A White House spokesman dismissed claims by the acting head of the Drug Enforcement Administration that police officers are holding back over fears their actions could ignite riots and protests like those that erupted in Ferguson, Mo, last year.
Chuck Rosenberg on Wednesday backed up the claims of his former boss, FBI Director James Comey, that there may be validity to this so-called “Ferguson effect.” However, unlike the tame Obama administration response Comey’s comments elicited, White House spokesman Josh Earnest on Friday took direct aim at Rosenberg’s assertion.
Rosenberg “is the second administration official to make that kind of claim without any evidence,” Earnest said. “And the fact is the evidence does not support the claim that somehow our law enforcement officers … are shirking their duties and failing to fulfill their responsibilities to serve and protect the communities to which they are assigned.”
“I guess you would have to ask him exactly what point he is trying to make,” Earnest continued. “You might also ask him if there is any evidence to substantiate the claims that he made.”
Earnest said he was “surprised” by Rosenberg’s statement that Comey’s assessment was “spot on.”
Speaking last Friday in Chicago to an audience of police chiefs, Comey mused that police fears of retaliation could be partly responsible for the spike in violent crime in some major cities.
“In today’s YouTube world, are officers reluctant to get out of their cars and do the work that controls violent crime?” Comey asked. “Are officers answering 911 calls but avoiding the informal contact that keeps bad guys from standing around, especially with guns?”
“I don’t know whether this explains it entirely, but I do have a strong sense that some part of the explanation is a chill wind blowing through American law enforcement over the last year. And that wind is surely changing behavior,” Comey said.
In response to similar comments Comey made earlier, Earnest responded on Oct. 26: “I will say that the available evidence at this point does not support the notion that law enforcement officers around the country are shying away from fulfilling their responsibilities.”
“On the contrary, I think you’ve seen a lot of local law enforcement leaders indicate that police officers and sheriffs and other local law enforcement officials are actually dedicated public servants who on a daily basis are putting their lives on the line to serve and protect the communities that they’re assigned to,” Earnest said.
After Comey met with Obama last week, Earnest wouldn’t say what they discussed but underscored that Obama values the bureau director’s independence.
“But I can tell you that one of the reasons that the president chose Director Comey for this job is he is somebody who is an experienced prosecutor, but somebody who has also demonstrated the capacity to think and act independently,” Earnest said. “And I think over the last few weeks we’ve seen Director Comey’s willingness to independently express his views.”
On Friday, Earnest said Obama “absolutely” has full confidence in both men and that although they are members of the administration chosen by Obama, they head independent law enforcement agencies, which “changes the nature of the relationship” he has with them versus other appointed senior officials, such as cabinet members.
Earnest acknowledged that Comey and Obama discussed their difference of opinion on the matter in their meeting last week but wouldn’t offer details beyond that.
Obama is “counting on Director Comey to play an important role in the ongoing public debate about criminal justice reform, about strengthening the relationship between law enforcement officers and the communities they are sworn to serve and protect,” Earnest said. Obama is also looking for him to “engage in debates around encryption — that there is a broader consideration that policymakers across this country have to make about balancing the national security and safety of the American people with the need to protect civil liberties.”
