​Facts of the case (taken directly from Ramsey Co Atty Complaint No: 0620373879):

• On November 15th, 2016, the State of Minnesota found probable cause to charge Jeronimo Yanez with second degree manslaughter and two counts of intentional discharge of a firearm that endangers safety. (both felony charges)
• Yanez is the police officer who shot Philando Castile to death on July 6, 2016 in Ramsey County Minnesota. 
• Riding with Castile at the time of the traffic stop (and the shooting) was Castile’s girlfriend, Diamond Reynolds, and her four-year-old daughter (referred to as D.F.R.)

• The charges against Yanez were filed by the complainant Doug Henning, Special Agent, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension.
• Henning conferred with Jeffrey J. Noble, an expert on police procedure whom the Ramsey County Attorney’s Office retains. Noble’s professional opinion affirmed that the totality of the circumstances indicated that Yanez' use of deadly force against Castile during the July 6 stop was not necessary, was objectively unreasonable, and was inconsistent with generally accepted police practices.
• Noble further opined that under the same circumstances, Yanez’ discharge of his firearm seven times into a vehicle in very close proximity to and towards Reynolds and her four-year-old daughter endangered their safety.

 
What the Prosecution had to Prove:

MANSLAUGHTER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
A person who causes the death of another by any of the following means is guilty of manslaughter in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than ten years or to payment of a fine of not more than $20,000, or both:
(1) by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another; or
(2,3, & 4 pertain to loss of life through animal involvement and 5 relates directly to children. As those are all irrelevant, I did not include them. Here is where you can find the full statute if you’re interested.)

DANGEROUS WEAPONS – INTENTIONAL DISCHARGE OF A FIREARM THAT ENDANGERS SAFETY
Felony crimes; suppressors; reckless discharge. (a) Whoever does any of the following is guilty of a felony and may be sentenced as provided in paragraph (b):
(1) sells or has in possession a suppressor that is not lawfully possessed under federal law;
(2) intentionally discharges a firearm under circumstances that endanger the safety of another; or
(3) recklessly discharges a firearm within a municipality.
(b) A person convicted under paragraph (a) may be sentenced as follows: (1) if the act was a violation of paragraph (a), clause (2)
(again, the remainder of the statute is irrelevant to the case, but here is the full statute.)

Why Yanez was not Charged:

1. As reported by the local Star Tribune, one of the jurors stated that “the prosecution didn’t prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Yanez was guilty in the shooting death of Philando Castile.”
2. 2 out of 10 jurors remained unconvinced after over 24 hours of testimony. Again, the Star Tribune reported that “in the end the majority of the jurors were able to sway the two remaining ‘no’ votes when breaking down the legal definition of the charges.” Specifically, the phrase “culpable negligence”. The jurors were unconvinced that Yanez committed culpable negligence during the deadly encounter with Castile.
3. Still, points 1 and 2 do not explain why Yanez was not charged with the second felony. Yanez absolutely did “intentionally [discharge] a firearm under circumstances that [endangered] the safety of another." He did it seven times, actually. Unless, of course, police officers are seen as being above the law. In which case, this whole situation makes a lot more sense.
4. In Minnesota, peace officers are judged by a different legal standard than their fellow citizens. So, they are not above the law, per se, they’re just allowed to do things other citizens are not. Here is the special statute just for them:

                                       609.066 AUTHORIZED USE OF DEADLY FORCE BY PEACE OFFICERS

This statute allows peace officers to discharge their weapon in a number of scenarios. Per the statute, “the use of deadly force by a peace officer in the line of duty is justified only when necessary:
(1) to protect the peace officer or another from apparent death or great bodily harm;
(2) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the peace officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony involving the use or threatened use of deadly force; or
(3) to effect the arrest or capture, or prevent the escape, of a person whom the officer knows or has reasonable grounds to believe has committed or attempted to commit a felony if the officer reasonably believes that the person will cause death or great bodily harm if the person's apprehension is delayed.

