All part of the divide and rule (divide and conquer) plan to keep America split. The multiple layer paid protesters are part of the contrived plan folks... there is a reason the so called "founding fathers" coined the term... United We Stand, Divided We Fall. 

10 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Just to be clear, because you've posted the clip with various comments - on this version, do you allege that all "far left" (what falls under that label?) elements or people holding such views are violent?

"Far left" has been redefined, it means anyone DT disagrees with, or whatever else POTUS 45 says it means.  John Bolton is a radical leftist. 

 

 

10 hours ago, Walker88 said:

If these camo-wearing people are unidentified and anonymous, then no one owes them anything. Anyone whom they threaten thus has a right to protect him or herself by whatever means is necessary, including deadly force, just as anyone has the right to defend him or herself against a mugger, thief or rapist.

 

There is a reason the US has rules and laws demanding any official law enforcement officers fully identify themselves, their unit, and display their names.

 

These guys are following no laws and thus, they are fair game if they threaten anyone.

 

The US is a democracy, not a totalitarian thuggery.

In other countries these unmarked gangs are known as death squads, and what they do in kidnapping people is known as disappearing (verb).

I believe the plan is to create martial law as a means to have the elections suspended/postponed.

 

Not long ago I saw Lawrence Wilkerson being interviewed, and he was asked what would be done if DT refused to leave the WH; he said there were people in The Pentagon concerned about this and it was being talked about.

 

 

10 hours ago, Siamjim said:

only get to see what they want us to know. so why we have not seen any interviews from locals living there? and how many of these PROTESTER are flown in from other states/countries..

 

Not sure of how many are from out of state but we can assume more than a few. That also makes it a crime under federal jurisdiction.

5 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Not sure of how many are from out of state but we can assume more than a few. That also makes it a crime under federal jurisdiction.

It is not a crime to cross state lines to protest. 

 

What evidence do you have that people are crossing state lines with the intent of criminal conduct during these protests?

27 minutes ago, heybruce said:

It is not a crime to cross state lines to protest. 

 

What evidence do you have that people are crossing state lines with the intent of criminal conduct during these protests?

 

What evidence do you have they didn't and I don't call what's going on a protest. I am from Minneapolis and can see what these mostly peaceful "protests" have done. Crossing state lines to riot is a federal crime.

 

Also there is no need of evidence to put law enforcement agents on the ground to prevent a crime. For example you don't need evidence of drunk driving to set up a DUI check point. Evidence is what happens upon arrest and being sent to court. There is no need at all of evidence of any kind to actively put crime suppression units out in the field.

 

They go to the scene to collect evidence. I hope you understand that now.

Edited July 22, 20205 yr by Cryingdick

20 hours ago, Walker88 said:

For the benefit of those who are not American, I will repeat the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution---something 45 has neither read nor understands---to point out what rights the Founders thought so critical to the new nation they put in their first written words:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

Toss in the Posse Comitatus Act, and what is happening is a violation of both the US Constitution and subsequent enacted laws.  Those troops are traitors, and anyone who supports their acts is a traitor.

 

"All enemies, foreign and domestic"

 

That was in the oath I took and the oath all who served took. We will live it. Real patriots will live it.

 

Notice will be given.

The first amendment doesn't assure destructive behaviors or vandalism. The antifa goons are not expressing freedom of speech, more likely they are denying others their right to speak up and express themselves. This is all that the cancel culture is about and antifa does the same.

At nightfall the antifa goons come out to burn and vandalize. When caught they cry like babies. 

2 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

What evidence do you have they didn't and I don't call what's going on a protest. I am from Minneapolis and can see what these mostly peaceful "protests" have done. Crossing state lines to riot is a federal crime.

 

Also there is no need of evidence to put law enforcement agents on the ground to prevent a crime. For example you don't need evidence of drunk driving to set up a DUI check point. Evidence is what happens upon arrest and being sent to court. There is no need at all of evidence of any kind to actively put crime suppression units out in the field.

 

They go to the scene to collect evidence. I hope you understand that now.

Yes, I understand.  After initially posting "Not sure of how many are from out of state but we can assume more than a few. That also makes it a crime under federal jurisdiction.", you are no saying you don't have evidence and none is needed to make an arrest.

 

That means if you can't show evidence you are not a bank robber, you're under arrest.

 

 

1 hour ago, checkered flag said:

The first amendment doesn't assure destructive behaviors or vandalism. The antifa goons are not expressing freedom of speech, more likely they are denying others their right to speak up and express themselves. This is all that the cancel culture is about and antifa does the same.

At nightfall the antifa goons come out to burn and vandalize. When caught they cry like babies. 

How many of those arrested have been identified as being in some way associated with antifa?

