Federal Law Enforcement Use Unmarked Vehicles To Grab Protesters Off Portland Streets (UPDATE: Trump admin. deploying federal LE to cities) (2 Viewers)

< Previous | Next >

Dragon

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
402
Reaction score
620
Age
57
Location
Elsinore
Offline
“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.
 

UncleTrvlingJim

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
745
Reaction score
1,388
Location
Virginia
Offline
Feels to me like we've been in a full-on propaganda war with this stuff.. as such I don't expect either side to tell the truth without heavily shading it to their benefit.

Without really delving into things it's very difficult to decipher what exactly has been going on.
Agree. And even when people are not trying to be deceptive, a lot of it is perception driven.
 

SaintForLife

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
797
Location
Madisonville
Offline
I think it's fair to say that there might be a better way to handle attempts to damage federal property than the one that Portland initially tried. But I also think it's hard to say the federal response was better, right?
What would be your suggestions for it to be handled in a better way?
 

SaintForLife

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
797
Location
Madisonville
Offline
Feels to me like we've been in a full-on propaganda war with this stuff.. as such I don't expect either side to tell the truth without heavily shading it to their benefit.

Without really delving into things it's very difficult to decipher what exactly has been going on.
That has happened with both sides which is not suprising with politics. The media has been trying their hardest to label the protests as peaceful. I know that most people are peacefully protesting, but to deny there has been a lot of rioting and violence as well is just gaslighting. Why can't the media honestly report about the riots and violence while also talking about the peaceful protesters?

 

UncleTrvlingJim

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
745
Reaction score
1,388
Location
Virginia
Offline
What would be your suggestions for it to be handled in a better way?
It's very hard, obviously, and I don't have actual ground truth, which is a big caveat. I have some general beliefs that I think would have helped.

Going with the bare minimum amount of force in every situation is the best way. When faced with a choice between protecting property or people, choose people. If a cop feels that their physical safety is in danger, I think under most circumstances, a tactical retreat is better than an escalation in violence (a notable exception is if another life is in immediate danger, but even then, I would not hold a cop responsible for failing to save that life, if they can't do so with safety to themselves).

A lot of this feels like a propaganda war, so those in power should understand that and think strategically. When faced with a narrative that police have too much power over life and death, and often use it unwisely, it seems stupid to allow yourselves to be caught on video breaking a Navy vet's hands who was just standing there yelling at cops. It seems idiotic to be caught on camera pepper spraying a child in the face (leaving aside whether that should even be allowed). It is the height of stupidity to let your cops continuously beat people who have fallen to the ground all while being captured on video.

If the situation is truly that dangerous, strategically retreat. Let the vandals burn the property. Do what you can to arrest those responsible later.
 

CoolBrees

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 29, 2019
Messages
349
Reaction score
728
Age
43
Location
Portland, Oregon
Offline
The federal building was breeched the same time as Minneapolis was burning. It hasn’t had any real damage since. Unless you consider Occupation the punishment for vandalism.

There are plenty of reports that Mr Ngo and the Proud Boys that fund him and his “journalism” were the ones that broke in, in the first place. He is a hack.

It is interesting how he has phone footage from INSIDE the federal bldg. he must have a Blackwater contact too.

Anyway, the cowards are tucking tail and finally leaving. We can now get back to the work of ending systemic anti-Black racism here in our police, prisons, schools, and basically every civic program today.

One of the speakers last night was the Chair of Black Studies Department at Portland State University. He spoke about our racism in Portland. How we are the shining example of progressive irony. We have all the best as far as public spaces, a hard border on the city to avoid sprawl, and are communities are not segregated. But we aren’t segregated because there simply aren’t any Black people who live here. So instead of white flight we stayed in the city worked to make all the social change; except against systemic anti- Black racism. Only 1.9% of our senior class is Black, yet our Black youth is reposnible for a out rate of nearly 50%. That is abhorrent.

But the thing he said that lifted my heart was about why he is hopeful. He is hopeful because of groups like The Wall of Vets are taking front line stands, not just signing petitions.

And then he brought up a group who he said truly gets it. He said they have laid the groundwork and are making a template on what white people can do to end Black and Indigenous racism. They are officially a non-profit now and I a proud of roll out to you all-

thewallofmoms.com

I would encourage anyone to go and read what the moms stand for and what they believe.

