No knock warrants:

Nine seconds:

"Police! [Garble. Garble.] Get on the Floor! Police!  [Garble.] Get on the fucking floor."

Bang. Bang. Bang.

The words are nearly unintelligible because four or five men were shouting at the same time.  Watch:

Click here. 

The Minneapolis police were investigating a murder that took place in the neighboring twin city of St. Paul, Minnesota. The police were not looking for Amir Locke, the man who was shot and killed, but he was on the couch of the place searched. He was wrapped in blankets just inside the door. He had a gun in hand when he was seen by police. A police officer entering the room decided in that instant that lives were in danger. A police officer shot and killed him.

The police department's interim chief said that their entry was announced. Officers "loudly and repeatedly announced ‘police search warrant’ before crossing the threshold into the apartment.” I have listened multiple times to the recording and cannot decipher the word "warrant" but I did hear "police" and "get on the fucking floor." Mostly I heard a cacophony of shouting. I watched them enter immediately, not after a warning.

I imagined myself being asleep in my bed in the middle of the night. I identified with Locke, startled out of sleep by angry shouting. The warrant was served just before 7:00 a.m. according to reports. Sunrise in Minneapolis is at 7:30. It would be dark out.  

Maybe Locke was awakened from sleep. I would have been wide awake for several hours at that hour, preparing a blog post. I would have been startled and frightened, but not groggy. Amir Locke may have been asleep and confused. It is not unusual or criminal to be asleep on a couch a half hour before sunrise. 

He was holding a gun. Guns seem suspicious to me. Very possibly he was up to no good. I don't identify with a man sleeping near a gun, but I am aware that many people keep guns in their houses for protection against intruders. I am reminded by conservative readers that it is a 2nd Amendment right. Having a gun at hand doesn't need explanation or justification under the law. It isn't criminal. 

I don't keep a gun near my bedside, although I consider it. I sometimes get unhinged comments sent to this blog. I send some of them to the police for a file they keep of these comments. They tell me they are evidence of disturbed thinking, but the letters and comments are not criminal in themselves. Carrying a handgun for personal protection is a two-edged sword. It might protect me from an intruder. If I were startled awake by the sound of a door crashing and men shouting and coming toward me and my wife, my instinct certainly would be to reach for a gun if one were nearby. Wouldn't anyone? If it were a thief or crazy person, I would be glad to have it. If it were the police, it might get me killed. Of course, having no gun may not protect me against police moving quickly in the dark. Consider the speed of their entry, the obscurement of the blankets, and the near-instant decision that there was a deadly threat, all amid the chaos of officers moving quickly and shouting. In the uncertain light police might mistake my black bedside telephone for a gun if it appeared suddenly out of blankets. 

I understand that police have every right and need to protect themselves. They undoubtedly thought they were going into a dangerous place. And they were. They encountered an armed man there. They were in uniform and shouting verbal commands, the first two steps in the continuum of force. Under the circumstances, in a dark room with bright lights shined at Locke, their uniforms would have been unseen, especially if he was groggy with sleep. He would have been blinded by their high-powered flashlights. Giving clear commands is step two. My sense is that a half-dozen men each shouting different things to a man wrapped in blankets is better described as a chaotic provocation, not a clear command. 

I think police escalated this encounter. They could have gotten themselves and multiple innocent parties killed in the apartment and ones around it. As it was, one person was killed, and he was doing nothing criminal.

Oregon has outlawed no-knock search warrants. So has Florida and Virginia. Note that the Minneapolis police may not consider this a "no knock" warrant. After all, the interim chief claimed the police "loudly and repeatedly" gave warning before crossing the threshold. This simply isn't true. They burst in. 

I was brought up to respect the police. My assumption has been that police officers are the good guys and would be reliable witnesses. I have mentioned this assumption to former trial judges and attorneys who work criminal cases. They laugh at my naïveté.  

I have placed inquiries with the City of Medford police and the Jackson County, Oregon sheriff department to learn their on-the-ground practices when making searches. Southern Oregon has illegal cannabis grow-sites and there are announcements of busts and seizures of cannabis and cash every week. I will report what they tell me.

Press reset for Democrats: Pete Buttigieg

It takes one to know one. 

