Federal Law Enforcement Use Unmarked Vehicles To Grab Protesters Off Portland Streets (UPDATE: Trump admin. deploying federal LE to cities) (1 Viewer)

Users who are viewing this thread

    Dragon

    Well-known member
    Staff member
    Joined
    Sep 28, 2019
    Messages
    1,138
    Reaction score
    2,088
    Age
    61
    Location
    Elsinore,Denmark
    Online
    “All United States Marshals Service arrestees have public records of arrest documenting their charges. Our agency did not arrest or detain Mark James Pettibone.”

    OPB sent DHS an extensive list of questions about Pettibone’s arrest including: What is the legal justification for making arrests away from federal property? What is the legal justification for searching people who are not participating in criminal activity? Why are federal officers using civilian vehicles and taking people away in them? Are the arrests federal officers make legal under the constitution? If so, how?

    After 7 p.m. Thursday, a DHS spokesperson responded, on background, that they could confirm Wolf was in Portland during the day. The spokesperson didn’t acknowledge the remaining questions.








    This story is very troublesome.
     
    Just a minor legal question here - the federal government doesn’t have unlimited power to do policing where the president doesn’t think state and local police are doing a good enough job.

    The Constitution provides that the federal government is a limited one and may only act in accordance with the roles and powers bestowed upon it in the Constitution. All other power and jurisdiction is left to the states.

    Given how often the populist right lays claim to constitutional integrity and how their leader claims to so adore the Constitution, can anyone tell me what federal law these federal “law enforcement” officers are enforcing?

    Dude your the juris doctorate! Been that way since 1803. Good luck.
     
    1595472683316.png
     
    You said it brother! No matter what the end game is, no matter which side wins, the peaceful citizens get forked up the arse! I can see it coming!
    I disagree that peaceful citizens get "forked up the arse!" regardless of what side wins. One side is violating the constitution that they all took an oath to protect and defend. The other side it out exercising their rights guaranteed under the constitution that the other side is taking a shirt on. If the side that is violating the constitution wins, then the constitution becomes meaningless. The end game is for the police to be held accountable for their actions. The end game is for every citizen to be treated exactly the same regardless of how they look. The end game is for peaceful protestors to not be kidnapped and beaten and have their rights violated. The only way peaceful citizens get forked up the arse is when the people who scream the loudest about being patriotic and loving the constitution so much stand by and cheer as the constitution is being shirt on.
     
    1. Yes, crime is up. Just about in every democratic run city since the BLM protests started. Is it not?
    2. Come on Ward, you are a smart guy. Do you really think littering or traffic accidents is the same as what we are seeing in Chicago, NYC, Portland and Seattle? If you honestly do, then there is no reason to continue this dialogue.
    At what point, do the citizens that live there and pay taxes, get the aid that they don't get from the local scared, activist leaders?

    I got busy at work, and then at home. So, I'm not caught up here.

    1. I was asking, because I don't trust any politician on the subject, without seeing the data.
    I've heard a bit about 'crime being up', but I haven't seen any reliable tracking. Part of that is on me, for not caring enough to look. I spent a few minutes earlier today looking at and best, I think I looked up that shootings are up for July. The percent increase is alarming, but it's a small ish number.. last year, they had like 5 in that month, this year like 17 (going off memory). is 12 extra shootings/murders in a moderately sized city worth sending in federal troops? That's a very low bar, which is why I made my other comments. Otherwise, are the protests really out of hand? Seattle's non police zone, or whatever they call it, was the only one I've heard about that seemed a bit dicey, potentially.

    2. Which leads me to said comments. Again, 12 extra murders in a month is a very low bar to send in Federal Troops to pluck people off the streets. I mean, New Orleans should have federal troops every other month, if that's the bar. It's a dangerous over step of federal authority. I recall the Curfew and pseudo martial law for Katrina (really wasn't, since the guard was working under the Governor), and even then, the Guardsmen/women were accompanied by a State Trooper to be able to arrest someone. That was an actual crisis, and even then, the feds didn't take on sole arresting authority.

