By Victoria Taft

Photo Credit: Screenshot/Mike Bluehair
Photo Credit: Screenshot/Mike Bluehair

Mike Strickland was arrested and charged in Portland for pulling a gun at a Black Lives Matter/anarchist protest when a mob converged on him. But now he sits in jail. As one person put it, “[Mike Strickland] is now a political prisoner in Multnomah County.”

First, it’s been awhile since I’ve posted here. But this video of Laughing at Liberals unholstering his gun and pointing in the direction of Portland anarchists and protesters awoke me from my slumber. It’s time to sound off.

Second, I’m well acquainted Mike Strickland and his work. Since at least 2010, the videographer has been on the scene in Portland and the northwest chronicling important stories about the organized left. I’ve used the fruits of his labors on my radio program in Portland, on this website, and in my current radio and other work.

We’re not besties, but I should tell you that when I was asked to design an online news platform, he was the one guy I sought to be on my team.  Later, when I had a chance to suggest a videographer for a California state wide candidate, I suggested Mike Strickland. He’s talented and knows when a set of facts equate to a story. I’ve been impressed by his work for himself and also for Jim Hoft’s “Progressives Today” and “Gateway Pundit” where he has done some painstaking and important work — especially on gun rights.

Third, you should know that about a year ago Strickland was attacked by an anti-second amendment filmmaker named Skye Fitzgerald and so badly hurt he was hospitalized and out of work for months. His arm was broken in three places. Though charged with a felony, Fitzgerald was never prosecuted by Multnomah County prosecutors.

Here is the video that I’m told was presented to Multnomah County prosecutors showing the beating. It has not been made public until it was shared on

Strickland Being Beaten

Enjoy the videos and music you love, upload original content, and share it all with friends, family, and the world on YouTube.

Even with this evidence, the DA chose not to prosecute the filmmaker, though he clearly assaulted and robbed Strickland of all his cameras (which he later returned with erased flash drives/data cards).

Reports from the left and media to the contrary notwithstanding, Strickland’s not a nut or a kook. He’s a serious young man who is fulfilling a calling to expose the manipulations of the left and the media that proliferate and quite literally shout down the voices of opposing points of view in Portland and Oregon. There are probably several things with which I disagree with Mike, Ron Paul fandom comes to mind, but he’s no ‘winger.’ 

So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m posting the video from a guy named “Mike Bluehair” who trained his camera on the mob surrounding Strickland in the seconds leading up to the unholstering of his gun and the aftermath. I don’t know “Mike Bluehair,” but the protesters apparently do and trust him (except the Crabbe and Goyle* of the anarchist set, who threatened him for being Strickland’s friend. No idea if that’s true.).

Please do these things:

And remember: You do not have permission to copy and paste any/all of  the content from this post. Use the link or use nothing at all. Contact me for permissions:

Watch the video from “Mike Bluehair’s” Channel:

Man pulls gun on crowd of Portland protesters

Michael Strickland is facing menacing and disorderly conduct charges after pulling a gun on crowd of Portland protesters. July 7th 2016 link for more info he…

Now, let’s go over the video (I apologize for the differently sized GIFs, but apparently it can’t be helped).

The mob begins to surround Strickland:

gun surround him

The mob keeps coming:

Gun crowd surround 2

Angry looking man and person with green coat converge with crowd:

gun crowd closes in around him

Green jacketed person presumably sees gun and runs:

gun crowd burning girl 4

Strickland draws his weapon to back them off and backs away from the mob:

gun crowd drawn 4

Strickland is asked to holster his weapon by someone off camera and complies:

gun crowd holsters assurance 6

“Mike Bluehair” tells mob to back off to let Strickland back away from the scene:

gun Strickland looks behind him 7

Angry man has to be held back by person in green jacket:

gun crowd hold back 3

Angry man has to be restrained by another protester. Note that green jacket person has now put on Guy Fawkes mask:

gun green jacket mask 10

Strickland tells mob to stop anarchists advancing on him:

gun crowd strickland anarchists 8

The mob follows Strickland as he backs his way up the street:

gun Strickland mob assault guy back 15

Sideways hat advances while gray hoodie guy advances to the side and assaults Strickland:

gun assault 13

The Crabbe and Goyle * of the anarchist set threaten the photog:

gun crabbe and goyle 16

Angry man is back, this time with his anarchist kerchief, and advances toward Strickland:

gun angry man back 15

The rest of the video involves police arriving, arresting Strickland and people being questioned. No one says they were menaced by Strickland.