Democrats need to reposition. They need an anti-elitist populist spokesman.

Pete Buttigieg. Yes, Pete Buttigieg. 

Democrats are the party of educated managers and office workers. "Trust the science" is something Democrats say. "Listen to the people" is something Republicans say. Republican populism has taken aim at experts. It is time for Democrats to do the same.

Education level is a prime indicator of partisan identity. "Working people" are moving to the GOP. Their bosses, the managers with educations and office jobs, are moving to the Democrats. Republicans have the bigger half of the loaf. 

Distrust of experts is bipartisan. There is ample justification for it. Wall Street "wizards" destroyed the economy with their mortgage fraud, then stayed wealthy by being bailed out by taxpayers. The supposed know-it-alls at the Fed have given us one asset bubble after another. Foreign policy experts at the State Department and military kept us fighting an un-winnable war in Afghanistan for 20 years, and it ended ugly. Even supporters of the CDC are frustrated with mixed signals and changes in COVID advice. 

Democrats defend experts and expertise. The real world is messy. Things fall apart. Democrats, especially with COVID, send a message of "we know best," which sets them up for failure. This stance isn't working for Democrats. It is time to press reset. That can best be done with generational change and a party leader that calls for institutional change.

Pete Buttigieg attended Harvard, then Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar. He was a consultant at McKinsey. Now he is Secretary of Transportation. Buttigieg has the perfect resume for Mr. Meritocracy. He has excelled and has been fast-tracked. Buttigieg is the new version of Robert McNamara's "Whiz Kids," those best and brightest who carried out a failed war with Vietnam. 

Isn't that as bad as it gets? Doesn't that put Buttigieg in the deepest of political holes?  

No. It qualifies him as a change agent.

Buttigieg can do something brave. He can take aim at people like himself and his own mentors. He can tell the simple truth that the former generation of leaders made mistakes, that managers and experts have been wrong. He can say they have been insular and self-protective. He needs to say he wants to shake up and change out the very people he knows best. It takes a thief to catch a thief. It takes one to know one.

Buttigieg can say it's time for people to think outside the box. Some of his message can be regional. He can decry the error and insult imbedded in the notion of "flyover country." He can say he loves "midwestern values" and that he believes in "Minnesota nice." Buttigieg can include sharp criticism of academic elites at Harvard, Oxford, and McKinsey, the Ivies, the coasts. He's seen it. Praise universities in swing state Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. No need to put on duck-hunting clothes and borrow a shotgun. He is who he is, and he is a "traitor to his class." No one can dump on Harvard as persuasively as a person who excelled there.

Won't that cost votes on the coasts? In Massachusetts? In New York? No. Nobody resents snobbery as much as people closely exposed to the snobs. 

Buttigieg must be willing to name names, face criticism, and show that he is resolute in the face of that criticism. That is the test of a change-agent politician. Does he stand firm in calling out error? Can Buttigieg say "You're fired?" That is what change agents do.  

Americans are ready for change. 

News silo. Don't look up!

Fox. 

Newsmax. 

One America News.

You are what you eat. Ignorance is bliss.

Democrats are frustrated by the silence of "good Republicans." Democrats have expectations of the "good ones," and are disappointed with them. Most Republicans are sitting back, quietly enabling the dismantling of America democracy. Democrats think Republicans should be thrilled by Michael Pence, Brian Kemp, Doug Ducey, and Brad Raffensperger. They should be happy Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger are saying the things that any good Republican would normally believe as recently as a few years ago. It isn't happening.  

These "good Republicans" are normal rational people. They don't have "Fuck Joe Biden" signs on their cars. They aren't Q-Anon. They don't believe Hillary Clinton is a lizard who feeds on the blood of kidnapped children. They voted for Reagan, two Bushes, Dole, McCain, and Romney. They aren't crazy. 

There are complicated explanations for why these otherwise-normal democracy-loving Republicans are silent in the face of such anti-democratic behavior. Trump charisma. White demographic anxiety. Subtle and un-subtle racism. Immigration panic. Or maybe it is mostly opposition against Democrats and woke-ness, abortion, spending priorities, tax policies, or too much "free money" to the wrong people. 

There is also a simple explanation: News silos and the business of news. Republicans don't much see the anti-democratic side of Trump.