ETA- their whole site is down so I hope they weren’t hacked but the FB is still there. Basically their mantra is- we are here to take some of the abuse so our Black brothers and sisters may experience a little less. We aren’t the movement. We are here so the movement can be heard
 

SFIDC3

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
97
Reaction score
94
Age
56
Location
Maryland
Offline
I see that some people are claiming it's just peaceful protests until the feds get violent. I've seen plenty videos of the mob attacking officers or the couthouse, but I didn't see any posted in this thread. I searched Portland riots video on Twitter. I know some will complain about Andy Ngo posting the videos.
I guess you don't believe the accounts that say before the feds arrived there, the protest had dwindled to just 100-200 folks protesting out there and it was peaceful. I believe someone on this board stated that as a witness/first hand account....I'm not sure why they would lie about that....

That said, the more important question is if there wasn't such a compelling reason for the feds to be there then why were they in the first place?

You mean the Andy Ngo that is knowingly connected to far right neo-fascist, white supremacy groups? How dare someone complain....
 

Brandon13

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
335
Reaction score
394
Location
Pensacola, FL
Offline
I knew nothing of that Ngo guy, or at least didn't remember anything.. basically a right-wing culture warrior right? That's what it looked like to me from the little bit of searching I did but someone can correct me if I'm incorrect.

He and his left-wing equivalents are exactly who I'm talking about when it comes to shading the truth and us not being able to decipher the actual truth because of it.
 

The moose

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2019
Messages
937
Reaction score
701
Age
51
Location
New Orleans
Offline
Here are some more videos


The founder of The Post Millennial!


Come on man find a remotely decent source.

For fork sake he works for a Canadian web site and not a factual one.


Anybody can scour the web and find someone saying what you want to hear. fork you can find a crazy black lady from Cameroon to back up your argument but it doesn't make it right.
 

JimEverett

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
1,500
Reaction score
1,022
Location
Nashville
Offline
The justification may be the same, but the first example (civil rights) was using the power of the Federal Government to protect the rights of people. Which, I'd have to believe the 14th amendment was used as justification to some extent... Also, it may be a stretch to say a court house is part of interstate commerce (maybe not.. probably can be argued). However, from the 14th...

" No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. "

While, I believe the feds can protect their building, it seems like an odd thing to overzealously protect a building by trampling on the first amendment rights of others. Sure, the agitators deserve it, but as usual, it seems like a bunch of collateral damage. I also don't like the whole 'snatching people off the street' deal.

How far does it go to protect property? Every single Federal Park? Are interstates federal property or state property? Every federal court house? How far can they go to create a 'safe perimeter?'
As to the use of the 14th - I am not sure I know the answer. Although the 14th Amendment and the subsequent incorporation of various rights to the States through it opeartes as a limit to federal action - not a grant to act, although I guess there is a view that the federal government can act to stop criminal actions (including acts that are strictly unconstitutional) - but that seems to be the Trumpian view to me. As in: any violation justifies federal troop presence.

As to your final two paragraphs: I think the key word is "overzealously" - as in one of my posts above, given the context of destructive acts against a polie building (and police themselves) I don't find using tear gas as necessarily overzealous when a fence protecting the courthouse has been destroyed.
 

SaintForLife

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
797
Location
Madisonville
Offline
The federal building was breeched the same time as Minneapolis was burning. It hasn’t had any real damage since. Unless you consider Occupation the punishment for vandalism.
That's not true. The videos I posted are all recent and most from yesterday and the day before.

There are plenty of reports that Mr Ngo and the Proud Boys that fund him and his “journalism” were the ones that broke in, in the first place. He is a hack.

It is interesting how he has phone footage from INSIDE the federal bldg. he must have a Blackwater contact too.
I don't follow Ngo on Twitter, but I am familiar with him. Which reports are you talking about?
 

SaintForLife

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
797
Location
Madisonville
Offline
I guess you don't believe the accounts that say before the feds arrived there, the protest had dwindled to just 100-200 folks protesting out there and it was peaceful. I believe someone on this board stated that as a witness/first hand account....I'm not sure why they would lie about that....

That said, the more important question is if there wasn't such a compelling reason for the feds to be there then why were they in the first place?

You mean the Andy Ngo that is knowingly connected to far right neo-fascist, white supremacy groups? How dare someone complain....
Which accounts are you referring to? That same person who you are saying had a first hand account claimed there hadn't been any damage to the federal building recently which isn't true. The videos that I posted from NGO were all from other sources that you can see if you click on each Tweet.

For example, many of his videos were from a local CBS reporter:

Check out her Twitter thread to see the same videos that NGO reposted. It clearly shows the "protestors" attacking police and the federal building with some videos from last night.

Can you point out the article that shows Ngo is connected to Right wing neo-fascists and white supremacists?

