After John and I discussed the documentary The Fall of Minneapolis late last year, we heard from one of the major players in the case against Derek Chauvin and the other officers involved: Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison. He insisted that the film distorted the facts and cast doubt on verdicts that were, he argued, rightly decided. After some back and forth, he, John, and I decided we had a lot to talk about, including Keith’s new book,
I had been looking forward to this conversation and now that I’m 3/4 through it all I can say is wow.
First of all a quick aside, I am sometimes critical of John although I hugely respect him, and both Glenn and John were great here but this was a masterclass from John’s perspective. Talk about holding the guy accountable and pushing him to answer questions. Excellent work.
But the other “wow” is that I’m amazed at how out of touch this man is! He’s clearly infected by this new Marxist ideology.
* He didn’t believe it was correct (if I understood correctly) that black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime. Unless he was saying it was incorrect that he didn’t care about it. I’m not clear.
* He is a black man who holds the position of attorney general in the state of Minnesota. He scoffed when Glenn mentioned fatherless homes and then went on to describe how he grew up with his father in the home. He can’t see the correlation between his success and having both parents in the home!
* He thinks a better thing to focus on is truancy. Clearly not seeing that having fathers at home would likely fix that problem.
* He thinks charter schools segregate kids and all kids would be better off if they were just mixed together. I’m glad Glenn and John both pushed back on this. This guy doesn’t know the data, he also doesn’t realize or care that public schools are a mess and the kids are out of control. So he would rather, presumably in the name of ‘equity’ (Marxist) have all kids suffer equally, rather than allow kids who want to do well to have a place they can focus on their studies rather than public school violence.
I mean we all know how successful charter schools are and that’s why black families try so hard to send their kids there.
It’s amazing to me how out of touch from reality this man is and how ideologically driven he seemed to be. Especially considering he’s the AG.
For a podcast entitled prosecuting Chauvin I was disappointed how little time was allocated to this topic. Not once did they discuss Mr. Floyd’s behavior at the time of arrest. Additionally, they did not discuss Mr Floyd’s level of narcotics or his chronic ill health and it’s impact on his ultimate demise. Mr Ellison was never ask to comment on these inconvenient facts. Had Mr. Floyd compiled with police directions surely his matter would not have derailed the country for 2 years nor would their be any question of murder. If nothing else I would love to know how Mr. Ellison would deal with the belligerence exhibited by Mr Floyd. No doubt were it not for slavery, Mr Floyd would not have resisted.
Yes Mr Chauvin was convicted of via a jury trial. Legally it cannot be argued he is not guilty of murder. A similar finding applies to OJ. He did not commit murder. The justice system renders verdicts, it does not validate facts.
I was pleased Glenn and John question a number of Mr Ellison’s assumptions. I just wish they hadn’t shown him quite so much deference. For example, Mr Ellison claimed there police were not defunded, it was simply a talking point used for partisan benefit. Tens of cities (including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Baltimore …) across the US reduced police funding. I am certain both Glenn and John are aware of this.
How about the part where police morale is raised when criminals are actually prosecuted for their crimes, rather than immediately released? Glenn and John, why did you let this guy redirect the conversation to schools etc. His roll is prosecuting crime, and he didn’t answer Johns question early on. I can see where at some point you two decided that you weren’t going to get much out of him, but good God fellas, I would have appreciated a bit more effort here.
I once voted for Kieth Ellison. Thanks for having him on. On the prosecution discussion, his points were interesting and I felt better about him. Yet, on the rest, I agree that many of his his arguments are tired. His social science is way behind the curve. John & Glenn, you guys were brave to have him on.
Regarding rioters/arsonists at 3rd Precinct Police Station: May 30, 2020 marked the 10th week of the Covid pandemic emergency in USA. I was scared that SF numbers would soon become like NYC. A potentially high Covid death count would require increased deployment of emergency personnel- paramedics, fire and police. May 30 was also during the most restrictive phase of the Covid Shut-down due to elevated disease concern.
If the 3rd Precinct rioters/arsonists were unwelcome from perspective of City Hall and DEI and if Minneapolis Police Department were truly overwhelmed by rioters, then the mayor calls the governor asap and says “I need your help immediately.” That is standard emergency procedure.
