Hey Seattle and Portland.....

[UNI88]

Including driving around in vans and snatching people off the street without identifying themselves or the reasons they're picking people up?

Maybe the governor should call in the national guard to surround the courthouse and make sure the federal paramilitary force sticks to their mission of protecting federal property; contain them within 50 yards of the building or so?

As I posted earlier "They're also attacking peaceful protesters and picking people up off of the street and in so doing violating their oath to protect the Constitution (1st Amendment - right to assembly and probably the 4th & 5th Amendments - searches & seizures and Miranda rights). Their actions are far from righteous."

Conservatives and liberals should both be alarmed by this. But conservatives don't mind when the Feds are going after left-wing extremists and liberals don't mind when they're going after right-wing extremists. If we allow it they're going to keep expanding their purview and eventually you or something you care about will be in their sites. It's better to nip this in the bud now.

That would be great if the Gov called out the NG to help Portland PD and Oregon SP to quell the riots. But he won’t. If the feds hadn’t been there that courthouse would have been conpletely ransacked if not burned to the ground weeks ago.

Once some in the crowd start attacking the building and police its an unlawful assembly and there are no peaceful protestors.

So someone who was there to protest peacefully instantly becomes a criminal when someone else throws a rock? Guilt by association is a dangerous thing. So if you're in a bar having a drink with friends and a fight breaks out, the cops will be justified in cracking you in the skull with a baton just because you're standing there.

Rumor has it that the average number of protesters had dropped to about 100 before the Feds arrived. Now it's back over 1,000. But yeah, Trumpkins says it's so so they must be improving the situation. This isn't a desperate effort by Trump and his administration to fire up his base and distract attention from his blundering response to the virus.

[∞∞∞]

I was listening to the mayor of Portland on NPR this morning.

Basically said that they had gotten the protests under control, then Trump's goons showed up unannounced and decided to re-kindle things. Now the citizens of Portland are pissed, rightfully so, and more people are taking to the streets (as they should).

[CID1990]

I was listening to the mayor of Portland on NPR this morning.

Basically said that they had gotten the protests under control, then Trump's goons showed up unannounced and decided to re-kindle things. Now the citizens of Portland are pissed, rightfully so, and more people are taking to the streets (as they should).

DHS showing up was the greatest gift from Trump that choad mayor ever could have asked for

He should hope they stick around indefinitely


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDKJMU]

That would be great if the Gov called out the NG to help Portland PD and Oregon SP to quell the riots. But he won’t. If the feds hadn’t been there that courthouse would have been conpletely ransacked if not burned to the ground weeks ago.

Once some in the crowd start attacking the building and police its an unlawful assembly and there are no peaceful protestors.

So someone who was there to protest peacefully instantly becomes a criminal when someone else throws a rock? Guilt by association is a dangerous thing. So if you're in a bar having a drink with friends and a fight breaks out, the cops will be justified in cracking you in the skull with a baton just because you're standing there.

Rumor has it that the average number of protesters had dropped to about 100 before the Feds arrived. Now it's back over 1,000. But yeah, Trumpkins says it's so so they must be improving the situation. This isn't a desperate effort by Trump and his administration to fire up his base and distract attention from his blundering response to the virus.

Its not just one person throwing projectiles, smashing, burning. Its many who are acting violent. When the violence starts by numerous people I'm assuming the protests are declared unlawful assemblies, and anyone who doesn't immediately leave the area is no longer a peaceful protester.

[BDKJMU]

I was listening to the mayor of Portland on NPR this morning.

Basically said that they had gotten the protests under control, then Trump's goons showed up unannounced and decided to re-kindle things. Now the citizens of Portland are pissed, rightfully so, and more people are taking to the streets (as they should).

Lol the mayor claims they had things under control. If the feds had abandoned that fed building/courthouse to the mob like the Minneapolis and Seattle PDs abandoned precincts, at minimum it would have been similar to what happened to those precincts- rendered unusable for quite some time until extensively renovated.

[UNI88]

I was listening to the mayor of Portland on NPR this morning.

Basically said that they had gotten the protests under control, then Trump's goons showed up unannounced and decided to re-kindle things. Now the citizens of Portland are pissed, rightfully so, and more people are taking to the streets (as they should).

Lol the mayor claims they had things under control. If the feds had abandoned that fed building/courthouse to the mob like the Minneapolis and Seattle PDs abandoned precincts, at minimum it would have been similar to what happened to those precincts- rendered unusable for quite some time until extensively renovated.

