“It’s Not The Same Group”: Minnesota Attorney General Under Fire Distinction Between The National Guard And Police

Screen Shot 2020-05-31 at 7.05.37 AMMinnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison is facing criticism for a curious distinction that he drew in a message to protesters about how they should treat the national guard versus the police.  Ellison has been in a difficult spot over the rioting following the death of George Floyd in an arrest by the Minneapolis Police Department.  I thought he did well in a recent interview in resisting pressure to declare the officers clearly guilty and cautioned that everyone should allow the system to work in the bringing of any criminal charges.  On this occasion, however, he seemed to throw the police, including state police and other assisting jurisdictions, under the bus.


Ellison alluded to the same point that we discussed yesterday, in quoting Martin Luther King, on how rioting is the voice of the unheard.  He told the public that this is how the “unheard get heard” and  “Don’t just dismiss that and ignore it and relegate it to just criminality and bad behavior. Actually ask yourself what’s going on there.”

“I’d like everyone to recognize the fact that the National Guard just a week ago was administering COVID-19 tests to help people. The presence you see on the street, don’t react to them the way you might react to the Minneapolis Police Department. It’s not the same group. They have different leadership, different authority, and their job is to try to bring peace and calm back again. Please remember that this is not the group that you associate with unfair conduct.”

Given the attacks on police, that would seem a glaring distinction for officers trying to stop the looting and rioting.  There are a variety of different police departments working together to protect the city, including a large contingent of state police.  Moreover, the Attorney General of the state should be asking citizens to treat all officers with respect and consideration in “reacting to them.”  All of the police, including the Minneapolis Police Department, has the “job … to try to bring peace and calm back.”

In fairness, Ellison did encourage everyone to protest “peacefully” in the press conference and his words supporting describing the good works routinely done by the Guard (including Covid testing) is well taken.  However, the distinction with the local police was striking and, no doubt for many officers, chilling.

As a Chicagoan, I was reminded of the statement of Mayor Richard Daley during the 1968 riots at the Democratic National Convention when he declared

“The confrontation was not created by the police; the confrontation was created by the people who charged the police. Gentlemen, let’s get the thing straight, once and for all. The policeman isn’t there to create disorder; the policeman is there to preserve disorder.”

That was a telling Freudian slip for Daley who encouraged the crackdown on protesters.  This appears a distinction that Ellison was struggling to draw in how citizens should react to police as opposed to the Guard in the streets. With officers being injured across the city, it was the wrong distinction to make at the wrong time.



70 thoughts on ““It’s Not The Same Group”: Minnesota Attorney General Under Fire Distinction Between The National Guard And Police”

    1. After watching how the coup cabal stays free, and the elite almost never sits or sits pretty for 13 months like Epstein, it’s hard to blame them.
      I predict their no cash bail thing though is screwy – what they need to do is take the stats and calculate with known past cases, the egregious of the elite, vs the rabble, and then twist their bill around so the elite sit and rabble goes free. I’d accept anything less as a failure on their part. They will fail.

  1. Love Ellison and I love how turley disrespected him on Twitter by calling him Marc Ellison. Coward.

  2. Hillary’s running mate, Tim Kaine’s son is an Antifa thug. Nice job parenting Tim Kaine. Thank god you are not the VP. Too bad you are still a senator.

    1. Sorry, a black brick wall is too much of a racist dog signal whistle for me, pass.

      1. 38 seconds Chicago clip: The racist cop sexually assaults his white female defender by punching her in the crotch.

        Racism against whites should not be tolerated like this, whites are so oppressed they get sexually assaulted when clearly trying to peacefully help.

        Stretch out ! Don’t crotch punch !
        Stretch out ! Don’t crotch punch !
        Stretch out ! Don’t crotch punch !

    1. They shot white people because they are racist police and racism against whites is getting really bad. They were on their own front porch on their own property. Racism is rampant there, with surrounding majority black regions pushing this!

