“Distrust and verify”–Michelle
Malkin
For the second time in as many weeks, Democrats have accused health
care opponents of politically-motivated
crimes–vandalism at the Democratic Party’s state HQ and even a death
threat against Rep. John Salazar.
Thanks to intrepid investigations by PPC
and others in the blogosphere, we know how the vandalism story
turned out.
Now, police in Grand Junction are telling the public that the
allegations of an unnamed suspect threatening Rep. Salazar’s life are
“unfounded.”
From Lynn Bartels at the Denver
Post:
“People who witnessed the interaction
between the man who made the complaint and the suspect confirmed they
never heard any direct threats made regarding Congressman Salazar,”
said Kate Porras, spokeswoman for the Grand Junction police.
“Also, a (Grand Junction police officer) in close proximity
when
the interaction took place never heard any direct threats made against
Salazar by the suspect,” she said.
Asked whether the person filing the report faced any
kind of charge, such as filing a false report, Porras said, “Not at
this time. We don’t have any information to show the person who filed
the report intentionally gave us false information.”
Alleging that someone issued a death threat is a serious issue. The
person who was investigated was undoubtedly put through the ringer by
local police and possibly Federal agencies.
Kudos to Bartels for covering the story, while the rest of the MSM
on the Front Range has gone silent (so far).
So, is this a true “false flag” operation, the work of an agent
provacateur, or something else entirely?
The police should seriously consider charging the accuser of filing
a false report, especially seeing as not one shred of corroborating
evidence turned up during the investigation.
**Note–early reports were heavily favored toward the accuser’s
point-of-view, and the speculation was that the person allegedly making
the death threats was, in fact, either a rabid anti-Salazar opponent or
part of a “false flag” operation attempting to smear Salazar’s Western
Slope opponents, just as the suspected vandal was in the Democratic
Party HQ debacle (remember, the first two theories in that case were
that the vandalism was a result of “hate” as Chairwoman Pat Waak
alleged, or a result of an orchestrated effort to smear ObamaCare
opponents). Now that the suspect has been cleared of wrongdoing based
on “unfounded” charges, could this now be an example of Dems “crying
wolf” as is suggested in the comments?
September 1st, 2009 at 2:12 pm
A “false flag” operation would be if a Salazar supporter actually threatened Salazar intending that the threat be blamed on Salazar opponents. When a Salazar supporter falsely claims an opponent has issued a threat then that is something else - “crying wolf” perhaps.