The for-profit news business is all about attracting an audience.  A solid lock on a loyal customer niche is a very successful business model. Fox built a huge, profitable niche essentially doing infomercials for Trump and the GOP, but with some journalistic news sprinkled in during the afternoons. In the fractionalized market, people seek a predictable, consistent product. A Big Mac is a Big Mac. A Big Mac is not a salad. Not even mid-days.

Fox was tabloid. It has beautiful women with bare legs facing the camera. They wear form-fitting solid-color dresses and heavy makeup. Fox has flash. On-air hosts say provocative things. Trump was the perfect star vehicle for them--more glamorous and trashy and interesting than the earnest, boring Bushes or Mitt Romney. 

Fox made a mis-step we have seen before with music labels, movie studios, and political machines. Fox created a monster, a star popular enough to go rogue. Trump's independence exposed another mis-step. Fox had tried to be a quasi-news organization. It gave Trump and his huge base of supporters reason to be disappointed in Fox. Trump has the power to move an audience to upstart Newsmax and One American News Network. They had better Big Macs and no salad. 

Fox is scrambling to recapture its its core audience. That helps explain "good Republicans." Democrats may think the big news today is that Trump demanded the overthrow of an election. No. Maybe it is news that Pence said "Trump is wrong," signally a growing rift in the GOP. No. Would it be that Pence's Chief of Staff testified for hours to the January 6 commission, or that confidantes of Trump are being subpoenaed by the House, or that memos by Trump's lawyers outline a White House plan to void the 2020 election? No. What about the job report number, something Biden was thrilled to announce. No.

Fox still dominates the news diet of Republican voters. Here is the news they see on Fox and on its new rivals. Nothing about Pence, Cheney, or overthrowing an election. Zero. Not one word.

Fox News

25 top stories

 

Newsmax:

28 top stories

One America News Network:

22 top stories

Trump asks too much of GOP candidates

"Peter, you need to stop writing about Trump. Trump is out. We Republicans have moved on."

                Comment from a former Republican officeholder

If only they could.

Trump is on-message. He insists he won in a landslide in 2020. GOP voters believe him. Candidates need to go along. Or else.

The Republican National Committee is meeting in Salt Lake City. They are wrestling with a resolution to condemn Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger. Some want them declared not-Republicans. Others want them censored. There is a group that allegedly wants to "water down" the resolution lest the GOP appear too slavish to Trump. They insist to NBC reporters that their comments be unattributed. NBC wrote "they are loath to antagonize Trump and possibly drive off his hard-core followers." Even finesse is dangerous.

Republican candidates have a problem. Trump polarizes, and when Trump is in full glory he is indefensible--except to the GOP primary electorate. Some candidates try nuance. Be Trump-adjacent but not Trump-compliant. We saw it with the Oregon GOP candidates for governor.

Trump keeps himself center stage by being outrageous. He wrote yesterday:

Why isn't the corrupt Unselect Committee of political hacks and highly partisan sleazebags in Washington investigating the massive voter fraud and irregularities that took place in the 2020 President Election, rather than spending all of its time investigating those who were protesting its result?"

This is on top of a week when he suggested he would probably pardon Capitol rioters if elected again. He put in print that he wanted Vice President Michael Pence to "overthrow the election." He called for the investigation and prosecution of both Nancy Pelosi and Pence. He called Lindsay Graham a RINO. He continues his public condemnation of "stupid," "loser," "Old Broken Crow" Mitch McConnell.

It is hard to find finesse and middle ground with that. Republican candidates fear sounding weak or skeptical of Trump, and doubly fear outright contradiction of him. Take 30-seconds to watch this advertisement from David Perdue's campaign. He is in a contested primary against Brian Kemp for Georgia governor:  

Click

Trump is seen saying:

The Democrats walked all over Brian Kemp. He was afraid of Stacey 'the hoax' Abrams. Brian Kemp let us down. We can't let it happen again. David Perdue is an outstanding man. He's tough. He's smart. He has my complete and total endorsement. Vote for David Perdue.

Kemp is stuck. He certified Biden's election victory. He did his duty and made Trump an enemy. That is baked in for him. Like Pence, he didn't overthrow an election.