Summary of the Findings:

Ultimately, Jeronimo Yanez was not charged with either felony because there was not enough evidence to indicate that he acted with culpable negligence when he shot Castile seven times. Here is the definition of culpable negligence: The crime of 2nd Degree Manslaughter involves a person who causes the death of another "by the person's culpable negligence whereby the person creates an unreasonable risk, and consciously takes chances of causing death or great bodily harm to another."
In short, because he is a peace officer, Yanez is justified in his actions. He is justified in not only dangerously discharging his weapon around a child and the child’s mother, he cannot be considered negligent in the shooting death of Castile because Yanez very intentionally shot Castile with deadly force.

My Background:

I think it is necessary that I preface my views on this case with my personal law enforcement background because so many people are voicing opinions but not saying anything of value. I do not want to fall into that category. I was a military police officer for nine years in the Army. I have an extensive law enforcement background from working in various military police capacities. I have done everything from gate guard (before the DoD took over) to regular patrol officer (also before the DoD took over) to combat MP running convoys and training foreign national officers. I have specialty training as a V5 Military Police Investigator, Drug Suppression Team officer, and CID candidate (Criminal Investigation Command – Yep, the acronym is wrong). CID accepting my application packet in 2011 was my wake-up call. I knew it was now or never if I wanted to get out and go to school. I declined the acceptance and began the lengthy out-processing required for me to put my military career behind me.  

Law enforcement culture in this country is out of control, and authority worship extends to anyone wearing a uniform, not just police. The uniformed heroes in the TSA are obeyed when they heroically confiscate our breast milk and other personal items, then heroically hand those items over to the states who, in turn, sell those items back to us for a profit. Classic hero strategy. Similarly, police officers are called heroes simply for signing up to do a job virtually anyone could walk into. I wish I were joking, but I am not. If you want to see what kind of standards are in place to become a police officer, here is a posting I found on Indeed for an Entry Level Police Officer in Minnetonka, MN:

Minimum Qualifications:
A commitment to and belief in the organization's shared values.
Must be a United States citizen.
Two years of accredited college work is required (90 quarter credits or 60 semester credits).
Meet the educational requirements or reciprocity standards of the Minnesota Peace Officer Standards and Training (P.O.S.T.) Board to become licensed as a peace officer in Minnesota by December 29, 2017.
Possess a valid driver's license.
Ability to meet the physical demands as indicated below with or without accommodations.
 
60 semester credits do not necessarily translate to an Associate’s Degree, by the way. Nor does this job posting make mention of the type of degree required. You could effectively have 60 hours of glassblowing and qualify to be a cop in Minnetonka. Neat, huh? For the record, I had a GED, a bad attitude, nine hours of college, 2 years in the “real world”, and the Army gave me a gun, a uniform, and a superiority complex before I was even old enough to drink. No. Not everyone who wears a uniform is a hero, let alone a legitimate authority figure. Luckily, I got my act together and took my duties seriously in a short amount of time. I certainly cannot say the same for many of the men and women with whom I shared a shift.
 
Analysis of the Case:

With regard to Yanez, obviously there was legitimate reason to charge this man with 2 felonies (3 counts). The officer who brought the charges is a special agent, and the man who substantiated them specializes in police procedure. Meaning, the charges against Yanez weren’t made on a whim by random pencil pushers. Henning explicitly outlined his concerns in the criminal complaint, that Yanez initially approached Castile’s vehicle with “his right hand on the right side of his duty belt near his gun” and that, despite allegedly pulling Castile over because he matched the description of an at-large robbery suspect, Yanez ignored protocol by not calling that in. Instead, he called in a busted brake light. To break that down even further, that means Yanez approached Castile’s vehicle with his hand ready to pop the lock on his gun holster for a minor moving violation.  

The Blue Lives Matter’s website reports the following: “I thought I was going to die,” Officer Jeronimo Yanez testified in his defense, “I had no other choice. I was forced to engage Mr. Castile. He was not complying with my directions.” But, which directions does he mean, I wonder? Because the transcripts I read make it clear that Castile was doing everything he was supposed to do as a citizen being detained for a moving violation. Yanez approached the vehicle and asked for Castile’s insurance and ID. Castile provided the insurance as requested and was presumably going for his ID and permit to carry a handgun.  In other words, Castile was following directions when Yanez shot him to death.

