Trump Secret police

#377
#377
GoDucks349 said:
This last bold is very disturbing, you put it in quotes as if it is something I said. This is something that is a total lie and requires an apology from you.
Click to expand...
I want to make sure I understand your criticism. Is it your contention that you never argued that the Feds have no right to be there arresting citizens off of Federal property? Or are you just quibbling about the fact that I summarized that part of your argument and attributed it to you with quotation marks?

To show my point, will you be happier if I summarize by wrapping it in quote script blocks instead of quotation marks?

GoDucks349 said:
From my reading of various news reports, the mandate implied and sighted seems to be that the Feds were sent to protect Federal property and that was the jurisdiction they were to adhere to. Whether that's completely accurate or not I'm not sure. However, the apparent arrests by the Feds took place off of Federal property when they went beyond the mandated jurisdiction for their presents in Portland. That's the best understanding I have of the situation.
Click to expand...

By claiming your understanding that they had gone "beyond the mandated jurisdictio for their presence in Portland", you weren't claiming they don't have the right to make the arrests they've made?

So, again, are you quibbling a punctuation issue, or claiming that I misrepresented your point? I need to know which you're doing, as my response will differ.
 
#379
#379
Weezer said:
JMO, but for jurisdictional purposes, feds shouldn't intervene unless invited, which they weren't. If mayors want to let their towns go to hell, then it's up to the constituents to hold their feet to the fire. I'm not okay with the continual federal overreach. They keep taking more and more power, and I don't see that as a good thing.
Click to expand...
The only reason they can have anyone there is federal property. Other than that they have no business there. If the protesters actually had any knowledge about the sites they are tagging, they would have left the federal sites alone.
 
#380
#380
RockyTop85 said:
In most contexts, it’s the government’s burden to show that its actions comport with the law and the constitution, particularly when depriving us of our freedom. That’s true in fourth amendment challenges, it’s reflected in the allocation of the burden of proof, it’s true in Miranda challenges (the classing Miranda warning is a prophylactic measure to satisfy the government’s burden)... I’m sure there are other contexts where this is the case, but it’s late.

There are many good reasons for this. Surely they don’t require elaboration.

So, when unidentified government agents of an unknown agency are arresting people to an unknown location on unknown charges, I’m not sure the scarcity of publicly known information and facts regarding the constitutionality of this action is really on the pro-government side of the ledger. It seems like the lack of transparency is the grievance.

The fact that the government hasn’t provided any remedy for this grievance doesn’t have any bearing on the merits. There’s no presumption of validity when the government deprives people of their liberty. Thats a rake we should probably all try to stop stepping on.
Click to expand...
They are required to make it public, or disclose it to arrested and legal system as required?

Are you saying that, in active investigations, they are required to make the facts of their investigation public? Or they have the ability to play their card close with the public when going public would jeapordize parts of their investigation?
 
#381
#381
BigOrangeTrain said:
Interesting. Trump has been in a no win situation since the beginning of this. If he helps detain these criminals he is a fascist. If he doesn’t he is incompetent. Oh and we just need to stop with all the “peaceful protestors” BS. It’s not peaceful protesting when you are destroying public property, assaulting police officers and enticing fear into the general public. That friends is terrorism. And when local and state leaders are either too incompetent or refuse to resolve these issues and protect their citizens, then the government should step in and do it for them.
Click to expand...
50 days in, I think it qualifies as terrorism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol, MemphisVol77, Orange_Crush and 1 other person
#382
#382
davethevol said:
I’m guessing it’s done under the patriot act, which if I remember clearly allows the government to detain anyone indefinitely without charging them if they are suspected of terrorism or being connected to someone that is. That was something that terrified me when I read it way back when it was passed, and I have a feeling we are seeing some of that now.
Click to expand...
Me too.
 
#383
#383
BigOrangeTrain said:
Interesting. Trump has been in a no win situation since the beginning of this. If he helps detain these criminals he is a fascist. If he doesn’t he is incompetent. Oh and we just need to stop with all the “peaceful protestors” BS. It’s not peaceful protesting when you are destroying public property, assaulting police officers and enticing fear into the general public. That friends is terrorism. And when local and state leaders are either too incompetent or refuse to resolve these issues and protect their citizens, then the government should step in and do it for them.
Click to expand...
I believe that was the plan all along.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and NurseGoodVol
#385
#385
Weezer said:
JMO, but for jurisdictional purposes, feds shouldn't intervene unless invited, which they weren't. If mayors want to let their towns go to hell, then it's up to the constituents to hold their feet to the fire. I'm not okay with the continual federal overreach. They keep taking more and more power, and I don't see that as a good thing.
Click to expand...
So, if these riots across the country (across state lines) are a coordinated effort to destabilize the country, the Feds have no jurisdiction? If they are sponosored by foreign actors to destabilize our democracy, the Feds should just say, "Uh oh. Portland told me to keep my nose out of it!"

???
 
#386
#386
Orange_Crush said:
So, if these riots across the country (across state lines) are a coordinated effort to destabilize the country, the Feds have no jurisdiction? If they are sponosored by foreign actors to destabilize our democracy, the Feds should just say, "Uh oh. Portland told me to keep my nose out of it!"

???
Click to expand...
That creates a separate circumstance. Feds would have jurisdiction over this "shadow leadership" in your supposition because it crosses state lines.
 
