White House To FBI Director: No, Viral Videos Aren't Causing Crime

White House To FBI Director: No, Viral Videos Aren't Causing Crime

So apparently FBI Director Comey is saying that there is an uptick in violence across the country and is blaming it on viral police videos. The White House, notably Obama, disagrees saying that there is no evidence.

The White House on Monday slammed FBI Director James Comey's notion that pervasive cellphone footage featuring police actions has led to an uptick in violent crime.

Comey's comments from last week were brought up during Monday's daily briefing with White House press secretary Josh Earnest after The New York Times reported several people at the Justice Department "privately fumed" at the remarks. Earnest said there was no evidence to back up Comey's statements.

“In fact, you hear law enforcement leaders across the country indicating that that’s not what’s taking place," Earnest said.

Comey has for several days blamed an increase in shootings and killings, in part, on the frequency of civilians reaching for their smartphones to document anything from a traffic stop to a protest. On Friday, he told several hundred students at the University of Chicago Law School the "era of viral videos" has led officers to feel they're "under siege" and unwilling to get out of their cars.

So here we have two sides to a battle. The White House and the Police State. Who do the conspiracy theorists think is lying and who is telling the truth here? Is there really no evidence for this and Comey just has sour grapes that officers have to actually RESPECT the people they are supposed to be arresting and protecting? Or is the White House deflecting so that it can push it's plan for criminal justice reform? Which Obama should be speaking about tomorrow.

Comey also said the prevalence of drugs and guns may be to blame. On Monday, he reiterated to a group of law enforcement officials at the International Association of Chiefs of Police that he had a "strong sense" officers were changing their behavior for fear of being caught on camera.

Is this true?

The Times notes the White House response can be seen as a reiteration of President Barack Obama's fierce attempts to end a decades-long policy of mass incarceration that primarily targets racial minorities. Under new policies from his administration, federal prison populations declined in 2013 for the first time since 1980.

Or maybe the times are a changing and good ole Comey is trying to plant himself like a rock trying to dam up a riverbed. Unfortunately, that rock ALWAYS gets weathered down by the flow of the river. But hey, maybe Obama is just deflecting here and questioning police actions is un-American.

Oh and before I go, I got one more link from you. It was also linked in the article, but it is easy to miss.
FBI director concedes he has little evidence to support 'Ferguson effect'

FBI director James Comey conceded on Monday that he had little evidence to support his theory that a recent increase in crime was caused by heightened scrutiny of the police, as the White House appeared to distance itself from his remarks.

Addressing police chiefs at a conference in Chicago, Comey said he could not be certain that the so-called “Ferguson effect”, following unrest in the Missouri city after the fatal police shooting of an unarmed black 18-year-old last year, had led to a retreat by officers, but said this was “common sense”.

Yes, the trustworthy evidence called "common sense". That is what is backing up Comey's hypothesis here. Not statistical data or actual research, but common sense. Anyone else's "common sense" able to be used as evidence for this being true here? After all, maybe Obama is just deflecting here. He IS pushing a political agenda after all.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Dear The White House and the Police State,

Whilst you disseminate disinformation through main stream media propaganda outlets by appearing to be at odds on this subject, please be aware that since it is OK for you both to roll out PRISM as well as setup revenue raising cameras in all public areas to spy on citizens, also be advised that Youtube, LiveLeak and other social media outlets have given citizens the ability to turn the cameras around - so to speak, and put you all in the spot light for a change.

The honeymoon is over - we will record you at every opportunity so it is in your best interests to treat citizens with dignity and respect - or suffer the full wrath of public outrage and condemnation when you abuse the power vested in you.

These viral videos are called undeniable accountability - so I will leave you with a taste of your own medicine..

"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"

Yours Sincerely,
Your Boss (aka: The taxpayer paying your wage)

Great OP. Not really big on Obama, but his comments are correct in that there is no evidence for Comey's remarks. They were simply "truthy", and nothing more.

But I am very amused at the level of hyperbole by the author of the article. Obama didn't "slam" anything. He just said he disagreed due to lack of evidence.

Sexing it up for the drama. LOL

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Yea, you're right, gotta love propaganda in action. Frankly, I'm siding with Obama on this case. If it is ok to conduct surveillance on the populace like the government does, then it should be just as ok for the populace to conduct surveillance on the government.

Didn't the White House once claim that a viral video caused Benghazi?

I think Director Comey is correct but not in the way he actually meant.

I think there is an engineered slow down in many cities that is allowing more violent crime to take place so we can have an 'I told you so moment'.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Didn't the White House once claim that a viral video caused Benghazi?

What does that have to do with this topic?

a reply to: Krazysh0t

The impact that viral videos have on a population.

As I said in another thread, LEOs are the only people who claim they can't do their job properly with a camera pointed at them. If I build a house and can't be recorded while doing it, I must be scamming on materials. If I can't weld a seam with a camera watching, I must be skipping steps. If law enforcement can't perform a simple traffic stop while being recorded...........................

a reply to: DBCowboy

Well maybe the White House learned its lesson. Or maybe the political agenda doesn't align to promote the effect of viral videos on the populace. Do you agree with the police or Obama?

Viral videos have no correlation to other criminal acts being committed.

Viral videos are responsible for acts of terrorism being committed.

Well that's curious.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I don't think there is an "uptick" in violence in the country. I think violence has gone down in most areas. Some get highlighted, some get played for the anti gun crowd, but overall, I'd say there is less violence based on the articles I've read.
I also think Obama is an ignorant political ass who couldn't find common sense if it was stapled to his face. So I dread to even contemplate agreeing with that moron.

