a20 EZ RE the washington post.thursday, february 20 , 2020
letters to the editor[email protected]local opinionsJoin the debate at washingtonpost.com/local-opinionsT
HE TRUTH about the death of Bijan Ghaisar,
the young accountant shot to death by
U.S. Park Police officers in 2017, has n ot become
less true in the 26 months since he died.
Ghaisar’s killing was unwarranted, unjustified and
unjust. That fact remains unchanged despite the me-
andering two-year FBI investigation, despite the Jus-
tice Department’s gutless decision last year against
prosecuting and despite the legal mumbo-jumbo now
emanating from federal officials.
In the latest twist, the chief of the Justice Depart-
ment’s Civil Rights Division has informed Virginia
prosecutors that if they decide to pursue state charges
against the officers who killed Ghaisar, they may be
forced to do so without testimony from the FBI agents
who investigated Ghaisar’s d eath. The reason, said Eric
S. Dreiband, who leads the division, is that the Justice
Department may actually defend the officers in a civil
suit brought by Ghaisar’s parents. If it does, he wrote,
the department would have a conflict of interest w ere i tto assist a state prosecution t hrough the F BI, its subsid-
iary agency.
In a letter to Fairfax’s top prosecutor, Mr. Dreiband
also suggested the Justice Department might in any
event try to block any state prosecution against the
officers. Citing p recedents, he w rote that states may not
prosecute federal officers w hen the o fficers’ a ctions are
“objectively r easonable.”
It’s useful that Mr. Dreiband cited that standard,
because the officers’ conduct failed to meet it.
As state and federal officials ponder the legal nice-
ties, it’s worth bearing in mind the f acts: Ghaisar was
unarmed. He posed no threat to the officers or the
public. The sequence culminating with his death began
as a fender-bender in which Ghaisar’s car was struck
from b ehind. Ghaisar l eft the s cene of the a ccident and
drove off twice after police pulled him over. But at the
moment the officers o pened f ire, s hooting 10 times and
striking Ghaisar with four bullets in the head, he was
edging his car a t a snail’s pace away from them.Translation: The officers’ d ecision to use lethal f orce
was objectively unreasonable. So why would the Jus-
tice Department intervene to defend them against the
Ghaisar family’s l awsuit?
The answer, perhaps, is that under President Trump,
the department’s commitment to civil rights enforce-
ment generally, and police accountability specifically,
has shriveled to the point of irrelevance. When the
department averts its gaze from the conduct of entire
police departments, including Baltimore’s, it’s h ardly a
shock that it would come to the defense of Lucas
Vinyard and Alejandro Amaya, the Park Police officers
who killed G haisar.
Ye t it should be a shock, as the dash-cam video of the
incident, recorded by a Fairfax County police cruiser
that trailed the Park Police vehicle, makes clear. B y
shooting Ghaisar, who had no weapon, no criminal
record and no intent to do harm, the police offended
any notion of justice. It’s a disgrace that the Justice
Department is trying to obscure that plain t ruth.Objectively unreasonable
The Justice Department is trying to hide the truth about Bijan Ghaisar’s killing.
T
HE EARLY phase of the coronavirus outbreak
in China remains an important and still poorly
understood lacuna. Prompt, early action could
have saved lives and averted enormous disrup-
tion. I nstead, the Chinese people were exposed to
danger in the first weeks of the epidemic when their
officials failed to sound the alarm, even though they
knew something was afoot.
Not all the details of decision-making in the secre-
tive Chinese system have yet come to light. But a key
disclosure was made Feb. 15 in the Communist Party
bimonthly journal, Qiushi, which reprinted the text of
a speech that President Xi Jinping gave Feb. 3, accord-
ing to the newsletter Sinocism. In the speech, Mr. Xi
declared, “I issued demands during a Politburo Stand-
ing Committee meeting on January 7 for work to
contain the outbreak.” Thus, he knew of the outbreak
by that day, a nd quite possibly days beforehand.
This is important because at that moment, the
information was largely withheld from the public. As
we noted earlier, according to a detailed insider ac-
count published by the China Media Project, o n Dec. 30
the Wuhan Health Commission “issued an order to
hospitals, clinics and other healthcare units strictly
prohibiting the release of any information about treat-
ment of this new disease.” The account says that while
Chinese officials i nformed the World Health Organiza-
tion of a new coronavirus outbreak, “they did not
inform their own people, b ut instead maintained strict
secrecy.”