 

"Attorney General William Barr and other top government officials have frequently blamed Antifa activists for the violence stemming from recent demonstrations in the wake George Floyd's death; however, in NPR's review of court documents of 51 individuals facing federal charges related to protests, none is alleged to have links to the Antifa movement."   https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/06/10/51-protesters-facing-federal-charges-yet-no-sign-of-antifa-involvement/#3220bea24138

 

"A review of the arrests of dozens of people on federal charges reveals no known effort by antifa to perpetrate a coordinated campaign of violence. Some criminal complaints described vague, anti-government political leanings among suspects, but a majority of the violent acts that have taken place at protests have been attributed by federal prosecutors to individuals with no affiliation to any particular group."  https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/11/us/antifa-protests-george-floyd.html?auth=login-email&login=email

 

 

5 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Don't be totally ridiculous please, just because the Antifa boys were not arrested does not mean they did not perpetrate violence......

So your "proof" is the argument "just because the Antifa boys were not arrested does not mean they did not perpetrate violence"???

Well, I for one am now totally convinced!

 

4 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

What evidence do you have they didn't....

As you made the claim the burden of proof is on you. Please tell me you understand this very basic debating concept?

On 7/21/2020 at 11:23 AM, Walker88 said:

For the benefit of those who are not American, I will repeat the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution---something 45 has neither read nor understands---to point out what rights the Founders thought so critical to the new nation they put in their first written words:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

Toss in the Posse Comitatus Act, and what is happening is a violation of both the US Constitution and subsequent enacted laws.  Those troops are traitors, and anyone who supports their acts is a traitor.

 

"All enemies, foreign and domestic"

 

That was in the oath I took and the oath all who served took. We will live it. Real patriots will live it.

 

Notice will be given.

Pure comedy.  I think you and most other libs here fail to understand the 1st Amendment.  You yourself quote it and bolden the relevant passage . . . or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, . . .  But you ignore the "peaceably" qualifier.  Once a peaceable protest becomes violent and criminal acts are committed then the 1st amendment no longer applies.  It then becomes a riot in which case mayors and governors have a responsibility to the Constitution to put an end to unlawful acts.

 

Normal people aren't so confused as to label a riot a peaceful protest.  45 understands quite well.  You don't.  Again, pure comedy.

On 7/21/2020 at 4:23 AM, Walker88 said:

For the benefit of those who are not American, I will repeat the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution---something 45 has neither read nor understands---to point out what rights the Founders thought so critical to the new nation they put in their first written words:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

Toss in the Posse Comitatus Act, and what is happening is a violation of both the US Constitution and subsequent enacted laws.  Those troops are traitors, and anyone who supports their acts is a traitor.

 

"All enemies, foreign and domestic"

 

That was in the oath I took and the oath all who served took. We will live it. Real patriots will live it.

 

Notice will be given.

But he (45) probably read the Supremacy Clause and then the state lawsuits suddenly went down the toilet. Check it out.

The feds are breaking no laws, just enforcing them and protecting federal property. If the state and local coppers would do their job this would not be the case, and if the dingbat portland mayor ASKED/TOLD his constituents to stop destroying federal property and prosecuting ALL violators there would be no need for fed intervention.

Edited July 22, 20205 yr by i84teen

On 7/21/2020 at 9:04 AM, mtls2005 said:

2016 Republican Platform: "Federalism is a cornerstone of our constitutional system. Every violation of state sovereignty by federal officials is not merely a transgression of one unit of government against another; it is an assault on the liberties of individual Americans."

 

Weird that the NRA isn't all over this? I mean, the NRA has fear-mongered about government tyranny for years. But now that the government is acting tyrannically, the NRA is silent.

 

 

 

 

It seems that the "tyranny" is at the state and city levels where governors and mayors are either unable or unwilling to support local law enforcement to enforce the law and protect property and people. Protecting everyone's right to free speech is commendable. Only protecting the free speech of those who comments you support or allowing them to break laws by thieving, looting, assaulting, murdering or preventing others from exercising their legal rights is deplorable. And clearly being done out of political motivation.

On 7/21/2020 at 11:23 AM, Walker88 said:

For the benefit of those who are not American, I will repeat the 1st Amendment of the US Constitution---something 45 has neither read nor understands---to point out what rights the Founders thought so critical to the new nation they put in their first written words:

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

Amendment 0

Don't burn down the country.

 

21 hours ago, Walker88 said:

If 45 is 'right' to attack people exercising 1st Amendment rights,....

Though I don't know much about the US constitution I seriously doubt that burning down police buildings and deserting cities is covered by the 1. Amendment.

1 hour ago, shdmn said:

 

Yes, the compulsive lying impeached reality TV star who ignored the fact Putin paid the Taliban to kill US soldiers is the real patriot.  Everyone else is lying to try make him look bad and it's a disgrace. That dementia test is really hard just like he said.  Also something something ANTIFA something something Soros.  ????