From my public health perspective, emergency response employees and property are top priority during a pandemic. On transmission- we only learned after the fact that we erred on the side of caution. But, at week 10 with limited information- we could have easily erred in the opposite direction. Sudden presence of thousands of street protesters in the densest parts of the densest cities could have generated a nationwide transmission mega-spike with deaths jumping upward.
From my public health perspective; instructing the nation’s public to cover faces for protection- necessities increased public and gov cooperation with police. The reason is that decreased facial recognition places the public at increased risk of crime. I passed my supervisor on the sidewalk without recognizing her due to Covid mask. Instead of cooperation, Minneapolis City Hall painted a target on police foreheads.
May/June 2020 actions of gov officials in Minneapolis and Minnesota make sense to them based on information available to them. But, they deliberately concealed such information from the public- which is a transparency and disclosure violation. Across the US, officials in 100 DEI cities and 25 DEI states exercised an extreme degree of secrecy that makes Billionaire-recluse Howard Hughes look like a “Tell all blabber-mouth.” Not acceptable in a democracy.
[Time 55]; I am Muslim and I condemn the sadistic murderous rampage of Hamas on Oct 7. Palestinians have rejected statehood proposal from Israel because they truly want river to sea- where Israel is erased.
[Time 51:00]; AG Ellison suggests red-light runners receive ticket by postal mail instead of police pursuit that becomes high-speed chase. (1): If the criminal suspect were cooperative, there would be no high-speed chase. (2): Civilians with outstanding warrants or involvement in criminality are more likely to flee so as to avoid arrest. (3): Military background is good training for police because interaction with criminals is conflict-ridden.
[Time 40:00]; Arson at 3rd Precinct Police Station: (1) If “police violence” a true concern, trespassers/arsonists would be afraid of experiencing police violence. The fire added fuel to nationwide outrage “fire”. I believe that was the DEI intent. Regardless- fire the incompetent mayor for allowing gov property to be stolen and destroyed. (2): I suspect that rioters/arsonists got permission from City Hall to proceed with trespass into 3rd Precinct. (3) I want 3rd Precinct trespassers/arsonists arrested. (4) Fire the mayor for treason.
Thank you professors GL/JM and Minnesota Attorney General for your discussion.
[Time 22:00]; (1): If I compare myself to Officer Chauvin, the most harmful thing I could possibly do at my job is to accidentally kill an innocent computer. (2): Years ago, I supervised friends’ 4-10 yr old nephews - who were uncooperative, and dangerous to themselves and others. I told the uncles - “never again”. Police do not have such luxuries as 1 and 2.
(3):Once an officer sees a criminal suspect, he is essentially “glued to” suspect until delivery at a jail cell, even if uncooperative. Expecting no injury when suspect is resisting or fighting police - is illogical.
(4): In “The Fall of Minneapolis”; I didn’t see the other three officers display disapproval or verbally criticize Chauvin at the crime scene. To me, that suggests that Chauvin’s actions were viewed as normal.
(5): Expert testimony on witness stand about proper restraint technique should not be treated as if a retroactive rule while corresponding text in police handbook is vague.
(6): In 2016-ish; Suspect Tony Timpa of Dallas had officer knee on shoulder/neck for 11 minutes and died. Police in different jurisdictions appear to believe such procedure is allowable. This suggests to me that top-down communication is at fault.
(7): Beginning Wednesday April 3, 2024; all police in 100 DEI cities should begin strike. Do not go to work until the DEI-allies (DEI directors, police chief, health chief and mayor) are fired and DEI abolished. You can quote me.