Likewise, eight Chinese doctors expressed concern
in Wuhan in December and were reprimanded for
spreading rumors. O ne of them, Li Wenliang, who died
recently of the coronavirus, was warned by the police
after sharing concerns about seven new cases in an
online group chat on Dec. 30. Without knowing of the
alarming developments about the virus, in those first
weeks of January a “Spring Festival” was being
planned for 40,000 people in a residential community
in Wuhan. Also, annual provincial and city politicalmeetings were held in Wuhan from Jan. 1 2 to 17. In t hat
period, a city health commission issued public state-
ments that no new cases were detected. And a delega-
tion of Chinese officials was in Washington, to sign a
“phase one” trade deal with President Trump on
Jan. 15.
Mr. Xi issued instructions for dealing with the
outbreak Jan. 20, nearly two weeks after he spoke
about it to the Politburo. Why only then? What did he
know, and when did he know it? Did he hope to avoidupsetting the Washington trade event? And why reveal
his Jan. 7 intervention now? To make himself look like
the wise captain of the ship, so that lower-level officials
can be punished?
C hina has an immense challenge coping with the
outbreak. Its success or failure will affect the whole
world. It has n ow mounted an enormous c ontainment
effort. But these early weeks of the epidemic reveal the
hazards of an authoritarian system t hat hides t he truth
from its own people.Autocrats
v s. coronavirus
What did Mr. Xi know,
and when did he know it?ABCDE
FREDERICK J. RYAN JR., Publisher and Chief Executive Officer
news pages: editorial and opinion pages:
MARTIN BARON FRED HIATT
Executive Editor Editorial Page Editor
CAMERON BARR JACKSON DIEHL
Managing Editor Deputy Editorial Page Editor
EMILIO GARCIA-RUIZ RUTH MARCUS
Managing Editor Deputy Editorial Page Editor
TRACY GRANT JO-ANN ARMAO
Managing Editor Associate Editorial Page Editor
SCOTT VANCE
Deputy Managing Editor
BARBARA VOBEJDA
Deputy Managing Editor
Vice presidents:
JAMES W. COLEY JR......................................................................................Production
L. WAYNE CONNELL..........................................................................Human Resources
KATE M. DAVEY..................................................................................Revenue Strategy
ELIZABETH H. DIAZ.................................................Audience Development & Insights
GREGG J. FERNANDES........................................................Customer Care & Logistics
STEPHEN P. GIBSON...................................................................Finance & Operations
SCOT GILLESPIE.........................................................................................................Arc
KRISTINE CORATTI KELLY...................................................Communications & Events
JOHN B. KENNEDY.................................................................General Counsel & Labor
MIKI TOLIVER KING........................................................................................Marketing
KAT DOWNS MULDER........................................................................Product & Design
SHAILESH PRAKASH...............................Digital Product Development & Engineering
JOY ROBINS...........................................................................................Client Solutions
the Washington post
1301 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071 (202) 334-Regarding the Feb. 13 front-page article “Presi-
dent attacks judge who will sentence Stone”:
President Trump’s deceitful diatribe against
respected U. S. District Judge Amy Berman Jackson
is his latest assault o n the judiciary’s independence.
To influence the outcome of his friend Roger
Stone’s sentencing and discredit Judge Jackson, he
accused her of being prejudiced against Mr. Stone
and lied about her judicial record. And though the
Bureau of Prisons sets conditions of confinement,
he dishonestly blamed Judge Jackson for sentenc-
ing Paul Manafort to solitary confinement.
Mr. Trump is jeopardizing t he rule of law. Federal
judges are rightly fighting back — and the whole
legal community should follow their lead.
Chief U.S. District Court Judge Beryl A. Howell of
Washington publicly defended Judge Jackson’s
well-earned reputation for fairness. The 1,100-
member Federal Judges Association scheduled an
unprecedented emergency meeting to address the
president’s blatant intrusion into criminal cases
that involve his political allies. Judge Paul L. Fried-
man, another esteemed senior district judge on the
federal court, recently observed, “We are in un-
charted territory. This is not normal.”
