Are Missouri Dems engineering a Republican-style grand-jury report in the Ferguson case?

Demonstrators outside the Ferguson PD on August 30

by Ken

I don't know whether Ferguson (MO) police officer Darren Wilson should be indicted in the shooting of unarmed black teenager Michael Brown, or if so what me should be indicted for. Rather obviously I don't have all the information or know all the relevant law.

The thing is, the St. Louis County grand jury now hearing the case is going to have masses of information and law dumped on them, but may not be in a much better position to answer thes e questions. What's disturbing, though, is the suggestion that "the fix is in," a possibility that worries Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank ("Ferguson traged becoming a farce"). "It’s a good bet the grand jurors won’t charge [Wilson]," Dana writes, "because all signs indicate that the St. Louis County prosecutor, Robert McCulloch, doesn’t want them to."

Dana cites the report by the Post’s Kimberly Kindy and Carol Leonnig, "In atypical approach, grand jury in Ferguson shooting receives full measure of case," which notes that prosecutor McCulloch's office, quite unusually, apparently intends to make no recommendation to the grand jury, instead trusting to the jurors to make sense of all the information dumped on them.

McCulloch’s office claims that this is a way to give more authority to the grand jurors, but it looks more like a way to avoid charging Wilson at all — and to use the grand jury as cover for the outrage that will ensue. It is often said that a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich if a prosecutor asks it to. But the opposite is also true. A grand jury is less likely to deliver an indictment — even a much deserved one — if a prosecutor doesn’t ask for it.

"One might give McCulloch the benefit of the doubt," says Dana, "if not for his background."

His father was a police officer killed in a shootout with a black suspect, and several of his family members are, or were, police officers. His 23-year record on the job reveals scant interest in prosecuting such cases. During his tenure, there have been at least a dozen fatal shootings by police in his jurisdiction (the roughly 90 municipalities in the county other than St. Louis itself), and probably many more than that, but McCulloch’s office has not prosecuted a single police shooting in all those years. At least four times he presented evidence to a grand jury but — wouldn’t you know it? — didn’t get an indictment.

Dana takes a closer look at one of the four cases when McCulloch did present evidence to a grand jury but didn't get an indictment --

A 2000 case in which a grand jury declined to indict two police officers who had shot two unarmed black men 21 times while they sat in their car behind a Jack in the Box fast-food restaurant. It was a botched drug arrest, and one of the two men killed hadn’t even been a suspect. McCulloch at the time said he agreed with the grand jury’s decision, dismissing complaints of the handling of the case by saying the dead men “were bums.” He refused to release surveillance tapes of the shooting. When those tapes were later released as part of a federal probe, it was discovered that, contrary to what police alleged, the car had not moved before the police began shooting.

For the record, McCulloch -- although declining to withdraw from the new case -- has distanced himself from it by having other attorneys in his office do the presenting to the grand jury, and he presumably won't try the case himself in the event that there's a case to try. Still, Dana notes that his spokesman, "asked by The Post’s Wesley Lowery about those remarks," said that the slain men "should have been described as 'convicted felons' rather than 'bums.' " Pointing out that the Post's Wesley Lowery "gained national attention last month when he was unjustly detained by Ferguson’s out-of-control police while covering the demonstrations," Dana notes:

He has since asked McCulloch’s office for a list of cases in which prosecutors pursued charges against a law enforcement official. McCulloch’s office ultimately came up with only one case over 23 years that The Post could verify of the prosecution of a white officer for using inappropriate force against a black victim, and it wasn’t a shooting.

Then there's the awkward political dimension to the case. If you suspect that the political actors involved are Republicans, gaming the system to produce a Republican result, the facts, alas, are otherwise. "Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon — like McCulloch, a Democrat — is refusing to appoint a special prosecutor," and "Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill has issued a statement in support of McCulloch. Dana doesn't claim to know any more than I do what Darren Wilson is guilty of, and he understands that "proving a case of excessive force against a police officer is difficult."

But that doesn’t justify declining to prosecute such cases. There’s no dispute that Brown ran away after Wilson shot him in a scuffle and that Wilson shot Brown several more times after that. Several witnesses — including those in a newly discovered video showing the immediate aftermath of the shooting — claim that Brown had his hands up in surrender. The alternative account offered by Wilson — Brown charged at him — requires us to believe that the unarmed and wounded man ran away, reconsidered and ran back toward the man pointing a gun at him.

And McCulloch won’t have his prosecutors recommend even involuntary manslaughter? If he persists and if the governor won’t intervene, their behavior will confirm suspicions that justice is rigged.

#

Yesterday's Primaries-- And A Preview For Tomorrow's Primary In Memphis

Judy Baker, progressive victor in Missouri

Kansas, Missouri and Michigan all had primaries yesterday. Mostly incumbents and Establishment favorites won their races. The stupidest candidate who ran for Congress in any district in any state for either party, Brock Olivo in the Missouri district (MO-09) being abandoned by Kenny Hulsdorf, got wiped out. He came in 4th. If you want to understand why, watch the video at that link back there. What I can't understand is why 4,637 Republicans (10%) voted for him. Blaine Luetkemeyer won the GOP nod with 39%, beating Bob Onder in a bloody, vicious contest between two extremists, and progressive state Senator Judy Baker beat former Missouri House Speaker Steve Gaw (42%-33%) to take the Democratic nomination. It's a very Republican, very white district (PVI is R+7) and includes "Little Dixie." Kerry scored 41% of the vote in 2004.

In the Missouri governor's race, Democratic homophobe Jay Nixon won his primary handily, as was expected, and he will face Kenny Hulsdorf who barely managed (49-45%) to edge by Sarah Steelman for the GOP nod. Nixon is favored to win in November but after his most recent outburt of homophobic hysteria some of his financial support dried up.

There were two congressional races in Michigan people were watching and one in Kansas. The KS-02 race looked like it would be a re-match between radical right lunatic (and ex-Congressman) Jim Ryun and incumbent moderate Democrat, Nancy Boyda. But it appears that Ryun went down to a narrow defeat-- 51-49%-- to Lynn Jenkins. It's a pretty red district but Boyda has done a good job, is known as very independent-minded, and hasn't given the voters any reason to vote her out of office. A side show in Kansas was ex-Attorney General Phill Kline's running for re-election as District Attorney in Johnson County. He's the titular head of the Nazi-faction of the Kansas GOP and he had his head handed to him by a mainstream conservative, Steve Howe.

In Michigan's 7th CD, state Senator and Blue America-endorsee Mark Schauer beat a perennial vanity candidate-- who was the party nominee in 2006-- 66-34%. Schauer will face far right extremist Tim Walberg, a freshman, in November. The more complicated race was in MI-13, where incumbent Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick, mother of Detroit's unpopular, hapless and indicted mayor, drew two opponents, Mary Waters and Martha Scott. Aside from being the mother of the reviled mayor, Kilpatrick was a die-hard Hillary supporter, something that went over badly among African-American voters in MI-13, who overwhelmingly and enthusiastically supported Obama. It was neck and neck all night-- with Waters ahead most of the night-- until Kilpatrick's home turf came in late and put her ahead. She raised around $800,000 and her closest opponent, Waters, raised around $10,000.

The other hot race today was the Democratic senatorial primary run-off in Georgia. Moderate ex-state Rep. Jim Martin beat reactionary loon Vernon Jones, 59-41%. He'll be facing extremist Saxby Chambliss, one of Bush's most dependable Senate rubber stamps in November.

Rep. Steve Cohen & Obama

Tennessee holds its primary tomorrow and all eyes are on Memphis, where progressive freshman Steve Cohen, who is white and Jewish, is being challenged by a vicious anti-Semitic, racist pawn of ex-Congressman Harold Ford. It's been a very ugly race-- and the ugliness is all on one side, Nikki Tinker's. Steve Cohen was first elected in 2006 with the help of Blue America and we have enthusiastically endorsed him again. If you know anyone in Memphis, please call them and talk to them about this race. Cohen has been a real leader for working families and he is the only progressive congressman from Tennessee. Tinker is a complete corporate shill and far more conservative across a wide array of issues. Rahm Emanuel, a longtime ally of Ford's, has encouraged institutional support for Tinker and has prevented his DCCC pawn, Chris Van Hollen, from coming to the aid of Cohen, the way the DCCC and Nancy Pelosi backed other challenged incumbents like Kilpatrick yesterday and Al Wynn a few months ago. One of the most corrupt members of the Democratic Party, Gregory Meeks (NY) has been supporting Tinker, as has Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-Ohio). More progressive and respectable members of the Congressional Black Caucus like John Conyers and Jesse Jackson, Jr. have been campaigning for Cohen.


EMILY's List Embarrassed By Nikki Tinker's Racist Campaign

We were pretty disappointed when EMILY's List came out for Nikki Tinker in her anti-semitic, homophobic, racist jihad to turn a solidly Blue district reddish. I think they wish they had never gotten involved with this campaign of bigotry. The following statement was issued by Ellen Malcolm, president of EMILY's List, in response to recent ads run by the Nikki Tinker for Congress campaign: 
 
"We were shocked to see the recent ads run by the Nikki Tinker for Congress campaign.  We believe the ads are offensive and divisive.  EMILY's List does not condone or support these types of attacks."

Next time DLC Chair Harold Ford makes a recommendation, take it with a grain of salt.

WHEN I WAS VERY YOUNG MY GRANDPA TOLD ME TO NEVER TRUST NIXON... HE DIDN'T KNOW HOW PRESCIENT HE WAS-- DO YOU KNOW ABOUT MISSOURI'S JAY NIXON?

A pair of Nixons

You all excited about the Missouri governor's race? According to the newest SUSA poll (June 3), Obama is leading McCain 45-43% in this state which Bush won twice. The most recent polling for governor was a couple weeks ago and it shows Democrat Jay Nixon, the current Attorney General, absolutely slaughtering either of the wingnut contenders the GOP is mulling putting up, Kenny Hulsdorf or Sarah Steelman-- neither of whom can get above a third of the popular vote! Yippeee?

Not so fast, buckaroo. McCain may not know much about economics but I don't know much about Missouri politics. McCain admitted it and so do I. But a few days ago I learned something about my subject; (McCain, apparently has still learned nothing at all about his). Jay Nixon found someone to Sistah Souljah: gays and lesbians. He announced last week that, on behalf of Missouri, he is joining 10 other bigoted homophobes "in asking the California Supreme Court to delay enforcement of its ruling allowing gay marriages." Two days later the California Supreme Court ignored Nixon and the others and said gays can start getting married immediately, just like anyone else.

“Regardless of how California decides to proceed, Missouri does not recognize same-sex marriages performed in California or any other state,” Nixon spokesman Scott Holste said Tuesday.

However, Nixon said if gay couples marry in California and then come to Missouri, the state’s courts could face cases on issues ranging from child-support enforcement to employee benefit decisions.

Missouri voters amended the state constitution to ban same-sex marriages in 2004 [a move Nixon supported].

The California court’s May 15 ruling allows same-sex marriages in the state and is set to go into effect later this month.

...In his letter to the California court, Nixon emphasized Missouri’s opposition to gay marriage and said that there could be “human costs” for same-sex couples who marry in California and then come to Missouri.

“Some of those may be Missourians who, in good faith but without fully understanding Missouri law, may already be planning travel to California to be married,” Nixon wrote. “Others will be those in California or other states who are understandably ignorant of Missouri law and do not anticipate the problems that they may encounter later while traveling or residing in Missouri.”