  3. I give Ellison a pass on the whole making a distinction between the National Guard and Police thing. I have been very much against almost everything the guy says on anything in the past, but on this one, making the distinction (while the police aren’t going to like it) doesn’t seem like Ellison was trying to justify violence against police officers but instead was meant to try and calm people a bit by saying, look, the National Guard did not kill Floyd, they probably would like to be doing other things too. He understands the anger but don’t carry that over to people that had no part of this.

  4. Turley should be fired. He shouldn’t be teaching any law students just his crackpot followers on here like Paul and mezo and that killer Darren smith

    1. I bet TurleyIsACoward is actually a foreign troll or some deluded Trumper attempting to make us think he’s a liberal.

      1. Yes, it’s a Russian for Trump’s re-election, you’re saying, but not directly.
        Dial 1-800-Adam-Schiff
        You know I know when a conspiracy is real. Hi Seth.

  5. I can’t believe it when the liberal left call the founding fathers liberals. Somehow I don’t think George Washington and Co. were into big social welfare programs and subsidies for public housing or EBT cards. I do think they believed in charity, which would be personal, but not the government helping itself to a large chunk of your paycheck too pay someone else’s bills. No, I think the founding fathers were libertarians. There is a big difference between the 2 groups.

    1. Actually, the Founding Fathers were “liberals” but not in the context that is considered “liberal” today. They, rather, were “classical liberals,”” which, by the way, are true conservatives. Progressives, whose philosophies are derived from Marxism, have appropriated the “liberal” term, with the help of pseudo-conservatives who apply the label.

  6. Too bad very few read the basic law of the land.

    Riots in their varied forms are by definition violent, Therefor illegal. The responding government agency can be police or some other form of law enforcement or the military. Both are from two or three levels. the first is local, State or Federal. thie second is federal military or State military.

    The National Guard is funded up to 95% by the federal government, Congress provides the regulations for ALL the military. It can be activated by the Governor or The President. State Militias on the other hand are not federal but are very few and far between.

    Now back to the basic law. Bill of Rights The very first article states two items that apply. One is Free Speech. the Second is The right to peaceful assembly. Neither has anything to do with Rioting or under it’s common name Mobocracy.

    They do draw attention for sure. Pepper Spray, Pepper Foggers. Water Cannon, at one end of the list of choices. Loaded rifles etc. at the other end. Riots are a former of civil insurrection and like a Resistance Movement are illegal. A particularly humorous to me was the use of the word Resistance by elected official as it wipes out their protection while in session and also worse the call by the left for martial law.

    Which would mean them being the first ones handcuffed and taken before a military tribunal with… as they often try to do to we citizens… no civil rights.

    Mobocracy style acts such as rioting can also legally be described as Act of or supporting Acts of Terrorism.

  7. Normally, I find Mr. Turley’s opinions compelling, but in this instance Mr. Turley has got it flipped.

    Mr. Turley, you are wrong!

    Mr. Turley writes, “Given the attacks on police…”

    Given the attacks on police? Given the attacks on police?

    Mr. Turley, don’t get it twisted.

    Who is attacking whom?

    Given the Palestinian attacks on Israel…

    Given the South African attacks on the Afrikaaner enforcers…

    Given the the attacks of the slaves on the task master…

    Which side are you on, Mr. Turley?

    I would have you attend the protest and then tell me who attacks whom.

    Your professorship, law degree, and polished mannerisms won’t protect you from the police.

    1. There was no “attack” on anyone in the arrest of George Floyd, who was a convicted felon and who had just passed a counterfeit $20.00 bill. According to the medical examiner, his death was caused by a combination of heart problems and stress, not asphyxiation. He refused to get in the police vehicle and dropped to the ground while struggling with the officers. Granted, the procedure of holding a suspect to the ground with a knee is controversial but it was approved by the Minneapolis PD. The attacks were by the mob on police, not only in Minneapolis but in other cities all around the country.

