Would Kamala Harris Have Prosecuted the Newton Pro-Israel Shooter?
Would Kamala Harris Have Prosecuted the Newton Pro-Israel Shooter?
Plus, David Brooks deserves a correction
David Brooks’s claim about Vice President Harris that “Her good cheer and compassion contrasts with the atmosphere of bitterness and indignation that has enveloped us for a decade” was the topic of a brief in the previous newsletter. The column is in print in today’s New York Times and it is worth returning to. Brooks wrote: “People can be up in arms for only so long. The wearier we grow with American carnage catastrophizing, Trump seems not just monstrous but, worse, stale.”
Here are some excerpts from the White House transcript of Harris’s remarks yesterday in Greensboro, N.C.:
we remember how we got here. Donald Trump hand-selected three members of the United States Supreme Court with the intention —
AUDIENCE: Booo —
THE VICE PRESIDENT: — with the intention that they would undo the protections of Roe v. Wade — with the intention they would undo the protections. And they did exactly as he intended. And now, more than 20 states have a Trump abortion ban, including North Carolina —
AUDIENCE: Booo —
THE VICE PRESIDENT: — and every single state in the South except Virginia, many with no exceptions even for rape and incest. It is immoral — immoral….
here’s the thing. This is not 2016 or 2020. The stakes are even higher, because two months ago, the United States Supreme Court basically told the former president that he will effectively be immune no matter what he does in the White House.
AUDIENCE: Booo —
THE VICE PRESIDENT: … imagine — imagine what that court ruling means. Imagine what that means. Because before, there might have been at least the — the belief that there would be the threat of consequence, but now there’s an explicit ruling from the court that suggests he would be immune.
Imagine Donald Trump with no guardrails.
AUDIENCE: Booo —
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Imagine what that would look like. He who has vowed, if reelected, he will be a dictator on day one.
AUDIENCE: Booo —
THE VICE PRESIDENT: He who called for the, quote, “termination” of the Constitution of the United States.
She gave a version of the same speech hours earlier in Charlotte, N.C.: “Because of Trump’s abortion bans, women are being refused care during miscarriages. Some are only being treated if they develop sepsis.”
It sounds pretty indignant, pretty up in arms, to me. It’s also interesting to see how much of Harris’s message is negative—essentially, stop Trump before he establishes a dictatorship and terminates the constitution—versus how much is positive talk about her plans. The North Carolina speeches were tilted toward the negative. It certainly is catastrophizing. Some people may figure it’s justified because a second Trump term would indeed be a catastrophe. My point here is just to say if you are stuck reading David Brooks’ description of Kamala Harris rather that actually watching Kamala Harris, you’ll be getting a misleading, inaccurate description of what she is up to.
Where were the editors? Maybe the Times will run a correction on the column: “A David Brooks column that appeared in Friday’s Times incorrectly said Vice President Harris’s campaign lacks indignation.”
We’ve got so much good cheer to spare over here that we hope Brooks and the Times keep getting it wrong. It provides us with plenty of rich material. It also offers a reason for those indignant at the inaccuracies of the Times to become paying subscribers here at The Editors.
The vice president, the Middlesex D.A., and the Newton shooting: The Middlesex County district attorney’s office in Massachusetts may seem far away from the White House, but stay with me for a moment and notice some parallels.
On September 11, Vice President Harris issued a “Statement from Vice President Kamala Harris on Aysenur Eygi.” It was pretty harsh on Israel. It said:
The killing of Aysenur Eygi is a horrific tragedy that never should have happened. Doug and I are keeping her family and loved ones in our prayers. Aysenur was peacefully protesting in the West Bank—standing up against the expansion of settlements—when her young life was senselessly cut short. No one should be killed for participating in a peaceful protest. The shooting that led to her death is unacceptable and raises legitimate questions about the conduct of IDF personnel in the West Bank. Israel must do more to ensure that incidents like this never happen again.
Israel’s preliminary investigation indicated it was the result of a tragic error for which the IDF is responsible. We will continue to press the government of Israel for answers and for continued access to the findings of the investigation so we can have confidence in the results. There must be full accountability.
The United States will continue to hold accountable anyone in the West Bank – Israelis and Palestinians – who stokes violence and undermines peace and stability.
In reality the protest in which Eygi was participating was not “peaceful.” An Israel Defense Forces statement September 10 described it as “a violent riot in which dozens of Palestinian suspects burned tires and hurled rocks toward security forces at the Beita Junction.” The IDF preliminary inquiry found “it is highly likely that she was hit indirectly and unintentionally by IDF fire which was not aimed at her, but aimed at the key instigator of the riot.”
The organization with which Eygi was in the West Bank, the International Solidarity Movement, describes itself as nonviolent but, according to NGO Monitor, also expresses support for “armed struggle.” After October 7, 2023, the International Solidarity Movement issued a statement claiming, “the root cause of the current violence is Israeli occupation and settler colonialism.”
The Middlesex County District Attorney, Marian Ryan, is, like Harris, also siding with an anti-Israel activist who was shot. Ryan has brought criminal charges against Scott Hayes, a Framingham, Massachusetts Iraq War veteran whose defenders say was attacked by a young man wearing a Palestinian flag pin. An online fundraiser to support Hayes has racked up more than $133,000 (and rapidly climbing) in donations from nearly 2,000 donors in less than 24 hours.
Massachusetts law on self-defense has a lot of nuances about “duty to retreat” and “excessive force” and “mutual combat.” Middlesex County includes Somerville and Cambridge where some jurors are so far left they might vote to convict someone of genocide merely for carrying an American or Israeli flag.
The Newton, Massachusetts case, some of which was captured in dramatic video footage, is attracting a lot of national attention. “We stand with Scott Hayes, who was defending himself after being attacked by a pro-Hamas maniac in Massachusetts,” the Republican Jewish Coalition said.
Kassy Akiva, the Daily Wire reporter who has been leading the way on the story, reports that Hayes pleaded not guilty at an arraignment on the charge of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, and that he’ll be released on $5,000 bail with an ankle monitor and instructions to stay away from Newton and from weapons.
Anyway, once the idea gets out that the pro-Israel side is wrongly shooting peaceful anti-Israel protesters, it spreads fast, whether it’s from Harris or from the Middlesex County District Attorney, and regardless of whether it is true. I don’t want anyone shot. Yet the pace of the online fundraising for Hayes is quite an indicator of how widespread is the feeling that violent anti-Israel protesters warrant a forceful response. It is also a sign of the widespread view that the rush to judgment by disapproving Democratic politicians, whether at the local or national level, is unseemly.
Thank you: If you can spare the $8 a month or $80 a year, please become a paying subscriber to The Editors. We are not shooting anyone, thank goodness, but we we try to tell it like it is. Your support sustains our independent journalism and continued growth and will ensure your continued complete access.
And if you know someone who’d like reading this newsletter, please share it.