The editorial board of the New York Post just published an article arguing that recent actions taken by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg prove that New York City "has its priorities upside down."
Bragg, of course, has gained notoriety for being the George Soros-backed prosecutor who has decided to bring an unprecedented indictment against former President Donald Trump - an indictment that most legal experts agree is bogus.
Bragg has also indicted Daniel Penny with manslaughter. Penny is the former Marine who placed Jordan Neely - a New York City subway passenger who was allegedly threatening other passengers - in a headlock, ultimately leading to Neely's death.
But, the Post has other, more recent actions by Bragg and New York City in mind.
For one, the editorial board of the Post has in mind Bragg's recent decision to indict Salvatore Provenzano, a Manhattan New York Police Department (NYPD) officer, for an incident that took place two years ago.
Bragg alleges that Provenzano punched an unruly man whom, at the time, he was escorting out of an Upper West Side Apple store. The punch caused no injuries.
The Post, in its report, references several other similar incidents that Bragg has decided to pursue, including the Penny incident.
The other thing that the Post has in mind is New York City's recent decision to pay more than $13 million to the so-called protestors who were arrested by the police during the 2020 Black Lives Matter riots.
As a result of this settlement, about 1,300 rioters are going to receive $10,000 each.
The Post's editorial board used the above examples to argue that New York City has "its priorities upside down."
"It’s just the latest turn in a series of madcap moves where officials rush to defend — and even reward — law-breakers, while punishing victims and those who seek to protect the public. Can any New Yorker feel safe in a world like that?" the board writes.
The board argues that the above examples prove that New York officials are on the side of criminals, not of law-abiding citizens. "The messages officials are sending is clear: Lawbreakers get protection, law-enforcers and crime victims get punished," the board writes.
The board then argues that this message is going to lead to a really bad consequence, namely, "more crime and crime in the streets."
The board concludes by asking, "Is that what officials want?" Based on what we are seeing, it is hard to imagine the answer to this question as being anything other than, "Yes, it is."