Nor is it acceptable.
I urge all lawyers, including state attorneys
general and local prosecutors, to honor their
professional and ethical obligation to protect our
legal system. We must be courageous and publicly
demand that Mr. Trump immediately stop his
attacks on the judiciary.
As the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. remarked
about our country’s civil rights struggle, “In the
end, we will remember not the words of our
enemies, but the silence of our friends.”
Karl A. Racine, Washington
The writer, a Democrat,
i s the D.C. attorney general.Our legal system is on the line
Regarding Thomas Boswell’s Feb. 14 Sports
column, “Signs of contrition? Houston missed
them.”:
I agree with Mr. Boswell’s sentiment that the
scandal is giving baseball the same black eye that
the 1919 White Sox gave it. That team got a label —
Black Sox — which I believe made other teams
notice and n ot want to have such an infamous label
applied to them.
Maybe this Astros team needs such a label as
well. Should the 2017 Astros be called the Houston
Phonies or the Houston Cheats or the Houston
Ta inted Astros? Something needs to be done here
to remember for the long haul — such as 101 years
for t he Black Sox — or we will a ll forget b y next year.
Thomas Deyo, BethesdaThe Feb. 14 Sports article “Astros express
regret but go no further” i ncluded a photograph of
two sad-faced Astros as their team owner read a
prepared statement of apology to the media.
Despite the photo, Thomas Boswell pointed out
that the words of apology seemed hollow and
rehearsed and how the whole Astros organization
appears to be clueless and unremorseful about
what is clearly the worst cheating scandal in many
years in baseball.
Mr. Boswell failed to point out the black eye the
whole affair gives Major League Baseball’s front
office in general because no Astros player — those
ultimately responsible f or implementing the cheat-
ing — has been called to account. T hey are the ones
who could have just said no when given the
opportunity to cheat by stealing the signs of
opposing pitchers.
Major League Baseball should ban the Houston
Astros from playing for a season and fine each of
the team’s players a year’s salary. That would send
the necessary message that Major League Baseball
is serious about not allowing cheating of any sort
and is likely the kind of punishment necessary to
prevent future such transgressions by other teams.
It’s t ime for Major League Baseball to step u p to the
plate and take action against the real cheaters.
Jared Wermiel, Silver SpringDespite the Houston Astros’ recent admis-
sions and apologies, a black cloud remains over the
team and all of Major League Baseball. The cloud
will not be dispelled until there is full accountabili-
ty for the Astros and any team that acted similarly.
The Astros — players and coaches — are
experienced baseball men who knew their actions
violated the rules. While no one can know for sure
who would have won the 20 17 World Series if the
Astros had not cheated, we do know that the Los
Angeles Dodgers would have had a better chance.
The Astros’ 2017 World Series championship was
gotten dishonestly and should be vacated, and all
players and coaches on that team should be
severely penalized. When a full and honest investi-
gation is completed, all teams that have conducted
similar actions should be penalized in a like
manner.
Mark Worthington, WoodbridgeThe Astros fall to Earth
Regarding the Feb. 14 front-page article “GOP
senators push back on Fed pick as an ‘outlier’ ”:
It appears likely that Republicans on the Senate
Banking Committee will not support President
Trump’s nomination of Judy Shelton for a seat on
the Federal Reserve Board. This would mark a
sharp break from Republicans’ almost universal
support for the president’s nominations. It indi-
cates that, despite Republicans’ fierce loyalty to the
president and his new populist base, the GOP still
cares deeply about the views of its ancestral base,
Wall Street.
Matthew P. Fink, Chevy Chase
The writer is former president of the
a ssociation of the mutual fund industry, the
Investment Company Institute, and author of “The
Unlikely Reformer: Carter Glass and Financial
Regulation” and “The Rise of Mutual Funds:
A n Insider’s View.”An even deeper G OP loyalty
I
N ANNOUNCING seven pardons and four com-
mutations of convicted federal criminals on
Tuesday, President Trump did not pretend to
have followed a fair, deliberative process. Rath-
er, he made clear the pardons were a function of his
whim, based on which celebrity or personal friend
caught his ear, who got on Fox News to appeal to
him, or who gave money to the Trump cause.