      1. Thank you for your response.

        I’m referring to a larger phenomenon — the phenomenon of the United States as a warfare state, at home and abroad.

        I’m wont to remember that this country was founded on a revolution against monarchy, and to monarchical rule we have returned.

        We no longer live in a constitutional republic — the legitimacy of the state has deteriorated to a such an extent. The Rule of Law applies only to the poor, and applies so with a heavy hand.

        The ship of state has been apprehended by monopolists and oligarchs.

        We live in economic collapse and plague, with no redress.

        This is a failed state — this is the third world.

        We have a responsibility as patriotic Americans to right this ship of state.

        It is our responsibility to draw light on ‘the system.’

        The working poor of the United States are the same as the working poor all across the world.

        Our political leaders, our giants of industry, do not so much as extend a hand, crumbs.

        This country is rigged. The system is rigged.

        The jig is up.

        This country’s destiny belongs to the masses, the poor folk.

        1. Wow a sensible follower of this blog who has actually read many books and not just those that support this strange American exceptionalism that’s found on here and propagated by turley

  8. This joker on meet the depressed claiming we have no idea who are the agitators are in Minneapolis.

    Seriously, GTFO.

    Read between the lines. The agitators are his antifa allies and he refuses to acknowledge that publicly. Why would MN elect a man who hates our Republic to be its AG? The DOJ should be investigating Keith Ellison.

  9. AG Ellison is a radical THUG himself. The people who elected him need to remove him, the Governor, Mayors and etc. What away to run a state. This is what you get when you elect radical left Liberals and you are seeing this across the country, poor MGMT, poor Leadership.

    1. Sources say Keith Ellison is coordinating with Antifa. It appears Ellison deleted the photo of himself posing with the Antifa Handbook last year. Subpoena Keith Ellison.

    1. Anonymous:
      “The enemy is you.”
      To you and yours? Sure and always have been; even sworn to be. And thanks to the Second Amendment, I’m ready. Consider me the alpha dog to your pussy cat. Lol

        1. It comes as no surprise you know what the Russians want. After all, you’ve spent nearly 4 years pimping their propaganda in an effort to sabotage our national security.

          1. If you’re not aware that Russia wants a weaker U.S. and is trying to foment domestic conflict as part of their strategy, you’re not paying attention.
            Just one example of the many reports out there about it: startribune.com/russia-trying-to-stoke-racial-strife-u-s-officials-say/570900002/

                1. Thanks for the grade school retort.

                  If you’re not aware that Russia wants a weaker U.S. and is trying to foment domestic conflict as part of their strategy, you’re not paying attention.

                  I will now identify how you failed. I said: pimping their propaganda in an effort to sabotage our national security.

                  their is in reference to Russia. sabotage our national security, is in reference to what their propaganda is intended to do to our country. This propaganda has been accepted domestically by Democrats and their cohorts within the IC/FBI/DOJ and MSM as a weapon against this administration.

                  Now, prove what you’re committed to, because it sure hasn’t been to anything resembling honest.

                  1. I pitched my retort at the same level as the comment of yours that I was responding to, so if you think they’re both “grade school retort[s],” so be it.

                    You told bythebook “It comes as no surprise you know what the Russians want,” and I was pointing out to you that *anyone* paying attention to the news knows what they want. It’s no surprise that btb knows what they want, since s/he pays attention to the news. BTW, I hope you understand how conditional (if-then) statements work: if the condition is false, then the consequent doesn’t follow.

                    You claim that bythebook has “spent nearly 4 years pimping [Russian] propaganda in an effort to sabotage our national security.” You provide no evidence of this. What he wrote above certainly doesn’t constitute “pimping [Russian] propaganda in an effort to sabotage our national security.”