I did find it funny that insidejob liked your post that included a sarcastic criticism of me posting Ngo's tweets when insidejob posted one of Ngo's tweets right after my post.😄
 

UncleTrvlingJim

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 8, 2018
Messages
745
Reaction score
1,388
Location
Virginia
Offline
That's not true. The videos I posted are all recent and most from yesterday and the day before.
I think he meant that there was no vandalism at the federal building between that first day and the sending of federal troops. At least that was what I got from his context - with the point being that the deployment of federal forces was ineffective in protecting the federal building.
 

SaintForLife

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
797
Location
Madisonville
Offline
It's very hard, obviously, and I don't have actual ground truth, which is a big caveat. I have some general beliefs that I think would have helped.

Going with the bare minimum amount of force in every situation is the best way. When faced with a choice between protecting property or people, choose people. If a cop feels that their physical safety is in danger, I think under most circumstances, a tactical retreat is better than an escalation in violence (a notable exception is if another life is in immediate danger, but even then, I would not hold a cop responsible for failing to save that life, if they can't do so with safety to themselves).

A lot of this feels like a propaganda war, so those in power should understand that and think strategically. When faced with a narrative that police have too much power over life and death, and often use it unwisely, it seems stupid to allow yourselves to be caught on video breaking a Navy vet's hands who was just standing there yelling at cops. It seems idiotic to be caught on camera pepper spraying a child in the face (leaving aside whether that should even be allowed). It is the height of stupidity to let your cops continuously beat people who have fallen to the ground all while being captured on video.

If the situation is truly that dangerous, strategically retreat. Let the vandals burn the property. Do what you can to arrest those responsible later.
I agree with what your saying about the police needling to avoid physical confrontation if possible and the instances about the Navy vet and child.

I do not agree with just surrendering the federal property to vandals and letting them burn it down. If they succeeded then you can guarantee it will continue. If it did continue, where and when do we put our foot down and stop it?
 

SaintForLife

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2019
Messages
1,039
Reaction score
797
Location
Madisonville
Offline
I think he meant that there was no vandalism at the federal building between that first day and the sending of federal troops. At least that was what I got from his context - with the point being that the deployment of federal forces was ineffective in protecting the federal building.
Gotcha. Considering there was vandalism of a federal building don't you think that's enough to warrant protection especially considering how the Portland politicians told the police to stand down?

How did they know if that was the end of the vandalism? It is troubling that many people think the violence is acceptable due to the need for police reform. How bad does it have to get until it's considered acceptable to stop the vandalism and violence?
 

JimEverett

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 30, 2019
Messages
1,500
Reaction score
1,022
Location
Nashville
Offline
I think he meant that there was no vandalism at the federal building between that first day and the sending of federal troops. At least that was what I got from his context - with the point being that the deployment of federal forces was ineffective in protecting the federal building.
When were federal "troops" sent, as opposed to the regular agents used for protection of the courthouse? This article suggests that on July 2, 2020 protesters set fire to the federal courthouse. https://www.opb.org/news/article/portland-police-less-lethal-munitions-protest-courthouse/

EDIT:

New York Times said:
Peaceful protests were already happening for weeks when federal officers arrived on July 4. Our video shows how President Trump’s deployment ignited chaos.
(I placed the emphsis)

OPB said:
Crowd control munitions were used after protesters shot fireworks towards police, broke windows and set what appeared to be a small fire inside the federal courthouse, police said.

The OPB article says the violence took place on July 2 into early July 3
 
Last edited:

efil4

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 14, 2019
Messages
306
Reaction score
423
Age
49
Location
Covington, LA
Offline
Gotcha. Considering there was vandalism of a federal building don't you think that's enough to warrant protection especially considering how the Portland politicians told the police to stand down?

How did they know if that was the end of the vandalism? It is troubling that many people think the violence is acceptable due to the need for police reform. How bad does it have to get until it's considered acceptable to stop the vandalism and violence?
Id ask that regarding police reform.

Only took 150,000 deaths to get current Administration to NOW start paying attention to COVID 19.

is that the benchmark?
 

insidejob

Takes one to know one...
Joined
May 21, 2019
Messages
904
Reaction score
882
Location
Back in 70124
Offline
I did find it funny that insidejob liked your post that included a sarcastic criticism of me posting Ngo's tweets when insidejob posted one of Ngo's tweets right after my post.
The dude is a hack but also was the first tweet I saw reporting information that's already been verified by numerous other outlets.
 

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.

< Previous | Next >

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 1)

  • Fact Checkers News Feed

    General News Feed

    Top Bottom