Trump Secret police

#976
#976
k-town_king said:
They know. I mention it every time they scream Chicago. Its just a racist talking point. It isn't a top ten dangerous city or murder rate.




Don't backtrack now. You LOVE per capita. You love it when I point out that white people commit 70% of the crime in the US.
Click to expand...

Post #955. Let’s see you or tiggy give some facts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MemphisVol77 and Y9 Vol
#977
#977
Purple Tiger said:
When is Trump going to send his storm troopers to the real violent cities? Oops - they all happen to be in Red States except for Washington and New Mexico.

Here are the 10 most dangerous metro areas in America for 2020
  1. Anchorage, Alaska
  2. Albuquerque, New Mexico
  3. Memphis, Tennessee
  4. Wichita, Kansas
  5. Lubbock, Texas
  6. Detroit-Dearborn-Livonia, Michigan
  7. Spokane-Spokane Valley, Washington
  8. Shreveport-Bossier City, Louisiana
  9. Corpus Christi, Texas
  10. Mobile, Alabama
10 Most Dangerous Cities in America for 2020 | SafeWise
Click to expand...

OH...OH...lets look at a water filter company ad and do a water quality chart next.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, BigOrangeTrain and MemphisVol77
#980
#980
k-town_king said:
You said a bunch of bs. What was your point?

You guys love per capita when it fits your agenda. When we see that the actual danger is not where your black boogeymen are then you act like its raw numbers that matter. lmao
Click to expand...

Stop avoiding and deflecting. Try answering the questions I posed. I don’t care about black and white. You, like always bring in the race card.

The point is simply this. Tiggy asked when is Trump gonna send in the Feds for other areas that are dangerous. Well my response was the questions I asked. If those areas are experiencing what Portland is, where the state and local governments either refuse or are incapable of controlling things, then send them in.

Again, you or tiggy try answering my questions.
 
#981
#981
BigOrangeTrain said:
Stop avoiding and deflecting. Try answering the questions I posed. I don’t care about black and white. You, like always bring in the race card.

The point is simply this. Tiggy asked when is Trump gonna send in the Feds for other areas that are dangerous. Well my response was the questions I asked. If those areas are experiencing what Portland is, where the state and local governments either refuse or are incapable of controlling things, then send them in.

Again, you or tiggy try answering my questions.
Click to expand...
There is no city having the nightly after 12 action like Portland. So in your opinion he should not send troops, unconstitutionally, to anywhere else?
 
#982
#982
k-town_king said:
There is no city having the nightly after 12 action like Portland. So in your opinion he should not send troops, unconstitutionally, to anywhere else?
Click to expand...

Kayleigh McEnany already debunked the unconstitutional argument. So to your point, no troops should not be sent into those areas. Only when, like Portland, where utter chaos is being allowed by a brainless official.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
#983
#983
BigOrangeTrain said:
Kayleigh McEnany already debunked the unconstitutional argument. So to your point, no troops should not be sent into those areas. Only when, like Portland, where utter chaos is being allowed by a brainless official.
Click to expand...
The military cannot perform law enforcement duties on American soil. Federal agencies also have to be invited by local law enforcement to do local law enforcement activity.

She is an idiot. She thinks they cancelled Paw Patrol and that it is about police.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Purple Tiger
#984
#984
k-town_king said:
The military cannot perform law enforcement duties on American soil. Federal agencies also have to be invited by local law enforcement to do local law enforcement activity.

She is an idiot. She thinks they cancelled Paw Patrol and that it is about police.
Click to expand...

Come on, everyone knows the Paw Patrol hoax was a Liberal plot to make Republicans look stupid.
 
#987
#987
k-town_king said:
The military cannot perform law enforcement duties on American soil. Federal agencies also have to be invited by local law enforcement to do local law enforcement activity.

She is an idiot. She thinks they cancelled Paw Patrol and that it is about police.
Click to expand...

Yet again you show your stupidity. DHS agents aren’t military. They are just wearing military style gear. Educate yourself. As soon as the Federal buildings were encroached upon, the feds can step in.