                    Your claim that “This [Russian] propaganda has been accepted domestically by Democrats and their cohorts within the IC/FBI/DOJ and MSM as a weapon against this administration” is foolish. Russian propaganda has been accepted by some people throughout the political spectrum and rejected by other people throughout the political spectrum. Trump is actually a significant purveyor of Russian propaganda, such as his ridiculous claims that the “[FBI] gave the [DNC] server to CrowdStrike … I still want to see that server. You know the FBI’s never gotten that server. That’s a big part of this whole thing. Why did they give it to a Ukranian company?” and “The [DNC] server, they say Ukraine has it.” The servers (plural) were never given to anyone. Both Crowdstrike and the FBI got byte-by-byte images. The idea that Ukraine rather than Russia hacked the DNC servers is Russian propaganda.

                    If you actually care about the U.S., figure out how to discuss Russia propaganda honestly. They want people to place partisanship over honesty. I’m not going to overgeneralize about Republicans just because they’d like me to, and you shouldn’t overgeneralize about Democrats.

                    “prove what you’re committed to, because it sure hasn’t been to anything resembling honest.”

                    For the umpteenth time, if you think I’ve said something false, all you have to do is quote it and provide evidence that it’s false, and if you’re correct (e.g., if your evidence isn’t cherrypicked), I’ll have no problem saying I was wrong. But you making accusations without quoting anything from me that’s false doesn’t cut it.

  10. This crisis has revealed what a weak and rudderless group of elected officials there are in these Democrat strongholds. Where else would you find a supporter of the Nation of Islam and Farrakan elected to be a state Attorney General of all things! And don’t tell me he was just a young man then. He was a law student which means that after having been to college he still supported a group that called for the eradication of Jews. But he is pretty and a person of color, hates President Trump and is for all of the woke things. In Minnesota, that’s apparently all you need to hold high public office. Minnesota (and much of the country) is paying a heavy price for its embrace of these feckless Democrats.

    1. “This crisis has revealed what a weak and rudderless group of elected officials there are in these Democrat strongholds”

      Cherrypicking and overgeneralizations are common fallacies.

      There are Democratic strongholds around the country, and the responses have been quite varied (if you want evidence of that, consider the responses in places like Atlanta and Newark). There are Republican strongholds around the country, and their responses have been quite varied as well.

      “Where else would you find a supporter of the Nation of Islam and Farrakan…”

      You mean former supporter. His beliefs were wrong, but he’s certainly not the only politician who has had wrong beliefs. FFS, there are people in office who have bigoted beliefs to this day: current racists, current anti-semites, current Islamophobes, current sexists, …

    2. The democrats have been supporting antifa for many years. Take the McCauliffe governorship. Take any number of democrat mayors and their commands on down the line during antifa violence.
      We heard the lie Russia wanted Trump. That failed, Brennan exposed, we heard the generic Russia wanted to sow division here.
      As if it takes Russia, or that Russia could help sowing division better than our msm, our democrats like the absolutey lying for 3.6 years Adam Schiff and democrat company…all voting in unison for a total lie.

      So, Russia is by choice powerless in this matter and of course smart to remain so on purpose, they wouldn’t dare try to mess up the democrats own dirty deeds against the USA by any action that could slow down that success by being noticed.
      That’s also why the democrats in charge of it all for years never gave specifics – that would expose part of the currently long running democrat political strategy.

  11. Not everybody who is out in the streets believes the same thing.
    There are people who believe that change can be had through the ballot box and there are others who believe that will never happen and change will only come when the power structure is threatened with violence.

    1. And the latter are called enemies who should be repelled by the military. You wanna play revolutionary, you get the fate of most revolutionaries.

      1. “And the latter are called enemies ”

        That was exactly what the loyalists said 250 years ago

        1. Of course the difference being these revolutionarIes have the intellectual candle power of someone like Anonymous not Jefferson or Madison. Oh yeah and the founders weren’t Marxist’s either.