It’s quite serious to draw your weapon, but if you fear for your life or fear great bodily injury, it’s a defensible thing to do. But that’s just my take. I decided to go to the experts.

I asked four cops to tell what they saw in this video. I’ve given all of them anonymity because of the explosive nature of this case and, after all, they have to live in the area. The only editing is for clarification and brevity.

First up is a 30+ year veteran who’s still on the job in Oregon:

“Clearly the man was afraid of the crowd. There is no crime committed, the man seemed obviously alarmed by the crowd and was backing away from the threat. Whether the threat was real or not is irrelevant, he felt threatened.”

“There is no crime committed”

Next is a long time cop in Oregon:

“Didn’t see what was going on to cause him to point a weapon initially. Clearly he was being menaced by a crowd hostile to him, who they seem to know. Many wearing full or partial masks, one holding a smoking object toward the gentleman, who was trying to back away.

At one point while backing, one of them got behind him and grabbed at him. Officer repeatedly ask if they felt menaced and he says no. Not sure why he was charged with menacing and disorderly, no victim was identified and a reasonable and prudent person might conclude he feared for his safety.

[N]ot a attorney, but his past assault and circumstances with the crowd might make a case for feeling threatened and he was attempting to leave, the videographer was shouting “If you want to be safe leave”

Menacing is a catch all misdemeanor charge, you might want to review ORS 161.205(5) A person may use physical force upon another person in self-defense or in defending a third person, in defending property, in making an arrest or in preventing an escape, as hereafter prescribed in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971. Oh and ORS 161.219(1) Applies to use of Deadly Physical Force.”

“Clearly he was being menaced by a crowd hostile to him, who they seem to know.”

Next is a retired police investigator who was on the job in Oregon:

“Here’s anonymous (please) take. It’s LOL. I have no idea who the videographer is, but he’s got a great set of lines. My impression is that he’s in cahoots with L[a]l, but he’s also asking the cops not shoot him, and I recognize that as leftie bullshit. He said straight out the HE didn’t feel threatened by L[a]L, so there goes a serious charge where HE is concerned and leaves (if unjustified) a charge of pointing a firearm at another.
The stinkin’ Justice Center and Federal building are teeming with cameras which might show what happened earlier, before this video started, which is about the ONLY evidence I would consider AGAINST L[a]L, because this film shows assholes following him and surrounding him in spite of the videographer’s urging them not to.
For a criminal case, it is incomplete and ends with the videographer coaching a man with the words it takes to GET a complaint issued rather than merely asking the questions and listening to the answers.
Beats me, but given the facts of the personages in the crowd and L[a]L’s long history without similar trouble, the most he’d likely face if I was heading this up is a trip to the Grand Jury along with all the “witnesses” (who likely wouldn’t even show up).”
“[G]iven the facts of the personages in the crowd and L[a]L’s long history without similar trouble…”

And finally, a politically connected, retired police administrator in Oregon pointed out the untenable political situation in which the Portland Police Bureau now finds itself:

“It’s difficult to know where to start. [Laughing at Liberals] came ready for trouble because he was armed. It might be that he carries a firearm all the time [editor’s note: Strickland has a legal concealed carry permit and frequently carries].

Generally, provide the kind of calm and strength a community needs circumstances more than anything else. It is here where the confidence in the police force pays huge dividends. That’s one reason why Dallas, for the most part, remains calm even though this shooter was black and the victims were white. 

Yes, and Portland, Oregon is in very sad shape in terms of political and police leadership at this point. I don’t understand how it is that the city has gotten so far out of control and lost the respect of its citizens. 

The cops are doing their best under the circumstances, however when there is so little confidence in the mayor, the city council and their guidance and leadership choices for the Police Bureau, troops on the street are under a great deal of pressure every day.”