    So, Imagine a president so liberal it gives you cold sweats, and they decide pollution is mankind's greatest danger. or that a rash of car accidents, resulting in 30 extra deaths warrants federal troops / DHS officers to show up and pluck people off the street. We should all be against this type of gross federal overstep. What I was getting at, is that allowing such a low bar for federal 'take over', is a very slippery slope. What's the justification for this?

    That's the conversation I wanted. What is the justification for this? Is this such a significant threat to allow this kind of gross Federal over reach?
     
    Last edited:
    Thanks for looking out for Ward. Actually, Ward and I have used that exact same line several times in the past so it was more of friendly banter, at least that is how I took it when he said it to me in the past.
    Yes. I don't mean it sarcastically. It means, I think we can have an actual conversation if we peel back the snark and dismissiveness (is that a word?).

    And I'll add this. When I say that phrase, I tend to mean, "I know you have a more nuanced opinion on this, and you're being a bit snarky with an opinion, but I'd rather have the nuanced chat." If that makes sense? I think at times, we get very dismissive of a subject and just want to call is something simple, even if it's a bit of hyperbole or "stupid".

    Some people, I honestly think are just that dumb. Sorry. Not you though. Others, I know are smarter, but are just being snarky in the moment or not willing to expend the energy to have a thoughtful discussion. So, in that case, it's a minor call out, to say, come on, man up (or women up) and have a real discussion about it, you are more than capable.
     
    I disagree that peaceful citizens get "forked up the arse!" regardless of what side wins. One side is violating the constitution that they all took an oath to protect and defend. The other side it out exercising their rights guaranteed under the constitution that the other side is taking a shirt on. If the side that is violating the constitution wins, then the constitution becomes meaningless. The end game is for the police to be held accountable for their actions. The end game is for every citizen to be treated exactly the same regardless of how they look. The end game is for peaceful protestors to not be kidnapped and beaten and have their rights violated. The only way peaceful citizens get forked up the arse is when the people who scream the loudest about being patriotic and loving the constitution so much stand by and cheer as the constitution is being shirt on.
    I disagree that peaceful citizens get "forked up the arse!" regardless of what side wins. One side is violating the constitution that they all took an oath to protect and defend. The other side it out exercising their rights guaranteed under the constitution that the other side is taking a shirt on. If the side that is violating the constitution wins, then the constitution becomes meaningless. The end game is for the police to be held accountable for their actions. The end game is for every citizen to be treated exactly the same regardless of how they look. The end game is for peaceful protestors to not be kidnapped and beaten and have their rights violated. The only way peaceful citizens get forked up the arse is when the people who scream the loudest about being patriotic and loving the constitution so much stand by and cheer as the constitution is being shirt on.

    Your right that citizens should be treated the same. Seriously, Peaceful protestors are protected, but I haven’t seen any suggestions of flower bearing peace loving hippies placing flowers in gun barrels being kidnapped or abused. But welcome to the club man. Believe in the constitution! Protect yourself from the government. Demand on your state and reps to defend that right. Join the NRA, or GOOA. Come to the dark side. I’ll cheer you on with jazz hands. But I can’t cheer the Methods of anarchy and/or the right to engage in them as some believe, achieving constitutional goals . It doesn’t achieve anything other than chaos. That’s just crazy to me. You fighting for natural rights in a cause. Chaos is a lost cause man. That’s what all this is.
     
    Your right that citizens should be treated the same. Seriously, Peaceful protestors are protected, but I haven’t seen any suggestions of flower bearing peace loving hippies placing flowers in gun barrels being kidnapped or abused. But welcome to the club man. Believe in the constitution! Protect yourself from the government. Demand on your state and reps to defend that right. Join the NRA, or GOOA. Come to the dark side. I’ll cheer you on with jazz hands. But I can’t cheer the Methods of anarchy and/or the right to engage in them as some believe, achieving constitutional goals . It doesn’t achieve anything other than chaos. That’s just crazy to me. You fighting for natural rights in a cause. Chaos is a lost cause man. That’s what all this is.