Most Republican candidates have more wiggle room. If Trump took off the pressure they could say they have doubts, that there were troubling irregularities, that they are focused on election security in the future. They could appear Trump-compliant but independent. One tack is to say they defer to the doubts of others. Nevada gubernatorial candidate Dean Heller had said in the fall that he knew who the president was, while refusing to say Biden's name aloud. That was not good enough. He has since met with Trump in Florida and hardened his position, saying the 2020 election was stolen from Trump and that Biden is an illegitimate president. He said his evidence is that 71% of Nevada Republicans believe that, and he is with them.

Las Vegas Review Journal

One of the two great political parties in America is stuck in a feedback loop. Trump won't let go and therefore his base of support won't let go. Trump is getting less cautious. He is openly and proudly admitting to crimes. He is openly coaching witnesses by dangling pardons. As Trump becomes more extreme, the heavier burden he becomes to Republican candidates in a general election. 

You are with him or against him. There is no finessing that. Trump demands too much.

The very best. But not from Harvard or Yale

Biden should nominate Judge J. Michelle Childs to the Supreme Court.

Who is she??  She's the one who didn't go to law school at Harvard or Yale.

She went to the University of South Carolina Law School.

Judge Childs

A Washington Post columnist, Paul Waldman, wrote about why Democrats risk a major shellacking in 2022. He was addressing the brand image of Democrats. They are the party associated with the triumph of the elites. Democrats aren't really for the little guy, and the public knows it. They are the party of highly-educated experts who tell the little guy how to live. 

Democrats will have proven unable to address the fundamental inequities in the American system that contribute to the widely shared — and correct — feeling that our system is rigged in favor of those with wealth and power.

Wealth and power compound through inheritance and privilege passed down to children. Ambitious parents work to get their kids into an Ivy or Stanford or MIT and a few other brand-name schools. It is confirmation of success in the Darwinian struggle for status. Yale or Harvard law schools grease the wheels for the climb up the ladders of power and money. It's not what-you-know, it's who-you-know. From Harvard and Yale law, to a judicial clerkship, to a good law firm, to judgeships on higher and higher courts. We consider people on that track "superbly qualified." At the time of Ruth Bader Ginsburg's death, all nine Supreme Court justices attended either Harvard or Yale Law Schools.

Biden has an opportunity. Nominate Judge Childs.

Yale Law School

Biden needs a win, and better yet, an easy, low-drama win. He needs a public demonstration that everything need not be a 50-50 partisan drag-out struggle. South Carolina congressman James Clyburn likes Judge Childs, which addresses a potential problem on Biden's left. South Carolina senator Lindsay Graham has spoken publicly in favor of her, too. Graham's support would mean there won't be unified GOP obstruction. Graham's support means that Susan Collins's no-vote isn't critical, which frees her to burnish her reputation as a moderate. Biden can get a bipartisan win.

Biden's bigger opportunity is to use this appointment to redefine affirmative action and diversity, by making it not about race but about the narrow-minded elitism of the privileged. He made a necessary campaign decision in promising to nominate a Black female Supreme Court justice. That promise backfires now that he is president. He appeared to undermine the qualifications of his nominee since he pre-judged that he was looking for a Black woman. Race and gender should be incidental in affirmative action. One notices race within the entirety of life experience. Biden's campaign pledge set him up for the criticism we are hearing from Republicans appealing to White grievance. We were excluded! How unfair! How discriminatory!  How come everybody's always picking on me? 

Biden can change the frame. He can praise Harvard and Yale Law Schools. Sure. Why not? It shows that he isn't acting out of malice. He can--indeed must--praise the potential nominees who have those Ivy League credentials. He put potential nominees like Harvard College-Harvard Law Judge Jackson into the public eye. He must not disrespect them. By acknowledging the elite tracking system he sets it up for his main point. It is too narrow, elitist, and most important, built on a false premise. Biden can tell the simple truth, understood by every sane and honest graduate of Harvard and Yale: There are a great many extraordinarily smart, able people who went to school elsewhere. This includes people who attended community colleges, night schools, public schools, schools no one has heard of, and no school at all. Elite schools have their dummies, too, but his message isn't about their bad apples. His key message is that there are a great many pathways to superb qualification for any job, and Scranton Joe Biden understands that. 

