C
Cathoholic
Guest
From just last night . . . .
Edit. Parenthetical mine.
Last edited:
Violence, Looting, Arson in Portland as Demonstrators Burn the City in Protest
- Status
J
josie_L
Guest
And then the hypocrites will ask for FEDERAL MONIES to clean up the destruction they LET happen!!!
Last edited:
Not let happen. They were complicit in. This is their political movement.
B
Balto1
Guest
The leaked document that revealed that the DHS goons had no relevant training and no idea how to handle crowds was certainly accurate. Their upgraded Sacred Fence did nothing except box themselves in and give protesters free run of the area.
Last edited:
W
WingedHussar
Guest
This would be easy to deal with if only the proper tactics were utilized.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You mean like the tactics that were used to regain control of a federal building from 40 far-right protesters in 2016? They let Bundy & co. have their way for more than a month.
Last edited:
P
PaulinVA
Guest
The problem is, what laws are being broken.
I would think that they could just start arresting people for defacing the federal buildings, assaulting the officers, etc, and get them off the street. The feds aren’t dong any better than the local police, which makes the increased federal presence … laughable.
K
KMC
Guest
Hmmm…I keep seeing videos of people spray painting, damaging and trying to get into federal court house. Call me crazy, but I’m willing to bet there is a law or two against what they are doing.
But “they” don’t. The local government officials are letting it happen.
My question to you: If a government building is under siege, and the local government officials won’t do anything, what is your solution?
K
KMC
Guest
There should be…its dereliction of duty by local government officials
H
Horton
Guest
I am beginning to understand where some of our more liberal friends come from. This is a headline from MSNBC news about the situation in Portland:
And only when you can find any reporting about the situations. This is from CNN:
I guess to be fair, it’s difficult to debate when the other side isn’t even getting the truth about the situation.
K
KMC
Guest
I see common ground with you, but it all starts with a mayor who does not have his PD enforce the law. It goes downhill from thereKMC:
Come on. While you are right in the overall Oregon protests, the federal officers are in Portland specifically to stop the attacks on the federal courthouse. Yet, seemingly, no arrests.
Just theater of the absurd.
C
Cathoholic
Guest
To the readers here.
These are “police”. Not “goons”.
They are risking their lives in a very thankless situation.
Sometimes the media will (mis)characterize the people that they are dispering as “innocent protestors”.
There are a few problems with this.
When President Trump spoke at the Pope JohnPaul II memorial we were told some of that same thing. The “news” showed people standing around.
You could only get the fuller story if you were there, had video clips from alternative news, or saw what some people posted to social media.
Things like projectile (rock?) throwing at the police.
In Portland there has been ongoing violence, looting, and arson.
So naturally the Federal police disperse crowds when these things occur.
We have seen firsthand the result in New York, Minneapolis, Seattle, Chicago, and elsewhere when the police are made to stand down.
So once the police (yes even Feds) tell the crowds to disperse, and they refuse, those people are by definition, lawbreakers too.
Why aren’t they being arrested?
Especially with the dishonset media there throwing proverbial gas on the flames of political unrest.
Meanwhile the police correctly still attempt to disperse the crowds.
Thank you officers and politicians who care enough about the law-abiding citizens not to stand down.
These are “police”. Not “goons”.
They are risking their lives in a very thankless situation.
Sometimes the media will (mis)characterize the people that they are dispering as “innocent protestors”.
There are a few problems with this.
When President Trump spoke at the Pope JohnPaul II memorial we were told some of that same thing. The “news” showed people standing around.
You could only get the fuller story if you were there, had video clips from alternative news, or saw what some people posted to social media.
Things like projectile (rock?) throwing at the police.
In Portland there has been ongoing violence, looting, and arson.
So naturally the Federal police disperse crowds when these things occur.
We have seen firsthand the result in New York, Minneapolis, Seattle, Chicago, and elsewhere when the police are made to stand down.
So once the police (yes even Feds) tell the crowds to disperse, and they refuse, those people are by definition, lawbreakers too.
Why aren’t they being arrested?
- Probably because some in the crowd WANT a scene for the “news” for propaganda purposes.
- The police are being OPPOSED by local leftist politicians in many cases.
- Leftist judges are letting criminals go from jail under the pretext of corona virus.
Especially with the dishonset media there throwing proverbial gas on the flames of political unrest.
Meanwhile the police correctly still attempt to disperse the crowds.
Thank you officers and politicians who care enough about the law-abiding citizens not to stand down.
Last edited:
M
MarkoB0726
Guest
Glad I got to visit there a couple of years ago…very beautiful city compared to the madness that’s overtaken it.
Oh well, what you reap is what you sew. I only feel bad for the law-abiding citizens there…
Oh well, what you reap is what you sew. I only feel bad for the law-abiding citizens there…
Z
Zzyzx_Road
Guest
I visited Portland several years ago. Took a job interview there some years before that. It was a good city with the largest bookstore I’ve ever seen and some pretty spots around town. The Rose Garden and the Grotto to name two.
