Back in January I wrote an opinion article suggesting that the Obama administration showed signs of moving toward nationalizing local police departments.

It was published online January 27 by The Patriot Post and the idea was largely pooh-poohed or ignored by people a lot smarter than little people like myself, or at least who think they are.

However, since January I have observed nothing that convinces me that getting control of local police agencies is not President Obama’s goal.

Admittedly, I failed to recognize the exact route the takeover would take, although I did hint at some possibilities.

I wrote: “Obama could effect a takeover of local police departments under cover of a crisis, real or hyped, in a sudden movement; or he could do it through attrition, though accomplishing it before he leaves office… The ‘need for training police’ is a phrase often used, training by government agents, with funding from government agencies.”

What we are seeing now is a takeover through actions by Obama and his Justice department, which would mostly fit into the attrition category. It’s not being done stealthily, but neither is it highlighted by the mainstream media.

The most recent example is what the mainstream media has dubbed a “settlement between Cleveland police and Justice” over what a U.S. Justice Department report described as a pattern of excessive force and civil rights violations by the Cleveland, Ohio police department.

The Justice Department’s report said officers were “poorly trained.” The agreement, no doubt, means to rectify that problem, through proper training by people sent from Washington.

So far, the full description of the settlement has not been released (and may never be) but it seems that a primary focus is for the police department to “work with” community and government officials to devise a plan to reform the police department.

To make the plan all legal and proper, a judge must approve the plan and the reform must be overseen by what one news report calls an “independent” monitor.

The “agreement” comes after a report on an 18-month Justice Department investigation was released in January.

Similar investigations have been, or are, going on all over the country.

Cleveland-like “agreements” are likely to be forthcoming.

Should we leave it to learned, elite, intellectual commentators to explain to us little people why the Cleveland agreement does not effect federal control of the police department, or, if they concede that it does, why it is necessary and justified?

It would be interesting to hear what national commentators who play conservatives on television or appear as token “conservative” commentators in major national print publications, have to say on the subject.

Don’t expect, however, harsh comments from those pseudo-conservatives, at least nothing that would risk getting them barred from important social circles in media-centered cities.