LOL at 90% of the sh!t that comes out of Trump's mouth. You believe his BS and question everything that might be negative toward him. Open your eyes and ears, the truth is somewhere in between.

CID's right this has been a gift for the choad mayor.

[UNI88]

So someone who was there to protest peacefully instantly becomes a criminal when someone else throws a rock? Guilt by association is a dangerous thing. So if you're in a bar having a drink with friends and a fight breaks out, the cops will be justified in cracking you in the skull with a baton just because you're standing there.

Rumor has it that the average number of protesters had dropped to about 100 before the Feds arrived. Now it's back over 1,000. But yeah, Trumpkins says it's so so they must be improving the situation. This isn't a desperate effort by Trump and his administration to fire up his base and distract attention from his blundering response to the virus.

Its not just one person throwing projectiles, smashing, burning. Its many who are acting violent. When the violence starts by numerous people I'm assuming the protests are declared unlawful assemblies, and anyone who doesn't immediately leave the area is no longer a peaceful protester.

1) It's not easy to leave an area with that kind of chaos. Expecting people to leave immediately is naive. Unless their lives are in imminent danger, law enforcement officers should act with some discretion.

2) There is video of the paramilitary troopers using clubs and spray on people just standing there (the former Seabee being one).

3) There is video of them snatching people off of the street blocks from the protests without identifying themselves or the reason for the detainment. If you really think they're reading people their Miranda rights then I have an ownership share in the New Jersey Generals to sell you.

4) If these guys are law enforcement officers then they suck at their jobs.

[CID1990]

Its not just one person throwing projectiles, smashing, burning. Its many who are acting violent. When the violence starts by numerous people I'm assuming the protests are declared unlawful assemblies, and anyone who doesn't immediately leave the area is no longer a peaceful protester.

1) It's not easy to leave an area with that kind of chaos. Expecting people to leave immediately is naive. Unless their lives are in imminent danger, law enforcement officers should act with some discretion.

2) There is video of the paramilitary troopers using clubs and spray on people just standing there (the former Seabee being one).

3) There is video of them snatching people off of the street blocks from the protests without identifying themselves or the reason for the detainment. If you really think they're reading people their Miranda rights then I have an ownership share in the New Jersey Generals to sell you.

4) If these guys are law enforcement officers then they suck at their jobs.

What is all this about Miranda rights? There is no requirement that people be read their Miranda card unless they are being interrogated. For example, if you have probable cause to make an arrest (warrant, plain view, etc), then Miranda is not required unless you are planning on asking the prisoner questions pertaining to what they are accused of. I made hundreds of arrests and never read people their rights, and never had to.

Second, investigative detentions are legal and covered by precedent. See Terry v. Ohio, Sibron v. New York, and Peters v. New York.

I’m fine with condemning the Feds running roughshod all over the place but trying to set up some kind of legal barrier to what they are doing is a losing proposition. Nothing about what they are doing is illegal, and all of these things are regularly used by both GOP and Dem administration (they gore each others’ oxen).

So if you think the Fed gov is out of line on this, you should never, ever vote Dem or Republican because they both employ these tactics with impunity.

[Baldy]

These protesters are attacking a Federal Courthouse on Federal Property, so it will be defended and protected by Federal agents. I don't see how the state's rights argument has much weight here.

Sure if that was all they were doing.

...and I haven't seen any evidence where that wasn't the case.

[UNI88]

1) It's not easy to leave an area with that kind of chaos. Expecting people to leave immediately is naive. Unless their lives are in imminent danger, law enforcement officers should act with some discretion.

2) There is video of the paramilitary troopers using clubs and spray on people just standing there (the former Seabee being one).

3) There is video of them snatching people off of the street blocks from the protests without identifying themselves or the reason for the detainment. If you really think they're reading people their Miranda rights then I have an ownership share in the New Jersey Generals to sell you.

4) If these guys are law enforcement officers then they suck at their jobs.

What is all this about Miranda rights? There is no requirement that people be read their Miranda card unless they are being interrogated. For example, if you have probable cause to make an arrest (warrant, plain view, etc), then Miranda is not required unless you are planning on asking the prisoner questions pertaining to what they are accused of. I made hundreds of arrests and never read people their rights, and never had to.

Second, investigative detentions are legal and covered by precedent. See Terry v. Ohio, Sibron v. New York, and Peters v. New York.

