By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A Washington D.C. resident arrested near the National Mall’s reflecting pool plans to fight the charges, as former President Donald Trump continues to blame vandals for the pool’s disrepair. Despite Trump’s claims of vandalism, the actual charges filed against individuals arrested at the site have not included causing damage. The resident, Christian Miles, was charged with violating a federal obscenity law for confronting state troopers guarding the pool, a charge he intends to contest, highlighting the irony of the situation given the pool’s deteriorating condition due to renovation issues.
Read the original article here
A man arrested near the Reflecting Pool, identified as Christian Miles, is reportedly planning to fight the obscenity charge leveled against him, stating he was berating Oklahoma state troopers who were guarding the area. This incident has sparked considerable discussion and frustration, particularly regarding the framing of the Reflecting Pool as belonging to Donald Trump, a notion widely rejected by many.
The notion that the Reflecting Pool is somehow “Trump’s reflecting pool” has been a significant point of contention. Many individuals emphasize that this iconic national landmark belongs to the entire country, not to any single individual, regardless of their political standing or claims. The repeated attribution of ownership to Trump has been met with disbelief and annoyance, with some suggesting it reflects a misunderstanding or deliberate misrepresentation by media outlets.
Miles’s charge stems from his alleged use of obscene language towards the troopers. However, the validity of this charge is being questioned by many, who find it unreasonable and potentially an overreach of authority. The argument is that using profane language, while perhaps impolite, should not warrant an obscenity charge, especially in the context of a protest or dissent.
The presence of Oklahoma state troopers guarding the Reflecting Pool in Washington D.C. has also raised eyebrows. Many are questioning why state officers from a different state are deployed for such a duty, suggesting it might be an unusual deployment of resources and raising questions about jurisdiction and the division of responsibilities among federal and state law enforcement agencies.
There’s a prevalent sentiment that the charges and arrests around the Reflecting Pool are part of a larger narrative being constructed, possibly to justify actions or to distract from other issues. Some believe that the focus on “vandals” and arrests is an attempt to create headlines and support a particular story, especially in light of concerns about the monument’s recent restoration.
The legal basis for the obscenity charge itself is being scrutinized. Miles reportedly plans to contest the charge under Section 2.34(a)(2) of the Code of Federal Regulations, which pertains to disorderly conduct involving obscene language, threats, or actions likely to incite a breach of the peace. Critics argue that this charge is flimsy and unlikely to hold up in court, especially given the subjective nature of obscenity and the context of potential protest.
The broader implication of such charges is seen as an attempt to intimidate future protesters and stifle dissent. There’s a fear that these actions contribute to a “creeping security state” and an authoritarian approach to managing public spaces and free expression. The idea of arresting individuals for using strong language while protesting perceived injustices is viewed as a worrying trend.
Furthermore, the discussion has touched upon the perceived hypocrisy of obscenity charges being brought in the current political climate. Some commentators point out that other public figures engage in language that could be considered obscene, yet do not face similar legal repercussions, highlighting a perceived double standard.
The financial aspect of the Reflecting Pool’s restoration and the subsequent arrests has also been a point of discussion. Some suggest that the arrests are a distraction from the significant cost of the repairs and any alleged mismanagement of the project, seeking to create a narrative of wrongdoing by others.
In essence, the situation surrounding Christian Miles’s arrest near the Reflecting Pool is seen by many not just as an isolated incident of disorderly conduct, but as a symptom of larger issues concerning freedom of speech, the use of public spaces, and the nature of political discourse and the application of law enforcement in such contexts. The planned defense against the obscenity charge signifies a broader challenge to what is perceived as an overzealous and perhaps politically motivated enforcement of regulations.