Trump says sending federal agents to more U.S. cities to fight violent crime

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, ChouDoufu said:

 

it's cool when they come for "the other."

they won't come for me or mine, right?

we'll see how they feel about things later.

like maybe in november when "the other" gains the white house.

surely the new guy wouldn't try to grab muh guns!

for the children.

Let's remember who was president when the Waco massacre happened. Hint- it wasn't a republican.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You’ve yet to demonstrate even the vaguest understanding of the Constitution and civil rights abuses being perpetrated by these paramilitary groups.

 

Lol, your empty air rather misses the point namely that  40 U.S. Code 1315 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 gives the department’s secretary the power to deputize other federal agents to assist the Federal Protective Service in protecting federal property, such as the courthouse in Portland.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/politics/federal-agents-portland-arrests.html

 

Again, you need to understand a bit more of the law, than you do, Chomper Higgott.

Edited July 23, 2020 by Logosone

[mtls2005]

Saw this written somewhere...

 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

 

and this one...

 

"No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment or trial for the same offense; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

 

 

[herfiehandbag]

4 hours ago, Tippaporn said:

So misleading to post this pick with your comment.  But you know that.

 

The Land of the Free does not mean that you are free to commit violence, loot, engage in arson, deface public property or the like.  The pictured officers are combating that illegal behaviour.

 

Again, so misleading.

Does "The Land of the Free" allow a President to deploy an alphabet soup of hastily trained Federal agents, from a variety of organisations, against the clear wishes of state and municipal authorities; principally, it rather seems, because those authorities are governed by his political critics  and because the voters of those cities did not support him electorally.

 

Portland does seem to be several hundred kilometres from a border, so why are the Border Patrol involved? Perhaps because they are controlled by his administration, and are in the process of being formed into a Federal Paramilitary force, conveniently outside the scope of existing accountability and constitutional constraints!

 

I wonder what part they will be playing by late November this year?

Edited July 23, 2020 by herfiehandbag

[Chomper Higgot]

8 minutes ago, Tippaporn said:

New flash!!  The rioters, looters, vandals, arsonists, while being private citizens, through their own actions become criminals.

News Update:

 

Courts of law decide guilt.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, Mac98 said:

Trump puting federal troops in place in Democrat-run cities, more cities every month, and could use them to seize the mail-in votes at postal centers and election headquartrrs, ahem, 'to protect the integrity of the election and purge illegal votes', thereby blocking the election results for months, or even disqualifying the election itself. That would certainly allow the appointment of hundreds of additional conservative judges, likely a Supreme Court judge, and more lackeys throughout the government.

Seriously?

Don't think there is an emoji of someone hitting head on brick wall to put here.

[Phoenix Rising]

Another inconvenient statement from a grown-up:

 

US Army Gen. Russel Honoré: Get the hell out of our uniforms

 

"Retired US Army Gen. Russel Honoré, the three-star general who commanded the military's response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, sharply criticized the Department of Homeland Security for wearing military uniforms.

"That uniform represents the cloth of our nation for people who don't draw overtime, who serve around the world at the direction of the national command authority,""

[Logosone]

Just now, mtls2005 said:

Saw this written somewhere...

 

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

 

and this one...

 

"No person shall be subject, except in cases of impeachment, to more than one punishment or trial for the same offense; nor shall be compelled to be a witness against himself; nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

 

 

Can you please stop quoting irrelevant nonsense and address the fact that 40 U.S. Code 1315 under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 gives the department’s secretary the power to deputize other federal agents to assist the Federal Protective Service in protecting federal property, such as the courthouse in Portland?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/politics/federal-agents-portland-arrests.html

 

Or the fact that Eisenhower sent in federal troops to uphold US law at Little Rock?

[Phoenix Rising]

15 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Apparently it's OK to be  a thug and a criminal if one is on the correct side of politics.

Apparently the hyperbole is strong in this one. From the same author:

 

"....thugs trying to destroy the fabric of society...."

Edited July 23, 2020 by Phoenix Rising

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, herfiehandbag said:

Does "The Land of the Free" allow a President to deploy an alphabet soup of hastily trained Federal agents, from a variety of organisations, against the clear wishes of state and municipal authorities, principally by it rather seems, because those authorities are governed by his political critics  and to because the voters of those cities did not support him electorally.