I asked former police executive if Strickland had broken the law:

“Tough call. On its face maybe not.”

Then came the political rationale for arresting Strickland in the first place which was to appease the anarchists:

“[O]ften the decision to arrest on the street other than the intent of the law is to address the larger issues in this case: restore or maintain the peace and also to re-establish that the police are in control. 

I am not sure there was any choice in the moment given the facts and the and the need to end the situation. What you to ask yourself is: can we allow the perception that guns drawn in these situations between the citizenry should be the new norm? That is not to say that the charges will stand when the DA has a chance to review the entire set of facts. Of course, by that time, the street has returned to some kind of calm and the situation ends safely.

Unfortunately, once in awhile the probably cause to make an arrest to keep the peace trumps the interest of the individual. In the end, the question becomes proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

A reasonable person may think [Strickland] broke the law but that doesn’t mean his actions will be judged to have been [unlawful].”


“Q: Did he break the law? A: On its face maybe not.”

Kevin Starrett of Oregon Firearms Federation told that this case is giving him sleepless nights.

“I can’t think of a situation that is more appropriate for defensive use of a weapon…”

He says the way in which the prosecutors increased the charges at the arraignment, raised the bail to $250,000 when they would have let anyone else go, the bizarre hearsay entered as ‘fact’ at the hearing, and the fact that the organized left has made Strickland a target with websites have basically made Strickland a pariah:

“[Mike Strickland] is a political prisoner in Multnomah County Jail. That is absolutely the case.”

Starrett says even some gun owners believe Strickland should not have been at the protest in the first place. He’s in that camp. But, he says, “he had every right to be there.” Furthermore, the head of the OFF told

“[I]f I were approached by a crowd like that, that I believe intended to do me harm, a deranged mob mentality —  can you win in that situation…probably not.  But I can’t think of a situation that is more appropriate for defensive use of a weapon. He had a right to be there. Was  it a great idea? No. He went into enemy territory. But there are war correspondents in the same situation.”

Starrett says the videographer’s own footage could exonerate him:

“The only video that counts is the one he shot. But I wouldn’t be surprised if it disappears [in prosecutors’ custody].”

And it’s the way forward that has Starrett concerned as well:

“What’s happening now with him is part of a grander thing. They’re determined to make an example out of him. He’s the easiest bone to throw them [the leftist power structure of Portland].”

Starrett told that OFF is ready to help with attorneys fees, but starting out with an outsized bail is going to sap valuable resources. This issue is bigger than their war chest can cover.
Starrett, who teaches firearms law and self defense law, told 
“I have only the videos to go on, but as an instructor I believe that after drawing his firearm, he holstered as soon as he thought it was safe and we tell people to do that.”
Starrett doesn’t hold out much hope that a pro Second Amendment person will get fair treatment in Portland:
“In any rational county they would have carted him off and cited him. Multnomah County is still predisposed against him. After all, he was attacked on video and his attacker was able to walk.”
And then he revealed his worst fear:
“A conservative person cannot expect justice in multnomah county.”


A private Facebook page has been set up to give support to Strickland and keep track of his case.

To help defray the costs of Strickland’s defense case, Oregon Firearms Federation is continuing to take donations at its Foundation with a credit card or via snail mail. Checks to the 501c3 organizations can be made out to Oregon Firearms Federation Foundation (marked Mike Strickland defense) and mailed:

PO Box 556
Canby OR



*Draco Malfoy’s thuggish friends from the Harry Potter series.

And remember: You do not have permission to copy and paste any/all of  the content from this post. Use the link or use nothing at all. Quotes will be attributed to Contact me for permissions:


65 Responses

  1. This does look like a situation where Strickland had every right to feel threaten, especially with his past experiences. The mob mentality of these crowds in Portland are well known, but Portland doesn’t seem to react in the same way to those damaging property, or marching without permits, or leaving routes assigned and agreed. Justice cannot simply be one-sided. A change of venue may be in order here so Strickland get a fair unbiased shake at the law.

