the Attorney General Jeff Sessions spoke to the National Sheriff’Association winter conference in Washington on Feb. 12. (C-SPAN) Washington was an outrage of the factory well before the President Trump arrived, and it became all the more now that he’s here. But who is constantly on a walk of protest can hurt your case. That’s what happened on Monday with criticism of a speech Attorney General Jeff Sessions given in which he cited the “Anglo-American” origins of the nation’s the sheriff. “The sheriff’s office is an essential part of the Anglo-American heritage of the application of the law,” he said. Several things have conspired to make this seem like a Very Big Deal: Sessions has a history of racial controversy, the adjective doesn’t appear in the Sessions d’s prepared remarks, and there is a clear and demonstrated history of the Trumpet and of its administration, exploitation, dog-whistle politics. Perhaps the two most full-throated responses came from Father Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and the NAACP. Schatz called “appalling.” The NAACP said they were Sessions d’s “last racist-tinged comments,” and that “it is considered as the last example of dog-whistle politics”. Do you know someone who says “Anglo-American heritage” in a sentence? What could possibly be the purpose of saying that other than to pit Americans against each other? For the chief law enforcement officer to use a dog whistle like that, it’s terrible. Best NO vote I ever cast. — Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) on 12 February 2018 The media quickly to the key on the apparent controversy. “Sessions draws fire for ‘Anglo-American heritage’ notice to the sheriff’ conference,” read ABC News’s the title. “The prosecutor General Sessions faces accusations of racism after honor “Anglo-American heritage” of the police,” the New York Daily News said. Splinter’s Emma Roller went a little further, writing that Sessions of “Let His Racism look Through a Bit More Than what He May Have had the Intention To do so”. But to the legal community, Sessions d’s comments are far from controversial. The office of the sheriff, after all, has been created in Anglo-Saxon England and has prospered in the united States, even after it has decreased in England. University of Denver law professor David Kopel detailed all of this in The Washington Post in 2014. And if to speak of the Anglo-American origins of the American police force is a racist, or a dog whistle, then someone needs to tell president Barack Obama. The National Review’s Charles C. W. Cooke dug up several examples of Obama himself using the same word as the Sessions: “A top Obama administration Department of Justice official, Bill Baer, has also referred to the “Anglo-American common law system” in a 2014 speech on the legal relationship between the united States and China. Is it possible that the Sessions inserted the term cause? In the sense that everything is possible, yes. But the term is not controversial in legal circles that Obama and his administration has used with some regularity. And it probably won’t surprise you to know that Schatz is not one of the sizable minority of members of Congress who are lawyers. I’m not a lawyer. Is this legal? — Brian Schatz (@brianschatz) on January 29, 2018 This is the danger of an over-reaction to a Trumpet’s opponents. There has been more than enough of real dog whistles in Trump’s presidency, and Trump’s most strident opponents would very much like for the media to call a cat and a cat. When Trump refers to as “shithole country,” they want it to be described as a racist comment. They are convinced that Trump has lost the benefit of the doubt. It’s 100% true that Trump and his administration’s track record must have an impact on the manner in which such comments are covered. The president of exploits in the grey areas of American politics and plausible denial too often that everything be innocent and coincidental. And who has demonstrated a history of color, each momentary controversy, as in his comment about “shithole country.” But erasing all the benefit of the doubt and to have your outrage on a hair-trigger can play in Trump’s hands. The more reactions like this happens, the more credible Trump’s the case is that the opponents are playing, the worst in everything he and his administration say and do, and most of its claim to be a victim of political correctness and an overzealous media rings true to its already dug at the base. And the people who really want to keep Trump and his administration accountable on the important issues that should be concerned about this.