Biden could blow this. He must not imply he is accepting second-best to get diversity or that diversity was his goal. That would ruin the message. He must insist he is taking the very, very best, damn it. Diversity is a consequence, not the cause. People will get it. You are nominating a Black, female, graduate of a public university in South Carolina. That is diversity. Take the win.  

Joe Biden wants to be seen as the defender of the little guy, the person without all the elite credentials. Good. So defend the little guy lacking all the elite credentials. Say it: The best candidate for the Supreme Court happened to go to law school at the University of South Carolina. It is a good message.

Did Biden Win in 2020?

Litmus test for GOP candidates.

Was Trump cheated out of a landslide win?

A November, 2021 poll of Republican voters in Oregon reported that 75% viewed Trump favorably and 58% agree with Trump that the election was stolen from him. Over 60% said that GOP candidates should be "more like Trump."  Oregonlive

Trump insists the election was stolen, period. Trump calls a candidate or officeholders who openly disagree with him on this "RINO," a Republican in Name Only. Trump doesn't ignore apostasy. He attacks it and endorses a Trump-compliant primary opponent to replace the person "soft" on the issue. Since state governors are part of the process of certifying presidential elections, they cannot avoid the question of whether they would certify the win of a Democratic candidate who got the most votes. Arizona governor Doug Ducey and Georgia governor Brian Kemp are clear warnings. Trump is bitterly critical.

GOP candidates face the question: Is Trump right?

GOP candidates: Biden won

Drazan: campaign photo

Christine Drazan resigned her state House seat and Minority Leader position to focus on her campaign for governor. She said Joe Biden won the election and the election was not fraudulent. She answered the question "Did Joe Biden legitimately win the 2020 presidential election?" in the affirmative, saying "Biden won," It isn't what she wants to talk about, however. "I’m focused on the here and now, not an election from two years ago. I encourage the press to do the same."

Bud Pierce is a Salem oncologist and was the 2016 GOP nominee. He is running again. He also directly answered the question with a "Yes." He said, "We had a presidential election in 2020. Joe Biden was declared the winner. He won the election."

Jessica Gomez, a Medford high-tech entrepreneur, agrees that Biden won. Like Drazan, she wants to change the subject and move on. In a letter to me she said: 

Gomez at GOP event

If a football team lost a game by 16 points, most fans would say the winning team played better, or that their own losing team needed to regroup, retrain, and rethink a winning strategy. It's doubtful that even the most disappointed fans would claim the game was stolen by the winners.

So it's time to move on from the fact that Donald Trump lost to Joe Biden by 16 points in Oregon. It's time for disappointed Oregon Republicans to focus on the 2022 elections.

GOP Candidates: Trump maybe won. There was fraud.

 

Stan Pulliam, the mayor of Sandy, Oregon, who is raising significant campaign funds, told a group of Republican women "We will truly never know who won the 2020 election" because the election was "absolutely fraudulent." He received applause for that comment. He urged GOP candidates to speak out against the election. "If your Republican candidate’s not gonna call a spade a spade, call it the fraudulent 2020 election in a primary when it’s easy, they’re never gonna do it as your next governor." 

He said he did not trust Oregon's vote system. "I will say that I have major concerns when you look at how particularly Republican candidates have performed here in Oregon since the implementation of the vote-by-mail system."

Brandon Merritt, a Bend-area businessman, is taking a position similar to Pulliam's. It is an "I don't know," combined with complaints that echo Trump. Merritt responded to my question, "Do you believe that Joe Biden legitimately won the 2020 presidential election?" by saying, he didn't know, and then: 

Certainly, some of the wilder theories like "servers in Germany", were obviously fake, but I think that the Supreme Court should have heard Texas' case alleging that voting procedures were improperly changed in several states.

I attempted a clarifying question, "Do you agree with former President Trump’s assertion that the 2020 election was rigged and stolen from him?" He did not answer in a way that pins him down, but responded in words that would likely satisfy GOP primary voters.

