“That’s why [FBI special agent] Robert Smith’s life is over. And when I say his life is over, I’m not saying I’m going to kill him, but I am going to ruin his life and look into his fucking kids…. How do you like them apples?”
What could he have possibly been thinking? He had a good, defensible position. Everyone would have rallied around him. And then he said that.
Yes. And yet the people will not apply the same indefensible yardstick to the FBI improperly investigating his mother, and instead will rally round the FBI as upstanding people just trying to do a tough job.
"And if it’s legal when it’s done to me, it’s going to be legal when it’s done to FBI Agent Robert Smith—who is a criminal."
This is his mistake. There is no Rule of Law in the US anymore. It's one rule for them... and another rule for everyone else.
In case you haven't heard the term before, the thing you're talking about is called Noble Cause Corruption.
"Noble cause corruption is a police crime in which police officers violate legal or ethical standards in pursuit of what they perceive to be the benefit of society at large."
The police/prosecutor/authority figure believes that their immoral behavior is acceptable because they are the "good guy". The disturbing thing (as you point out) is that regular people who read a story like this also become corrupted. "The accused did one bad thing, therefore all the bad things the police did don't count."
It's not a moralistic argument, it's a strategic argument. Threatening FBI agents the same way they threaten you could be morally ok, but not tactically.
They arrested his mother, and were coming for him. That's pretty scary stuff - people don't act logically when they're scared (that's why we give them defense lawyers).
Well that's a pretty embarrassing comparison. For you. You appear to be saying that criticizing the public actions of a sworn officer of law enforcement is just as bad as killing someone.
I'm saying people should take responsibility for their actions. Including if those actions are threatening the children of a sworn officer of the law while withdrawing from drugs.
People always look for reasons to excuse themselves (or in this case, others). Drug withdrawal explains Brown's actions, but they are still his alone to be responsible for and no one else's.
You write as if the actual YouTube video isn't available for us to watch. (Did you actually watch it?)
Brown vows to subject Agent Smith and his family to the public opprobrium that he feels is due to LEOs who file fraudulent charges, frame innocent people, suborn perjury, and endanger the public, as Brown describes. The parallel he draws is that the same techniques he alleges have been used to destroy his reputation, will be used to destroy Smith's reputation. He also promises to defend himself from unlawful assault with deadly force.
I think Brown is a bit optimistic about the public opprobrium. People just don't care enough, and besides the people ain't running the show. At one point he seemed to expect to get some incriminating evidence about FBI malfeasance off his laptop once he got the laptop back from the FBI. That seems... naive. I don't think the system works that way. Of course, I also don't see the harm in the crazed ramblings of a drug addict on his back porch. While you're sure that such awful speech is the equivalent of vehicular homicide.
That still doesn't make sense.
By the way "the children" are a bit older than you may think.
What could he have possibly been thinking? He had a good, defensible position. Everyone would have rallied around him. And then he said that.