40 U.S. Code § 1315 - Law enforcement authority of Secretary of Homeland Security for protection of public property
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77 and 37L1
#995
#995
MemphisVol77 said:
Click to expand...

A few parts I found interesting from the article linked in the tweet.
"The State has presented just one example of an arrest without probable cause and one example of an unreasonable seizure. That is the sum total of the evidence before me that underpins the legal injuries the State asserts in its brief,” the judge wrote. “In both instances of a federal seizure it is either admitted or clearly visible that the agents’ uniforms say ‘Police.' "
Click to expand...

I replied earlier in the thread that the video("use your words...", lol) didn't look legit.

The injury the state asserts is entirely conjectural. First, the state candidly admits that it does not have a shred of evidence that counter-protesters have ever, anywhere, kidnapped a protester or anyone associated with protests,” he wrote. “Second, the asserted interest rests on an utterly implausible inference. The State’s reasoning is that counter-protesters, once they learn of seizures of protesters by federal agents, will dress up like police and go out on private missions to kidnap protesters. This despite the fact that such kidnappings are Measure 11 felonies in Oregon, punishable by mandatory minimum sentences of up to 70-90 years in prison.”
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Electric Orange and 0nelilreb
#997
#997
0nelilreb said:
Welp that didn’t go as they had hoped I’ll bet .
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with the localities of his appointees but Trump has appointed about 182 Conservative federal judges. The states should maybe start playing ball, start enacting law and order, or they might start experiencing some hard times.
 
#998
#998
MemphisVol77 said:
I'm not familiar with the localities of his appointees but Trump has appointed about 182 Conservative federal judges. The states should maybe start playing ball, start enacting law and order, or they might start experiencing some hard times.
Click to expand...

What would a "Conservative" judge have to do with not ruling on the side of states rights? This has been one of their tenets. Seems like the AG presented a weak case.

In another ruling the Feds have been temporarily barred from interfering with journalists and legal observers, which effectively puts the brakes on indiscriminate force, and holds them accountable for their actions.
 
#999
#999
Stew Cook said:
What would a "Conservative" judge have to do with not ruling on the side of states rights? This has been one of their tenets. Seems like the AG presented a weak case.

In another ruling the Feds have been temporarily barred from interfering with journalists and legal observers, which effectively puts the brakes on indiscriminate force, and holds them individually accountable for their actions.
Click to expand...

Technically, federal law preempts state law, while feds don't have the authority to enforce state law unless the governors grant that authority.

However, when rioters are assaulting people, looting, and causing general mayhem, attacking federal monuments & buildings.... then that is against federal law, and last time a state seriously tried to tell the feds they couldn't enforce federal law, there was a civil war.....

The blue states won't have the backbone to do anything after the federal courts put them in check, so civil war is off the table...., but they will continue to get BTFO in the federal courts.

Feds have been temporarily barred from interfering with journalists and legal observers
Click to expand...
After the Feds declare a p̶r̶o̶t̶e̶s̶t̶ riot to be an unlawful assembly and issue an evacuation order, how does that apply to journalists and legal observers?
 
#1,000
#1,000
MemphisVol77 said:
Technically, federal law preempts state law, while feds don't have the authority to enforce state law unless the governors grant that authority.

However, when rioters are assaulting people, looting, and causing general mayhem, attacking federal monuments & buildings.... then that is against federal law, and last time a state seriously tried to tell the feds they couldn't enforce federal law, there was a civil war.....

The blue states won't have the backbone to do anything after the federal courts put them in check, so civil war is off the table...., but they will continue to get BTFO in the federal courts.

After the Feds declare a p̶r̶o̶t̶e̶s̶t̶ riot to be an unlawful assembly and issue an evacuation order, how does that apply to journalists and legal observers?
Click to expand...

Yeah, I doubt that. Sure they can protect their assets , but once they start roaming the streets, they'll be shut down post haste.

They are protest magnets, but that was the plan. I'd leave the rioters to clash with the feds, but protesters can choose to protest that too, regardless.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top