“You know, oftentimes — pretty much all the time
— I really rely on the recommendations of people
that know them,” Mr. Trump explained. The White
House stressed that high-profile recipients of the
president’s favor, such as former junk bond king
Michael Milken, were backed by an array of Trump
associates.
The president noted that he pardoned former
Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich (D), who was
convicted of attempting to sell a seat in the U.S. Sen-
ate, in part because he watched Mr. Blagojevich’s
wife appeal to him on television. He also admitted
that he developed sympathy for Mr. Blagojevich
because he saw in the former governor’s p rosecution
similarities to the investigations of Mr. Trump’s ownbehavior. “It was a prosecution by the same people —
Comey, Fitzpatrick [sic] — the same group,” he said,
referring to James B. Comey and Patrick Fitzgerald.
It should not be forgotten that investigators had
audio recordings of Mr. Blagojevich discussing his
corrupt plot to profit personally from his official
appointment powers.
Then there was the case of Paul Pogue, who was
convicted of failing to pay about half a million
dollars in taxes and sentenced to three years proba-
tion. Mr. Trump pardoned him after he and his
family gave hundreds of thousands of dollars in gifts
to the Trump Victory Committee.
This arbitrary deployment of presidential pardon
power sent several messages, all of them insidious.
One is that favor flows from the leader’s g ood graces.
Those seeking help in Washington had better pay
court to Mr. Trump in order to gain his special favor.
Another is that Blagojevich-like corruption is not
serious and that those who investigate and prose-
cute such wrongdoing do so not because it is unusual
but because they are biased. This is false. Not every
politician tries to sell a Senate seat — just like notevery president holds military aid ransom until an
ally investigates one of his political opponents.
Lastly, Mr. Trump is asserting control over crimi-
nal matters, which his predecessors avoided for fear
of corrupting the justice system. “I’m allowed to be
totally involved” i n the federal justice process, he
insisted Tuesday.
The pardon power is important. There will always
be mistakes and excesses in the criminal-justice
system. But the power’s exercise ought to reflect
equitable deliberation. If, say, t oo many people are in
federal prison for committing low-level drug crimes,
presidents should establish procedures to review
everyone with a claim who is serving time for these
offenses. If Mr. Trump thinks that white-collar c rime
and political corruption are too harshly punished,
he should similarly organize a review of every case.
President Barack Obama created an orderly process
to expand his use of the pardon power. Mr. Trump
has gone in the opposite direction.
“Somebody has to stick up for the people,”
Mr. Trump said Tuesday. W hat he really meant is that
someone has to stick up for his people.Mr. Trump’s corrupt mercy
The president’s pardon and commutation spree was far from fair.
ABCDE
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
editorialstom toles Letters can be sent to [email protected].
Submissions must be exclusive to The Post and should
include the writer's address and day and evening
telephone numbers. Letters are subject to editing and
abridgment. Please do not send letters as attachments.
Because of the volume of material we receive, we are
unable to acknowledge submissions; writers whose letters
are under consideration for publication will be contacted.After reading “Let Virginia pass good legislation
to end gerrymandering in 2020,” t he Feb. 14 letter
from Sherry Blanton, who leads the voting rights
group Herndon-Reston Indivisible, I can only ask:
Don’t the progressive Northern Virginia activists
understand that the pendulum swings? Ms. Blanton
supports passage of legislation to reform redistrict-
ing in Virginia rather than the proposed constitu-
tional amendment moving through the state legis-
lature. It has taken decades to get to a point at
which the political parties won’t be able to use
gerrymandering as their personal play-
ground. Among the things the amendment would
do is ensure that there won’t be mid-decade
redistricting if that pendulum does swing back in
the next election or the one after that. Theconstitutional amendment will do what legislation
cannot.
W e are at a juncture in our democracy where the
desire of individual political parties to protect what
they have in the present is not the best solution to
keeping our democracy in the future. Virginia has a
real chance to be a model for other states looking to
ensure that citizens choose who their representa-
tives will be. Let’s not wait another decade for
fairness in our state.
Elaine Braverman, ArlingtonVirginia’s gerrymandering choice
The constitutional amendment willdo what legislation cannot.