Trump Sends Unmarked Fed Goons to Kidnap Protesters

That video is very very disturbing and of course the Sweet Lous and other leftards sees nuthin And blames editing Lmao, also as disturbed as I am with that video , I am equal parts impressed with the black individual not agreeing with the mob injustice nonsense while being surrounded by the rioters- he cited only 2 percent blacks representing among the crowd, and that may be fairly accurate...

 

I accept the apology, but don’t make a habit of it, OK?

“You guys think it’s ok to destroy properties and destroy businesses, cool.”

No one here, in the middle or the left of the political spectrum - and I sincerely think it applies to those on the right, think it is “OK” to destroy property or businesses or cars or anything else. That is either a deliberately dishonest statement on your part or evidence that you spend way too much time perusing fringe far-right sites and actually believe the BS they gleefully pump out.

I suggest that you consider broadening your sources for political news coverage. Try the BBC. I’m assuming that you know of the BBC, right? Their coverage of politics in the USA is both extensive and largely free of the agendas seen here far too often. They are considered to be square in the “middle” of the political spectrum. Since you just popped in here and I don’t know you from Adam, perhaps you are simply a political neophyte. You wouldn’t be the first to show up in D&D.

As for the “Silent Majority,” you clearly have no idea what that is. There isn’t anyone, regardless of who they are or what they think about politics, that posts here regularly that are members of that largely mythical body of American human beings. In D&D, calling one’s self a member of the “silent majority” would be a contradiction in terms. The term “Silent Majority” was popularized over 50 years ago in the United States by President (at the time) Richard Nixon when he used it in a nationally televised speech delivered in early November, 1969.

Nixon didn’t coin the phrase, however. Far from it. It was used during the 19th century, sometimes politically and at other times when referring to the dead - a silent majority, who outnumbered the living then, as they do today. It was used during Calvin Coolidge’s campaign for president about 100 years ago. Nixon didn’t hesitate to steal from anyone. Since I’m old enough to have voted against the fellow, I am free to make that joke.

 

Anyone that doesn't agree is antifa and terrorist.
Its remarkable the absence of any notion of this being ok.

Thankfully it is not working.

But dont think for a second Deckard that they wouldnt have any problem throwing you in jail to meet their agenda. Barr talks all softly like he is a harmless guy all the while with secret police on speed dial.

These guys have zero morals

 

The whole point of my original reply was that there were already riots and destruction taking place before Trump/Feds intervened. One of your previous posts stated - "trump is deliberately attempting to provoke violence from peaceful protestors in an effort to help his campaign for reelection." - Based on Portland's local news sources - this statement is false.

Here are some of their local links with timelines:
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/lo...land/283-21d67e10-4b33-46d4-a81e-7d3b437a7519
https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/...e-of-the-portland-protests-and-police-clashes

TLDR - Protests started at the end of May. By day, protests were peaceful. By night, not so much. Trump deployed Federal Officers on July 1st - a month later.

 

LOL, ok man.

You probably missed the part where i apologized for making it seem like i was calling Deckard a terrorist when i was really referring to the terrorists in the video i posted.

 

But of course. Just like Trump always has a tweet, this crew always has a hypocrisy.

 

I don't think I've ever cited the Daily Show twice but this spot on. This very clearly shows that this isn't about principles. This is about which ideological side you're on.


[edit] looks like Cometswin beat me to it.

 

Should this get its own thread?

 

How do they know who the anonymous people were?

 

“You’re Probably Talking About the Van”

When Cline stepped up to the microphone, he started to address the reporter’s question about probable cause by saying, “[Y]ou’re probably talking about the van.” This is a reference to the now-viral video, viewed nearly 13 million times, in which two camo-clad federal agents remove a peaceful protester from the street by placing him in an unmarked van. If you have not seen the video, it is worth watching now. (It’s 39 seconds long.)

Cline proceeded to offer the government’s account of the facts leading up to and following this encounter. With respect to what happened before the video begins, Cline explains that earlier in the night the agents in the video had seen the man in the video “in a crowd and in an area” from which someone was aiming a laser at the eyes of officers. The agents, Cline said, followed the man because they wanted to ask him some questions.