          1. And these “revolutionaries” have no courage. The only reason they are doing what they are is because they believe they can get away with it. That is why a strong, immediate law enforcement response would have ended the riots before they began. By contrast, our founders knew that they had signed their own death warrants if the revolution failed. Big difference.

            1. HLM:
              Yeah they’re the Starbucks revolutionaries who sip latte over readings of the Frankfurt School and then step out onto the sidewalk to throw a brick at a police horse. Very Che!

    2. Violence is only acceptable when the government has become an intolerable oppressor. That is the essence of the 2nd amendment. Looting and destroying private property has never been accepted nor is it legal.

      We must shut down the rhetoric of those who advocate for violence against private citizens as a means to achieve a political end, that is pure deception and amelioration of a problem mostly stemming from the great democrat disaster of their failed experiment – The Great Society – which gave us this generational welfare class of flotsam.

  12. For God’s sake … what idiots voted for this man?

    Send him to Gitmo with Soros and the other antifa losers.

  13. No problem with the column or criticism of Ellison, but sloppier reasoning with malicious intent is a daily feature of Trump tweets and comments and rarely warrant a column by JT. We’ll get a “I have often criticized the President for (insert outrageous Trump BS) ….”, except he doesn’t in columns. Given Trump’s unfitness to be president and regular lowering of the bar for personal behavior by teenagers, let alone our President, I know it would be repetitious, but that’s kind of the point, isn’t it?

    It’s hard to assume a mantle of a moral and legal critic guardian when you are daily and pointedly ignoring the moral and legal failings of the most powerful man in the world, and one by the way the people have the power to remove shortly..

    1. Could you please cite any legal failings of this man. approved leftist talking points do not count.

      1. I note you don’t challenge his daily moral failings.

        Obstruction of Justice to start with, fraud (NY State and So Ditrict of NY await his WH exit) campaign finance violations (paid off National Enquirer), failure to execute Congressional appropriation (see GAO report on Ukraine), exhorting violence, defamation, sexual assault. Is that enough?

        Other than that he’s a fine example of manhood for our children to emulate.

        1. OoJ, LAUGHING – a total fantasy, never one seen before so completely absent of a single word concerning the actions
          Trump should be able to sue all of those on the other side of that for whatever is appropriate 5 million bucks each….

          “We came up empty, we lied, for years, we were empty at the start and knew it” “Um… oh yeah…. umm… Trump stopped us…”
          YOU PEOPLE TRULY ARE THE SICKEST CREEPS EVER. The creep level is 100X nixons, maybe 1000 the dirty tricks level

          campaign fin LAUGHING – another lib fantasy something never or nearly never prosecuted, it is fined by gov agency while in office – otherwise Bill Clinton and al gore would be in prison for 1,000 years each. Hillary too.

          GAO Ukraine, Obama and biden can block a billion for their own crime, but not Trump … LAUGHING

          the last 3 a schmear whatever…

          So literally nothing but your own sides crimes on the initial 3.

          4,5 yeah whatever – another joke – how about Obama executing Americans with drones as a counter to exhorting violence in a tweet
          5 defamation ‘ LAUGHING- the most defamed potus ever x1000 – frankly he can say whatever he wants about any of you, it’s deserved
          6 Clinton is the king and you let him off the hook for many rapes, you’ve got nothing but some awesome camaraderie in a bus.

          6. Speaking of that, if you had a brain… well wait you can’t it destroys your fake other point… I HAVE PROBLEM with the bus talk but not the one you idiots blabbered about lying about it outright like tards…
          Trump said he went after this woman, went after her hard… he even took her out and bought her furniture… but he couldn’t get there, she wouldn’t let him….she was MARRIED.

          I have a problem with that. That’s my criticism of Trump. If he could have he would have ? He had better not let me find out he has. Of course you never bring it up because it proves when rebuffed he accepts that.

    1. Oh, I think they’re directly tied to his jihadi beliefs just like his brutal subjugation of his former girlfriend. Know your enemy, doc.

Leave a Reply