On 6/11/2025 at 6:14 AM, Dan747 said:

 While the city burns to the ground Newsome and Bass are looking for their marshmallows…..

Domestic Terrorism Offense Prohibits intentionally or knowingly committing a felony that involves the use of a deadly weapon or infliction of serious injury with the intent to influence state government policy or actions, substantially damage or interrupt public services, intimidate civilians, or further the goals of any terrorist organization. The offense is a Class 2 felony, punishable by up to life in prison. "ACCOUNTABILITY PLEASE!!"

Completely ridiculous commentary like this skews the entire debate and sends it off into a deranged territory of highly partisan politics. 

 

In case you didn't realize that Los Angeles is a huge city of 470 square miles and that's just the city limits. These protests are going on in a few square blocks. Although a few vehicles have burned this doesn't quite hold up to the level of the George Floyd protests.

 

Are you rational enough to understand that? Or just blinkered? 

4 minutes ago, kimothai said:

Insurrection act (10 U.S. code 251-255).  Are you that F*ing lazy that you can't do your own research?  This is why James Carville described lefties as stunning stupid.

He didn't invoke the Insurrection Act for deploying troops to LA. Quote me if you have that evidence. I am waiting. Are you that dumb or just clutching straw. 

1 minute ago, transam said:

A bit like you, then, a fixation with the word 'Troll'........🤔

I have no "fixation" with the term troll. It simply fits some on here perfectly. Those who parrot the narrative and supply no actual counter points. Bit like you.

3 hours ago, jimmybcool said:

You need to get a grip man.   Unless of course you can cite a source that shows they are being issued live ammo I'll throw the BS flag on that.  But then you outed yourself as a left wing crazy when you use terms like "fascist" and "trampling innocent protestors".  Turn of CNN and MSNBC.  it is rotting your brain.

 

Under the burden-of-proof principle, I have no obligation to disprove your baseless “no ammo” claim.

Out of kindness to the less informed, I cited as a source the DoD statutes to support my argument.
 

I’ve already explained it ; I can’t understand it for you!
 

PS: I watch Fox now and then for a laugh—does that cause “brain rot,” or just leave me less informed?

1 minute ago, dinsdale said:

I have no "fixation" with the term troll. It simply fits some on here perfectly. Those who parrot the narrative and supply no actual counter points. Bit like you.

This is a chat forum for all, not just folk who think they are better ....🧐.....than others, ...🤔

13 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

He didn't invoke the Insurrection Act for deploying troops to LA. Quote me if you have that evidence. I am waiting. Are you that dumb or just clutching straw. 

Quite correct. He said he's considering it. What your evading though is he doesn't have to invoke the insurrection Act in relation to the deployment of the National Guard and a contingent of Marines. What invoking the Insurrection Act would mean is the Marines could engage in law enforcement activities and as it is this is not the case. They Marines have been deployed to work in conjunction with the National Guard to protect Federal employees and property. I guess MSNBC and the idiot women on the view haven't made this clear to you.

Here's another view of the "mostly peacefuls":

 

 

From Saturday, when Bass and Newsom were claiming they had it under control.

 

Edit:  That's the 101, BTW.  A major road that thousands depend on every hour to get through LA.  Which affects interstate commerce.  Not just LA and not just California.  The entire country...

 

 

 

4 minutes ago, transam said:

This is a chat forum for all, not just folk who think they are better ....🧐.....than others, ...🤔

There's chatting, there's arguing a point with supported counter arguments and there's trolling. 

6 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

There's chatting, there's arguing a point with supported counter arguments and there's trolling. 

We already know that, but you bandy the troll thing about when you don't like a reply......🤔

 

How many times have you used the word 'troll' today....?....🤗

6 hours ago, Mike_Hunt said:

CA was a very different place in 1965.  

So was most of the rest of the world back then.

Facebook 

26 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Quite correct. He said he's considering it. What your evading though is he doesn't have to invoke the insurrection Act in relation to the deployment of the National Guard and a contingent of Marines. What invoking the Insurrection Act would mean is the Marines could engage in law enforcement activities and as it is this is not the case. They Marines have been deployed to work in conjunction with the National Guard to protect Federal employees and property. I guess MSNBC and the idiot women on the view haven't made this clear to you.

So you agree that there are no legal justifications to deploy troops. Just demonstrate to me that he is lawless and acting like an authoritarian leader. But you maga folks are ok with that. 

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

So you agree that there are no legal justifications to deploy troops. Just demonstrate to me that he is lawless and acting like an authoritarian leader. But you maga folks are ok with that. 

Where did I say that? I said Trump hasn't as of yet invoked the Insurrection Act. He doesn't need to invoke the Act to deploy the National Guard and Marines and what he's done is lawful.

 

9 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Where did I say that? I said Trump hasn't as of yet invoked the Insurrection Act. He doesn't need to invoke the Act to deploy the National Guard and Marines and what he's done is lawful.

If lawful, please quote the law. He use a US Code on Armed Service to deploy troops which is not a law in traditional sense. More like guidelines and will not hold up in court if challenged. 

With the amount of guns in America I'm surprised there has not been any fatalities yet.

22 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

 

If lawful, please quote the law. He use a US Code on Armed Service to deploy troops which is not a law in traditional sense. More like guidelines and will not hold up in court if challenged. 

Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code,

The precedents for not going through the governor is President Lyndon B. Johnson, 1963, Alabama and the 1992 LA Rodney King riots.

https://time.com/7292433/trump-national-guard-la-protests/

I've just seen this. Lays things out quite nicely.

 

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

He didn't invoke the Insurrection Act for deploying troops to LA. Quote me if you have that evidence. I am waiting. Are you that dumb or just clutching straw. 