      1. Ultimately this will be disposed of quietly and forgotten. Neither the police nor the city want this to escalate further given the climate. He will get no justice, but the mob will not have their way.

        Life is often unfair, but he escaped in a far better position than he has in the past. For that I am grateful. Quite the courage. To be caught unaware is one thing; to walk into the fire is something else. True mettle.

  2. Given the stated reason for L(a)L arrest was to appease the crowd, perhaps our USAG will override FBI Dir. Comely and arrest and charge Hillary Clinton for a far more reasonable justification of appeasing her opponents??

    But more reasonably, when is arresting someone, anyone justified by placating a crowd?? It seems Michael L(a)L may well have an interesting civil rights suit against PPD for unlawful arrest, defamation and all the c(r)ookbook charges typically brought by the Left.

  3. This article is riddled with typos and missing conjunctions. I’d have someone proof it before you publish it to the Internet. The lack of professional writing is distracting and takes away from the message. Next time, take your time and don’t be so impulsive.

    1. My god, somebody’s life is in jeopardy, justice is lacking, tyranny is the rule and your worried about typos. What the hell is wrong with you!

        1. You know, I’m more than a little troubled by your saying you disagree with Strickland in part due to his support of Ron Paul. What possible justification to you give for that?

          David Jaques, Publisher
          The Roseburg Beacon

          1. There are many things about Ron Paul with which I agree. I was just giving an example. I think we should probably keep our eye on the ball and, to throw another cliche out there, make the main thing the main thing here.

  4. Why is Strickland’s act, manifestly in self-defense against a Black Lies Matter mob that prides itself on creating a sense of menance and has a well-known history of violence agains unarmed victims, even debatable? Based on thirty years as a civil rights lawyer, I am absolutely positive that if Strickland was black and the advancing anarchist mob white, Strickland the white mobsters would be prosecuted for a “hate” crime” for threatening him with great bodily harm, and Strickland, if black, would be showered with support by the same people who are now condemning him for defending himself as the law provides.

  5. Perhaps a full NRA or Gun rights rally to protest the sloppy and politically inept handling of Mr. Strickland’s case and in support of Mr Strickland is in order.

    This sounds not like the protection of individual legal rights but the covering of practical political pa-toot kangaroo style.

    They have the film, they can and ought to be arresting those who were menacing.

  6. Mike was the hostile one he was asked to leave due to his past with events like this he refused and went on a rant HE HIT PEOPLE WITH HIS STICK I DID NOT SEE ONE ANARCHIST HIT HIM WITH THERE FLAG. MIKE HAS BEEN MORPHING THE TRUTH. THAT “BURNING OBJECT” IS SAGE TO CLEANSE THE ENERGY. The “mob” was all of 8 (at the most) no one was ever behind him so he was never actually surounded. Yes I approached him with now fear for my life because my life is less important then the children and families he put at risk. My mask was on the whole protest for I am an open member of anonymous. I raised my mask to him at the end of everything because I wanted to talk to him rather then fight. The “mob” was only protecting the children. Nice job trying to make us look like fucks though you at least tried.
    PS I’m a dude
    -“girl” in green

    1. Yah, well you looked like a girl. That said, why did the mob follow him if they were so afraid? And, if you are who you say you are — a typical anarchist — you being afraid of Mike is pretty laughable. Why were you holding that ‘angry man’ back? Were you afraid he’d do what he eventually did?

      1. We where not afraid for ourselves but for the families. Never said anything about being an anarchist I’m an anonwas. not afraid of Mike at all. And that “angry man” could have done a lot more then follow him. Witch you could tell based of off his little speech earlyer in the day (I do not agree with).

        1. And another one who says they’re not afraid of Mike Strickland. I wonder how it is he’s still in jail. I’m sure angry man could have done more. He was charging up the street after sideways hat and gray hoodie guy. Could have been ugly. Those guys were stupid to do that, but…

          1. He’s in jail because he is a dumbass and irresponsible gun owner..

          2. There are those who may agree with you about the wisdom on unholstering his weapon. Considering the make up of the crowds, I don’t think it was dumb at all, however.

