Military and Police

Sen. Elizabeth Warren: All Criminal Justice Representatives are Racist, ‘Front to Back’

Speaking before the Congressional Black Caucus on August 4, 2018, Massachusetts Democrat Senator Elizabeth Warren cast an ugly net across every practitioner among our nation’s entire criminal justice institution. Her unambiguous, irrevocable slander is as follows: “The hard truth about our criminal justice system: It’s racist…I mean front to back.” If I were to ponder that malignant statement with the intention of granting any benefit of the doubt—seeking something benign or just, you know…out of context—I’d sadly come up empty.

“It’s racist…front to back” is tantamount to saying every…single…agent representing justice is a hater. Every police officer, deputy sheriff, prosecutor, judge, parole officer, game warden, probation officer, hearing officer, magistrate, corrections officer, wildlife officer, bailiff, tribal cop, postal inspector and federal agent…is a racist; that is what Ms. Warren would have you believe. Like mud-painting with a new mop, those are pretty broad, soiled brush strokes, folks. That is as unilateral as it gets. As such, I am eager to witness the smarmy dance perpetrated by Mrs. Warren when those whom she insulted step forward to address the cud she spewed.

Nobly, some of Senator Warren’s own constituents in Massachusetts responded with decorum and decency, asking her to clarify her remarks. Particularly, I didn’t have to wait very long at all for police executives and justice officials to knock on Warren’s door and request qualifications for her insidious invective.

First up at bat is Massachusetts Chief of Police Association President Steven J. Wojnar, also the police chief leading the Dudley Police Department. Chief Wojnar submitted a written request to Sen. Warren, seeking “an explanation” for her “generalized and inflammatory statements.”

Chief Wojnar elucidated: “As a police chief in your home state of Massachusetts, as well as the statewide association representative, I am extremely troubled by this statement. Labeling the entire criminal justice profession as ‘racist’ spreads false and damaging information about our members.”

US Attorney General Jeff Sessions got in the mix of rebuking Sen. Warren’s vitriolic verbiage. On August 8, AG Sessions said, “One of my most important goals as Attorney General is to help restore officer morale. In recent years, too many of you were taken for granted, ignored, or even maligned by political leaders. President Trump came into office determined to change that. But even now, there are still many politicians who don’t appreciate you.” Ding-ding!

Mr. Sessions continued his defense of and support for criminal justice professionals: “Earlier this week, a U.S. Senator called our justice system ‘racist…And when I say our system, I mean all the way. I mean front to back…on the front end—what you declare to be illegal—[and] on how you enforce it, on who gets arrested.’ This is a slander of every law officer and every prosecutor in America. And, frankly, I think it is an insult to their families and to the crime victims they have helped to face their attacker. And so this slur isn’t just wrong. It’s sad.”

With precision, Yarmouth police Chief Frank G. Frederickson hit the nail on the head when he reminded Sen. Warren of her apparent hypocrisy, saying, “It is bothersome that a short time ago Sen. Warren made some efforts to pay respects to Sgt. Sean Gannon and Sgt. Michael Chesna who lost their lives while protecting us all. Sen. Warren’s recent statement tarnished us all and diminished the sincerity of her condolence efforts.

“I now cannot trust her actions or words are real. I have a lot of respect for those who serve in elected positions, even though we may disagree at times. However, statements like this are disrespectful and divisive. In spite of what Sen. Warren said, the Yarmouth Police Department will continue to serve ALL people with dignity and fairness.”

Writing for The Whisky Patriots, Kyle S. Reyes sized-up Sen. Warren quite well: “It’s pretty easy to see which side of [the thin blue line] Elizabeth Warren stands on. Law? No, illegals. Order? No, chaos and disruption. Those who serve and protect? No, those who she believes will vote for her—legally or not.” Pure pandering at the expense of people she’s never even met.

In that regard, you likely heard, saw, or smelled chum in the waters regarding Sen. Warren’s alluded-to presidential run in 2020. I hazard to guess what public safety entities she will try to tap for endorsements. Fraternal Order of Police? Police Benevolent Association? American Bar Association representing prosecutors and public defenders?

Since Sen. Warren’s lash sounded rather empirical, what does that say for our military police officers and JAGs? Is the Military Tribunal gelled along with stateside criminal justice processors? After all, it is a durable fabric representing American society and national security, with specialized uniforms, practicing jurisprudence among a vastly diverse populace of selfless volunteers. Lump them in?

No law-and-order official operating under the American criminal justice umbrella could argue against our nation’s wheels of justice. It is one of myriad reasons I and others dedicated our lives, some of whom were lost in the course of duty, to public service and constitutional implementations on behalf of United States citizens.

As Mr. Sessions tells it with candor and realism: “We have inherited and advanced the greatest justice system in the history of the world. Is it perfect? Of course not. But we are blessed to live under this system and to be stewards of it.  I’d like to know whose justice system this Senator would prefer. The law officers who serve under this system do heroic work that enables us to live in peace.

“Rather than deriding officers like you, Senators could be helpful and give you the tools that you need to be successful.” In that specific regard, continual reports underscore that the anti-police climate is likely playing a role in law enforcement officer recruitment with particular regard to severely reduced candidate applications. Simply, the anti-cop rhetoric and hateful diatribe such as that propagated by Sen. Warren and others like her are largely attributed to why police candidates are dissuaded and refraining from joining the justice ranks.

Are Senator Warren’s words a swift smack in the criminal-justice face from someone who is bucking for the White House while capitalizing on the wafting winds of anti-police sentiments? If so, is that the kind of character-caliber worthy of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? What about Secret Service agents who safeguard the presidency? They are justice officials, too.

How do elected officials hypocritically countering hatred from others with boldly hateful remarks muster the ability to nuzzle into a pillow at night? How are such purveyors of propaganda re-elected? How do we tell loved ones of slain or living police personnel that the woman pictured in the cover photo above thinks their grandpa, father, mother, husband, wife, brother, sister, child, cousin or neighbor are categorical discriminators…and that she may want your vote in 2020?

By the way: I think I found Senator Warren’s potential running mate. If nothing else, they certainly have a knack for making unilateral statements.

The opinions expressed here by contributors are their own and are not the view of OpsLens which seeks to provide a platform for experience-driven commentary on today's trending headlines in the U.S. and around the world. Have a different opinion or something more to add on this topic? Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own experience-driven commentary.
Stephen Owsinski

Stephen Owsinski is an OpsLens Content Manager and Contributor. Owsinski is a retired law enforcement officer whose career included assignments in the Uniformed Patrol Division and Field Training Officer (FTO) unit. He is currently a researcher and writer. Follow Stephen on Twitter @uniformblue.

OpsLens Premium on CRTV.

Everywhere, at home or on the go.

SIGNUP NOW