Ellison struck me as fundamentally dishonest, little more than a demagogue. While not a firehose of falsehoods, his firehose of facts, assertions, dodges into historic grievances, self-promoting stories, policy proposals, ad hominem attacks on opponents and free passes for those sympathetic to his views sounded like a stump speech. It did not come over as a good faith attempt to answer tough questions, most of which he dodged. Nor was it a coherent, well-constructed defense of the prosecution of Derek Chauvin. I listened most of the time, so missed many reaction shots, though at one point I caught John looking like someone caught at a dinner party listening to a complete bore of a guest who never shuts up. I appreciate this show in good part because Glenn and John ask tough questions of their guests. In this case they tried and maybe gave up. To be sure, it's tough to ask tough questions of someone who never stops talking, who strings together words in a logic and toward an end known only to himself, who continually overtalks and interrupts. But I was disappointed, and didn't buy the amity at the end. The Fall of Minneapolis may well not have proven the innocence of Derek Chauvin, but it significantly complicated the "racist white cop kills innocent black man" story, and it showed some of the cost of that story to the city of Minneapolis and, by extension, the country as a whole. What I took from Ellison's appearance was a sense that his taking over the Chauvin case may well have been driven by a deep animus. That doesn't mean that Chauvin and his colleagues were not responsible, in whole or in part, for Floyd's death. But it also does not reduce my sense of unease over the conduct of the trial.
Keith Ellison says Chauvin, et al are in part guilty for not starting medical treatment on George Floyd at the scene. Ellison doesn't mention that policy says when it is safe to do so. Ellison also doesn't mention that MFD EMTs didn't start to work on Floyd until they were a number of blocks away from the scene. A scene one witness from the neighborhood called a "hot corner".
Ellison also mentions that holding Floyd's legs contributed to his death. Ellison does not mention that when Chauvin, et al took Floyd out of the squad they put him in the side recovery position. In that position, Floyd delivers a ferocious kick to Lane causing Lane to swear. It is in response to Floyd's actions of resistance that he is moved from the side recovery position.
Did Ellison, before, during or after the interview mention why Dr. Martin Tobin lied on the witness stand?
😅You never know who you're sharing a space with until you dive into the comments sections!
It speaks to the range of diversity in thought around here...I guess.
It's not a broad spectrum, but a spectrum nonetheless. We can look at each other's reads and see that. (Subscribers to The Bulwark is about as far left as it gets around here.)
I would love for Glenn and Sussman to do another informal survey (of paid subscribers in particular). i.e., who here self-describes as "right" and why? Who here self-describes as "left" and why? I assume the bird's eye view ratio is at least 4: 1 in favor of the right. But who knows?
And how does that break down? Passionate Trump supporters? Reluctant Trump supporters? NeverTrumpers? Lifelong Dems?
Any self-avowed White nationalists/sympathizers in here? (Not that long ago, there were at least a couple.) Are there any self-avowed Black nationalists?
While we're at it, how about some normal demographic info: age, sex, ethnicity?
Ellison's strongest point, to my mind, was about the rash of juvenile motor vehicle thefts. This can't be attributed to single parent homes or any such slow moving factors. School absenteeism does seem like the most important proximate cause, and as he pointed out, even if students are learning very little they are more likely to stay out of trouble.
I also think that he is right to say that people in different communities commit crimes for much the same reasons, though I would emphasize incentives (preemption, retaliation, lack of formal dispute resolution systems when engaged in prohibited transactions, etc) rather than his appeal to bad apples or your general appeal to culture.
On the passion question I think it was a bit unfair to say that he doesn't care much about civilian crime, and the case where he took charge of a prosecution for a particularly heinous offense was an effective rebuttal.
His appeals to the broad sweep of history (slavery, segregation) are surely relevant but these are presented as conversation stoppers rather than the first step in trying to figure out mechanisms and solutions. This was the most frustrating part of the conversation, especially regarding charter schools. He is dogmatic on these (and a few other) issues. But some of your commenters seem to think he has little of value to say about anything, and I think this is not correct.
The lovely tribute at the end where he pointed out that the two of you can converse productively with people who can't have useful conversations with each other was touching.
I’m ready to cancel my $7 a month man. Pathetic. Glenn you didn’t have any qualms, never pushed back, and neither of you know anything about Ellison’s Farrakhan and Antifa ties. Ellison’s a lightweight hollering bland generalities and deflections. God damn I can’t believe you let him snow you. 100%. Oh, and for perspective, I'm a lifelong Dem.