In a recent interview, Yanez claimed that the reason he exsanguinated Castile was because: “I, was scared and I was, in fear for my life and my partner’s life.” Right. I know that line. I was taught to repeat the same thing if I ever screwed up beyond belief and the system needed to bail me out. It’s called articulation, and cops count on it. Many times, during guard mount and pre-shift briefings, officers laughed about how foolproof the method of articulation was. You could get away with anything so long as you articulated that you were in fear for your life, or the life of your partner.

​Hell, you could even get away with murder.

Right now, you may be asking yourself, “Who the heck is Nikos Giannopoulos?” and “Why does it matter?” Nikos Giannopoulos is largely well-known for being the reportedly “sassy”, Rhode Island State Teacher of the Year who popped his black, Victorian lace fan and sported a nose ring in his recent, celebratory photo-op with the president. Mr. G, as his students call him, is a “secondary inclusion teacher” at the Beacon Charter High School for the Arts in Woonsocket, according to the school’s website. His profile also relates that “Mr. Giannopoulos is a firm believer that the arts, strong community engagement, and differentiated instruction are essential components of a positive learning environment.” Quite an introduction, I know.  Now, to the more pertinent question you posed: Why does it matter? Excellent question! Let’s get to it.

Most articles reporting on Mr. Giannopoulos focus on how he sent an intentionally pointed message to Trump about LGBTQ inclusivity. Headlines from WaPo and HuffPo respectively read, “A teacher's decision to be 'visibly queer' in his photo with President Trump” or “Gay Teacher Of The Year Fans LGBTQ Pride In Viral Photo With Donald Trump”. Smaller news outlets, like the Providence Journal, also opt to send the same message: “With 'flair,' gay RI Teacher of the Year meets Trump”. Then, there are the opinions coming from conservative leaning media. Kat Shepherd, writing for Dennis Michael Lynch, wrote a piece entitled, “Teacher takes photo with Trump at WH, then disrespects him on Facebook”.

In a nutshell left-leaning news outlets are celebrating the fact that Mr. G stuck it to “the man seated at the desk” (Mr. G’s words). Mr. G donned a rainbow flag pin on the lapel of his “blue jacket with a bold print” as a testament to his empowerment and self-awareness as a member of the LGBTQ community. The right-leaning media had much less to say about the meeting. In fact, the major conservative outlets have not even reported the story. I know. I checked. As of today, Kat Shepherd’s 283-word article (half of which is quotations) stands alone.

So, what exactly is the message the media hopes to send with such bold headlines? After reading through the most popular stories, and trudging through dozens of comment sections (don’t do it), I can attest that the cultivated message seems to be that Trump’s America exists in a dichotomy. You are either on Team Mr. G or Team Mr. T. One cannot possibly exist anywhere in between. Unfortunately, with such intentionally flashy headlines, the media offers no help in uniting the left and right sides. Once again, we are guided to remain stuck in a loop of perpetual ideological insulation. You have your views (which are wrong) and I have mine (which are correct). Be honest with yourself now. How is that healthy?

Let me clarify something before I continue. I am a lesbian (but I go by Angie). My wife and I have been together for three years and married for over a year now. I have been out of the closet since I was seventeen years old, minus the nine years in the military where I had to change the names of the women I dated into men’s names so I wouldn’t get kicked out and stuck with a Dishonorable Discharge. I know how important empowerment and authenticity in the LGBTQ community is. I know how serious the small victories are in everyday situations, let alone the once-in-a-lifetime situations like the one in which Mr. G found himself. Mr. G is awesome and I am super proud of him for being an obviously amazing teacher and fabulously fierce gay man.

What I am less than thrilled about, however, is the media’s incessant need to turn moments of unity, inclusivity, and accomplishment into a hotbed of vitriol and animosity. On April 29th, when Mr. G actually met Mr. Trump, Giannopoulos made no mention of any awkwardness or negativity. He reported to NPR that the president complimented his style and exclaimed immediately how much he loved the fan! That’s it. Although, to be fair, in his Facebook post he did comment on how mechanical and contrived the one-on-one meeting had been, but not the overall event itself.   

Regarding the date of the event, I found only one article that made mention of the ceremony at all prior to Mr. G’s photo going viral June 16th. Mercury News, ironically a Bay Area outlet, published a story on how “weird” and even disgraceful the ceremony under Trump had been compared with previous National Teacher of the Year Award events. Mercury News did not mention the sassy Mr. G at all. I suppose a story where a bold, barrier-busting, fan-toting, empowered gay man meets and upstages the president had to be reserved for June. You know? The one month out of the year where queer folks are exploited by the news for a boost in ratings. What other reason could there be to explain why it took the media 50 days to cultivate this meeting into the contentious feature story it has become. On April 29th, the day of the event, Nikos himself posted a lengthy account on his publicly accessible Facebook page. That story has nearly 1000 comments, and counting, the majority of which are overwhelming supportive.

To return to the question of why any of this matters, I want to emphasize a few things. First, it’s crucial that we all recognize and acknowledge that stories like these are cultivated and manipulated prior to consumption. Shocking, I know. But I mention this fact because people take it for granted that the media accurately reports events as they happen. They do not, and we need to be reminded of this from time to time. Why did it take this story 50 days to blow up? That is nearly two months after the fact. As a news consumer, such patently manipulative and calculated behavior should personally insult you. Here’s why.  

If you’re queer like me, it should upset you that such an accomplishment was relegated to LGBT Pride Month. Meaning, for whatever reason (marketing strategy) Mr. G did not matter until June. I disagree, and so does Mr. G. In fact, I want to know how the media’s manipulation of the virality of Mr. G’s story does not fly in the face of everything he was trying to accomplish when he strutted his flamboyant self into the Oval Office. Recall Nikos’ Facebook post:

“Had I been given the opportunity, I would have told [the president] that the pride I feel as an American comes from my freedom to be open and honest about who I am and who I love. I would have told him that queer lives matter and anti-LGBTQ policies have a body count. Taking pride in queer identity means rejecting the shame imposed upon us by a harsh society. It means opening yourself up to a lifetime of criticism and misunderstanding, but knowing that it’s worth it to be able to live authentically. Each and every queer person has been confronted with cruelty in ways many cannot imagine - verbal and physical abuse from strangers, friends, & even family; politicians callously attacking on our right to love or merely exist in public spaces; legalized discrimination for daring to be who we are. Brutality is a universal part of the queer experience.”

You’re damn right, Mr. G. I just wish your poignantly stated message of inclusivity and empowerment hadn’t been exploited and morphed into a diversity piece that fills a content quota for the disparate news agencies.

Nikos Giannopoulos’ story matters every single day, not only because he is a successful gay man, but because he is a dedicated teacher who genuinely cares about his students. If you don’t believe me, take a look at some of the replies he made to comments on the Facebook post I mentioned earlier:

“Thank you for the kind words. There is great power in being surrounded by a group of hardworking and caring educators! American education is in good hands. :)”

“Our co-teaching relationship has taken a job I loved and made it even more rewarding. I am so proud and honored to have you as a colleague. We get the privilege of helping our students share their stories through the art of filmmaking - what a gift."

“Karen, it means a lot to me to have a department head with whom I see eye to eye. I am so happy to have you running our department and working hard for our kids!”

Seems to me Mr. G found his calling, and America is a better place for it. You want to know what is missing from every single one of Mr. G’s replies to Facebook commenters? Vitriol, rhetoric, and divisive negativity. Thank you for that Mr. G. I wish there was an award for Classiest Gay Man in Rhode Island because you certainly deserve that one too.

TL;DR: Rhode Island Teacher of the Year, Nikos Giannopoulos, makes America great by being authentically Nikos Giannopoulos in April, June, and probably every other month of the year.      

Today, we live in the Digital Age. Remarkably, our current age was barely conceptualized in 1962 when Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s (MIT) head computer researcher, J.C.R. Licklider only, “envisioned a globally interconnected set of computers through which everyone could quickly access data and programs from any site.” Advancements in technology led to a number of breakthroughs, and on October 24, 1995, the Federal Networking Council (FNC) officially recognized the existence of the “Internet” as we now know it. Fast forward two decades later, and our increasing dependency on computer technologies and virtual data has completely transformed society.
 
The question I wish to pose is this: What is the Internet? To resolve this question, consider Aristotle’s predication theory. In Categories, Aristotle sought to classify all manner of things into one of ten possible praedicamenta, or categories. Those ten categories break down as follows: substance, quantity, qualification, relative, where, when, being-in-a-position, having, doing, being affected. The category of substance most comprehensively defines the Internet.
 
In the natural world, there exist two types of substances: primary and secondary. In Aristotle’s view, the individual man represents a primary substance for he “is that which is neither said of a subject nor in a subject.” Humanity as a species, however, denotes a secondary substance since the genus “man” may be predicated on an individual (primary substance). Aristotle further theorized that “a substance…can receive contraries. An individual man, for example, being one and the same, becomes now pale and now dark, now hot and now cold, now bad and now good.” I categorize the Internet as a primary substance operating as a subject of predication. While there are multiple genera of networks, there is only one Internet (always capitalized) and its existence and functionality depends on very specific predicates. And, unlike other primary substances, the Internet’s predicates may present as virtual as well as physical.
 
Future advances, now being realistically conceptualized and tested on animals, purport to fuse two primary substances together: the individual and the Internet. In technological jargon, the process of entity coalescence is dubbed “the Singularity.” The term, first coined by John Von Neumann in the 1950s, originally denoted “the ever accelerating progress of technology” leading to “some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue." Murray Shanahan, an expert in the field of cognitive robotics, appropriated the term in his 2015 monograph, The Technological Singularity, to signify the moment in time when “the ordinary human is removed from the loop, overtaken by artificially intelligent machines or cognitively enhanced biological intelligence and unable to keep pace.”
 
A testament to the extent which artificial intelligence has permeated our cultural imaginings, the cover of Shanahan’s book contains a black background with nothing but an illuminated red circle and a yellow pin-pointed dot in its center; undoubtedly this image alludes to a specific character in the Stanley Kubrick film 2001: A Space Odyssey. The character HAL 9000 (Heuristically-programmed ALgorithmic computer), was a pre-programmed, sentient computer installed into a spacecraft that carried human crew members. In the film, HAL somehow became corrupted resulting in the machine killing a number of the humans placed in its charge.
 
The popularity behind science fiction stories like 2001 is that they combine reality and myth. Films evoking artificial intelligence and other seemingly far-off technological advancements blend the actual with the imaginary by inspiring scientists and engineers to develop the technology portrayed in their favorite stories. Mark Strauss of Smithsonian Magazine reports on a number of science fiction inspired technological inventions, from the rocket and the cell phone to the virtual world of Second Life. Philip Rosedale, the inventor of Second Life’s virtual community, credits Neal Stephenson’s 1992 novel Snow Crash with inspiring him to create his virtual world located within the Internet. Then, there is the immensely popular Ghost in the Shell series and the Netflix original film Blame!. Both stories are set in a futuristic world where cyborgs are commonplace and humans have figured out how to connect to the Internet directly.
 
Outside of film and literature, men and women remain dedicated to changing the future of our species through the implementation of advanced neurotechnology. These visionary engineers and scientists work to harness the power of the Internet and the potential of it to progress the human species into a new era; an era of Direct Brain Communication through brain-machine interface (BMI). So, who leads the charge for this species-advancing, neuro-technological movement? Elon Musk.
 
In 2016, Musk created a new company he called “Neuralink.” The technology is marketed separately by Neurological Integration System (NIS) to healthcare professionals. Their website declares, “it is committed to developing proprietary healthcare methods for a spectrum of complaints.” Recently, Musk drafted the talents of blogger Tim Urban to help him translate the benefits of BMI and Neuralink so that the average person could better understand the potential applications of this technology.
 
In order to take advantage of the obvious medical benefits of BMI technology, cofounder of Neuralink, Flip Sabes explains how we must first “use engineering to get neurons to talk to computers”. Thus, if we want to harness the potential of the brain, we must first rely on computers to teach us what we do not already understand about our brains.
 
In his wonderfully written article, (really, you should read it) Urban offers us a lively metaphor of a wizard hat to better conceptualize the type of technology necessary for fusing the Internet into our brains. A wizard hat refers to Musk’s vision of a “digital tertiary layer” or “a new physical brain part to complement the other two” parts of our brain: “our animal limbic system (which could be called our primary layer) and our advanced cortex (which could be called our secondary layer).” This means, in order for humans to enter the next era, we must bring about the Singularity, i.e., we must fuse two primary substances into one mega-substance. In his blog, (did I mention how well written it is?) Tim Urban dubs the mega-substance the Human Colossus.
 
In Urban’s view, and my own, the Singularity is already upon us, thanks to the invention of the Internet so many decades ago. What’s more? The Internet is its own substance. In order to keep up with its ability to advance way beyond the natural capacity of human evolution, humans must figure out how to merge our organic selves with this created substance. Musk and Neuralink are a means to try to accomplish exactly that.
 
In short, the Internet’s eventual takeover of non-adapted animals is a process that must occur as a natural part of its evolution. Musk realizes this and recognizes that if we do not adapt, we will become extinct. And I am sure most of you are familiar with the talk among biologists that we are dangerously close to fomenting a sixth mass extinction. It’s really just a matter of time before life on this planet changes drastically. We just don’t know exactly what those changes entail. For those of you familiar with the storyline for Terminator, think of the Internet as the precursor to Skynet, but based on actual facts and very real technology. But, like the philosopher Slavoj Zizek says, if you want to know the future, look at Hollywood.

Here are the facts of the case:

• On Wednesday May 24th 2017, then-Congressional candidate Greg Gianforte (Bozeman, Montana) assaulted Guardian reporter Ben Jacobs by “[grabbing] Jacobs by the neck with both hands and [slamming] him into the ground...then began punching the reporter.” The accusation comes from eyewitness testimony.

• The simple assault occurred on the eve of the special election for Montana’s lone congressional House seat. Greg Gianforte won the special election the following day largely due to absentee ballots cast prior to his despicable behavior toward the press.

• The Congressman plead guilty to misdemeanor assault on Monday, June 12th. Rather than serve jail time, Gianforte will serve forty hours of community service and twenty hours of anger management. The judge initially sentenced the accused to four days in jail but revoked that decision minutes later after “consulting with prosecution and defense lawyers.” Gianforte was also fined $300 (plus $85 in court fees) for assaulting Jacobs.

 
So, let’s break this down a bit.
Greg Gianforte is a Congressman. Congressional representatives, according to the House of Representatives’ website, are “elected to a two-year term serving the people of a specific congressional district. Among other duties, representatives introduce bills and resolutions, offer amendments and serve on committees.” In short, the people in a given district elect a Congressional representative to serve them for two years in various capacities.

You may have noticed, there’s a word that keeps popping up over and over. It’s important to emphasize this word because it reveals how ridiculous and outright mock-able the sentence handed down by  Judge Rick West actually is. So, what’s the word you should care about? Serve. Here’s why it matters:

Greg Gianforte’s job, that is, what he is paid to do, is serve his community. He was literally elected to do that. Meaning, the man whose job it is to serve his community will be punished by...wait for it.... serving his community. Yes. You read that right. Judge West elected to alter the initial sentencing of four days in jail and two days under the “jail work program” after conferring with the lawyers involved in the case. Why?

According to the Bozeman Daily Chronicle, a Montana-based newspaper, “Judge Rick West said he and fellow Judge Bryan Adams, also in Justice Court, sentence criminals to the work program daily.” West also stated that he and Adams make up “a pretty significant number of the usage,” and that they “really see the benefit of it. It’s worked out great for us.” Interesting. I wonder why West decided not to utilize such a successful program. Probably because the jail-work program applies only to non-violent crimes. Assault is a violent crime. According to Montana law, “A person convicted of assault shall be fined not to exceed $500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for any term not to exceed 6 months, or both.”

Gianforte was fairly sentenced with a fine and no jail time, according to Montana law. However, that does not remove the irony of sentencing a Congressman to community service. We can only hope that the newly-elected Congressman’s constituents remember the poor leadership he displayed on May 24th and his willingness to resort to violence in order to silence an ideological opponent. Is that the type of leader Montanans want representing them in D.C.? A man who avoids questions by physically attacking the questioner? Come on now, Montana. You can do better than that.

And while I recognize that Gianforte’s constituents largely voted for Donald Trump in the November 2016 Presidential election, I also want to point out that Gallatin County went to Hillary Clinton by about 500 votes. Gary Johnson pulled about 300 votes. Why does those numbers matter now? Only because I want the Republicans who voted for Gianforte to remember their own values.
Recall the GOP 2016 Platform. In it, Republicans emphasize the necessary division between federal power and individual sovereignty. “Federalism is a cornerstone of our constitutional system,” it reads. “Every violation of state sovereignty by federal officials is not merely a transgression of one unit of government against another; it is an assault on the liberties of individual Americans.” Though Gianforte did not attempt to transgress against the state of Montana itself, the Tenth Amendment warns against the very behavior he displayed on May 24th.

Republican men and women who purportedly value the separation of powers and who prioritize preventing federal officials from infringing on the liberties of individual Americans are being led by a man who literally began his Congressional career by violating his own party platform. Greg Gianforte epitomizes the abuses of federal power on the sovereign individual. In this case, that individual was Ben Jacobs. Even more ironic, Republicans elected him.

The irony of punishing a Congressman by forcing him to serve his community should not be lost on us. We also cannot ignore the physical assault Gianforte committed nor overlook what his behavior indicates. He is a federal official willing to infringe on the rights of individual Americans who oppose him. How was he punished for his crime? A $300 fine, not even the maximum amount allowable. Further, $300 is a drop in the bucket considering his net worth. Oh, and no jail time, despite being charged with a violent crime.

Let’s hope Montanans learn from their mistakes and kick this guy to the curb in 2020.
  
 

Our current political system foments an atmosphere so intensely polarized that murdering your ideological opponent is seen as a rational option. To me, this indicates a few important things:

1. The people feel so powerless that some are willing to resort to violence in order to be heard.

2. Though hoping to bolster their ideology with drastic measures, these failed revolutionaries like Antifa, the Portland murderer, and today's VA shooter, push reasonable leftists away thus saturating the left with extremists. This trend won't end well. The extremists on the right fall into the same trap: Islamists, White nationalists, fascists, don't you read history? Extremism does not work. It has zero staying power.

3. Infotainment reality news programming is a garbage medium benefitting no one apart from its sponsors. It is intentionally divisive and dramatic in order to generate ratings. Meanwhile, it motivates extremists while producing little to no actual value for society.

4. Pretending this country is red versus blue rather than haves and have-nots is a convenient strategy used by oligarchs to distract, divide, and rule the masses, i.e., you and me.

5. Using violence to spread your message makes you look weak and reveals the impotence of your ideology.

Hitting someone over the head with a lock (Antifa), shooting a politician in the face (white nationalist), shooting a politician in the hip (progressive revolutionary), ramming people with vehicles (Islamists).
Left & Right extremists: Don't you get it? No one apart from inspired radicals, brainwashed by intense propaganda, are listening to you. You are losing and you will always fail because the majority of people are good, decent individuals who don't condone violence to achieve peace.

It is in our primate DNA to be ethical, moral members of a community. You are the result of 4 billion years of evolution. Maybe it's time to start acting like it.