I’m fine with condemning the Feds running roughshod all over the place but trying to set up some kind of legal barrier to what they are doing is a losing proposition. Nothing about what they are doing is illegal, and all of these things are regularly used by both GOP and Dem administration (they gore each others’ oxen).

So if you think the Fed gov is out of line on this, you should never, ever vote Dem or Republican because they both employ these tactics with impunity.

My bad on Miranda. I don't have a lot of direct experience with the criminal justice system. For an investigative detention, do they need to identify their agency and provide the reason they're picking someone up? The cases you sited seem to be about arrests made after a reasonable search. The feds appear to be snatching people off of the street away from the protests, who look pretty similar to those around them and with no search. Detaining them makes sense if they're using city video cameras or have another means of identifying the person they're picking up as a perpetrator but that is unknown at this time. What am I missing that justifies the snatch and grabs? Don't they need probable cause?

My concern is that this is only a step. Eventually all the oxen are going to look the same and they're going to gore them indiscriminately. I haven't voted D or R for a while.

[UNI88]

Sure if that was all they were doing.

...and I haven't seen any evidence where that wasn't the case.

There is plenty of video available of them driving around in vans snatching people off the street away from the protests. Are they doing this to protect the courthouse or to intimidate people?

[Baldy]

...and I haven't seen any evidence where that wasn't the case.

There is plenty of video available of them driving around in vans snatching people off the street away from the protests. Are they doing this to protect the courthouse or to intimidate people?

Maybe because they saw the 'protesters' destroying or attempting to destroy Federal property. I've seen quite a few mugshots of 'protesters' who were charged by the Feds for doing so...

[UNI88]

There is plenty of video available of them driving around in vans snatching people off the street away from the protests. Are they doing this to protect the courthouse or to intimidate people?

Maybe because they saw the 'protesters' destroying or attempting to destroy Federal property. I've seen quite a few mugshots of 'protesters' who were charged by the Feds for doing so...

There are also reports of them snatching people off the street for no apparent reason. Speculation is that it's because they look they might be a protester (i.e. dressed in black at night). They are reportedly giving detainees their Miranda Rights and asking them if they'll waive them. If they can't prove anything, they release the detainee and keep no record of the pickup or detention. I don't know if the "detainee" is lying about being picked up or if the Feds are lying about picking him/her up.

This whole situation is a shitshow that the Feds have aggravated. Their presence has given the mayor and governor someone else to blame things on. This is a local issue that should be handled by local authorities. It would have been better to let things fizzle out and let the politicians answer for their responses or lack of responses.

Conservatives will support this and bemoan stuff like what is happening to the McCloskeys in St. Louis and Liberals will do the opposite. If government is willing to do these kinds of things, what else will they do in the future? Let's put aside partisanship and stop enabling the bullsh!t that encroaches on our freedoms.

[UNI88]

Responding to criticism of their tactics and their military uniforms, DHS and other agencies are considering a change. They asking for feedback on the following options:

[bobbythekidd]

Second, investigative detentions are legal and covered by precedent. See Terry v. Ohio, Sibron v. New York, and Peters v. New York. *

* Depending on the State. Oregon is not a Terry Stop State. The person can refuse to identify themselves. The officer can also detain that person until his/her ID is known if that person is suspected of committing a crime so it's kinda silly not to ID yourself if you are suspected of a crime. It's also a pretty low bar for a cop to say I thought he might have _____.

HOWEVER, if the cop is just wanting to know who you are/show your ID, you can tell him/her to take a hike and keep walking yourself.

[CID1990]

What is all this about Miranda rights? There is no requirement that people be read their Miranda card unless they are being interrogated. For example, if you have probable cause to make an arrest (warrant, plain view, etc), then Miranda is not required unless you are planning on asking the prisoner questions pertaining to what they are accused of. I made hundreds of arrests and never read people their rights, and never had to.

Second, investigative detentions are legal and covered by precedent. See Terry v. Ohio, Sibron v. New York, and Peters v. New York.

I’m fine with condemning the Feds running roughshod all over the place but trying to set up some kind of legal barrier to what they are doing is a losing proposition. Nothing about what they are doing is illegal, and all of these things are regularly used by both GOP and Dem administration (they gore each others’ oxen).

So if you think the Fed gov is out of line on this, you should never, ever vote Dem or Republican because they both employ these tactics with impunity.