I had been looking forward to this conversation and now that I’m 3/4 through it all I can say is wow.
First of all a quick aside, I am sometimes critical of John although I hugely respect him, and both Glenn and John were great here but this was a masterclass from John’s perspective. Talk about holding the guy accountable and pushing him to answer questions. Excellent work.
But the other “wow” is that I’m amazed at how out of touch this man is! He’s clearly infected by this new Marxist ideology.
* He didn’t believe it was correct (if I understood correctly) that black males commit a disproportionate amount of crime. Unless he was saying it was incorrect that he didn’t care about it. I’m not clear.
* He is a black man who holds the position of attorney general in the state of Minnesota. He scoffed when Glenn mentioned fatherless homes and then went on to describe how he grew up with his father in the home. He can’t see the correlation between his success and having both parents in the home!
* He thinks a better thing to focus on is truancy. Clearly not seeing that having fathers at home would likely fix that problem.
* He thinks charter schools segregate kids and all kids would be better off if they were just mixed together. I’m glad Glenn and John both pushed back on this. This guy doesn’t know the data, he also doesn’t realize or care that public schools are a mess and the kids are out of control. So he would rather, presumably in the name of ‘equity’ (Marxist) have all kids suffer equally, rather than allow kids who want to do well to have a place they can focus on their studies rather than public school violence.
I mean we all know how successful charter schools are and that’s why black families try so hard to send their kids there.
It’s amazing to me how out of touch from reality this man is and how ideologically driven he seemed to be. Especially considering he’s the AG.
For a podcast entitled prosecuting Chauvin I was disappointed how little time was allocated to this topic. Not once did they discuss Mr. Floyd’s behavior at the time of arrest. Additionally, they did not discuss Mr Floyd’s level of narcotics or his chronic ill health and it’s impact on his ultimate demise. Mr Ellison was never ask to comment on these inconvenient facts. Had Mr. Floyd compiled with police directions surely his matter would not have derailed the country for 2 years nor would their be any question of murder. If nothing else I would love to know how Mr. Ellison would deal with the belligerence exhibited by Mr Floyd. No doubt were it not for slavery, Mr Floyd would not have resisted.
Yes Mr Chauvin was convicted of via a jury trial. Legally it cannot be argued he is not guilty of murder. A similar finding applies to OJ. He did not commit murder. The justice system renders verdicts, it does not validate facts.
I was pleased Glenn and John question a number of Mr Ellison’s assumptions. I just wish they hadn’t shown him quite so much deference. For example, Mr Ellison claimed there police were not defunded, it was simply a talking point used for partisan benefit. Tens of cities (including New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Seattle, Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Baltimore …) across the US reduced police funding. I am certain both Glenn and John are aware of this.
How about the part where police morale is raised when criminals are actually prosecuted for their crimes, rather than immediately released? Glenn and John, why did you let this guy redirect the conversation to schools etc. His roll is prosecuting crime, and he didn’t answer Johns question early on. I can see where at some point you two decided that you weren’t going to get much out of him, but good God fellas, I would have appreciated a bit more effort here.
I once voted for Kieth Ellison. Thanks for having him on. On the prosecution discussion, his points were interesting and I felt better about him. Yet, on the rest, I agree that many of his his arguments are tired. His social science is way behind the curve. John & Glenn, you guys were brave to have him on.
He’s just a never ending stream of cliches from 1963 and an avoidance reality in 2024. He’s the status quo mouthpiece
Regarding rioters/arsonists at 3rd Precinct Police Station: May 30, 2020 marked the 10th week of the Covid pandemic emergency in USA. I was scared that SF numbers would soon become like NYC. A potentially high Covid death count would require increased deployment of emergency personnel- paramedics, fire and police. May 30 was also during the most restrictive phase of the Covid Shut-down due to elevated disease concern.
If the 3rd Precinct rioters/arsonists were unwelcome from perspective of City Hall and DEI and if Minneapolis Police Department were truly overwhelmed by rioters, then the mayor calls the governor asap and says “I need your help immediately.” That is standard emergency procedure.
