Mark Fitzgibbons Commentary: Charlottesville, Charlottesville, Charlottesville


by Mark J Fitzgibbons, Esq.


Charlottesville is the new meme of the far left, the media, and even the establishment GOP in their effort to replace President Trump by any means. Those means include impeachment, and by some, assassination.

No longer do we hear Russia, Russia, Russia.

It’s now Charlottesville, Charlottesville, Charlottesville.

But whether it’s Russia or Charlottesville, the plan associated with the meme is the same. The media, often working off talking points from the left, can’t be trusted to report the facts accurately. Some members of the establishment GOP think they’ve got an issue to weaken Trump or even run him out of office, and choose the left’s narrative over facts and principles. Trump’s style has disrupted the Washington insiders’ game.

On Charlottesville Trump was right again, and as facts come to the surface it is perfectly clear that two sides were responsible for the violence in Charlottesville, as explained with great reporting at The Daily Caller. Phillip Stucky’s article about how police cleared the park where the protest started before it fatally poured out onto the streets is just one of many examples. The faith leaders there to attempt to preserve the peace fled soon after seeing the impending violence between neo-Nazis on one side, and militant antifas and Marxists on the other.

There is also wonderful reporting by our friend Mike Leahy at Breitbart about the timeline leading to the declaration of unlawful assembly, noting that the ACLU had helped secure the permit for the white supremacists. The failure of the police to stop the initial violence resulted in flow-over chaos, as noted by pen-named former cop Jack Dunphy at PJ Media, in “How the Police Should Have Treated the Nazis in Charlottesville.” Dunphy writes:

No participant in the rally, and not a single counter protester, should have been able to take a step without coming close to a group of police officers. And for their part, those police officers should have been operating with the understanding that they would enforce the law at the first sign of trouble.

Clearly this was not done, and as has been seen over and over in recent years, when a mob sees the police doing nothing to maintain order, pandemonium follows. Having officers massed on the perimeter is beyond worthless when fights are taking place under their eyes. I have no doubt that the rank-and-file officers present were ready and eager to act, but they were restrained from doing so by their timid leaders, who in turn were following instructions from cowardly politicians.

What happened in Charlottesville is sure to be repeated elsewhere. The fringe Left feels itself empowered to decide what monuments are fit to be displayed in public, and they exult in the destruction of those found unworthy. They delude themselves if they think their violence will not in some places be opposed with like measures.

The “cowardly politicians” were Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe and other Democrats with jurisdiction over the protest. There should be a Department of Justice investigation about whether their plans and orders contributed to three deaths that day.

So Trump was correct to say that two sides were responsible for the violence. One was the grotesque racists. The other was violent extremists of the left. These facts don’t fit the media’s narrative, though. The media and leftwing talking heads ignore the violence from the side that opposes free markets, our constitutional values, and peaceful disagreement. Trump’s “facts” are turned into support for grotesque racists.

In step members of the anti-Trump GOP, with figures such as Arizona Senator Jeff Flake, about whom Daniel Horowitz at Conservative Review wrote, “Flake is the embodiment of the intellectually bankrupt party that gave rise to Trump.”

Flake tweeted:

We can’t accept excuses for white supremacy & acts of domestic terrorism. We must condemn. Period.

We can’t claim to be the party of Lincoln if we equivocate in condemning white supremacy

But Lincoln would not have us ignore facts of bigots versus bigots. As repulsive as slavery was to Lincoln, in his Second Inaugural Address he struck a less judgmental tone:

All knew that this interest [slavery] was somehow the cause of the war. To strengthen, perpetuate, and extend this interest was the object for which the insurgents would rend the Union even by war, while the Government claimed no right to do more than to restrict the territorial enlargement of it …. Both [sides of the conflict] read the same Bible and pray to the same God, and each invokes His aid against the other. It may seem strange that any men should dare to ask a just God’s assistance in wringing their bread from the sweat of other men’s faces, but let us judge not, that we be not judged. The prayers of both could not be answered. That of neither has been answered fully. The Almighty has His own purposes. “Woe unto the world because of offenses; for it must needs be that offenses come, but woe to that man by whom the offense cometh.”

I wonder whether either the neo-Nazis or the militant antifas and Marxists who engaged in Charlottesville can lay claim to reading the Bible and praying to the same God.

It is quite reasonable for constitutional conservatives to recognize that Confederate statues appear to glorify a side so wrong in American history that they should be replaced (why not more Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, Patrick Henry, George Mason statues?). But we are already seeing what the caustic left is doing, seeking to eliminate the statues of authors of the very words of liberty that eventually lead to the undoing of American slavery. Their goal is satisfied when the American heritage embodied by the Declaration of Independence and Constitution is crushed, and they engage in hate and violence towards this end.

Trump knew this. His remarks about Charlottesville are controversial only because he refuses to buy into the caustic left’s narrative. Jeff Flake and other DC insiders are blind to this, which is why Trump will again win this debate with his style of honesty that is contrarian in the Washington bubble of dishonesty and appearance.


Reprinted with permission from



Related posts

One Thought to “Mark Fitzgibbons Commentary: Charlottesville, Charlottesville, Charlottesville”

  1. 83ragtop50

    Please quit making Lincoln into some kind of saint. HIs motives were not so pure. He has blood on his hands just as sure as if he pulled the trigger in the battles that killed so many.