My bad on Miranda. I don't have a lot of direct experience with the criminal justice system. For an investigative detention, do they need to identify their agency and provide the reason they're picking someone up? The cases you sited seem to be about arrests made after a reasonable search. The feds appear to be snatching people off of the street away from the protests, who look pretty similar to those around them and with no search. Detaining them makes sense if they're using city video cameras or have another means of identifying the person they're picking up as a perpetrator but that is unknown at this time. What am I missing that justifies the snatch and grabs? Don't they need probable cause?

My concern is that this is only a step. Eventually all the oxen are going to look the same and they're going to gore them indiscriminately. I haven't voted D or R for a while.

Investigative detention implies just what it is - investigative - because you do not yet have enough probable cause for an arrest. So an investigative detention is not predicated on probable cause but reasonable suspicion.

A good example is a victim calls 911 and says a guy in a smiley face t-shirt just vandalized her house and ran off. On the way to her house, you see a guy running down the street in a smiley face tshirt. At that point you have reasonable suspicion to detain him, but you do not yet have probable cause for an arrest. So you stop the guy and cuff him and have him sit at the back of your cruiser.

Another cop goes and picks up the victim and drives her to where you are. She says that the guy you have detained, although he does by great coincidence have a smiley face shirt, is not the guy she saw. So you thank him for his cooperation, explain to him why you stopped him, and send him on his way.

Or, when the victim comes by, she positively identifies the guy as the one who vandalized her house. At that point you have probable cause to arrest him.

Now, at any time in the above two scenarios if you decide you want to just ask the guy, “Did you just vandalize a house down the street?” ... then you need to remind him of his rights against self incrimination and to counsel under Miranda vs Arizona. But if you aren’t going to interrogate him, then Miranda isn’t necessary.

Now, I don’t know all the details about what is going on in Portland. But if these jump out teams are detaining people based on witnesses at the scene of non-peaceful protests at Federal properties, then what they are doing is above board. Unmarked cars are probably necessary to keep from having them torched. The military camo is a bad look though. I see no reason why they can’t be in gear identifying them clearly as “Federal Agent”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

Second, investigative detentions are legal and covered by precedent. See Terry v. Ohio, Sibron v. New York, and Peters v. New York. *

* Depending on the State. Oregon is not a Terry Stop State. The person can refuse to identify themselves. The officer can also detain that person until his/her ID is known if that person is suspected of committing a crime so it's kinda silly not to ID yourself if you are suspected of a crime. It's also a pretty low bar for a cop to say I thought he might have _____.

HOWEVER, if the cop is just wanting to know who you are/show your ID, you can tell him/her to take a hike and keep walking yourself.

Terry v Ohio is an investigative pat down for weapons. You are in a high crime area, you see a guy on a corner who tries to dip on you when he sees you. You can pat that guy down for a heater or contraband.

I included Terry because it is part of the larger body of case law that supports investigative detentions, but what the Feds are doing in Portland does not appear to be under the auspices of Terry itself. What appears to be happening is that bad actors at Federal facilities are being ID’d by people at the scene. Then the jump out guys pick them up away from the protests where they don’t have to contend with the mob.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

Lol the mayor claims they had things under control. If the feds had abandoned that fed building/courthouse to the mob like the Minneapolis and Seattle PDs abandoned precincts, at minimum it would have been similar to what happened to those precincts- rendered unusable for quite some time until extensively renovated.

LOL at 90% of the sh!t that comes out of Trump's mouth. You believe his BS and question everything that might be negative toward him. Open your eyes and ears, the truth is somewhere in between.

CID's right this has been a gift for the choad mayor.

I’ve said it from the very beginning: Trump should have let Portland burn.

[BDKJMU]

Maybe because they saw the 'protesters' destroying or attempting to destroy Federal property. I've seen quite a few mugshots of 'protesters' who were charged by the Feds for doing so...

There are also reports of them snatching people off the street for no apparent reason. Speculation is that it's because they look they might be a protester (i.e. dressed in black at night). They are reportedly giving detainees their Miranda Rights and asking them if they'll waive them. If they can't prove anything, they release the detainee and keep no record of the pickup or detention. I don't know if the "detainee" is lying about being picked up or if the Feds are lying about picking him/her up.

This whole situation is a shitshow that the Feds have aggravated. Their presence has given the mayor and governor someone else to blame things on. This is a local issue that should be handled by local authorities. It would have been better to let things fizzle out and let the politicians answer for their responses or lack of responses.