          3. I will say he is being fucked by the system. I don’t disagree with that. I disagree with Michael, everything he stands for, and his whole reason for wanting to be there. He was there to cause trouble the same reasons the black panthers where there and I just don’t agree with it. We had a really nice peaceful protest other then those two incidents and all media can cover is the nagitive.

          4. i actually read that already i was there when they said it. i don’t agree with it no one agreed with it and we don’t support it. the little violence speech they gave has actually given my friends at Don’t Shoot PDX a really bad name. everything they said was 100% them being that it was an “open mic” situation. no one “moved in violence” that night. we where not “moving with the panthers”. it was actually a very peaceful protest. riot cops agreed to play hopscotch with mike bluehair in a situation where they didn’t have to hold there line. it was a very positive march except for what the media decides to cover witch for the record has nothing to do with Black Lives Matter or Don’t Shoot PDX.

    2. Are you going to answer Victoria, or cower behind one of your stupid masks? Mike Strickland had every right to be there – it’s a public place. A mob cannot tell him to leave. And with all those cameras around, not one shows Mike hitting anyone.

      Burning sage to cleanse the energy? LOL! What lame ass B.S. is that?!? Too bad it didn’t help keep you thugs from assaulting Mike.

      1. I did reply I just don’t spend my days on this little blog talking shit lmao. Yes he has every right to be there but it goes like this I can do whatever I want nothing can stop me but I go somewhere I’m not wanted I’m not going to be treated kindly with open arms. I am not hiding behind my mask I talked right to the police evidence camera with my mask up. Not one camera shows Mike hitting anyone but at the same time not one camera shows what happened before and as he was leaving the main crowd and yes burning sage it I had her cleanse me With it about a half hour before the incident. She had it burning before we even made it to the justice center.

    3. The following is a deconstruction: “..asked to leave..” If you ask me to stop breathing, I’m required?
      “…Hit people with his stick..” Prove he did, and show it was not self-defense.

      “I did not see..” So what?

      The burning object was sage. Why would a normal person know that?

      “The mob was 8 (at most). Defend yourself, only 8 enemies.

      “ one was behind him..” how do you know what he knows?

      “Yes I approached him with now fear for my life because my life is less important…” NO fear, Okay, that your choice. Did your lack of fear communicate intimidation?

      “My mask was on the whole protest…” until “I wanted to talk to him rather than fight” Wow! Wow!

      “The “mob” was only…” Define mob, that’s okay, here you go: Large crowd of people, especially one that is disorderly and intent on causing trouble or violence.

  7. And remember: You do not have permission to copy and paste any/all of the content from this post. Use the link or use nothing at all. Quotes will be attributed to Contact me for permissions:

    I really like this site, thanks, unfortunately to the incident downtown, but jeez, post that intellectual property warning at the front.

  8. Great job VT. I sent some cash to OFF and I suggest others do the same if they have the resources. The lack of justice in the country starting here and going all the way up to the Democratic POS candidate is really disconcerting. While I no longer listen to Glen Beck, He was right when he said we would not recognize our country one year after Obama’s first term…A lot of water has passed under that bridge and we are closer to full scale anarchy because of these types of instances that drive us further from being a United States and a united people.

  9. If a man has a gun pointed at a crowd at a peaceful rally, he’s the problem. If this was the thanksgiving day parade and that was a black guy, what would you want the crowd to do? Give the guy with a gun plenty of space to move around? Lol, hypocrites.

          1. Predate? That’s not the right word, I think you meant to say prey, perhaps? As in predator/prey? So large groups of people like to prey upon videographers without being molested….huh, I don’t see anyone preying on him, I see people who don’t want a nosy Nellie who is going to post their personal information online for anyone to see. The guy is a menace, and now he’s mad that people have the same right to harass him as he has to harass them. But he doesn’t have the right to pull a loaded weapon on a peaceful protest.