 

Please, you're embarrassing yourself. At least you could address the video of violent attacks on law enforcement. You guys are pathetic.

Troll argumentative baiting post removed

53 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Those people are clearly Buggeroo boys and QuackAnon agents and I challenge anyone to prove me wrong!

This video is clearly about antifa organized riots and nothing to do with the Proud Boys as claimed. The all black clothing and umbrellas are typical of this group. Are you on some mind alternating drugs or just making things up to fit your illiberal agenda.

1 hour ago, Phoenix Rising said:

As you made the claim the burden of proof is on you. Please tell me you understand this very basic debating concept?

So now you want rules instead of total chaos. 

List of 96 Antifa crimes perpetrated in one city in 47 days:

 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/16/acting-secretary-wolf-condemns-rampant-long-lasting-violence-portland

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

List of 96 Antifa crimes perpetrated in one city in 47 days:

 

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/16/acting-secretary-wolf-condemns-rampant-long-lasting-violence-portland

Don't think breaking fences, windows, graffiti and throwing animal seeds at officers necessitate the need for armed federal forces.  

Shooting at Chicago funeral, 14 wounded.

More than 60 shots, 12 killed in weekend violence.

And the problem of US is police violence, what a bunch of idiots

BLM for sure

Edited July 22, 20205 yr by Anton9

5 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Don't think breaking fences, windows, graffiti and throwing animal seeds at officers necessitate the need for armed federal forces.  

U conveniently forgot this Loh:

07/03/2020

• After ongoing riots around the Hatfield Courthouse, crowds were dispersed only to make a return later into the night.
• Violent Anarchists broke the front window of the Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and shot fireworks into the building.
• Violent anarchists firebombed the building. Federal law enforcement extinguished the fire.

Imagine if rioters did this in Sg or Cn!

Law and order for all, except you.

6 minutes ago, i84teen said:

U conveniently forgot this Loh:

07/03/2020

• After ongoing riots around the Hatfield Courthouse, crowds were dispersed only to make a return later into the night.
• Violent Anarchists broke the front window of the Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and shot fireworks into the building.
• Violent anarchists firebombed the building. Federal law enforcement extinguished the fire.

Imagine if rioters did this in Sg or Cn!

Law and order for all, except you.

Correct me if I am wrong. Federal forces can only be used internally under the Insurrection Act to suppress insurrection (da) and rebellion. Don't see those incidents as insurrection that can't be handled by the state police. Is US different in defining insurrection? 

1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

Correct me if I am wrong. Federal forces can only be used internally under the Insurrection Act to suppress insurrection (da) and rebellion. Don't see those incidents as insurrection that can't be handled by the state police. Is US different in defining insurrection? 

Are we watching the same news and/or videos?  

22 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Don't think breaking fences, windows, graffiti and throwing animal seeds at officers necessitate the need for armed federal forces.  

More golden comedy.  For one, crime is crime.  For another you know damn well it's much more than low level hooliganism.  If the mayors and governors are fine with riots and unlawful acts then normal people, including Trump, aren't.  And normal people can take this bullsh!t so only so long.

 

It's obvious which side of the fence you're on. You've got a lot to learn, Eric, in my opinion.

7 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Correct me if I am wrong. Federal forces can only be used internally under the Insurrection Act to suppress insurrection (da) and rebellion. Don't see those incidents as insurrection that can't be handled by the state police. Is US different in defining insurrection? 

Eric, why in the world are you against putting an end to rioting and criminal behaviour?  Are you good with it all?  If the mayors and governors don't do squat, in fact support it, then that's O.K. by you, too?  Do you understand at all that you're arguing for this sh!t?  There are a lot of normal people in this world, Eric, and I and they will never go along with it.  Supporting riots and mayhem and equating it to the right to protest is fringe lunacy.

45 minutes ago, checkered flag said:

This video is clearly about antifa organized riots and nothing to do with the Proud Boys as claimed. The all black clothing and umbrellas are typical of this group. Are you on some mind alternating drugs or just making things up to fit your illiberal agenda.

Never heard of groups being infiltrated by their opponents?? Of course the BoogerBoys and the QuackAnon would wear "Antifa garb"  - how else would they fit in?

 

"The all black clothing and umbrellas are typical of this group"

As well as Goths, Black Metal rockers and Seattleites. But do continue with your generalizations.

2 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

Eric, why in the world are you against putting an end to rioting and criminal behaviour?  Are you good with it all?  If the mayors and governors don't do squat, in fact support it, then that's O.K. by you, too?  Do you understand at all that you're arguing for this sh!t?  There are a lot of normal people in this world, Eric, and I and they will never go along with it.  Supporting riots and mayhem and equating it to the right to protest is fringe lunacy.

Eric seems to hope that the riots will lead to left wing political changes. But I think they cause just the opposite.