How involved is the White House in violent protests?

  When Sarah Palin was accused of being complicit in the shooting of Gabby Giffords, I thought it absurd. All she did is what every politician does: "target" political areas to win.
  But when Leftist politicians went all over the country, including Obama's much lauded "rain puddle" sermon that "we are better together" calling for comity, for an easing of political speech, we knew he was just talking about Palin type folks, not himself and his ilk.
  Any time there's a Leftist call for being nicer, that refers to the right wing, certainly not their own.
  Each time a violent extremist attacks Americans, the media tries to pin it on Tea Partiers, on Republicans, hopefully digging about for bits of information that can link a conservative with the atrocity. 
  In short, I don't want to be guilty of doing what Leftists do, which is to rush to unreasonably blame political opponents.
  Yet this situation is not like the Palin situation, where she did absolutely nothing overt to incite violence. Later a friend even claimed the Giffords shooter was a "left winger," a fact that dropped out of the public discussion for obvious reasons.
  Now an insane individual has murdered two policemen, creeping up behind them and slaughtering them like animals, while social media reveals he'd been planning this and that he had taken cues from violent Islamic extremists. NYPD officers had a few weeks ago been attacked by an ax wielding Muslim extremist.
  The public has been subjected to repeated calls for violence, perpetual grievances again police and those who do not have black skin. What do we want? Dead cops. When do we want it? Now.
  Some reflections from the past week:
  Obama's luxury vacation is again being recorded by slavishly eager ciphers in the press.
  Yet Obama himself seems unusually uninterested in the murders of policemen, which seems odd, given his extreme interest in any perceived slight of black people, even as petty as a cop who is making sure an old professor isn't breaking into his own house.
  Yet after the murders of the policemen, Obama remained on the golf course, issuing a statement that he was "monitoring" it from the golf course,causing consternation among even the most committed journalists, but  22 hours later his staff issued a statement that he "unconditionally condemned" the murder. 
  Unconditionally? Why the need to say "unconditionally" unless you're politically concerned that you look bad because you haven't been sufficiently demonstrative in disapproving the murders?
  Meanwhile Palestinian activist Masri led taunting chants of "pigs in a blanket" through out Ferguson.
  So-called protesters scream they "don't need no white saviors."
  To combat criticism about his lack of action, de Blasio attacked the NYPD, something that has become the go-to excuse for Leftist politicians lately including Obama.
  For a more effective argument, de Blasio then moved to blaming the media for "dividing us" notwithstanding his own suggestions that his black son needed to avoid police and the divisions he had already created between himself and the NYPD, including his order that police need "retraining."  
  The violent protests continued, unabated.
  One might suspect that those politicians--the Holders, the Sharptons, the Obamas--who have fanned these flames of war have done even more to encourage dissension and violence.
  For example, we know that communists are behind much of the activity. Did you notice the professionally printed signs? the organized social media? the "united" front around the country in orchestrated marches?
   Powerlineblog:

Beginning way back in 2002, we wrote about International A.N.S.W.E.R., a Communist organization that was founded in September 2001 and that organized substantial antiwar demonstrations during the Bush administration. A.N.S.W.E.R. embodied within itself the seeming contradiction between the far left and Islamic extremism: it enthusiastically supported both Kim il Jung and Saddam Hussein, and is directed in part by the Muslim Student Association.

  Robin of Berkeley's been wondering about these circumstances in California. She reasons through the circumstances of the continued rioting in Berkeley and concludes this:

2. What do I think is going on? Again, I don’t know. But the official story makes no sense. I don’t think that this “spontaneous” protest/rioting movement has been so spontaneous. Interesting, isn’t it, that the riots just so happened to coincide with the one week that the UC Berkeley students have off before finals? And though I’ve been here for decades, there’s never been anything like it — yes, a riot up on Telegraph every few years, but never in downtown, never involving thousands of people, and never a takeover of a freeway, Amtrak, etc. etc. This whole thing feels planned and engineered. But by who and where? That is the million dollar question.

  Of course, communists and socialists are always at these occasions; they even had booths at the Stewart/Colbert DC "rally." They have cemented their relationship with the NEA.
  In fact, "neo-Coms" have become a driving force in the Democrat party.
  A.N.S.W.E.R. itself is an umbrella party for all kinds of troublemakers. 
  Another group  (whose colors are red and black) fomenting hatred and violence is the Treyvon Martin Organizing Committee TMOC #turnuptheanger. Their banners scream " No Cops No Prison," which of course is anarchy.
  Tweeted by "Loot-Back" from The Daily Beast:

   Given that the now discredited monstrous Rolling Stone U.Va. false rape accusations have tentacles to the White House, is it so hard to believe that, given the Sharpton actors involved in the rioting, many of the "community organizers" who are creating these violence protests are known--or worse--to the White House?
  After all, Sharpton is Obama's primary advisor on race relations.
  His history includes criminal behavior such as tax dodging, false accusations, racial exploitation, defamation, racial slurs, anti-Semitic incitement resulting in death.
 AND he is highly supported not only by the White House, but by a major news network to lend himself credibility.
  Much like the unsuccessful Occupy movement, riots have "broken out" in 90 US cities.
  Holder and Obama met behind closed doors with the Ferguson rioters, reportedly saying that they should "stay the course."
  Who wouldn't wonder if there's White House involvement in these disturbances?

Protest resumed-photo from NY Daily News