 

Portland does seem to be several hundred kilometres from a border, so why are the Border Patrol involved?

so why are the Border Patrol involved?

 

Need some hard men to deal with thugs.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, herfiehandbag said:

Does "The Land of the Free" allow a President to deploy an alphabet soup of hastily trained Federal agents, from a variety of organisations, against the clear wishes of state and municipal authorities, principally by it rather seems, because those authorities are governed by his political critics  and to because the voters of those cities did not support him electorally.

 

Portland does seem to be several hundred kilometres from a border, so why are the Border Patrol involved?

Yes it does allow it, see the request for assistance from the governor of a state is not provided for in law, it's not required. It's a non issue. All that matters is that:

 

40 U.S. Code 1315, which under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 gives the department’s secretary the power to deputize other federal agents to assist the Federal Protective Service in protecting federal property, such as the courthouse in Portland.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/politics/federal-agents-portland-arrests.html

 

That's why DHS are involved in Portland, because leftist thugs, criminals and ANTIFA have damaged federal property.

 

Surely easy to understand?

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

Can you please stop quoting irrelevant nonsense and address the fact that 40 U.S. Code 1315 under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 gives the department’s secretary the power to deputize other federal agents to assist the Federal Protective Service in protecting federal property, such as the courthouse in Portland?

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/politics/federal-agents-portland-arrests.html

 

Or the fact that Eisenhower sent in federal troops to uphold US law at Little Rock?

Where does it give Federal Officers the right to act against the constitution of the United States?

[ChouDoufu]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Let's remember who was president when the Waco massacre happened. Hint- it wasn't a republican.

 

yes, exactly!

hint - that and the weavers got the militias all riled up. 

the feds were coming after them.

oh, it's different when the shoe is on the other glove!

 

i can see a time when a president could send in federal assets to disarm the militias, or the urbanites.  y'know, who needs an assault-(style) weapon?  who needs detachable magazines.  the police will protect you.

 

gun violence is bad m'kay!  we'll do it for the children, so there's really no limit.  you don't hate children, right?  heck, if they're doing nothing wrong, what do they have to worry about?

 

we go down this road there's no end.

[OneMoreFarang]

34 minutes ago, Logosone said:

The whole world has seen the violence unleashed by the street thugs in the US. 

 

It's time the hammer came down. 

 

Hard.

I agree. Lock them up!

 

[Laza 45]

..he is getting prepared for the election..

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Another inconvenient statement from a grown-up:

 

US Army Gen. Russel Honoré: Get the hell out of our uniforms

 

"Retired US Army Gen. Russel Honoré, the three-star general who commanded the military's response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, sharply criticized the Department of Homeland Security for wearing military uniforms.

"That uniform represents the cloth of our nation for people who don't draw overtime, who serve around the world at the direction of the national command authority,""

Ever served? I have and didn't have such a worshipful view of those that supposedly led us.

"The cloth of our nation" 55555555555555

Where was he during the Vietnam era when scruffy malcontents were wearing US military uniform?

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, Laza 45 said:

..he is getting prepared for the election..

He’s desperately trying to turn the polls around before Labor Day, after which he has some to one with Mitch McConnell.

[Logosone]

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Where does it give Federal Officers the right to act against the constitution of the United States?

Lol, you don't understand the position in law, Chomper Higgot, see:

 

40 U.S. Code 1315, which under the Homeland Security Act of 2002 gives the department’s secretary the power to deputize other federal agents to assist the Federal Protective Service in protecting federal property, such as the courthouse in Portland.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/politics/federal-agents-portland-arrests.html

 

The Homeland Security Act of 2002 is the law of the land. It is not against the US constitution. It is the law.

 

So in law Trump has the right to deploy federal troops in cities to uphold US law, without request from the governor.

 

If you think the constitution has been violated you should specify how.

 

Of course before you get your constitutional law textbook out and spend hours studying it let me remind you that Eisenhower sent in federal troops to uphold US law in Little Rock. Just as Trump sent in federal troops to uphold law in Portland.

[thaibeachlovers]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Where does it give Federal Officers the right to act against the constitution of the United States?

Where in the constitution does it give the right for thugs and criminals to destroy public property?

I'm happy that at last there is a president that doesn't just give lip service to law and order.