#387
#387
Weezer said:
That creates a separate circumstance. Feds would have jurisdiction over this "shadow leadership" in your supposition because it crosses state lines.
Click to expand...
That's been my point all along. All of this bluster has been assumptions and accusations from ignorance. Barr clearly stated that there are indications of coordinations of violence between these "protests" to destabilize our democracy. He also stated that there may be indications that the coordination is foreign sponsored to destabilize our nation.

It may well be that those things are true, and the Feds are rightly doing what they are supposed to do here.

If this is Federal overreach, I want it shut down as much as the next person. But if this is organized (and foreign-sponsored) violence to destabilize the Republic, I want the Feds to shut it down hard.

Sorry, editing to correct. He didn't say there are indications. He says they have evidence that the violence is coordinated by radical left wing groups, and evidence that foreign actors are involved in it.

"While many have peacefully expressed their anger and grief, others have hijacked protests to engage in lawlessness, violent rioting, arson, looting of businesses, and public property assaults on law enforcement officers and innocent people, and even the murder of a federal agent," Barr said. "We have evidence that antifa and other similar extremist groups, as well as actors of a variety of different political persuasions have been involved in instigating and participating in the violent activity.


Barr added, "we are also seeing foreign actors playing all sides to exacerbate the violence."
Click to expand...

"There are some groups that don't have a particular ideology, other than anarchy and there's some groups that want to bring about a civil war -- the 'Boogaloo' group that has been on the margin of this as well trying to exacerbate the violence," Barr said. "So we are dealing with as I say a witch's brew of a lot of different extremist organizations."
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
#388
#388
Here, Barr tells us that he's set up a joint terrorism task force to arrest violent agitators that are associated with the organized violence in protests--on Federal crimes.

We have directed our 200 Joint Terrorism Task Forces across the country to assist local law enforcement with apprehending and charging violent agitators who are hijacking peaceful protests. On a national level, we’re soliciting tips, leads, and video evidence of criminal activities through our National Threat Operations Center — NTO
Click to expand...

That investigative work has so far resulted in 51 arrests for federal crimes associated with the rioting across the country, and Barr said the agencies “will continue to investigate, make arrests, and prosecute where warranted.”
Click to expand...

Again, folks. You all genuinely haven't considered that this isn't just the Feds overstepping into state business? You haven't once considered that this is Federal arrests, for federal crimes, that have come from Federal investigations? And that the Federal response to suppress ongoing violent protests is because they have evidence that the violence is coordinated nationawide, thus making it a Federal issue?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hjeagle1vol and MemphisVol77
#390
#390
davethevol said:
I’m guessing it’s done under the patriot act, which if I remember clearly allows the government to detain anyone indefinitely without charging them if they are suspected of terrorism or being connected to someone that is. That was something that terrified me when I read it way back when it was passed, and I have a feeling we are seeing some of that now.
Click to expand...
I believe the NDAA allows for indefinite detention of US citizens. Somehow that turd keeps getting wrapped up with defense spending so it won't get shot down
 
#391
#391
AG Barr:
“With the rioting that is occurring in many of our cities around the country, the voices of peaceful and legitimate protests have been hijacked by violent radical elements… Federal law enforcement actions will be directed at apprehending and charging the violent radical agitators who have hijacked peaceful protest and are engaged in violations of federal law… The violence instigated and carried out by Antifa and other similar groups in connection with the rioting is domestic terrorism and will be treated accordingly.”
Click to expand...
 
#393
#393
Weezer said:
JMO, but for jurisdictional purposes, feds shouldn't intervene unless invited, which they weren't. If mayors want to let their towns go to hell, then it's up to the constituents to hold their feet to the fire. I'm not okay with the continual federal overreach. They keep taking more and more power, and I don't see that as a good thing.
Click to expand...
Me either.
I don’t like it at all. I said it was bad when I called it.

But here we are
 
#394
#394
utvolpj said:
I believe the NDAA allows for indefinite detention of US citizens. Somehow that turd keeps getting wrapped up with defense spending so it won't get shot down
Click to expand...
Yes, that did as well. I think that allowed the military to detain and the patriot act allowed federal law enforcement. I had conversations with family at the time that supported the patriot act and asked them if they had actually read what was in it. They hadn’t and were shocked at what it allowed. I’ve never thought that it was created to fight terrorism, but that it was created to fight Americans that spoke out against the government.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Electric Orange
#395
#395
EdTN8b2XsAAEsIn
 
  • Like
Reactions: Carl Pickens and hjeagle1vol
#398
#398
n_huffhines said:
It'll be super meme worthy when Biden turns this task force loose on all the off-grid anti-gov right wingers that freak out the libs. You guys have no ability to look 1-4 years into the future
Click to expand...
Is it your contention that the Feds never have the right to arrest? That they only have the right to arrest when they clear it with you?

Do you want to define the difference between "arrested" and "disappeared"?

I've posted the quotes from Barr that this task force is the response to federal investigations per national, organized, coordinated violence and riots. So, I'd be interested in your clarification on this. Thanks.
 
#399
#399
If Trump had secret police, a lot more other people would have disappeared. :) The same people that are screaming about federal overreach in Portland seem to be the same ones hollering about the federal government not mandating to the states that they have to mask up and what they can open and close because of Corona. Which one do you want?
 
  • Like
Reactions: orangesoda, allvol123, hog88 and 3 others
#400
#400
n_huffhines said:
It'll be super meme worthy when Biden turns this task force loose on all the off-grid anti-gov right wingers that freak out the libs. You guys have no ability to look 1-4 years into the future
Click to expand...
They were doing it to a small extent under Obama.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top