Crucially, it is clear from Cline’s statements that the agents never had any reason to believe that the man was the person pointing the laser. Cline says “the individual that they were questioning was in a crowd and in an area where an individual was aiming a laser at the eyes of officers” (emphasis added). Cline later adds that the agents wanted “to question this individual to find out what their [sic] role was in this laser pointing.”

The video speaks for itself regarding the manner in which the agents grabbed the man and put him in the van. Cline, however, gave important additional context for why the officers behaved the way they did. “As they approached” the man, Cline explained, “they noticed that coming in their direction were violent demonstrators.” Fearing for their own safety, the agents decided to leave the scene—and to take the man with them.

Note again that Cline did not suggest the man in the video ever did anything himself to alarm the agents or to give them grounds to believe he was engaged in criminal activity. The agents wanted to get off the street to get away from the crowd—and they wanted the man to come with them. So, they grabbed him; put him in a van; and took him, in Cline’s words, “to an area that was safe for both the officers and the individual to do the questioning.”

Cline never explicitly says where the agents took the man. But we know that in a separate incident federal agents who wanted to question a man named Mark Pettibone similarly grabbed him off the street, put him in an unmarked van, and took him into the nearby federal courthouse itself for interrogation. It seems safe to conclude that when the agents in the video relocated the man they grabbed to “an area that was safe” for them “to do the questioning,” they took him into the courthouse as well. That conclusion is bolstered by Cline’s statement that the amount of time that transpired “while [the agents] did the questioning” was roughly twenty minutes, as the agents surely would not have questioned the man for that long out on the street, given their apparent fear of the surrounding crowds.

 

https://grabien.com/story.php?id=7501

Donald Trump: I Like Cliven Bundy

 

So...basically...they kidnapped him. He just described what takes place in a kidnapping, almost to the letter.

 

"I think we are coming into very dangerous waters over the next couple of months," said Seth Jones of the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "This has the potential for larger numbers and amounts of street violence between groups and networks on opposing sides. This is serious. I haven't seen this kind of domestic terrorism threat, really, in my lifetime."

Analysts say far-right and anti-government agitators are either attacking protesters or trying to glom onto their cause to push their own agendas. Other extremists see a chance to trigger a violent revolution; still others, a race war. Meanwhile, guns are increasingly visible on the protesters' side too. Some armed anti-fascist groups and Black gun clubs have joined the fray as self-proclaimed community defense forces.

...

"I, for so long, have taken for granted what protesting in this country meant. That you could go out and come home that night," she said. "And I think now this is changed. You could get hit by a car. You could get a rubber bullet to the face. You could be shot by someone who's trying to protect you."

Howard said that's what makes the sustained demonstrations remarkable. Protesters have seen the beatings and car rammings. And yet, she said, they keep coming out.

"That makes the stakes so much higher to protest, but I think that also demonstrates how the stakes have already been high," Howard said. "That people are willing to put their lives on the line to finally get a freer kind of freedom in this country."

 

Yep.

They kidnapped him to ask questions about somebody else possibly doing a crime in his vicinity.

I don't know why this has not been a bigger thing.

@Os Trigonum @tinman @dachuda86

 

btw, andy ngo thanks you for spreading his propaganda on your social media, especially multiple threads here.

 

By the color of the hats they were wearing...

 

"Don’t want federal agents in your city or town? Then protect federal property":

https://theconversation.com/dont-wa...-or-town-then-protect-federal-property-143574

 

The snowflakiest authoritarian must have written this piece:

wait for it. . . .

smh goshDAMMIT they vandalized a FENCE you MF'ers.
and you sit there all protected by our BOYS IN BLUE, who are HITTING PEOPLE WITH CLUBS, so you can sit there in your libby air conditioning with NO graffiti on your federal buidling.

my hope for the future is in doubt because of you.
I HATE AMERICANS WHO HATE AMERICANS
go back to your own country