Oh, noooo, violent videos don't affect anyones outlook, aren't used again and again by the media to influence minds in the war on terror, either.

Kind of hard for the government to equate violence with videos and then go ahead and allow the release of the next beheading by Jihadi John.

a reply to: DBCowboy

But you ARE agreeing with him here. Due to your bias against Obama, you are doing it indirectly, but you ARE doing it nonetheless.

originally posted by: intrptr
Kind of hard for the government to equate violence with videos and then go ahead and allow the release of the next beheading by Jihadi John.

Erm... The government ISN'T equating violence with videos. The government is saying that the videos aren't causing an uptick in police violence. Do you know what the word "equate" means?

originally posted by: DAVID64As I said in another thread, LEOs are the only people who claim they can't do their job properly with a camera pointed at them. If I build a house and can't be recorded while doing it, I must be scamming on materials. If I can't weld a seam with a camera watching, I must be skipping steps. If law enforcement can't perform a simple traffic stop while being recorded...........................

Your post truly brings back memories.

A gazillion years ago, when I was working in a Shock Trauma unit in an inner city hospital, the new Director came around to check out our unit, just then we had an emergency come flying through the doors. One of my co-workers was trying to insert a peripheral line and was having trouble. She told the Director she couldn't put the line in with him staring at her. He told her if she couldn't put the line in with him watching, then she didn't have the skills required to do the job. Of course that was all it took to bring her up to the challenge.

If the LEOs can't function while being filmed, then they don't have the skills required of the job. I guess next time they will be careful what they ask for.

They have been modeling themselves after the bad ass cops, the media has been pushing in movies and TV shows, so now they get to be the film stars they are such fans of.

Most certainly videos are putting a damper on effective policing. Even the people who have to live in these sh*t hole communities are complaining about the crime now. See what you numbnuts can't comprehend is that often times, busting many of these thugs on low level offenses is actually preventing bigger crimes like assault and murder. So when the police ease up on taking the corners, they indirectly are allowing the thugs yet another day to eventually do something more serious.

Once again, what is common sense to clear thinking people, just bounces right off the thick skulls of our progressive leadership. Of course, the white house is going to deny it because it exposes the fallacy of the narrative they have been pushing with this black lives matter BS.

a reply to: Edumakated

And you are basing this off of what evidence? Oh the same evidence that Comey is using, nothing. Common sense isn't evidence buddy.

Oh and insulting the people who don't agree with you before they even have a chance to respond is a good way to not get anyone to listen to you.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Go look up the current murder rate in Baltimore vs what it typically is and come back to us...

Nothing is different in Baltimore. Laws are the same. Population is similar. Nothing changed. Yet, the murder rate is like double. The ONLY thing that occurred is the mess with Freddy Gray and all the other alleged videos in other cities.

It is common sense that police know they are under scrutiny and even doing your job correctly could be used against you. So what are you going to do? You are going to think twice about tangling with the local street thugs for anything except the most serious crimes. It simply isn't worth your career or life. As a result, they are leaving a lot of thugs to roam free which invariable could lead to increased incidents of major crimes.

Police tend to get most of these thugs off the street for relatively minor offenses. small amounts of drugs, Gun charges, etc. Guy gets pulled over for speeding and they find an illegal pistol. He now cannot go shoot someone. So when the police stop this low level stuff, the thug may now have the ability to eventually carry out the deed.

It is nice to have data and everything all neatly packaged, but sometimes you have to use intuition. However, I am sure some sociologist will look back on this in a couple of years and come to the same conclusions.

originally posted by: Edumakated
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Go look up the current murder rate in Baltimore vs what it typically is and come back to us...

Nothing is different in Baltimore. Laws are the same. Population is similar. Nothing changed. Yet, the murder rate is like double. The ONLY thing that occurred is the mess with Freddy Gray and all the other alleged videos in other cities.

Why should I look up YOUR evidence for you? Are you allergic to linking sources or something? I live in Baltimore by the way. And this is why you don't know what you are talking about. Baltimore has been at the top of the most violent cities list for a LONG time. Since at least when I've been in high school. Heck The Wire is based on this very concept. Baltimore is CURRENTLY ranked 2nd, but we've been number 1 before. Sure there has been a spike since Freddie Gray after a lull in crime, but it's really just more of the same in this city.

PS: The Freddie Gray incident wasn't a viral video on Youtube.

It is common sense that police know they are under scrutiny and even doing your job correctly could be used against you. So what are you going to do? You are going to think twice about tangling with the local street thugs for anything except the most serious crimes. It simply isn't worth your career or life. As a result, they are leaving a lot of thugs to roam free which invariable could lead to increased incidents of major crimes.

How do you know this? I don't care if you think it is common sense or its something that YOU would do, I want to see statistics and data on this. Your feelings on the matter are irrelevant.

Police tend to get most of these thugs off the street for relatively minor offenses. small amounts of drugs, Gun charges, etc. Guy gets pulled over for speeding and they find an illegal pistol. He now cannot go shoot someone. So when the police stop this low level stuff, the thug may now have the ability to eventually carry out the deed.

It is nice to have data and everything all neatly packaged, but sometimes you have to use intuition. However, I am sure some sociologist will look back on this in a couple of years and come to the same conclusions.

So if the data clearly shows that correlation isn't equaling causation, intuition is still allowed to trump it?

One last question, do you not have a problem with having the largest incarceration rate in the world by a large margin?