this age of CCP virus exaggerations and lies and the theft of a presidential election? It seems to me there are four possibilities that our kids are learning from this so-called adult behavior.

Traditional Americans teach their sons and daughters (sorry, Dem legislature) the Golden Rule: treat people as you’d like to be treated. Other traditional but more secular folks teach their children simply to treat others with civility. That works, too. Some less traditional parents may teach their children, “do as I say, not as I do.” At least, the ultimate aim is toward good behavior, even if they’re not setting the example. But, sadly, there is a fourth group which has become ascendant in recent years, especially this year. By their actions and words, the socialist-Democrats seem to be teaching their kids the ends-justify-the-means.

We just saw the Democrats’ example of this dressed up in all its hellish regalia on Wednesday, January 6th, 2021. The day a successful presidential coup was consummated in the United States of America. The Democrat Party did that—along with significant help from the Republican swamp. One positive: from here on out, the Republican Party no longer belongs to the swamp. They’re done!

How do average Democrats, who consider themselves good, patriotic Americans, process the obvious 2020 election cheating? Their kids are watching them do it. Their children will one day be independent, thinking adults. Won’t they wonder why their parents allowed, even facilitated, the greatest election fraud in American history? As a retired cop, I think about this aspect alone. In one breath, the Democrats (and Georgia Republican leaders) say, “there is no evidence of fraud.” With their very next breath, the Democrats et. al. tell Republicans, “you may not see the evidence of fraud.”

While it’s true the mainstream media and social media are engaged in full-on censorship and misinformation, there must be intelligent, traditional Democrats who see the massive evidence of election corruption and media bias and censorship. Except for some anti-socialist comments from Sen. Joe Manchin (D WV) and former Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D HI), Democrat politicians at the federal level are mute.

Is having a D next to your political leaders’ names worth being silent while radicals turn your Democrat Party into a perpetual, one-party socialist ruling class? The former Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is a conservative, no doubt about that. But aside from having been a very high-ranking politician, he is also a scholar, historian, and author whose analysis of politics and government is always measured. Now, even he has had enough with Democrat election sleaze.

Do you support individual military members being able to opt out of getting the COVID vaccine?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from LifeZette, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

In a recent article in the Washington Times, Gingrich wrote, “A smart friend of mine who is a moderate liberal asked why I was not recognizing Joe Biden’s victory.” Just his phrasing of this question says a lot. First, it asserts Gingrich is going as far as not accepting Biden as the legitimate U.S. President. Even though Gingrich’s article only covers a relative few of the elements of this perverse election, he nails several items that could, on their own, invalidate the election.

First, he notes the Democrats’ perpetual legal and illegal attempts to interfere with President Trump’s candidacy and presidency, including spying on his campaign and impeaching him based on a bogus dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton. Then he points out several specific items, which he believes alone could have changed election results. For just one, how does FB’s Mark Zuckerberg get away with illegally paying $400 million dollars to buy local government election establishments in swing states?

Gingrich calls the “election process itself… the final straw in creating a crisis of confidence which is accelerating and deepening for many millions of Americans.” He adds, “Officials in virtually every swing state broke their state’s own laws…” to assure the corruption that would flip a massive Trump victory to an impossible Biden victory. 81 million votes, about 20 million more votes than Barack Obama in 2012? Right. That happened.

The venerable statesman concludes, “As I thought about it, I realized my anger and fear were not narrowly focused on votes. My unwillingness to relax and accept that the election was over grew out of a level of outrage and alienation unlike anything I had experienced in more than 60 years involvement in public affairs.” Yes, this is different—way different. And all of us Trump supporters share his outrage and alienation.

With this massive amount of fraud, corruption, and lawlessness being endorsed (and committed) by a major national political party, how should law enforcement officers process it? Cops are far more adept at following the rule of law and the Constitution than your average Democrat politician or activist. So, when they see officials at the highest levels of government getting away with flaunting the law, will that affect how officers enforce the law—even unconsciously—how could it not?

Today, in many large Democrat-run cities, cops are more likely to be told not to enforce the law than to enforce it. With Biden’s stolen election, it can only get worse. Talk about a visceral example of the fruit from the poisonous tree legal doctrine. Everything Biden and his administration do from January 20th, 2021 on, will be poisoned.

So-called prosecutors, many funded by George Soros, openly side with lawbreakers over the law-abiding and law enforcement officers. The case of the McCloskey’s in St. Louis shows this more than adequately. While the circuit attorney prosecuted none of the rioters, she went out of her way, allegedly tampering with evidence, to prosecute people whose only “crime” was self-defense.

Cops see governors and mayors restricting people from going to church but allowing people to gamble and go to strip clubs. And, as mentioned above, cops are watching massive amounts of valid evidence being ignored by a major political party, news media, social media, academia, state and city governments, Hollywood, pro sports, and the deep state.

A cop’s mandate is to fairly and equitably enforce the law within permissible discretion, which is what the vast majority of officers do. But, with the Democrats’ assault on law and order, right now in America, the law simply doesn’t mean what it used to. Rather than a two-tiered justice system, in many places, America now has a one-tiered justice system that prosecutes conservatives but refuses to even charge, never mind prosecute, leftists.

At what point do officers pay attention to who’s being arrested and prosecuted based on their politics? At what point, being human beings, do police officers, who are largely conservative, resist arresting conservatives even when they commit actual crimes. I mean, if police know arresting a leftist will bring no charges but arresting a conservative will for sure, will cops begin to consciously or unconsciously attempt to balance the scales—until no one is arrested for non-major (and even some major) crimes?

meet the author

Steve Pomper is a retired Seattle police officer. He's served as a field training officer and on the East Precinct Community Police Team. He's the author of four books, including "De-Policing America: A Street Cop's View of the Anti-Police State." He's also a contributor to the National Police Association.

Join the Discussion

COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments