SEATTLE CHIEF OF POLICE WRITES TO RESIDENTS

Submitted by: Ebau

HIGH PRIORITY COMMUNICATION:FOR YOUR ANALYSIS AND CONSIDERATION:

 

In Seattle, the police chief just sent this letter to all the businesses in town:<https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/rick-moran/2020/07/26/police-tell-business-owners-in-seattle-youre-on-your-own-n697723>

Please also know that the City Council Ordinance 119805 Crowd Control Tool goes into effect this weekend on Sunday, July 26, 2020. This ordinance bans Seattle Police officers the use of less lethal tools, including pepper spray that is commonly used to disperse crowds that have turned violent. Simply put, the legislation gives officers NO ability to safely intercede to preserve property in the midst of a large, violent crowd.

It is important to bring to your attention that yesterday, I sent the City Council a letter ensuring them that as the Chief of Police, I have done my due diligence of informing them numerous times of the foreseeable impact of this ordinance on upcoming events. The letter is attached for your reference.

For these reasons, Seattle Police will have an adjusted deployment in response to any demonstrations this weekend – as I will never ask our officers to risk their personal safety to protect property without the tools to do so in a safe way.

 

The leaders of the city just gave Antifa/BLM carte blanche to riot, loot and burn to their hearts content, without any fear that the police will intervene.

In the end, the fault lies with the voters who elected these Marxist morons. They are getting what they wanted, good and hard.  However, the business and non Marxist people who live and invest and work there are truly getting a raw deal.

After a few days of rioting and destruction under these conditions, the federal government would be correct to go in in force and restore order.  The local politicians should be arrested immediately and tried in federal court for purposely denying the people their constitutional rights.

 

The Insurrection Act says:<https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/253>The President, by using the militia or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means, shall take such measures as he considers necessary to suppress, in a State <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:I:chapter:13:section:253>, any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy, if it­

(1) so hinders the execution of the laws of that State<https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:I:chapter:13:section:253>, and of the United States <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=> within the State <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:I:chapter:13:section:253>, that any part or class of its people is deprived of a right, privilege, immunity, or protection named in the Constitution and secured by law, and the constituted authorities of that State <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:I:chapter:13:section:253> are unable, fail, or refuse to protect that right, privilege, or immunity, or to give that protection; or

(2) opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States<https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=> or impedes the course of justice under those laws.

In any situation covered by clause (1), the State <https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?width=840&height=800&iframe=true&def_id=10-USC-80204913-2012473785&term_occur=999&term_src=title:10:subtitle:A:part:I:chapter:13:section:253> shall be considered to have denied the equal protection of the laws secured by the Constitution.

 

Lyle J. Rapacki, Ph.D.