          2. You see black people as dangerous, that’s why you see him as being in danger. And then you go searching for any evidence you can to justify your fear of people with dark skin. It doesn’t really matter what you use to justify it, it’s still racist. The only people I see actually touch him at any point are white, which is kinda funny when you look at who he is pointing his gun at, they tend to have darker skin. Now, no one else has a weapon, and I understand self defense is self defense, but since when it is okay to shoot someone for pushing you or bumping into you on purpose? Yeah, there were a lot of people and a lot of people against one dude, doesn’t matter if they have weapons, right? But there were already people helping him, and pushing him back specifically for his own safety. I’m sorry but pulling your gun out just shows what a coward he is.

          3. I repeat, you see what you want to see. People who disagree with you must be a boogeyman of some sort. I understand it. It’s sad, but I understand it.

          4. So, it’s okay to pull a gun on someone for pushing you? It’s okay to pull a loaded firearm on people that are trying to protect you? No, ya’ll aren’t the bogeyman, you don’t scare me, but it does make me sad. I can’t find a single moment when his life is threatened in any way in this video, and I just want to understand why you think he had to defend himself against unarmed people?

  10. Update your article. It was Saunderson of LaughingatLiberals who had his arm broken, not Strickland. Don’t make us look like liars or fools. The arm breaking and theft of equipment is bad no matter what, but just get the facts straight or we’ll be questioned on other things.

      1. I don’t see how this is accurate: “Third, you should know that about a year ago Strickland was attacked by an anti-second amendment filmmaker named Skye Fitzgerald and so badly hurt he was hospitalized and out of work for months. His arm was broken in three places. Though charged with a felony, Fitzgerald was never prosecuted by Multnomah County prosecutors.”

        The first link in that paragraph goes to a site that says, “The victim of this latest attack, Mr. Saunderson, is currently undergoing surgery on his left arm which was seriously (and potentially permanently) injured. ”

        So is that site wrong? It’s clear that both this site and yours are talking about the laughingatliberals channel, but whose arm was broken? Saunderson or Strickland?? That’s what I’m getting at.

        I’m just trying to get this cleared up. I support laughingatliberals, have been a long time subscriber, and a frequent commenter who the L@L channel user has dialogued with.

        If this Strickland/Saunderson thing could be clarified it would benefit us. Thank you for your work in posting the slowed videos. I was recommending that people download and play the videos slow so they could see just what all was going on. It’s clear that one black guy was a DANGER. He had THREE people restraining him at one point.

        Thanks again for posting this stuff to help out Strickland!

          1. I see the webpage linked to in this sentence, “Third, you should know that about a year ago Strickland was attacked by an anti-second amendment filmmaker named Skye Fitzgerald ” has been changed and the video that was posted there with a title about Strickland being attacked has been modified and the linked video has been removed. It’s a good thing I always save pages and videos when I come across questionable discrepancies like that. Now there is a different video linked on that page, although the story is the same.

            It’s completely and utterly intellectually dishonest to pretend as if these changes weren’t made and say that you stand by the story. Now it makes me wonder if a big money making operation is going on here.

            Bail generally requires that 10% of the total be paid for in order to be released. I’m not seeing note of that any where. It’s a common intel technique to try to raise big legal funds after an operation.

            So I’m wondering, is this black panter a mason. Is Strickland a mason? What a lucrative operation if so…

            How would you feel if I go ahead and post a youtube video showing these before and after changes?

            And yes, I’ve got every thing on this page saved too. Gotta be sure I can share it later ;). Wouldn’t want it to disappear like the video on the aforementioned link…

  11. In planning his defense at trial, Strickland should plan for the fact that this will be a political prosecution, that any motions to compel witnesses, evidences, and testimonies in his defense, or even being able to present the defense of his choice, and the right to compel exculpatory evidence that would tend to exonerate him will be severely abridged or denied, and that any oral motions, arguments, or testimonies on his behalf will be interrupted, censored, rejected, and denied before two words can be spoken.

    He must plan for and vigorously defend against malicious prosecution and any prosecutorial ‘error’ that ‘innocently’ arises with the nudge nudge wink wink blessings of the court, as well as plan for and vigorously defend against any judicial ‘errors’ that ‘innocently’ occur during pre-trial and trial proceedings – as the appellate courts will rule that any failure to timely submit motions (to force disclosure of evidence, follow up motions to force the release of evidence when earlier rulings have been ignored by the prosecution, etc.) failure to raise arguments of law, failure to raise and document arguments of fact, or failure to preserve any issue of law or fact, even one arising from prosecutorial misconduct or error or even judicial error, is simply too damn bad for him.