    In a country ruled by laws, guns should not be necessary. But that is not the kind of country the ultra right wing promotes.
    In a democracy, citizent should not have to protect themselves from the government, because the government should be their representatives and their elected leaders.

    Unfortunately the current administration circumvent all those checks and balancing build into the laws and into the constitution itself.

    Most of those currently serving in the current administration are appointed - and have not gone through the legal process of being approved by congress as the laws decree and several have served longer than the 2 years they are allowed to with a temporary appointment.

    The current administration is (ab)using the system to benefit their own personal gains - firing AG's and Inspector generals who investigate the current admins and their friends. When the person who holds the highest office in the land openly breaks the emolument clause in the constitution and doesn't care about it at all.

    They have also shown Zero respect for the first admendment - having targeted journalists and peacefull protesters repeatedly. What you call anarchy is people who has both the right AND a permit to assemble and voice their grievances. Read the description above. The feds escalates the situation every night - not the protesters...
     
    Last edited:
    This is all such a flimsy pretense, it holds no water whatsoever. They are there to combat anarchy? That’s just crazy talk. That’s what authoritarian regimes say when they are trying to thwart the will of the people. Portland had a situation that they used restraint and discussions to resolve. It was resolving, down to just a few protests. When anti-maskers marched in Michigan, everybody kept their cool and it was largely resolved. We have learned how not to ratchet up these protests.

    Seriously. If there are crimes, that’s a local matter. Portland didn’t ask for this. They’re doing illegal stops and searches. Illegal interrogations without any probable cause. They are doing what they call “preemptive arrests”. They are beating, shoving and gassing peaceful protesters.

    Crime is up? Then why is it only cities with democratic mayors? Hint, it’s not. Crime is up in cities with Republican mayors as well, it’s just that Trump isn’t interested in doing anything in those cities. The height of irony is that his sycophants are showing scenes from Portland, with teargas swirling and saying “this will be America under Biden.” Good lord, it’s America under Trump, you dolts. It’s happening now, and it’s largely because of Trump’s own actions. There were about 50 protesters nightly before the secret Federal police rolled into Portland. It’s probably grown 1000%.

    Essentially this is the “refuge caravan” of this election season. It’s a political stunt. The rank dishonesty of Trump should surprise no one. That political toadies have been placed in powerful positions is a stain on the Senate. That the Republican Party says nothing about this is a stain on whats left of it.
     
    @JLL

    First, you have to admit there's a problem. You seem to have done that, so now it's on to real reforms that would actually help the situation.

    New regulations could include guidance on required deescalation training. Reallocating funding from police "military equipment" to social workers and counselors. Removing police near-immunity from prosecution when they make mistakes in the line of duty. Rebuilding police unions from the ground up as salary and working conditions negotiators, not high-powered criminal defense teams.

    Even more effective work could be to remove lethal weapons from police officers. No guns. They do this in the UK without much issue. But to do this, you would need a gun buyback from the government to reduce the availability of guns from average people. Perhaps that's unreasonable at this point, but part of the reason police in our country are taught to view every situation as a confrontation with a lethal threat is because they're partially right - there are more guns than people in this country, so the odds that the average citizen is packing heat is much higher than in other industrialized nations. The only way to fix that problem is to reduce access to weapons.
     
    Basically because Congress has created federal crimes that federal police can enforce.


    I saw where the ACLU filed a lawsuit based on activities in Portland.

    Just a minor legal question here - the federal government doesn’t have unlimited power to do policing where the president doesn’t think state and local police are doing a good enough job.

    The Constitution provides that the federal government is a limited one and may only act in accordance with the roles and powers bestowed upon it in the Constitution. All other power and jurisdiction is left to the states.

