On selective justice

Any right-thinking American wants the perpetrators of violence against our Capitol grounds and leaders to be treated with the full weight of the law. But note the difference in what’s written about similar violence by some attendees at other riots in recent months … at, say, Portland, Seattle, etc., done in the name of leftist causes. For those we had to “understand the pain,” or the injustice, or some such, that motivated them. We were to accept the gross laxity of law enforcement and prosecution of those perpetrators, while now we pull last week’s attendees off planes and trains, toss them into the clink, and threaten years behind bars.

The most recent example of such hypocrisy-soaked leftist diatribe is Brummett’s column in Tuesday’s paper: “Let’s get conciliatory toward the Constitution before we worry about being conciliatory toward seditionists and their enablers.” Let’s see, does he mean the mushy, malleable “living Constitution” so often advanced by his ilk to justify whatever liberal cause is at the moment popular? Or the one written by brilliant people in the 18th century, even now hailed as the best set of founding principles ever set forth by man?

Mr. Brummett gives new meaning to the term “double standard.” I say no, sir, you don’t get to invoke my country’s Constitution to punish those you disfavor while waving it aside when it’s inconvenient for those you favor.

PETER MARVIN

Little Rock