President Donald Trump finally did what no-one in the Conservative Establishment would: calling out the Antifa (the “Alt Left” in his words) for sparking violence at the legally-sanctioned demonstration in Charlottesville: “You had a group on the other side that came charging in without permit,” the President said. “They were very violent” [Trump Says ‘Both Sides’ to Blame in Charlottesville Violence, Reversing Monday’s Stance, by Peter Nicholas, Wall Street Journal, August 15, 2017].
This is objectively a true statement. And it has sparked nothing short of shrieking hysteria from the Opposition Party, the far-Left journalists who are tirelessly working to overthrow the President of the United States and ruin the lives of everyone who voted for him.
But Donald Trump did say something questionable. He called James Alex Fields Jr., the man who allegedly drove a car that collided with a crowd of protesters and killed one person, a “murderer.” He thundered:
“I want to know the facts. The driver of the car is a disgrace to himself, his family, and his country. You can call it terrorism. You can call it murder. You can call it whatever you want. And then you get into legal semantics. The driver of the car is a murderer, and what he did is a horrible thing.”
[Trump: The Driver Of The Car Is A Disgrace To His Country, “Terrorist,” Murderer, by Tim Hains, RealClearPolitics, August 15, 2017]
Needless to say, Trump will get no credit for these words. And perhaps he shouldn’t. Especially when it follows a statement about wanting to “know the facts,” it is wildly premature to call James Fields a “murderer.” There is a surprisingly good chance he will be acquitted—or, perhaps more likely, convicted of a lesser offense such as manslaughter. This is exactly what happened with George Zimmerman, Officer Darren Wilson and a long list of other Main Stream Media lynching victims (including most notoriously South Charleston police officer Michael Slager, whose murder charges were ultimately dropped).
The key fact which the Main Stream Media is concealing: the Antifa Communists were allowed, and indeed, encouraged, to run wild and attack people after the police broke up the #UniteTheRight rally. This included taking over the streets, something you would think would not be allowed after Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe had declared a “State of Emergency” in order to break up the rally. As Rebel Media’s Faith Goldy pointed out on the scene, this was a blatant double standard.
Not surprisingly, when heavily armed far-Left psychopaths are marching around looking for people to attack, there is violence. And this includes attacking people in cars. Antifa and Black Lives Matter activists have long practiced trapping people in cars before attacking them. An eyewitness reported that this was precisely what was being done to James Fields. Taylor Lorenz of The Hill made several points:
For good reason.
Though there are many conspiracy theories out there, let’s accept that Fields was the driver. He plowed into the crowd, and then, damningly, backed up and hit more people.
However, video evidence shows his car was quickly set upon by a mob wielding bats, who smashed his back windows and would presumably have smashed his skull had he not backed out quickly. That’s clearly self-defense.
What about the initial plunge into the crowd? Video evidence shows the car was struck before hitting anyone—meaning Fields could have panicked and hit the gas.
Most importantly, he did not accelerate after hitting the crowd, he braked and paused. He threw the car into reverse only when his window was smashed.
Fields’ car also shows signs of having sustained damage before encountering the crowd—meaning a confused and frightened Fields was driving around a town he didn’t know, perhaps chased by Antifa, and then hit the gas when his car was struck. Already, there are reports saying that just this occurred [Eyewitnesses: James Fields’ Car Was ‘Attacked,’ Police Set Up Rally-Goers To Be Assaulted, by Patrick Howley, Big League Politics, August 14, 2017]
And obviously, regardless of the exact circumstances, none of this would have happened had Charlottesville police simply done (or been allowed to do) their job and prevented riots in the streets.
Of course, Fields does appear to be a troubled kid. Though all groups at the rally deny he was a member, he was apparently not there by happenstance. [Alleged driver of car that plowed into Charlottesville crowd was a Nazi sympathizer, former teacher says, by T. Rees Shapiro, Alice Crites, Laura Vozzella, and John Woddrow Cox, Washington Post, August 13, 2017] He allegedly threatened his own mother. [‘Very threatening’: Mother of Charlottesville suspect James A. Fields called 911 twice, by Arelis Hernandez, Jack Gillum, Michael Miller and Steve Hendrix, Washington Post, August 14, 2017] He flunked out of the Army and may suffer from mental disorders, including schizophrenia. [What We Know About James Alex Fields, the Driver Charged In The Charlottesville Attack, by Margaret Hartmann, New York, August 14, 2017]
Of course his politics will be presented as relevant in the trial, used to support the motive that Fields ruthlessly and deliberately tried to kill as many people as possible. But is this really relevant?
Consider the case of Epic Beard Man, Thomas Bruso, an older white man who was accosted on a bus and defended himself against a black man, becoming an Internet celebrity. Though Bruso did not start the fight, he used Politically Incorrect language and apparently had a history of mental illness.
Should he have been convicted of a crime? Of course not. And in fact he was not.
Similarly, Fields may have views that many people consider repugnant. He may have committed actions in his past that are deeply troubling or even disgusting. But the key question in the upcoming trial is not whether he is a good or bad person, but whether he was attacked and in fear for his life.
Certainly it seems unquestionable at this point that the Narrative claiming he deliberately tried to kill his as many people as possible by backing up is totally false.
What remains to be seen is what happened in the critical seconds not captured on video, before Fields approached the crowd in his car. These will determine whether he was trying to run the crowd down or just to escape.
Needless to say, many people will not care about this. They will simply insist Fields must be convicted because he allegedly has “racist” sympathies, attended a “racist” rally, and put himself in a position where he was likely to be attacked.
Which of course was the MSM case against George Zimmerman. He was quickly pronounced guilty by the MSM after the death of Trayvon Martin. The MSM argument: Zimmerman should never have approached Martin, that in some way he had brought Martin’s attack on himself. And the FBI’s investigation included interviewing witnesses to determine whether George Zimmerman was a “racist”. [Witnesses tell FBI that George Zimmerman is no racist, by Ashley Hayes, CNN, July 13, 2012]. They could find no evidence he was.
(Presumably, if they had, Zimmerman would have met a different fate. It’s called Equal Justice).
Obviously, the evidence already exists to suggest Fields is “racist,” whatever that means in today’s hysterically anti-white society. Indeed, with the all the video evidence already in the public domain and all the other evidence that will emerge during the investigation, Fields’s “racism” may be the only real evidence the prosecution has for the charge of murder.
If Fields is acquitted, or convicted of a lesser charge, this country may see further riots like the ones that followed the acquittal of the officers who arrested Rodney King—which apparently scared our Ruling Class permanently.
But if Fields is convicted of murder, it may be another example of a System using “exemplary sentencing” to tell Whites this isn’t their country any more—and that the Constitution no longer applies to those who have the wrong, Politically Incorrect, opinions.
James Kirkpatrick [Email him] is a Beltway veteran and a refugee from Conservatism Inc.