[Sujo]

Those moms must be really scary.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/wall-moms-portland-protests-getting-173742870.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly9uZXdzLnlhaG9vLmNvbS93YWxsLW1vbXMtcG9ydGxhbmQtcHJvdGVzdHMtZ2V0dGluZy0xNzM3NDI4NzAuaHRtbA&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAFgVz4ohuFjuUuENVq2JuT-QYn6JrqzQR1ZX-G2-LPgVtc9Y8qNEf7HjxNdc-DGCViILfN0DOF9vgp6I8NHEVUluW-Rhj4B678lEYF6l2yTqBrsvl8kYRDISKZ_VM7bNHGtdIa1Iw1kmpUgkWQCZmvddPkEsz3k8VWFW9E33TIUM

[Logosone]

Just now, herfiehandbag said:

Much the same argument as was advanced by one "Ernst Rohm" when he argued for the S.A. to become the primary armed force of the German State...

Funny enough it's the ANTIFA and leftist thugs who are acting like brown shirts. They're the ones using violence for political discourse. And of course ANTIFA are the violent arm of the extreme left.

 

You live by the sword.....

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, herfiehandbag said:

Much the same argument as was advanced by one "Ernst Rohm" when he argued for the S.A. to become the primary armed force of the German State...

I seem to recall that he didn't end well.

That's a rather large deflection, but one that has been used many times against Trump, and this time is no more applicable than the rest. Nice try but no cigar.

[Sujo]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Where in the constitution does it give the right for thugs and criminals to destroy public property?

I'm happy that at last there is a president that doesn't just give lip service to law and order.

Heard of roger stone?

[mtls2005]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

40 U.S. Code 1315

 

You still cannot arrest or detain someone without probable cause.

[Logosone]

Just now, Sujo said:

Heard of roger stone?

Hear of Little Rock?

 

You know, when Eisenhower sent in federal troops to uphold US law? Learn some history.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

Funny enough it's the ANTIFA and leftist thugs who are acting like brown shirts. They're the ones using violence for political discourse. And of course ANTIFA are the violent arm of the extreme left.

 

You live by the sword.....

All those mums standing shoulder to shoulder.

 

It must be terrifying to face such peaceful protest.

[RANGER55]

4 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Thank you for what?

Sending federal agents to cities who never asked for them?

If the cities would need support with their law enforcement they would have asked. They didn't! 

They don’t have to ask, its to defend federal property. Again, 51 days of rioting, over 23 million in damages before the Feds showed up and started doing their job.

 

Loved the video of the PPD clearing out the park yesterday. Shoving that white boy with his man bun into the back of their police car. Then the fat white girl started to grab one of them, screaming her head off like a 5 year old brat. His words, don’t put your F---- hands on me again. Believe me the PPD have had it with these little white brats.  I keep saying white because probably 95% are white rioter and has nothing to do with the death of Floyd. Its to press their Marxist agenda.

 

 

As for asking for permission form the mayor or city council. They don’t have to. As they say there is a food chain, local, county (Sheriff), state and then federal. When the federals roll in, they don’t have to ask anybody, they are at the top of the food chain. They are in charge, no if, and are buts. I have seen it happen several times. One time rolling in and arresting a county Sheriff for crimes. They walk in and say everybody get up and step away from your desk NOW.

 

[Logosone]

Just now, mtls2005 said:

 

You still cannot arrest or detain someone without probable cause.

Correct.

 

However, in this case it is probable cause under federal law. Not the state law of Oregon:

 

"But the lack of any consent from local officials just means federal agents cannot rely on state and local laws to justify the arrests. Federal agents can still detain the demonstrators away from federal property if they can assert probable cause that a federal crime was violated, according to Peter Vincent, a former top lawyer with Immigration and Customs Enforcement, which has also sent agents to cities across the United States."

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/17/us/politics/federal-agents-portland-arrests.html

 

Judging by the many arrests in Portland, this would not appear to be a problem.

 

[Surelynot]

Oh! If only everyone had a gun....there would be none of this trouble.

[mtls2005]

Just now, Logosone said:

Judging by the many arrests in Portland, this would not appear to be a problem.

 

I lack the clarity you have into "many of the arrests", but the one captured on video was illegal. There was no probable cause. The "suspect" was transported to the courthouse, questioned for two hours and released.

 

Can wolf and cuccinelli  -both with potentially illegal appointments - make a case on this one? Doubt it.