    He needs to plan a scorched earth defense, attempting to have the charges dismissed with prejudice before trial, attempting to have the charges dismissed immediately when the prosecution rest its case at trial, attempting to have the charges dismissed immediately when resting his own defense, and fighting any attempt of the prosecution to cherry pick the jury, to bias the jury with slanderous questions rather than evidence, and to fight against any attempt by the prosecutor or its witnesses to infer to the jury that their opinion proves a crime despite a lack of evidence, and knowing that he will lose at trial.

    He should know going into this that the only way to secure his freedom and to secure the restoration of his rights in the event he is unable to force a dismissal of the charges is to win the case at the appellate level, and the only way to do that is to fight like hell to document every issue of law and every issue of contested fact and every issue of misconduct and error by the officers of the court, and then to present an unimpeachable case argued upon the lawful use of force in self defense.

    Having said that, the most damning evidence against him that will ensure his conviction are the several repeated instances, after having drawn a weapon and then reholstering it, that he stopped retreating from the mob and actually took several steps forward to speak with persons from the crowd or to continue filming the crowd. The prosecution will demand that the jury, as finders of fact, reasonably conclude that the fear of harm was not as great the defendant claims, evidenced by his stepping towards the crowds several times after having reholstered his weapon, and the prosecution will demand that the jury find that his failure to expeditiously retreat after holstering his weapon, evidenced by his stepping towards the crowd several times instead of continuously retreating, demonstrates both a lack of reasonable fear of harm and his own culpability inciting any danger to himself.

    Whatever he filmed showing the danger to himself had better be pretty good, as the jury is going to expect him to provide a reasonable rationale explaining his own lapse in judgement stepping towards the crowd several times after reholstering his weapon. Drawing his gun and pointing it at persons telling people to get back because their actions threatened him, and then, albeit briefly, stepping back towards the crowd trying to resume documenting the protest as if nothing had happened after reholstering his gun – isn’t going to cut it.

    Does that excuse the criminal actions of those in the crowd assaulting him? No. If this man is to be prosecuted for his culpability endangering the public then, in the interest of of justice, they should be prosecuted as well for their criminal mischief inciting panic and alarm, and engaging in assaults upon fellow citizens that were also attempting to exercise their constitutional rights.

    The public should be demanding that ALL parties engaged in criminal mischief during the demonstration be identified and prosecuted. Any bets on if the police department and the city administration will fail or refuse to investigate, indict, or prosecute demonstrators that engaged in criminal mischief, incited fear or panic, caused property damage, and assault other persons and deprived them of their civil liberties?

    I wouldn’t hold my breath. And that is precisely why it can be illustrated that this is not merely a prosecution to punish this man for his own culpability in creating a public danger, but a political prosecution intending to sacrifice him upon the alter of electoral politics.

  12. If he is a political prisoner here are more: Lawrence Scarsell, 23, Daniel Thomas Macey, 26, Nathan Wayne Gustavsson, 21, Joseph Martin Backman, 27

    These 4 “white supremacist” (one of the asian, which makes them the worse white supremacist ever) were arrested under similair circumstances, except they actually fired. Apparently they protesters thought one of them was a white supremacist because he had a BLM sign, so they go confront them demanding the de-mask and show ID. When they refuse the peaceful protesters punch them. When one of the “white supremacist” reaches behind for his gun the peaceful protesters punch them again. The “white supremacists” run away and over 2 dozen peaceful protesters gave chase, KNOWING HE HAD A GUN! How stupid do you have to be to chase and threaten someone you know is armed?

    One of the most clear cut case of self defense I’ve ever seen, and all 4 of them have been sitting in jail for over 7 months now with bails at $100K-$500K facing decades in prison. The similarities to this case are striking. I don’t feel optimistic about his chances of beating this unfortunately.