Gov. Mike Parson, R-Mo., Said Tuesday that President Donald Trump would “get involved” in the case of the St. Louis couple who saw weapons brandishing protesters who passed by their mansion in a viral photo earlier this month. past.
Parson, who claimed he had spoken to Trump on Wednesday, said the couple, local defense attorneys Mark and Patricia McCloskey, had “every right to protect their property.” The president made it clear that he was “focused” on the case “and” he doesn’t like what he sees and the way these people are treated, “according to the governor.
“The president said he would do everything in his power to help with this situation and that he would take steps to do so,” Parson said, adding that attorney general Bill Barr “was represented on the call.” He believes the couple “will take a look” at the case.
The McCloskeys are currently under investigation. The circuit attorney’s office told the St. Louis American that it kept the allegations in the national surveillance case under the seal of security concerns. St. Louis Circuit attorney Kimberly Gardner, the city’s chief prosecutor, received “serious threats” after authorities issued a search warrant to confiscate Mark McCloskey’s semi-automatic rifle from the couple’s home.
McCloskeys attorney Joel Schwartz told Salon that his clients were unaware of any charges. Mark McCloskey told Fox News on Wednesday that the couple expected to be charged. However, Schwartz told Salon that the decision to collect now appears to have been delayed for unknown reasons.
“We were hoping to hear about the charges of [the attorney’s office] , Either for or against, before today, “Schwartz told Salon in a call Thursday.
Schwartz said he did not know the reason for the apparent delay and was not aware of any federal filing in the case beyond news reports. He declined to comment further.
When Salon asked the circuit prosecutor’s office whether Schwartz’s claim was correct, a spokeswoman said she was unable to comment on an ongoing investigation. She also declined to comment when asked if Gardner’s office had been informed of any federal action or pending federal action.
Gardner accused Parson and Trump of “spreading misinformation” in a statement Tuesday.
“Today, both the Governor and Donald Trump came after me for doing my job and investigating a case,” he said. “As they continue to play politics with handling this issue, spreading misinformation and distorting the truth, I refuse to do so.”
“It is incredible that the Missouri state governor seeks the advice of one of the most divisive leaders of our generation to dominate the discretion of a locally elected prosecutor,” he added.
Parson has always disagreed with Gardner, a former Democratic state representative elected to office in 2016, for dropping the charges against his predecessor, former Democratic Governor Eric Greitens, in exchange for his resignation in 2018. Greitens had been charged with a crime serious invasion of privacy for allegedly blackmailing a lover with racy photos.
On Thursday, Sen. Josh Hawley, a Mo. Republican, also entered the fray by calling for an investigation into Gardner’s investigation of the McCloskeys.
“Attacking law-abiding citizens who exercise constitutionally protected rights for investigation and prosecution is an abuse of power,” the senator tweeted.
The McCloskeys, meanwhile, were prepared for the charges. According to St. Louis American Albert Watkins, the couple’s previous attorney said her former clients had given her the gun Patricia McCloskey was handling “in the event of criminal charges.”
Watkins also said the couple had not similarly prepared to hand over Mark McCloskey’s long gun, because they considered its use was not possibly incriminating. Mark McCloskey allegedly stretched the gun through the crowd with the safety activated and did not put his finger on the trigger, while the video shows his wife pointing her gun directly at the protesters, sometimes with her finger on the trigger.
The McCloskeys boarded Schwartz on July 10, shortly before authorities executed the search warrant and seized the rifle. He was not present at the press conference the next day when Watkins gave investigators the gun.
Schwartz declined to comment on the conditions surrounding Watkins’ departure, and Watkins did not respond to Salon’s request for comment.
During that press conference, Watkins said the gun was harmless and had been on display at the McCloskeys’ law offices. The weapon had been an exhibit in a lawsuit the McCloskeys filed against the manufacturer for being defective. (It was unclear when the McCloskeys had relocated the gun to their home.)
As reports of the rifle seizure spread, the McCloskeys received more than 50 offers to replace it, Insider reported. Alien Armory Tactical, a gun store in St. Charles, Missouri, posted on Facebook a message within two hours of the news, offering to “gladly rearm them” for free and provide firearms training to “show you how. be better prepared “in case” something happens “.
“This couple did what they had to do to protect private property, as the property was being ambushed,” the publication said.
Gardner said in a statement after the June 28 incident that the McCloskeys’ behavior had “alarmed” her and that “any attempt to relax (the right to protest peacefully) through intimidation or the threat of force will not be tolerated. lethal”.
Trump’s liking to insert himself into the statewide case with national visibility, a viral video of a white couple wagging arms at protesters against police brutality, is an extension of his ongoing opposition to the Black Lives Matter movement, which has including violent threats and use of force.
Trump said in an interview Tuesday with Townhall, a conservative news website, that any attempt to prosecute the couple for a crime would be “disgraceful.”
Earlier in the day, Trump also mocked a question about black people being killed by law enforcement, an urgent focus of the protests, noting that police also kill white people. He recently described the Black Lives Matter movement as a “symbol of hatred” and has called for the protection of Confederate monuments, painting those seeking to tear down statues with racist stories as violent mobs.
Parson did not explain exactly how the president would be “involved” in a state-level case, which appears to be beyond federal jurisdiction. The Justice Department’s intervention could cross legal lines, and would likely meet with strong resistance from the circuit lawyer.
An in-depth investigation following the St. Louis dispatch revealed that the McCloskeys, both defense attorneys for the St. Louis area, have a rich litigation history, filing lawsuits against neighbors, family, employers and others over a variety of disputes, generally over private property.
They filed a lawsuit to obtain their home, a castle built in the early 20th century for the daughter of Adolphus Busch. They sued a man who sold them a Maserati for not including a tool bag. Mark McCloskey once filed two lawsuits in a single trip to court: one against a dog breeder and one against the Central West End Association for putting a photo of their home in a brochure after the McCloskeys instructed them not to.
“I guess we were saving gas,” Mark McCloskey later commented in another lawsuit.
Mark McCloskey destroyed beehives that the local Jewish Central Reform Congregation established near the north wall of his mansion. He left a note saying he did, and if they didn’t clean up the mess, he would apply for a restraining order and seek attorney’s fees.
The congregation told The Post-Dispatch that the hives were part of a school project to harvest honey and pick apples for Rosh Hashana.
“The children were crying at school,” said Rabbi Susan Talve. “It was part of our curriculum.”
The McCloskeys said they feared for their lives when more than 100 protesters crossed their private neighborhood on their way to a social justice rally outside the home of St. Louis Mayor Lyda Krewson. The McCloskeys alleged that the protesters had broken their door; The protesters, while admitting the intrusion, deny any harm.
In cable news interviews, the McCloskeys have claimed without evidence that the protesters appeared to be “terrorists” bent on murdering them, as well as looting and burning their home.
The message seems to have played a chord in the Oval Office.
“When you look at St. Louis, where two people came out, they were going to be mistreated, if they were lucky. If they were lucky,” the president told Katie Pavlich of Townhall in an interview Tuesday. “They were going to be mistreated, and the house would be totally looted and probably burned down as if they were trying to burn churches.”
“And these people were standing there. They never used, and they were legal, the weapons. And now, I understand someone local, they want to prosecute these people,” said the president. “That is a misfortune.”
The White House, Justice Department, Parson’s office, and Alien Armory Tactical did not respond to Salon’s requests for comment.