National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (please review page 1)

[ThunderHorse]

Was he upset when Clinton moved Marines into LA during those riots?

I just want to issue the correction here y'all. Clinton did not send Active Duty troops into Los Angeles.

Bush Senior was president at the time. If anything we're significantly behind the timeline of the Rodney King riots and troops should have been deployed in the middle of last week. We're going on almost two weeks of riots in certain places. 4,000 active duty personnel and 9,000 guard personnel were deployed to Los Angeles on the third day of Riots.

1992 Los Angeles riots - Wikipedia

However, in 1993 Clinton did deploy active duty troops to Waco as part of the siege force on the Branch Davidian compound. There was a Bradley company involved in the assault, I'd have to look, but I do believe that is the ONLY time crew serves were used against Americans in the last 50 years.

Somehow the insurrection act was not invoked, not sure what authority active duty troops were there.

 

[BloodStripe]

Well.. The mayor is evicting all military from DC hotels now, so I guess people got their wish

She is not evicting. The state of emergency is no longer active. She's asking they go home.

 

[Florida173]

She is not evicting. The state of emergency is no longer active. She's asking they go home.

You're right. Asking them by having them kicked out of the hotel they were in.

I'm actually not too familiar with who has jurisdiction in this matter. Who has the legal authority to employ security measures on federal property?

 

[R.Caerbannog]

She is not evicting. The state of emergency is no longer active. She's asking they go home.

That's not what the protestors are sayin, they want a repeat of the Bolsheviks Bloody Sunday.

Add on: Unless something breaks their spirit, chain of command, or commo, I don't see these people throwing in the towel.

 

[BloodStripe]

You're right. Asking them by having them kicked out of the hotel they were in.

I'm actually not too familiar with who has jurisdiction in this matter. Who has the legal authority to employ security measures on federal property?

The city doesn't need them therefore they don't want to pay for their lodging anymore. Where's the issue with that?

 

[amlove21]

I don't see why usung an existing law is a threat to the constitution, unlike weaponizing the DoJ. I wonder how Mattis feels about that?

Huge strawman here but I’ll play your game, because I’m off work today. While Mattis used this as an example, he cities the presidents prior behavior and not just the current situation


Sedition and treason are still laws. Punishable by felonious imprisonment and up to death. So when this administration decides to merk some looters here post-arrest using sedition and treason, we’re cool here? We gonna hang some traitors for treason to make a point to the rest of the populace that protesting- I mean, rioting and looting- won’t be tolerated.

I don’t know how Mattis feels about weaponizong the DoJ. I also don’t know why that matters. I will say, I know exactly how Mattis feels about the president’s 3 years running up to this mess. Remember- he’s not saying the riots are are overstep of the constitution, he said quite clearly that the presidents divisive nature and entire presidency has led to this.

Mattis worked for the president; spent his life in service to a country he loved; quit the admin when he no longer could tolerate the admin’s actions.

You wanna have him prosecuted for his work on Theranos? Fine. I’m sure some internet lawyers I know will lay out an ironclad case- doing yeoman’s work for actual lawyers who don’t seem terribly interested in actual prosecutions.

 

[amlove21]

Both of the things are correct.

And- here’s the weird thing- both can be correct AND if you want to be a grown up, you can call fouls on your own team when they do bad things.

 

[Florida173]

The city doesn't need them therefore they don't want to pay for their lodging anymore. Where's the issue with that?

I'll have to look into this more. I don't know why a city would be paying for the federal activation of troops. Where would that line of accounting in DTS be? Usually the state will set up a line of accounting and bill the federal side after the fact so that account bureaucracy doesn't get in the way of mobility.

 

[amlove21]

I'll have to look into this more. I don't know why a city would be paying for the federal activation of troops. Where would that line of accounting in DTS be? Usually the state will set up a line of accounting and bill the federal side after the fact so that account bureaucracy doesn't get in the way of mobility.

Weren’t these NG soldiers? Or did I misread?

 

[ThunderHorse]

I guess people don't actually listen to the POTUS words much. Because what I'm reading in the media after today's Rose Garden speech are clear lies. I watched it.

The Insurrection Act of 1807 is necessary. Trump should have definitely used it, it should have been invoked last Thursday. I posted the timeline of what occurred in 1992 above. In a sense we're well past the period where deploying federal troops will actually aid a situation.

I also mentioned above the only time you actually saw armored vehicles on the "streets" in an attempt to anything against Americans was in 1993 during the Clinton Administration. The goalposts in this thread seem to have moved. Nothing Trump has done or said would indicate that there would be an armored division sent into a city to quell the violence.

So can we agree that the POTUS is trash, Mattis is trash, and every other dickhead using this moment to score points is also trash?

Now, back to what's really going on out there. I take you to Buffalo:

Entire BPD Emergency Response Team resigns in support of suspended officers

This obviously looks like cow shit. WTF?

 

[Florida173]

Weren’t these NG soldiers? Or did I misread?