From my public health perspective, emergency response employees and property are top priority during a pandemic. On transmission- we only learned after the fact that we erred on the side of caution. But, at week 10 with limited information- we could have easily erred in the opposite direction. Sudden presence of thousands of street protesters in the densest parts of the densest cities could have generated a nationwide transmission mega-spike with deaths jumping upward.
From my public health perspective; instructing the nation’s public to cover faces for protection- necessities increased public and gov cooperation with police. The reason is that decreased facial recognition places the public at increased risk of crime. I passed my supervisor on the sidewalk without recognizing her due to Covid mask. Instead of cooperation, Minneapolis City Hall painted a target on police foreheads.
May/June 2020 actions of gov officials in Minneapolis and Minnesota make sense to them based on information available to them. But, they deliberately concealed such information from the public- which is a transparency and disclosure violation. Across the US, officials in 100 DEI cities and 25 DEI states exercised an extreme degree of secrecy that makes Billionaire-recluse Howard Hughes look like a “Tell all blabber-mouth.” Not acceptable in a democracy.
[Time 55]; I am Muslim and I condemn the sadistic murderous rampage of Hamas on Oct 7. Palestinians have rejected statehood proposal from Israel because they truly want river to sea- where Israel is erased.
[Time 51:00]; AG Ellison suggests red-light runners receive ticket by postal mail instead of police pursuit that becomes high-speed chase. (1): If the criminal suspect were cooperative, there would be no high-speed chase. (2): Civilians with outstanding warrants or involvement in criminality are more likely to flee so as to avoid arrest. (3): Military background is good training for police because interaction with criminals is conflict-ridden.
[Time 40:00]; Arson at 3rd Precinct Police Station: (1) If “police violence” a true concern, trespassers/arsonists would be afraid of experiencing police violence. The fire added fuel to nationwide outrage “fire”. I believe that was the DEI intent. Regardless- fire the incompetent mayor for allowing gov property to be stolen and destroyed. (2): I suspect that rioters/arsonists got permission from City Hall to proceed with trespass into 3rd Precinct. (3) I want 3rd Precinct trespassers/arsonists arrested. (4) Fire the mayor for treason.
Thank you professors GL/JM and Minnesota Attorney General for your discussion.
[Time 22:00]; (1): If I compare myself to Officer Chauvin, the most harmful thing I could possibly do at my job is to accidentally kill an innocent computer. (2): Years ago, I supervised friends’ 4-10 yr old nephews - who were uncooperative, and dangerous to themselves and others. I told the uncles - “never again”. Police do not have such luxuries as 1 and 2.
(3):Once an officer sees a criminal suspect, he is essentially “glued to” suspect until delivery at a jail cell, even if uncooperative. Expecting no injury when suspect is resisting or fighting police - is illogical.
(4): In “The Fall of Minneapolis”; I didn’t see the other three officers display disapproval or verbally criticize Chauvin at the crime scene. To me, that suggests that Chauvin’s actions were viewed as normal.
(5): Expert testimony on witness stand about proper restraint technique should not be treated as if a retroactive rule while corresponding text in police handbook is vague.
(6): In 2016-ish; Suspect Tony Timpa of Dallas had officer knee on shoulder/neck for 11 minutes and died. Police in different jurisdictions appear to believe such procedure is allowable. This suggests to me that top-down communication is at fault.
(7): Beginning Wednesday April 3, 2024; all police in 100 DEI cities should begin strike. Do not go to work until the DEI-allies (DEI directors, police chief, health chief and mayor) are fired and DEI abolished. You can quote me.