Conservatives will support this and bemoan stuff like what is happening to the McCloskeys in St. Louis and Liberals will do the opposite. If government is willing to do these kinds of things, what else will they do in the future? Let's put aside partisanship and stop enabling the bullsh!t that encroaches on our freedoms.

Its a FEDERAL COURTHOUSE that’s being attacked. Since when is it a local issue to protect Fed property?

[BDKJMU]

LOL at 90% of the sh!t that comes out of Trump's mouth. You believe his BS and question everything that might be negative toward him. Open your eyes and ears, the truth is somewhere in between.

CID's right this has been a gift for the choad mayor.

I’ve said it from the very beginning: Trump should have let Portland burn.

Maybe. But I think he would have caught flack for not protecting the Fed Courthouse.

As far as the other cities, I wouldn’t do anything but protect the Fed buildings/courthouses/property. Thats’s only what, a block or 2 depending on the city. Let the rest of it burn.

[BDKJMU]

Children of Portland:

[houndawg]

Maybe because they saw the 'protesters' destroying or attempting to destroy Federal property. I've seen quite a few mugshots of 'protesters' who were charged by the Feds for doing so...

There are also reports of them snatching people off the street for no apparent reason. Speculation is that it's because they look they might be a protester (i.e. dressed in black at night). They are reportedly giving detainees their Miranda Rights and asking them if they'll waive them. If they can't prove anything, they release the detainee and keep no record of the pickup or detention. I don't know if the "detainee" is lying about being picked up or if the Feds are lying about picking him/her up.

This whole situation is a shitshow that the Feds have aggravated. Their presence has given the mayor and governor someone else to blame things on. This is a local issue that should be handled by local authorities. It would have been better to let things fizzle out and let the politicians answer for their responses or lack of responses.

Conservatives will support this and bemoan stuff like what is happening to the McCloskeys in St. Louis and Liberals will do the opposite. If government is willing to do these kinds of things, what else will they do in the future? Let's put aside partisanship and stop enabling the bullsh!t that encroaches on our freedoms.

The riots are a godsend for the cops. Everybody gets paid OT and nobody is asking questions about the stream of snuff flicks featuring cops and handcuffed/unarmed suspects and reminding us that its just the tip of the iceberg. That we're a nation of cunts and deserve what were getting becomes more apparent with each new day.

[SDHornet]

1) It's not easy to leave an area with that kind of chaos. Expecting people to leave immediately is naive. Unless their lives are in imminent danger, law enforcement officers should act with some discretion.

2) There is video of the paramilitary troopers using clubs and spray on people just standing there (the former Seabee being one).

3) There is video of them snatching people off of the street blocks from the protests without identifying themselves or the reason for the detainment. If you really think they're reading people their Miranda rights then I have an ownership share in the New Jersey Generals to sell you.

4) If these guys are law enforcement officers then they suck at their jobs.

What is all this about Miranda rights? There is no requirement that people be read their Miranda card unless they are being interrogated. For example, if you have probable cause to make an arrest (warrant, plain view, etc), then Miranda is not required unless you are planning on asking the prisoner questions pertaining to what they are accused of. I made hundreds of arrests and never read people their rights, and never had to.

Second, investigative detentions are legal and covered by precedent. See Terry v. Ohio, Sibron v. New York, and Peters v. New York.

I’m fine with condemning the Feds running roughshod all over the place but trying to set up some kind of legal barrier to what they are doing is a losing proposition. Nothing about what they are doing is illegal, and all of these things are regularly used by both GOP and Dem administration (they gore each others’ oxen).

So if you think the Fed gov is out of line on this, you should never, ever vote Dem or Republican because they both employ these tactics with impunity.

Yep. Listed to the Ben Shapiro podcast a couple days ago and he said the Fed is well within their rights to do what they are doing and there are SC precedents that back that up that are decades old. The "Feds can't do this" is just a weak Leftist narrative.

[SDHornet]

...and I haven't seen any evidence where that wasn't the case.

There is plenty of video available of them driving around in vans snatching people off the street away from the protests. Are they doing this to protect the courthouse or to intimidate people?

How is this different from tracking down protesters/rioters caught on video that are arrested days later? Both are well within the rights of the Federal authorities.

[SDHornet]

Black Trump supporter stabbed by antifa