I'll assume you are asking sincerely.

I'm guessing my use of "federal activation of troops" is what you're hung up on. Active duty components don't get activated, they are already "active." Comes down to authorities and who's paying. States have sovereignty from each other and can't just send troops into another state without permission. No idea when it comes to DC. I believe the 3500 or so soldiers deployed were on request by the Pentagon, not a governor, so if they are federally activated, they would more likely be in a title 10 capacity and would therefore gain federal benefits. Although the title 10 vs 32 thing might be a little iffy here because you have federally activated title 32 missions in various states, like counter drug and stuff.

 

[BloodStripe]

Weren’t these NG soldiers? Or did I misread?

NG is correct.

 

[Florida173]

NG is correct.

Yeah.. I believe the 82d guys had already been sent home. Think there was supposed to be some from 10th mountain too, but haven't looked into it.

 

[Kaldak]

Weren’t these NG soldiers? Or did I misread?

Utah NG troops to be precise.

 

[amlove21]

Utah NG troops to be precise.

Yeah in that case- the state was ordering the city to foot the bill for the housing- city doesn’t feel like it? Doesn’t seem too crazy to me. Sounds like a state problem.

 

[Florida173]

Utah NG troops to be precise.

Mayor is calling for all out of state guardsmen to leave her city. As far as I know that includes at least Ohio, South Carolina, and Utah. There might be some more though. Saw some pictures of guys that I'm assuming are coming from 19th SFG.

I go back to my question though on who owns the authority for the district? She doesn't even control the DC National Guard, the President does.

 

[Marine0311]

Mayor is calling for all out of state guardsmen to leave her city. As far as I know that includes at least Ohio, South Carolina, and Utah. There might be some more though. Saw some pictures of guys that I'm assuming are coming from 19th SFG.

I go back to my question though on who owns the authority for the district? She doesn't even control the DC National Guard, the President does.

I believe they govern for local affairs only.

D.C. Home Rule • Council of the District of Columbia

 

[Marauder06]

I quit Facebook yesterday, the reason was this post you just made.

I had literally typed almost exactly what you just said, and within minutes was getting lit up for my“insensitivite” comments.

I deleted the post, locked down my homepage and vowed never to post again.

The only thing you’ll find there going forward is a picture of me and my email address.

I understand why you did that. Social media is weaponized in the name of America’s new religion and it’s hard to be on if you’re not willing to literally bend the knee to it.

But for me, FB is something useful and interesting from a business, educational, and social standpoint. It’s also one of the front lines of the cold civil war that’s raging right now, and I’m not going to be driven from it. Because that’s what people want: not a rational debate, not reasonable discussion and disagreement, but capitulation, subjugation, and submission.

You're a very rational and "centrist" person, and our country needs to hear those kinds of voices right now. I hope one day you'll reconsider.

 

[SaintKP]

Seems like a lot of the posts last night got lost to the void,

@R.Caerbannog We didn't cover that in school, just a cursory course over the Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya and Stalin pushing everyone out. Nothing in depth, do you have recommendations on articles for the stuff you mentioned?

@Florida173 I'm glad they're looking at qualified immunity, it's a shame that no one is talking about it though. I will agree though that I'm worried that people are wanting to effectively remove the polices ability to do their job when it most likely needs proper oversight and training.

@ThunderHorse I stated before that I'm fully against the actual rioting and looting. But thats not what we're really seeing the majority of right now. Did any of those people I posted about deserve that for exercising their first amendment right? I'm for trying to find reconciliation but don't do it at the expense of my rights.

 

[Florida173]

Seems like a lot of the posts last night got lost to the void,

@R.Caerbannog We didn't cover that in school, just a cursory course over the Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya and Stalin pushing everyone out. Nothing in depth, do you have recommendations on articles for the stuff you mentioned?

@Florida173 I'm glad they're looking at qualified immunity, it's a shame that no one is talking about it though. I will agree though that I'm worried that people are wanting to effectively remove the polices ability to do their job when it most likely needs proper oversight and training.

@ThunderHorse I stated before that I'm fully against the actual rioting and looting. But thats not what we're really seeing the majority of right now. Did any of those people I posted about deserve that for exercising their first amendment right? I'm for trying to find reconciliation but don't do it at the expense of my rights.

I tried to find quickly if SCOTUS already had the question of qualified immunity on the docket, but only found that they had recently refused and now are looking into it. I believe we can probably find something that us citizens feel safe from that immunity, and the LEOs safe from a really litigious citizenry.

What else can be helped from a Federal level? The president has been working on prison reform and been getting a lot of praises from certain black leaders on his efforts. Why are people protesting in front of the White House over the alleged systemic racism that the POTUS didn't bring with him. If there was a voice of the people that could list out some demands and expectations at the Federal level, I would say, yeah.. let's all have that discussion and murderboard the shit out of it for pros/cons, but who's leading this from the BLM and greater movement?