Trump could have used the Insurrection Act (which authorized him), but he didn't too.  He simply invoked Title 10 authority (to protect federal personnel and property).  I'm tired of doing research for you.  Either you think you are entitled or as I said before, "stunningly stupid" or maybe just too lazy.  This research only takes 10-15 seconds to do, but in your case maybe longer since I'm guessing you can only type with one finger.  

5 hours ago, Woke to Sounds said:

 

Can't be easy, I appreciate that.

 

Roofies work their axrses off.  I admire their skills providing an essential service like shelter.

 

But I already put in my time and it was not gravy.

 

Fact is the system was rigged in the Boomer generation's favour because that is what the system needed at that time.

 

The system doesn't need the same dynamics now.

 

Look at Gen Z. They are, on average, f00ked compared to even Generation X.

 

Six roommates to afford rent in San Francisco / Toronto / Auckland / Sydney / L.A. / London??

 

Never in my day, and certainly I dare say never in yours.

What kind of work did you do?

 

 

3 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Completely ridiculous commentary like this skews the entire debate and sends it off into a deranged territory of highly partisan politics. 

 

 

This is your MO dude. 

3 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Title 10, Section 12406 of the U.S. Code,

The precedents for not going through the governor is President Lyndon B. Johnson, 1963, Alabama and the 1992 LA Rodney King riots.

https://time.com/7292433/trump-national-guard-la-protests/

And I think anybody with a rational point of view would argue that those were very extreme events, and the current riot, with a population of 300 people, and 2,000 plus law enforcement is anything but extreme. Though Trump, his nimwit Hegseth, and many on this forum, are doing their best to pretend it is. 

11 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

And I think anybody with a rational point of view would argue that those were very extreme events, and the current riot, with a population of 300 people, and 2,000 plus law enforcement is anything but extreme. Though Trump, his nimwit Hegseth, and many on this forum, are doing their best to pretend it is. 

National Guard was sent in to protect Federal personnel and property. LAPD were not in control initially. Rioting and looting was taking place. Eventually a curfew was put in place. Not extreme? 

1 hour ago, spidermike007 said:

And I think anybody with a rational point of view would argue that those were very extreme events, and the current riot, with a population of 300 people, and 2,000 plus law enforcement is anything but extreme. Though Trump, his nimwit Hegseth, and many on this forum, are doing their best to pretend it is. 

I agree this incident affects 00.1% of the city of LA it’s tiny it’s a classic attempt at overreach by a wanna be strong man Donald trump aka taco don.its pathetic more like a troll than a president.

Very sad to see the left destroying LA (or supporting those destroying it).

 

Still, that's what the left do. 

 

 

25 minutes ago, Tug said:

I agree this incident affects 00.1% of the city of LA it’s tiny it’s a classic attempt at overreach by a wanna be strong man Donald trump aka taco don.its pathetic more like a troll than a president.

 

Well Trump is a puppet, but the regime is still very much liberal and the promotion of weakness, disorder and degeneracy continues. I don't even know how you liberal cupcakes operate in Thailand. Do you just stay in your condos 23 hours a day and ignore the reality of where you are - a highly nationalistic country where people waving foreign flags and rioting would be met extreme force and opposed to your wishy-washy ideology.  Judging by the post counts many of you have, that's probably the reality. Maybe the other hour you spend in your local Starbucks with the other liberals who couldn't afford an ivory tower in San Francisco, Sydney or London.

1 hour ago, Tug said:

I agree this incident affects 00.1% of the city of LA it’s tiny it’s a classic attempt at overreach by a wanna be strong man Donald trump aka taco don.its pathetic more like a troll than a president.

You would let it burn? 

 

If not, what would you do?

14 hours ago, StandardIssue said:

You've missed the point completely. 

 

What makes you think this topic is about local business owners needing Trump to send in military troops and national guard to protect them when CA is well equipped with all kinds of police force and LE agencies to take care of such problems?

 

CA did not ask for Trumps help, CA doesn't need Trumps help with this. Gavin Newsom sees that it is obviously Trump trying to push him around and using the protests as an excuse to do it, possibly make him look bad for political reasons.

 

Are you reading these posts?

CA may be will equipped, but when they dont do anything it doesn't matter. 

 

You're right CA didn't ask for help,  they are playing politics instead of looking out for the safety and well being of their citizens. 

Why didn't they ask the protesters to stop the destruction?  Why aren't they asking people to please protest peacefully. 

 

All they talk about is Trump and say Trump is causing this.  Gavin talks about getting arrested when nobody said anything about arresting him.  Gavin is putting on a political show.

1 hour ago, mogandave said:

You would let it burn? 

 

If not, what would you do?

Let LA Handel their own business they didn’t request help and don’t need it it’s trump trying to create a spectacle and score points with gullible people 

3 hours ago, Tug said:

I agree this incident affects 00.1% of the city of LA it’s tiny it’s a classic attempt at overreach by a wanna be strong man Donald trump aka taco don.its pathetic more like a troll than a president.

I think later today I'll come over your place and protest because I dont like the color.  Then I think I'll throw a rock through your window. 

You should be fine with that, it's just one window in your whole place.

 

It's ok when it's other peoples stuff being burned down.   One of my friends who is a Democrat and supported Biden had a Tesla.  It was burned down because people dont like Elon anymore. 

So my friend lost his car, guess the police shouldn't do anything it's only one car.  They are ignoring laws, as it's ok if you overstayed your visa or entered illegally you can stay in the US forever!! Laws dont apply to undocumented immigrants. 

 

Did you see the burning cars in LA??? I never once heard Gavin tell people to stop the violence, all he did was play politics and blame this on Trump. 

No concern for the people or what going on.   LA police chief announced they were overwhelmed, instead of Gavin calling in police support from neighboring towns or cities, he doesn't do his job and waits for Trump so he can play politics.