Merritt: Campaign photo

'Rigged' and 'stolen' are very loaded terms. It is not in dispute that Trump's enemies did everything in their power, legal and otherwise, to prevent him from carrying out his agenda or win re-election. We saw this repeatedly, including the Russian Collusion Hoax, the politicization of the COVID pandemic, and the collective shrug from Democrat Mayors and Governors as their cities were being burned down. We saw it again in the changes to election procedures, most of which were not made by legislatures (and therefore unconstitutional). We can presume that Democrats would not have made those changes if they didn't think they would be advantaged by them. Additionally, Trump was hobbled by a Republican establishment which never got over its resentment towards him and which refused to help him fight.

There are other candidates who have not yet responded to me or other media about their positions. I will add their responses as they become available. Their websites do not address the issue. That absence is the real message. GOP candidates understand the litmus test is a political loser in the general election. 

Stages of COVID Grief.

Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression, Acceptance.

COVID won.  A majority of Americans accept that.

Americans watched the stages of grief play out. At the very beginning we saw Trump deny COVID. There was no COVID here. Then it was barely here. Don't test so much, he said. That is Denial.

Then Anger. At first Trump gushed at how cooperative China was, and then turned to anger at the "China virus." It was a deliberate attack by our enemy, he said. And maybe Andrew Fauci was in weaponizing it.  Anger.

We watched Bargaining play out in the efforts by Trump and then Biden to control the disease. Bargaining is the long, exhausting period in the war on COVID. COVID had its early streak, then we got vaccines and it looked like we had won. Then delta turned the game for COVID. Then boosters evened the score. We are stuck in midfield, with more-virulent but less deadly omicron. The vaccinated felt personally safe, mostly, then felt the let-down realizing the vaccinated could get COVID and spread it. Meanwhile, the COVID-concerned see the maskless stand next to them in stores and gather at events.

The Bargaining phase is deeply unsatisfactory, breeding discouragement and the Depression stage. Being COVID-compliant feels like being the designated driver at a party. The unvaccinated gather and want schools open and maskless. They don't seem to worry about COVID, and still almost none of them die. Some do--like my anti-vaxxer cousin--but by dying he disappears and people remove his anti-vaccination and pro-Trump signs. Herman Cain probably caught COVID at a Trump event in Tucson, then died. We don't hear from him anymore. Meanwhile, the people who got COVID and lived are on TV and podcasts saying COVID is overhyped.

Bargaining frustrates the COVID-compliant. We are impatient and feel helpless to motivate the unvaccinated. They fill the hospitals. I feel flashes of anger at them. Meanwhile the COVID-unconcerned resent vaccine mandates and the public health scolds. It is lose-lose. No wonder we are Depressed.

Acceptance is where Americans are. A college classmate said "Shame on you, Peter," when I wrote about acceptance two weeks ago. He works in an overcrowded hospital.  

Monmouth Poll

Monmouth University polls have credibility and rigor. Their survey reported:

Fully 7 in 10 Americans (70%) agree with the sentiment that “it’s time we accept that Covid is here to stay and we just need to get on with our lives” – including 78% of those who report having gotten Covid and 65% of those who say they have not been infected.

Americans do not think we won the battle against COVID. They think we lost. They don't care. It is like our leaving Afghanistan. The war is hopeless. Stop fighting. Move on. Monmouth reports:

Only one-third of the public (34%) feels the country will get the outbreak under control and return to normal by the end of the year. In fact, more than 1 in 4 (28%) now believe a return to normalcy will never happen, which is up from 22% who felt this way in September and just 6% who were similarly pessimistic exactly a year ago.

My cohort of friends are mostly older Boomers, educated, and politically liberal. We got immunized and boosted and are careful in public spaces. We are in the minority who have not yet accepted. I expect another "shame on you, Peter," letter. I am not happy with Acceptance but I recognize it as the new political reality. Another reality is that if Democrats don't adopt something like the position taken by Colorado's Democratic Governor Jared Polis, and end mandates and masks, going "back to normal," they will have badly misread the American public.

Polis: Acceptance

Acceptance means more anti-vaxxers will die. So be it. It means more vaccinated-but-vulnerable people will die, too. They deserve better, but Americans are OK with that. All of us run a greater risk of new variants from the unvaccinated, but the disease is worldwide and we will face new variants when they come. COVID won. COVID is everywhere.

Democrats could easily misread the moment and mood. It is still a democracy. There is an election coming up. You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.