The decision by Nixon, a Democrat running for governor, to join with the other states came after criticism from Republican Gov. Matt Blunt’s office for the attorney general’s silence on the issue.

In news releases, Blunt accused Nixon of ignoring the will of the people by not joining the other states in their request to the court.

When Nixon did take the step, he made sure to express his opposition to gay marriage.

“As attorney general, Jay Nixon supported the Missouri constitutional amendment to define marriage as being between a man and a woman and has consistently fought to protect traditional marriage,” Holste said.

The other Attorneys General attempting to persuade the Supreme Court to rule against gay people were Talis Colberg a wingnut Repug from Alaska; John Suthers, a bigoted Republican from Colorado; Florida's GOP crackpot Bill McCollum; Lawrence Wasden, a far right Republican from Idaho; Mike Cox, a virulent Repug gay-hater who stirred up hatred in Michigan when he ran 2002; lunatic fringe Republican Jon Brunning from Nebraska; Kelly Ayotte who is a vicious reactionary Republican from New Hampshire; Henry McMaster, another homophobic Republican from South Carolina; Larry Long, a Republican bigot from South Dakota; and Mark Shurtleff, a big McCain backer from Utah. All Republicans. And then there is Jay Nixon.

It sure would be nice to elect a Democrat in Missouri, wouldn't it? Should we give him a pass on this? Would we give him a pass if he buckled to right wing pressure to throw women under the bus? Hispanics? African-Americans? The elderly? The poor? Other targets of Republican divisiveness? Screw Jay Nixon. If he's going to behave like a Republican he shouldn't expect support from Democrats.

Within hours of arriving in Washington last week, Jane asked me to sit down and get to know a friend of hers, Paul Yandura. The name sounded familiar... "Oh, wait! That Paul Yandura! Isn't he suing Howard Dean?" "Well, not exactly," said Jane patiently. "But his partner, Donald Hitchcock, was fired by the DNC and he has a law suit against Dean."

I had introduced Jane to Governor Dean a month or two earlier and I figured she wanted me to help Paul and Donald figure out how to get out of this law suit. "No, I just want you to meet Paul. If you want him to, he'll tell you about the law suit but that's not the reason I want you two to meet each other."

The reason she did want me to meet Paul became apparent within a few minutes of our meeting 2 days ago. Paul rocks! He believes passionately in holding elected Democrats and Democratic Party functionaries accountable for upholding the values and principles that make us Democrats. To Paul, like me, showing up at the beginning of the term and voting for the Democratic leadership does not excuse acting like a Republican for the rest of the term. When I read about Nixon I immediately asked Paul for his insight into what looked like a total betrayal of our values, our principles and our families. Paul, one of the most dedicated and sincere Democrats I've ever met:

It is one thing to give a gay marriage “pass” to a candidate in a red state, but quite another when that candidate is proactively using the issue to define themselves, unnecessarily.
 
Being the only Democratic AG to support the letter, Nixon would do well to look around and realize the company that he is keeping. The Attorneys General races are usually overlooked, but in many cases it has been Democratic Attorneys General that have helped the fight against anti-gay ballot initiatives in certain states. Attorneys General wield power that can be helpful to the progressive cause, this is why many of us have focused on targeted races. In this case, where a current Attorney General is running for Governor, and is on record opposing gay marriage, AND there is no imminent threat to Missourians AND he is already on-record opposing marriage equality AND his state already has a constitutional amendment barring marriage equality-- he has taken an unneeded proactive stance, in an attempt to jump on the “me too” discrimination train.

In fact, the San Francisco City Attorney Dennis Herarra, who has filed an opposition to the request by the Attorneys General, told reporters that, "To further delay constitutional rights to gay and lesbian partners based on political conjecture as to whether or not an amendment will pass-- or even qualify for the ballot-- would be both unprecedented and inhumane." Except for Florida and New Hampshire, all of the Attorneys General states have constitutional provisions banning gay marriage.