Ellison struck me as fundamentally dishonest, little more than a demagogue. While not a firehose of falsehoods, his firehose of facts, assertions, dodges into historic grievances, self-promoting stories, policy proposals, ad hominem attacks on opponents and free passes for those sympathetic to his views sounded like a stump speech. It did not come over as a good faith attempt to answer tough questions, most of which he dodged. Nor was it a coherent, well-constructed defense of the prosecution of Derek Chauvin. I listened most of the time, so missed many reaction shots, though at one point I caught John looking like someone caught at a dinner party listening to a complete bore of a guest who never shuts up. I appreciate this show in good part because Glenn and John ask tough questions of their guests. In this case they tried and maybe gave up. To be sure, it's tough to ask tough questions of someone who never stops talking, who strings together words in a logic and toward an end known only to himself, who continually overtalks and interrupts. But I was disappointed, and didn't buy the amity at the end. The Fall of Minneapolis may well not have proven the innocence of Derek Chauvin, but it significantly complicated the "racist white cop kills innocent black man" story, and it showed some of the cost of that story to the city of Minneapolis and, by extension, the country as a whole. What I took from Ellison's appearance was a sense that his taking over the Chauvin case may well have been driven by a deep animus. That doesn't mean that Chauvin and his colleagues were not responsible, in whole or in part, for Floyd's death. But it also does not reduce my sense of unease over the conduct of the trial.
Keith Ellison says Chauvin, et al are in part guilty for not starting medical treatment on George Floyd at the scene. Ellison doesn't mention that policy says when it is safe to do so. Ellison also doesn't mention that MFD EMTs didn't start to work on Floyd until they were a number of blocks away from the scene. A scene one witness from the neighborhood called a "hot corner".
Ellison also mentions that holding Floyd's legs contributed to his death. Ellison does not mention that when Chauvin, et al took Floyd out of the squad they put him in the side recovery position. In that position, Floyd delivers a ferocious kick to Lane causing Lane to swear. It is in response to Floyd's actions of resistance that he is moved from the side recovery position.
Did Ellison, before, during or after the interview mention why Dr. Martin Tobin lied on the witness stand?
😅You never know who you're sharing a space with until you dive into the comments sections!
It speaks to the range of diversity in thought around here...I guess.
It's not a broad spectrum, but a spectrum nonetheless. We can look at each other's reads and see that. (Subscribers to The Bulwark is about as far left as it gets around here.)
I would love for Glenn and Sussman to do another informal survey (of paid subscribers in particular). i.e., who here self-describes as "right" and why? Who here self-describes as "left" and why? I assume the bird's eye view ratio is at least 4: 1 in favor of the right. But who knows?
And how does that break down? Passionate Trump supporters? Reluctant Trump supporters? NeverTrumpers? Lifelong Dems?
Any self-avowed White nationalists/sympathizers in here? (Not that long ago, there were at least a couple.) Are there any self-avowed Black nationalists?
While we're at it, how about some normal demographic info: age, sex, ethnicity?
Good conversation, thank you Glenn and John.
Ellison's strongest point, to my mind, was about the rash of juvenile motor vehicle thefts. This can't be attributed to single parent homes or any such slow moving factors. School absenteeism does seem like the most important proximate cause, and as he pointed out, even if students are learning very little they are more likely to stay out of trouble.
I also think that he is right to say that people in different communities commit crimes for much the same reasons, though I would emphasize incentives (preemption, retaliation, lack of formal dispute resolution systems when engaged in prohibited transactions, etc) rather than his appeal to bad apples or your general appeal to culture.
On the passion question I think it was a bit unfair to say that he doesn't care much about civilian crime, and the case where he took charge of a prosecution for a particularly heinous offense was an effective rebuttal.
His appeals to the broad sweep of history (slavery, segregation) are surely relevant but these are presented as conversation stoppers rather than the first step in trying to figure out mechanisms and solutions. This was the most frustrating part of the conversation, especially regarding charter schools. He is dogmatic on these (and a few other) issues. But some of your commenters seem to think he has little of value to say about anything, and I think this is not correct.
The lovely tribute at the end where he pointed out that the two of you can converse productively with people who can't have useful conversations with each other was touching.
So, again, thank you.
Thank you for having Keith Ellison as a guest. A valuable perspective. Could you now have a rebuttal from a capable source? Roland Fryer, etc.?
I’m ready to cancel my $7 a month man. Pathetic. Glenn you didn’t have any qualms, never pushed back, and neither of you know anything about Ellison’s Farrakhan and Antifa ties. Ellison’s a lightweight hollering bland generalities and deflections. God damn I can’t believe you let him snow you. 100%. Oh, and for perspective, I'm a lifelong Dem.