To see Portland descend like this is both sad and prophetic. The canary in the coal mine. The longer demonstrators can keep at this, the more potential demonstrators in other major cities will take heart and inspiration.
To see Portland descend like this is both sad and prophetic. The canary in the coal mine. The longer demonstrators can keep at this, the more potential demonstrators in other major cities will take heart and inspiration.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
Cillizza: How/when does this end?
Campbell : The truth is, there is no end in sight. It is classic entrenchment.
Trump and his political appointees at DHS continue to publicly describe Portland as being in a state of bedlam. Raising further questions about whether this is pure politics, the President is also threatening to send federal agents to other cities run by Democrats, which he has described as lawless. In a heated election year, it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Trump’s exaggeration about the state of things on the ground in Portland is being done for partisan gain as he attempts to project his so-called “law and order” agenda.
Federal law enforcement officials tell us that as long as the downtown federal building in Portland remains under threat, the infusion of federal agents will remain. The acting secretary of Homeland Security said this week that if those agents were to depart, the building would burn to the ground.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outl...e9822c-cceb-11ea-91f1-28aca4d833a0_story.html
This past week, the Department of Homeland Security held a news conference to clear up a few things about the federal paramilitary police force grabbing protesters on the streets of Portland, Ore. If the goal was to reassure everyone that these armor-clad agents were acting lawfully, it did not go well. Instead the conference revealed, with painstaking clarity, a very big problem: The deputy director of President Trump’s new federal police force does not know what the word “arrest” means.
…
Given the central importance of the word “arrest” in the constitutional law of policing, it is chilling to see a commanding officer of a law enforcement agency demonstrate a basic misunderstanding of its meaning. But that is what happened during the administration’s news conference. When asked whether federal agents in Portland are complying with the requirement to have probable cause for arrest, Richard Cline, deputy director of the Federal Protective Service, took the microphone. “You’re probably talking about the van,” he replied. Cline was referring to a viral video that shows two camouflaged federal agents grabbing an apparently peaceful protester off the street and taking him away in an unmarked van for questioning.
…
In terms of probable cause, Cline candidly acknowledged that the agents in the video “didn’t have what they need” to conduct an arrest. They released the man when lawyers from the department of justice told them that there was no lawful basis to continue detaining him.
Those lawyers were right. The Supreme Court has made clear that officers cannot arrest people simply for standing next to someone who may have committed a crime. Rather, police must have probable cause that is “particularized with respect to” the person they want to arrest. Yet, as Cline acknowledges, the agents never had any reason to think that the man in the video — as opposed to others in the crowd — had done anything wrong.
In other words, they did not have probable cause. Not when they spoke to the lawyers. Not when they put the man in the van. Not ever.
This past week, the Department of Homeland Security held a news conference to clear up a few things about the federal paramilitary police force grabbing protesters on the streets of Portland, Ore. If the goal was to reassure everyone that these armor-clad agents were acting lawfully, it did not go well. Instead the conference revealed, with painstaking clarity, a very big problem: The deputy director of President Trump’s new federal police force does not know what the word “arrest” means.
…
Given the central importance of the word “arrest” in the constitutional law of policing, it is chilling to see a commanding officer of a law enforcement agency demonstrate a basic misunderstanding of its meaning. But that is what happened during the administration’s news conference. When asked whether federal agents in Portland are complying with the requirement to have probable cause for arrest, Richard Cline, deputy director of the Federal Protective Service, took the microphone. “You’re probably talking about the van,” he replied. Cline was referring to a viral video that shows two camouflaged federal agents grabbing an apparently peaceful protester off the street and taking him away in an unmarked van for questioning.
…
In terms of probable cause, Cline candidly acknowledged that the agents in the video “didn’t have what they need” to conduct an arrest. They released the man when lawyers from the department of justice told them that there was no lawful basis to continue detaining him.
Those lawyers were right. The Supreme Court has made clear that officers cannot arrest people simply for standing next to someone who may have committed a crime. Rather, police must have probable cause that is “particularized with respect to” the person they want to arrest. Yet, as Cline acknowledges, the agents never had any reason to think that the man in the video — as opposed to others in the crowd — had done anything wrong.
In other words, they did not have probable cause. Not when they spoke to the lawyers. Not when they put the man in the van. Not ever.
W
WingedHussar
Guest
Bundy and his merry men were sitting around in a static location and unlike Antifa and BLM, were not burning, looting, and murdering across entire cities. Would you like to ask a question in good faith now?
Various forms of assault, vandalism, arson, theft, unlawful assembly and disorderly conduct are just a few off the top of my head.
P
PaulinVA
Guest
Yeah, but, if they were making these types of arrests, I would expect that there would be press releases touting how well they are restoring order.
It’s baffling.
- Status