    Given how often the populist right lays claim to constitutional integrity and how their leader claims to so adore the Constitution, can anyone tell me what federal law these federal “law enforcement” officers are enforcing?

    See above?

    Jim was replying to Saintmaniac who was asking why doesnt the mayor/governor ask their respective law enforcement agencies to detain/arrest the feds there unlawfully.
     
    See above?

    Jim was replying to Saintmaniac who was asking why doesnt the mayor/governor ask their respective law enforcement agencies to detain/arrest the feds there unlawfully.

    I’d like specifics.

    “Congress created federal crimes” isn’t really an answer. I’m sure Jim can give details and I suspect he’s talking about those domestic terrorism components of the NDAA but I’d like to know what those are.
     
    Damn, even the Mayor of Portland is catching that work by the Feds. This is pretty shameful.


    “The reason I am here tonight is to stand with you no matter what,” Wheeler had said earlier in the night to a roar of cheers from the steps of the Multnomah County Justice Center, where the county jail is located. “And if they launch the tear gas against you, they’re launching the tear gas against me!"

    Well, they did.

    “It’s hard to breathe — it’s a little harder to breathe than I thought,” Wheeler told The Washington Post while a man with a leaf blower turned the nozzle on the mayor to clear away any gas still hanging in the air. “This is abhorrent. This is beneath us.”
     
    Let’s all say it together: there is no plenary federal policing power.



    So, where does this go? SCOTUS via states or cities suing the feds to stop doing this?

    By the time anything gets decided, the damage is done. This is gross. People want to talk about trampling on first amendment rights over essentially group think / mob justice and we're ok with Federal Troops in a city, under a pretense of an increase in violent crime, but really there to basically shake down any protesters?

    It feels like the nightmare scenario of the Patriot Act (I don't know enough about it to speak to it though).
     
    1595523583054.jpeg

    My wife is in this picture. White helmet on the left.
    Once again they were peaceful. The forking mayor was out for god sakes.

    then at 1230 the notice came from the building and at 1240 they launched gas canisters and flash grenades from the loading dock and then rushed the moms. Again for less than an hour and went back in like cowards, like nothing happened. And again the city has to clean up the mess and deal with the wounded.

    My wife said the elderly lady in the blue helmet was pushed down and kicked after they rushed. My wife was hit with either a baton or a fist on the back near the shoulders as she was moving away.

    Again there is no violence Except the feds.I mean at all. There are children present until like 1030. Then everyone has learned that they come out so only the vulnerable leave.

    forking pathetic
     
    1595523583054.jpeg

    My wife is in this picture. White helmet on the left.
    Once again they were peaceful. The forking mayor was out for god sakes.

    then at 1230 the notice came from the building and at 1240 they launched gas canisters and flash grenades from the loading dock and then rushed the moms. Again for less than an hour and went back in like cowards, like nothing happened. And again the city has to clean up the mess and deal with the wounded.

    My wife said the elderly lady in the blue helmet was pushed down and kicked after they rushed. My wife was hit with either a baton or a fist on the back near the shoulders as she was moving away.

    Again there is no violence Except the feds.I mean at all. There are children present until like 1030. Then everyone has learned that they come out so only the vulnerable leave.

    forking pathetic


    Tell your wife she should be proud. In a time where many care most about themselves, she has the courage to stand up for what is right and just!
     
    Question: How does the "Acting Head of Homeland Security" still have any power since he's exceeded the statutory time one can be in an "acting" position without being confirmed. How is he even still allowed in the office? Congress really can't walk and chew gum at the same time, can they?

    And I heard someone mention kind of casually that he's the one who's ultimately responsible for these unmarked federal police forces Trump is now deploying across the country. Is that the strategy for Trump? To say it wasn't him even though he's been touting how awesome the new special police are?
    I posted this question in the Trump Tracker thread but figure it's relevant here to find out if anyone knows if these Trump Jump Out Boys are really under the authority of DHS.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom