I love my country, but we're going through a rough patch

[Wayward Son]

The best case you can make is that their presence was inciting violence. And if anyone has a problem with a LEO simply being present in a public space, especially one they're charged with protecting, there are larger problems that need addressed, and it isn't the LEO.

Yes, this is exactly what people have pointed out - the introduction of the stormtroopers predictably escalated tensions, and the completely predictable actions/reactions on both sides fed into each other.

Knowing that introducing the stormtroopers would escalate tensions and the resulting conflicts is on the administration.  Responsibility for any particular instances of violence in on each protester or stormtrooper. Whether human nature is such that people should automatically respect police authority, and that any resulting lack of respect is something that can be "addressed" is an interesting question, but quite separate from the actions of the administration leading to escalating violence.

The "Federal Stormtroopers" didn't turn up until those "peaceful protesters" had broken into the federal building, after several nights of attempts being foiled by the Portland Police, and started causing property damage inside the building.

So you're saying Federal agents turning up to protect Federal Buildings from being set on fire, something which had already happened, would cause things to escalate to people trying to burn down the Federal Building... Something they were already doing?

OK.  What day was it when the protesters broke into the Federal building, which building was it, and what damage did they do to it?  I'm curious to review the timeline of this.

[Fenring]

If a person going to, say, an abortion clinic, thought that the likely result of their action would be an escalation of violence by a mob of people present, or the likely torching of the clinic, and they chose to undertake that action, then yes.  This is self evident. 

No, this isn't quite the parallel. Rather, you'd have to agree that if you thought that a person going to an abortion clinic would likely result in an escalation of violence by a mob of people present, and they did so, that you would come to the determination that they are responsible for the violence. That's the limit of what I said in my previous post; but if we're going to go by the full parallel then we might also ask you to agree that you'd be asserting that a woman going to an abortion clinic under those conditions probably did so to escalate the protest. The reason this is the accurate parallel is because we cannot assume her intentions or knowledge in advance any more than we can about Trump. Sure, the most likely reason for a Federal official to send in officers during a violent protest is to establish order, but it's possible that it was done with malice aforethought; just like we could probably assume that a woman going to an abortion clinic is going there to get an abortion, but it's possible she's going there to incite a reaction. You sure you want to be the one to accuse her of malice aforethought when walking into an abortion clinic? I find it very hard to believe you would come to that as your first hypothesis in that situation.

[TheDrake]

Passive opposition is a lot different than active opposition. Using pepper spray on people is different than trying to walk past someone to get to a clinic. Especially in a public atmosphere of making statements about how you're going to clear the streets. I think a more appropriate analogy is going to somebody's conservative speech with the intention of blocking their path and interfering with them, which is often called out as provoking violence.

[TheDeamon]

The "Federal Stormtroopers" didn't turn up until those "peaceful protesters" had broken into the federal building, after several nights of attempts being foiled by the Portland Police, and started causing property damage inside the building.

So you're saying Federal agents turning up to protect Federal Buildings from being set on fire, something which had already happened, would cause things to escalate to people trying to burn down the Federal Building... Something they were already doing?

OK.  What day was it when the protesters broke into the Federal building, which building was it, and what damage did they do to it?  I'm curious to review the timeline of this.

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2020/07/16/acting-secretary-wolf-condemns-rampant-long-lasting-violence-portland

Gives a biased overview of things up to mid-July.

highlights from the Federal perspective(I'm ignoring damage to fencing surrounding federal facilities, which can also be defined as damage to Government Property/Trespass, likewise ignoring graffiti claims):

06/08/2020
Violent anarchists broke a window at the Hatfield Courthouse while pelting the building with objects.
...
06/10/2020
...
Violent anarchists attempted to remove wooden barriers from a window on the Hatfield Courthouse.
...
06/13/2020
Violent anarchists destroyed the card reader at the Hatfield Courthouse by ripping it off its mount.
Violent anarchists destroyed the fence at the Hatfield Courthouse.
Violent anarchists threw metal pipes at the Hatfield Courthouse, causing Portland Police to issue a disbursal warning for unlawful assembly.
...
06/25/2020
Violent anarchists vandalized an FPS camera at the Hatfield Courthouse. (FPS = Federal Protective Service)
...
06/30/2020
Violent anarchists ripped down plywood covering the windows at the Edith Green-Wenell Wyatt Building, before breaking the windows.
...
7/01/2020
Violent anarchists graffitied new plywood covering the windows at the Hatfield Courthouse and ripped down plywood on the other side of the building.
...
07/02/2020
Violent anarchists broke a front window to the Hatfield Courthouse and attempted to enter the building.
Violent anarchists refused orders to vacate the Hatfield Courthouse area, and instead launched fireworks and threw objects at officers, while attempting to cause eye damage with lasers. One explosive firework was shot into the courthouse.
FPS law enforcement officers were forced to utilized crowd control measures for safety.
07/03/2020
After ongoing riots around the Hatfield Courthouse, crowds were dispersed only to make a return later into the night.
Violent Anarchists broke the front window of the Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and shot fireworks into the building.
Violent anarchists firebombed the building. Federal law enforcement extinguished the fire.

Up to this point it has only been FPS and the Portland Police defending the building. At this point "The Federal Storm Troopers" are brought in.

07/04/2020
Around 1,000 violent anarchists spray painted, threw rocks, and shot fireworks (including mortar style fireworks) at the Hatfield Courthouse. They also destroyed a security camera at the facility.
A CBP team supporting FPS at the courthouse arrested suspects from the graffiti and camera vandalism incidents.
The mob continued to throw rocks and paint-filled balloons, while attempting to breach the doors.
Teams were forced to utilize crowd control measures for safety.
Multiple individuals were seen carrying rifles, including the driver of a vehicle who attempted to strike a Portland Police Bureau officer with his car in front of the Hatfield Courthouse.

Portland Police version of some of these events:
The night of July 2nd:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250945

Around 11:42 p.m., Federal officers inside the courthouse came outside to protect the integrity of their building. While federal officers were outside, demonstrators began launching projectiles at the officers with sling shots. These projectiles included large rocks, full cans, and bottles. Demonstrators also threw lit commercial grade fireworks, which landed inside the broken glass doors of the federal courthouse. Simultaneously, demonstrators began setting a fire nearby on Southwest Main Street.

The sound truck made an admonishment telling demonstrators that they must cease the criminal activity of throwing projectiles and fireworks. Demonstrators were also warned if they did not cease the illegal actions and back away from the building, they would be subject to use of force, to include crowd control munitions. Even though the demonstrators were given several warnings by the sound truck, their criminal actions continued.

To protect the life and safety of personnel both inside and outside of the Federal Court House, at 11:52 p.m., a riot was declared. The sound truck admonished the crowd letting demonstrators know a riot had been declared. Demonstrators were told they needed to leave the area to the south and west immediately. If demonstrators did not leave the area, they were subject to tear gas and crowd control munitions. The sound truck gave this admonishment several times, however, demonstrators continued to stay in the area.

Officers began dispersing the crowd in an effort to move them from the immediate area. During this lawful action, the demonstrators were very hostile and violent towards officers. An open pocket knife was thrown at an officer, coming within inches from striking them. Demonstrators continued to throw large rocks and full cans, as well as shot off commercial grade fireworks towards officers. During this time, several arrests were made. Once demonstrators were at Southwest 6th Avenue and Southwest Main Street, officers disengaged the crowd.

Around 12:46 a.m., demonstrators returned to the west side of the federal courthouse. Once again, demonstrators were warned by the sound truck that the riot declaration was still in effect and they needed to leave the area. At this time, demonstrators started launching mortars towards the federal courthouse and a fire erupted inside of the building where the glass doors had been broken.

Because of this immediate life safety issue, officers once again began to disperse the crowd. As they dispersed the crowd, demonstrators continued to throw rocks, cans, and commercial grade fireworks and mortars towards officers. Because of the violent nature of the demonstrators while officers cleared the area, crowd control munitions were used and several arrests were made. As officers began to disengage the crowd at Southwest Main Street and Southwest Broadway Avenue, commercial grade fireworks were once again thrown at officers.

Several demonstrators trickled back in to the Lownsdale and Chapman Park but eventually dispersed over the next several hours.

No CS gas was used by Portland Police Bureau officers during this event.

The night of July 3rd, morning of July 4th:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250947

Around 12:53 a.m., a few of the demonstrators began throwing rocks at the Federal Courthouse building. Some of these rocks broke windows. At around 1:30 a.m., some demonstrators began shooting the commercial grade fireworks towards the Justice Center. Many demonstrators were carrying makeshift shields and sticks.
...

In on-going efforts to de-escalate the situation, PPB members stayed away from the demonstrators, as there was not an identified life safety risk.

At about 4 a.m., the Federal courthouse was attacked. A riot was declared and efforts were made to get the crowd to disperse, including numerous warnings to leave the area or be subject to arrest or force.

PPB did not deploy CS gas at any point during the overnight demonstrations.

Also for reference they "burned the elk" on the night of July 1st.

[TheDeamon]

July 4th/morning of the 5th, as I forgot that in the previous:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250952

At 10:48 p.m., demonstrators continued launching fireworks and projectiles at the Federal Courthouse. Because of this, several windows were broken and fireworks and projectiles entered the Federal Courthouse building.

To protect the life and safety of personnel both inside and outside of the Federal Court House, just after 11 p.m., a riot was declared. Officers began dispersing the crowd moving demonstrators from the closed area of Southwest Broadway to Southwest 1st Avenue, Southwest Columbia to Southwest Yamhill Street.

As officers dispersed the crowd, demonstrators threw bricks, mortars, M-80s, and other flammables towards them. To defend themselves from serious injury, officers used crowd control munitions and tear gas at this time. Lasers were directed at Officer's eyes, which is unlawful.
Despite having moved from the closed area, demonstrators began to trickle back to Southwest 3rd Avenue, starting a large bonfire in the middle of Southwest 3rd Avenue and Southwest Main Street 1 a.m.

During the dispersal, numerous business windows were shattered by members of the crowd. Officers made several arrests, including one at Southwest Main Street and Broadway where a male fought with officers. Officers were able to get him in custody and recovered an illegally possessed loaded firearm and a knife.

Between 1 and 2 a.m., some individuals launched fireworks, smoke bombs, and mortars at and near the Federal Courthouse. Crowd control munitions were deployed in the area.

The crowd continued to remain in the area and engage in riotous behaviors involving fireworks, lit fires, smashing windows, and targeting officers with dangerous projectiles. The closure area was extended to I-405 and Southwest 1 Avenue and Columbia to Burnside Streets.

Several Officers sustained injuries throughout the night, mostly due to mortars and fireworks thrown at them by members of the crowd, which exploded on or near them.

Most of the crowd was dispersed by 4:30 a.m.

[Fenring]

Passive opposition is a lot different than active opposition. Using pepper spray on people is different than trying to walk past someone to get to a clinic. Especially in a public atmosphere of making statements about how you're going to clear the streets. I think a more appropriate analogy is going to somebody's conservative speech with the intention of blocking their path and interfering with them, which is often called out as provoking violence.

Obviously no analogy will map on a strictly 1-to-1 basis. If you want to quibble I could remind you that from the perspective of the abortion protester the woman effectively has announced that she's there to do violence (to the fetus). And I could quibble more that the point made earlier in the thread isn't that the protesters reacted violently to any actual offensive action taken by federal agents, but rather than the actual fact of them arriving was enough to incite violence.

[TheDeamon]

And I could quibble more that the point made earlier in the thread isn't that the protesters reacted violently to any actual offensive action taken by federal agents, but rather than the actual fact of them arriving was enough to incite violence.

The "funny thing" is the closest that came to "offensive action" were the street grabs. Everything else was defensive. Don't want to be gassed or hit with other crowd control munitions? Don't attack/threaten the Federal Building, or anywhere near the vicinity of anyone who is.

Even worse for the counter-claim on this.  The protester activities before the CBP officers turned up was essentially the same as their behavior after. And it's very odd that the protester behavior "took it up to 11" on the very same night that CBP turned up to assist FPS. That doesn't strike me as a response to CBP turning up, it seems more like they escalated expecting the same response as the night before, only found a stronger counter-response than they expected.

[DonaldD]

No, this isn't quite the parallel. Rather, you'd have to agree that if you thought that a person going to an abortion clinic would likely result in an escalation of violence by a mob of people present, and they did so, that you would come to the determination that they are responsible for the violence.

Not what I said at all.  It doesn't matter what 'you' think 'their' expectation was, it matters what 'their' expectation was.

'You' can certainly have a belief about what their expectation was.

[Fenring]

No, this isn't quite the parallel. Rather, you'd have to agree that if you thought that a person going to an abortion clinic would likely result in an escalation of violence by a mob of people present, and they did so, that you would come to the determination that they are responsible for the violence.

Not what I said at all.  It doesn't matter what 'you' think 'their' expectation was, it matters what 'their' expectation was.

'You' can certainly have a belief about what their expectation was.

You can guess, but stating as a fact what their expectation was is off the table. I like speculating as much as the next guy, but you cannot submit a statement of someone else's intent as anything more than just that. You want to believe that Trump sent in officers just to create a backlash, go right ahead - so long as (along the lines of my analogy) you think it's equally reasonable to conclude that a woman going to an abortion clinic past protesters is doing it just to rile them up. My point is that I don't think your logic would track into cases of an opposite political alignment, and it is my speculation that Trump gets his own special analysis involving assuming the worst motives that would not be applied to other cases.

[TheDeamon]

"Peaceful protesting" continues in Portland:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=251067

On Monday, August 3, 2020, multiple events took place. At about 9:00p.m., vehicles were used by protesters to block traffic in downtown Portland around Lownsdale Square park. However, the gathering was mostly peaceful and PPB did not interact with the crowd other than two previously released incidents. See other releases for further information on those.

...

Over the course of hours, some members of the group began throwing objects at officers and flashing laser pointers, bright flashlights, and strobe lights in the officers' eyes. Officers instructed people to stay off the property. The same instructions were made via a loudspeaker and over PPB's Twitter account.

At about 11:30p.m., members of the crowd entered the Kelly Building property. Officers made an arrest. The officers making the arrests had numerous items thrown at them.

At 11:46p.m., due to criminal activity, the gathering was declared an unlawful assembly. After numerous instructions via loudspeaker, officers moved the crowd to the east. During the dispersal, the officers had paint balloons and other objects thrown at them. One officer was punched. Another was injured in the arm by a protester swinging a stick or baton. Another arrest was made. After moving the crowd several blocks, officers deployed inert smoke to allow officers to safely disengage.

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=251066

On Monday, August 3, 2020 at about 10:00p.m., Portland Police received a report of a suspect pointing a handgun at people in the area of Southwest 4th Avenue and Southwest Taylor Street. Oregon State Police were in the area and attempted to arrest the suspect. A hostile crowd surrounded the law enforcement officers, so they requested help from the nearest crowd control unit. Oregon State Police Mobile Response Team (MRT) responded and secured the area to allow the investigators to safely make the arrest. As soon as the suspect was transported away from the scene, the MRT began to disengage. Objects were thrown at the MRT members, including one glass object that struck a Trooper in the head and shattered. Munitions were deployed to defend the retreating MRT unit. Three Troopers suffered minor injuries during the event.

A suspect, a juvenile male, was detained and a realistic looking replica firearm, metal knuckles, and a knife were seized as evidence (photos). The investigation is continuing.

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=251065

Officers have determined that the stabbing took place in Lownsdale Square park when an adult female suspect entered the park taking photos and/or video. An argument ensued between the female and other people in the park. During the argument, the female produced a knife and stabbed another female in the chest. The victim is being treated at a hospital and her injuries appear to be non-life threatening.
...
During the initial response, officers encountered a hostile crowd and additional police resources were summoned to try to conduct an investigation. Officers initially located the knife used in the stabbing, however as the officers were trying to secure a crime scene someone picked it up and ran off with it. Officers were unable to safely conduct an investigation due to the hostile crowd, and supervisors made the decision to disengage. As the knife is evidence, it should be returned to police custody.

But hey, at least the Federal Storm Troopers aren't getting involved in Portland anymore.

[TheDeamon]

July 22nd:
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1290418202820788224
People removing plywood over a window, the horror!:
https://twitter.com/USAO_OR/status/1290418202820788224/photo/1

7 minutes later, the window has a hole in it now, and someone is doing something:
https://twitter.com/USAO_OR/status/1290418202820788224/photo/2

90 seconds later, federal agents are coming out the broken window in pursuit, as a fire appears to burn inside the room?
https://twitter.com/USAO_OR/status/1290418202820788224/photo/3

https://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/portland-man-charged-assaulting-deputy-us-marshal-explosive-device-during-courthouse

PORTLAND, Ore.—U.S. Attorney Billy J. Williams announced today that Isaiah Jason Maza, Jr., 18, of Portland, has been charged by criminal complaint with assaulting a federal officer with a dangerous weapon and willfully damaging government property during protests at the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse on July 22, 2020.

According to court documents, in the early morning hours of July 22, 2020, a group of individuals gathered in an exterior entryway of the Hatfield Federal Courthouse. Several members of the group, including Maza, began removing plywood attached to the front of the building to protect its damaged glass façade. After the group successfully removed the plywood sheeting, Maza made multiple attempts to kick in the window, struck it with a metal object, and repeatedly pounded on it with what appeared to be a hammer.

Shortly thereafter, a number of people successfully removed the entire wooden structure protecting the courthouse entryway and an unknown individual broke one of the windows. After this breach, Maza walked toward the building carrying a cylindrical object. Maza then appeared to light a fuse connected to the object and place it inside the broken window. A short time later, the object exploded in close proximity to law enforcement officers exiting the building through the broken window. A deputy U.S. Marshal sustained injuries to both his legs as a result of the blast.

and putting the lie to the claim that the Feds were gone by Thursday:

On July 31, 2020, deputy U.S. Marshals spotted Maza less than one block from the courthouse. Maza ran from the deputy marshals who pursued him several blocks by foot before catching and arresting him.

Sounds like "the snatchers" were still running around in the 31st.

[TheDrake]

Wow the first 14 posts of this nature failed to make your point, but adding this one more just convinced everyone! Nice Job!

[TheDeamon]

Wow the first 14 posts of this nature failed to make your point, but adding this one more just convinced everyone! Nice Job!

The July 22nd incident they just shed light on demonstrates "the power of optics" very well however.

The only people among the protesters who "knew what happened" could likely be counted on one hand.

Meanwhile, for everyone else, they just saw some protesters tearing down plywood and damaging a glass window that was likely going to be replaced anyway. "Funny ha ha!"

What they didn't see was the explosive device being placed inside the Federal Building. And thus everyone else can claim the police response was "disproportionate and inappropriate" for the situation they were aware of because they were unable to see what triggered the response.

[TheDeamon]

Found this while browsing back looking for the Mayor's "brave appearance" at the protest. Decided to link to those images from twitter in the context of the PPB report from that evening.

Last night looks to have been rather eventful in Portland. Broken windows at the Federal Building, and attempted arson of a government building among other things going by Twitter. Portland Police haven't posted their police log version of things, but given that all of what happened involved the feds, they may now be under pressure from their Mayor to not report on that stuff... Or there simply is that much to report on that it's taking longer than usual to compile, after their Mayor banned on-site Federal co-ordinators with the PPB, so the information flow is being hampered.

Edit: It's missing from the index for their news feed on their own site, but could find it via twitter:

https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=251017

...
Around 1:00 a.m., some people associated with the group opened a fire hydrant at Southwest 3rd Avenue and Southwest Taylor Street and added soap to the water causing a hazard downtown. Some other people downtown set several small fires while other people vandalized and spray painted both city, federal, and private property. At 1:27 a.m., another fire was lit outside an exit door on the south side of the Federal Courthouse and the group successfully tore off a large piece of plywood protecting some glass doors on the west side of the building.

TimeStamp 01:37:55
https://twitter.com/USAO_OR/status/1290418202820788224/photo/1
TimeStamp 01:44:53
https://twitter.com/USAO_OR/status/1290418202820788224/photo/2

At 1:45 a.m., Federal Police Officers once again were forced to disperse the crowd west from the building. During the dispersal, a large fire was started in the middle of Lownsdale Square.

TimeStamp 01:46:12
https://twitter.com/USAO_OR/status/1290418202820788224/photo/3

And looking back on that, looks like I also double posted the police report of that night, I'll have to go find the July 22nd/23rd report now to account for the Mayor's visit, as I incorrectly attributed the previous night to "his night" on the scene.

edit: Correct police report for events from the night of his visit:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=251022

[Wayward Son]

Up to this point it has only been FPS and the Portland Police defending the building. At this point "The Federal Storm Troopers" are brought in.

So up until July 3 or so, the violence consisted of graffiti, broken windows and damaged fences, from what I can see.

And according to this site, Federal Officers confronted the crowds on July 1.  So they were already there on July 3.

So as far as I can see, the "Federal agents turning up to protect Federal Buildings from being set on fire" (which seems to have happened with fireworks on July 4, if I read this correctly--what a surprise! ), actually had not happened until AFTER they showed up.  Which means the Federal agents were not a reaction to up-ticking violence, but most likely vice-versa.

[TheDrake]

Wow the first 14 posts of this nature failed to make your point, but adding this one more just convinced everyone! Nice Job!

The July 22nd incident they just shed light on demonstrates "the power of optics" very well however.

The only people among the protesters who "knew what happened" could likely be counted on one hand.

Meanwhile, for everyone else, they just saw some protesters tearing down plywood and damaging a glass window that was likely going to be replaced anyway. "Funny ha ha!"

What they didn't see was the explosive device being placed inside the Federal Building. And thus everyone else can claim the police response was "disproportionate and inappropriate" for the situation they were aware of because they were unable to see what triggered the response.

Your commitment to collective punishment is strong. It reminds me of Israel running roughshod over noncombatants in Gaza because they won't overwhelm the terrorists and stop them from firing rockets. Could that truck marked with ambulance markings have terrorists in it? Maybe. But you still don't blow it up with a drone. In large part because of "optics". Are those equivalent? Not at all. Lethal force is different than less than lethal options. But it is still a reckless disregard and makes you look like crap, and it is on the same spectrum. Is it 100% fair? No, it isn't. But if you want to take the moral high ground, you accept the tactical disadvantage and live with it. What's the best thing to do? Address the problems that have peaceful protesters in the street, you take away the human shields for people who really just want revolution against the state. Oregon tried to fake it, and leave loopholes for cops to keep doing what they've been doing all along. It was transparent and infuriating to those demanding real reform.

[TheDeamon]

Up to this point it has only been FPS and the Portland Police defending the building. At this point "The Federal Storm Troopers" are brought in.

So up until July 3 or so, the violence consisted of graffiti, broken windows and damaged fences, from what I can see.

And according to this site, Federal Officers confronted the crowds on July 1.  So they were already there on July 3.

First off, the Federal Protective Service are the guys that are normally charged with protecting Federal Buildings. It has an organizational history going back to 1790, they're only a year younger than the US Marshall's service, although they've gone through multiple name changes over the years as they moved between various administrative departments. Without regard to who PotUS is, absent a presidential directive directing otherwise, what the FPS did up to that point is very likely to have happened without regard to who PotUS is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Protective_Service_(United_States)

This also is where timeline confusion comes into play. Is July 1 talking about the night of June 30/July 1, or the night of July 1/July 2?

And I love how that article leads with the peaceful protesters starting July by gathering around the Elk Statue. The very same statue they burned that very same evening and damaged its base badly enough that Portland removed the statue the next morning out of concerns it might fall on someone(that and it needed cleaning/restoration after being vandalized and burned anyway).

7/01/2020
Violent anarchists graffitied new plywood covering the windows at the Hatfield Courthouse and ripped down plywood on the other side of the building.
...
07/02/2020
Violent anarchists broke a front window to the Hatfield Courthouse and attempted to enter the building.
Violent anarchists refused orders to vacate the Hatfield Courthouse area, and instead launched fireworks and threw objects at officers, while attempting to cause eye damage with lasers. One explosive firework was shot into the courthouse.
FPS law enforcement officers were forced to utilized crowd control measures for safety.

Based on the Portland Police reports, the 07/03 report from this summary(not quoted here) would be for the morniing of the third, not the evening. So the 07/02 entry is the morning of the 2nd, and the 07/01 entry is the morning of the first.

So for the FPS their first "significant confrontation" with the crowd was the morning of the 2nd, as reported by DHS. Sadly the PPB doesn't have a police report covering that night to corroborate. But from the DHS version, the officers didn't do anything until someone started to forcibly enter the building, and again when someone started shooting fireworks into their building. Which would match up with:

Then federal law enforcement officers began appearing at the daily protests.

At first, activists viewed the agents as a minor nuisance compared to officers from the Portland Police Bureau, who for many nights before had used impact munitions and tear gas to drive demonstrators away from the building that houses the county jail and out of downtown Portland."

Because they only came out when the building they were defending was being attacked, rather than simply being defaced. And as per the DHS version of things, the building didn't start getting attacked in earnest until the morning of July 2nd.

Then on July 3rd, as per DHS:

Violent Anarchists broke the front window of the Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and shot fireworks into the building.
Violent anarchists firebombed the building. Federal law enforcement extinguished the fire.

So again, the building was attacked, not just vandalized. So again, as per their SOP, they came out to respond to the attack. But that's now two nights in a row that FPS came out... And you did notice the entry about "Firebombed" on the 3rd? The PPD also reflected that with this from the night of the 2nd/morning of the 3rd:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250945

Around 12:46 a.m., demonstrators returned to the west side of the federal courthouse. Once again, demonstrators were warned by the sound truck that the riot declaration was still in effect and they needed to leave the area. At this time, demonstrators started launching mortars towards the federal courthouse and a fire erupted inside of the building where the glass doors had been broken.

Because of this immediate life safety issue, officers once again began to disperse the crowd. As they dispersed the crowd, demonstrators continued to throw rocks, cans, and commercial grade fireworks and mortars towards officers. Because of the violent nature of the demonstrators while officers cleared the area, crowd control munitions were used and several arrests were made.

So as far as I can see, the "Federal agents turning up to protect Federal Buildings from being set on fire" (which seems to have happened with fireworks on July 4, if I read this correctly--what a surprise! ), actually had not happened until AFTER they showed up.  Which means the Federal agents were not a reaction to up-ticking violence, but most likely vice-versa.

So CBP forces turning up to support the FPS agents on the 4th somehow magically made the fire on the 3rd not happen, and also retroactively made the breach on the 2nd and the fireworks being shot into the building not happen on that night as well?

But getting back to your linked article:

But by July 4, that mission shifted as federal officers cleared demonstrators blocks away from federal property. Over the next two weeks, their tactics became increasingly aggressive.

Well, more manpower being available means more aggressive tactics are available as you are capable of being able to do more(you can "counterattack" and defend at the same time), and one of the best defensive actions you can take is move the crowd far enough away that they cannot endanger the building further... By lauching more fireworks into windows they just broke. And again, of course, those Federal agents only came out and did so after somebody attacked the Federal Building... odd that. But that does make for three nights in a row where Federal Agents have come out to disrupt crowds... That happened to attack Federal property rather than simply spray paint it.

Don't believe me? Even the PPB says the Federal Building was being attacked on the morning of the 4th, I've already quoted them on this matter. So I'll just give you the link.
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250947

On the night of July 4, morning of July 5th, another attack with unsurprising Federal response:
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=250952

At 10:48 p.m., demonstrators continued launching fireworks and projectiles at the Federal Courthouse. Because of this, several windows were broken and fireworks and projectiles entered the Federal Courthouse building.
...
Between 1 and 2 a.m., some individuals launched fireworks, smoke bombs, and mortars at and near the Federal Courthouse. Crowd control munitions were deployed in the area.

The crowd continued to remain in the area and engage in riotous behaviors involving fireworks, lit fires, smashing windows, and targeting officers with dangerous projectiles.

So nightly attacks on the Federal building, with corresponding nightly responses, odd how that works. Do we really need to rehash this or do you want to ignore the matter that the Feds were responding to escalations rather than doing escalating?

And looking at the twitter feed for the PPB, it seems to be mostly peaceful around the federal building atm, but they're trying to wreck the Portland Police Association building again, they've declared a riot.

[TheDeamon]

Your commitment to collective punishment is strong. It reminds me of Israel running roughshod over noncombatants in Gaza because they won't overwhelm the terrorists and stop them from firing rockets. Could that truck marked with ambulance markings have terrorists in it? Maybe. But you still don't blow it up with a drone. In large part because of "optics". Are those equivalent? Not at all. Lethal force is different than less than lethal options. But it is still a reckless disregard and makes you look like crap, and it is on the same spectrum. Is it 100% fair? No, it isn't. But if you want to take the moral high ground, you accept the tactical disadvantage and live with it. What's the best thing to do? Address the problems that have peaceful protesters in the street, you take away the human shields for people who really just want revolution against the state. Oregon tried to fake it, and leave loopholes for cops to keep doing what they've been doing all along. It was transparent and infuriating to those demanding real reform.

How is telling people that an assembly has become a public safety risk and that for that reason they must relocate a punnishment?

The "punishment" you're talking about is when the Crowd Control Munitions were employed, which pretty consistently came with 5+ minutes work of advanced warnings in most cases.

You have a 1st amendment right to protest, but you do not have a 1st amendment right to endanger public safety. And when you start disobeying lawful orders from a LEO, well, I'm not going to be very sympathetic about what happens next if it is happening in the context of other parties being violent towards those same LEOs.

Even for the Non-violent old-school protesters, being arrested and/or detained was a badge of honor, although that isn't supposed to involve you getting arrested alongside a guy that was throwing rocks or launching explosives at said officers.

[TheDeamon]

"Peaceful" Portland protesters find a Portland woman outside her house wearing a Nazi armband. Shine bright lights and laser pointers into her eyes while also physically confronting her. Not going to support her, but it's pretty ironic that the same people who take issue with "federal snatchers" don't see a problem with this:

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1291322964512837633

Of course, that only happened after the Portland Police removed them from the vicinity of their East Precinct building, where those "protesters" set a fire at the entry door to the building.

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1291316396236963842

Night of August 5/morning of August 6
https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/news/read.cfm?id=261071

[TheDeamon]

https://twitter.com/DailyCaller/status/1290739667357376531

timestamp 1:09

113 out of 277 injuries sustained by DHS Personnel in Portland have been eye injuries.

[TheDrake]

The people with the laser pointers were obviously not peaceful protesters. How many people were shining laser pointers? How many got physical with her? This is at the heart of the appropriate phrase "mostly peaceful protesters". The video on NY Post shows about 6-7 people confronting her. We don't see whether they are alone, or if they broke off from 500 people marching and singing. I don't know why you think that anyone is making the argument that protesters in Portland are 100% nonviolent.

[Fenring]

The people with the laser pointers were obviously not peaceful protesters. How many people were shining laser pointers? How many got physical with her? This is at the heart of the appropriate phrase "mostly peaceful protesters". The video on NY Post shows about 6-7 people confronting her. We don't see whether they are alone, or if they broke off from 500 people marching and singing. I don't know why you think that anyone is making the argument that protesters in Portland are 100% nonviolent.

I think TheDeamon's point is something to the tune of people here accusing Trump of escalating a peaceful protest into being violent, whereas his point is that it was already violent to an extent which according to him hasn't appreciably changed as a result of DHS presence. I don't have a factual thing to add to any of this, other than it sounds super-fishy to me to argue that it's Trump's fault that some violence has ensued. I don't know, I guess it's possible, but somehow it doesn't ring true.

[TheDeamon]

The people with the laser pointers were obviously not peaceful protesters. How many people were shining laser pointers? How many got physical with her?

At the 23 second mark, I could count 4 different laser pointers being directed towards her vicinity. Of course, video being what it is, and their tendency to shift them around quickly, it could be after images. There definitely were at least three pointers in use just based on the angles and some other factors I was seeing in the mix. (One of the people with a laser is either short, or was inside a car)

This is at the heart of the appropriate phrase "mostly peaceful protesters". The video on NY Post shows about 6-7 people confronting her. We don't see whether they are alone, or if they broke off from 500 people marching and singing. I don't know why you think that anyone is making the argument that protesters in Portland are 100% nonviolent.

At least with the twitter video, there is enough sound present that doesn't seem to line up with what's happening at the door to suggest that a second group was gathered on/along the street but otherwise staying on public right-of-ways, but as I haven't seen video of that crowd, can't begin to even guess. Presumably there are at least 4, the cameraperson, and the ones with the laser pointers.

[TheDeamon]

The people with the laser pointers were obviously not peaceful protesters. How many people were shining laser pointers? How many got physical with her? This is at the heart of the appropriate phrase "mostly peaceful protesters". The video on NY Post shows about 6-7 people confronting her. We don't see whether they are alone, or if they broke off from 500 people marching and singing. I don't know why you think that anyone is making the argument that protesters in Portland are 100% nonviolent.

I think TheDeamon's point is something to the tune of people here accusing Trump of escalating a peaceful protest into being violent, whereas his point is that it was already violent to an extent which according to him hasn't appreciably changed as a result of DHS presence. I don't have a factual thing to add to any of this, other than it sounds super-fishy to me to argue that it's Trump's fault that some violence has ensued. I don't know, I guess it's possible, but somehow it doesn't ring true.

Pretty much this.

These protests have a "violent core" attached to it that have been from present from the start, and the presence of the Feds simply provided them a target to focus their attention on, rather actually escalate the violence in and of themselves.

That "violent core" wants a police response. Which should be plainly obvious now that once command of the Federal Building's security was given to the state, the protesters started targeting the Portland Police Department and their union/association buildings and once again resuming the practice of "gradual escalation" over the course of the night until the Police come in to clear them out.

So they can then try to get footage of "police brutality" to try to get more people to rally to their cause.

The Portland protests aren't about Black Lives Matter, and never really have been, although many of its participants like to think they were. The Portland Protests are all about waging psychological warfare.

[Wayward Son]

These protests have a "violent core" attached to it that have been from present from the start, and the presence of the Feds simply provided them a target to focus their attention on, rather actually escalate the violence in and of themselves...

The Portland protests aren't about Black Lives Matter, and never really have been, although many of its participants like to think they were. The Portland Protests are all about waging psychological warfare.

This exemplifies what is pissing us off, Deamon.

First you talk about the "violent core," which by implication is a minority of the protesters.  (If it were a majority, it wouldn't be a "core" now, would it? )

Then you make a blanket statement that "the Portland protests aren't about..." based on what this core minority does.

This is what we mean when we say that you are blaming the entire protest on the actions of a minority.  Suddenly the intentions of everyone outside of the "violent core" is subsumed by this "core."

Have you ever considered that the protests are really all about Black Lives Matters and justice for all Americans, not just the ones that look right, and it is this "violent core" that is exploiting it to wage their psychological warfare against the will of the majority?

[DonaldD]

I think TheDeamon's point is something to the tune of people here accusing Trump of escalating a peaceful protest into being violent

I don't think anybody here is making that argument.  Few if any of the protests have been completely devoid of any violence.  It is almost impossible nowadays to have a peaceful protest not get co-opted by fringe violent groups.  That doesn't make the primarily peaceful protests violent.  It makes them simply visible.

Trump's actions, however, have been to pour kerosene on a camp fire.

[rightleft22]

These protests have a "violent core" attached to it that have been from present from the start, and the presence of the Feds simply provided them a target to focus their attention on, rather actually escalate the violence in and of themselves...

The Portland protests aren't about Black Lives Matter, and never really have been, although many of its participants like to think they were. The Portland Protests are all about waging psychological warfare.

This exemplifies what is pissing us off, Deamon.

First you talk about the "violent core," which by implication is a minority of the protesters.  (If it were a majority, it wouldn't be a "core" now, would it? )

Then you make a blanket statement that "the Portland protests aren't about..." based on what this core minority does.

This is what we mean when we say that you are blaming the entire protest on the actions of a minority.  Suddenly the intentions of everyone outside of the "violent core" is subsumed by this "core."

Have you ever considered that the protests are really all about Black Lives Matters and justice for all Americans, not just the ones that look right, and it is this "violent core" that is exploiting it to wage their psychological warfare against the will of the majority?

I would add that we have tendency to define a group based on the actions of a few or make the bad apple argument. Which way be decide to defend or define a group tells us more about ourselves then the group or issue.

Take those who lean toward the 'Law and Order' argument. Often in this case the protesters are defined by the actions of the few while the police are left off the hook and not being defined by the "few bad apples". (I've done this many times myself without realizing the contradiction in my arguments)


Ibram X makes a pretty good argument that when it comes to race Blacks are more often defined by the actions of a individuals which may be at the heart of a lot of racist policies.  Need to defend a policy that discriminates? Define the group by the actions of a few individuals.  Its a interesting observations. In this context the The Portland protests discussions are very much about race issues.

[TheDrake]

That's got to be the most successful destabilization campaign in history, and all perpetrated by twenty year olds who work in fast food and retail. The CIA must be jealous.

[Fenring]

Have you ever considered that the protests are really all about Black Lives Matters and justice for all Americans, not just the ones that look right, and it is this "violent core" that is exploiting it to wage their psychological warfare against the will of the majority?

This wasn't addressed to me, but it's a good case in point for why the country is going through a rough patch. It's not because there's a protest; sometimes things need to be protested, that's good. It's because right now each side needs to prove how evil the other side is, on any topic and using any example. In the case of a protest the left needs to keep showing how it proves how bad Trump is and how the right is supporting an authoritarian government; and the right needs to keep showing how it proves how much of a menace the [radical] left is and how all they really want is destruction. Nevermind how everyone can learn from it, or agree on the problems to solve, no - it needs to just be another call to arms against the other side, with the incident of the protest itself just being yet another signpost of what's wrong with the evil ones.

That is why the country is going through a rough patch. Not because there are some bad people out there among good-intentioned others, but because a growing majority want to hate each other rather than heal and grow. It's what happens in war-torn African countries, and it's sad and scary to see happening in North America. Even the Canadians are on board the hate train on one side or the other, although probably more on the side of the American left.

[TheDeamon]

That's got to be the most successful destabilization campaign in history, and all perpetrated by twenty year olds who work in fast food and retail. The CIA must be jealous.

Plenty of 30 and 40-somethings getting arrested alongside them.

[TheDeamon]

These protests have a "violent core" attached to it that have been from present from the start, and the presence of the Feds simply provided them a target to focus their attention on, rather actually escalate the violence in and of themselves...

The Portland protests aren't about Black Lives Matter, and never really have been, although many of its participants like to think they were. The Portland Protests are all about waging psychological warfare.

This exemplifies what is pissing us off, Deamon.

First you talk about the "violent core," which by implication is a minority of the protesters.  (If it were a majority, it wouldn't be a "core" now, would it? )

Then you make a blanket statement that "the Portland protests aren't about..." based on what this core minority does.

This is what we mean when we say that you are blaming the entire protest on the actions of a minority.  Suddenly the intentions of everyone outside of the "violent core" is subsumed by this "core."

Have you ever considered that the protests are really all about Black Lives Matters and justice for all Americans, not just the ones that look right, and it is this "violent core" that is exploiting it to wage their psychological warfare against the will of the majority?

 

I'm sure the sudden increase in protesters after the reports about "federal stormtroopers" and "secret police" operating in Portland were entirely in response to people being concerned about Police unjustly profiling and killing black men while in custody, and had nothing to do with a psychological operation that had been running in the city for the 6 weeks prior to that. I mean, that totally explains why all of those people suddenly returned to the woodwork after "the federal issue" had been resolved by the Governor agreeing to send in the state police.

[DJQuag]

As a mostly lurker have to say that the whole hearted support of beating the living *censored* out of people for being in a general area around others who allegedly did bad things is not something I expected out of you Daemon.

[TheDrake]

Tiananmen square was an unlawful assembly also. Hong kong had people breaking security cameras and throwing bottles. Northern Ireland had bombs placed in pubs. Boston had people breaking into private houses and TAR AND FEATHERING public officials.

In the end:

Crackdowns never quell the violence, no matter how justified you might think they are.
Only true lasting systemic change does. That can come violently or it can come peacefully.

[wmLambert]

The problem is not Covid-19 nor George Floyd. It is all about the election and history. In 2006, 2008, 2016, 2018, and now, the Democrats purposefully sabotaged the economy. Vote-scamming has always been their game plan, They were frantic to do anything they could to savage Trump. Trump's metrics before the Coronavirus rated him as the greatest President of all time, and his reelection was guaranteed. Their attempt at a coup failed, and it looks lake many of them will go to prison for lying and illegal spying. The Coronavirus to them was a Godsend, because they jumped on it with both feet. When Trump was stopping entry to block the disease vector, Pelosi was in China Town hugging people and calling him racist. As soon as the disease penetrated, she said he hadn't done enough. A 180° degree flip, both aimed at denigrating Trump. Sabotaging the economy was the goal - never just health concerns. Slowing down emergency funding to offset the shut down by adding poison pill add-ons was only designed to make things worse.

The media has been slow to look at the metrics coming from Sweded. They decided the best way to treat the Pandemic was to protect the most endangered, and allowing the young with no co-morbidity to build herd immunity. There was a spike in March and April when the senior centers were most affected, but the trend is indisputable. Although this is the right way to go, and to revitalize the economy by opening everything while protecting those with co-morbidity factors, will not be allowed by the Dems until after the election.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fadamaltmejd.se%2Fcovid%2F&psig=AOvVaw3t_ZFWnSJbNoSK_KDLsjIx&ust=1596906965916000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCLiogJvMiesCFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD

[TheDrake]

Sweded?

wmL posts are so entertaining, and even more so if you read them as if Gilbert Gottfried was reading them.

[TheDrake]

FYI, 25% of America is in the risk category for age, chronic health, etc. It's not like you can just sequester 75 million people from the others. Particularly because as soon as your employer "opens up", your risk category gets you fired if you stay home.

[wmLambert]

FYI, 25% of America is in the risk category for age, chronic health, etc. It's not like you can just sequester 75 million people from the others. Particularly because as soon as your employer "opens up", your risk category gets you fired if you stay home.

FYI? 25% is a made-up number. 25% of the population may get sick from other issues - but how many have co-morbidity and may die of other causes which will be attributed to Covid-19 for the money and Democrat message it might bring? Sweden allowed the young to get exposed to Covid, just like families used to have measles and mumps parties to get past the threats while kids are young and able to become immune. Protecting the endangered makes sense, and is a lot easier than slowing the young from getting past it and extending the contagion.

Look at the chart from the link I posted. What do you disagree with?

[DonaldD]

Yes, 25% was hand-waving, but not the way you think.

Obesity is considered a risk factor for negative COVID-19 outcomes. The obesity rate in the USA? 36%

Age above 60 years old is also considered a risk factor for negative COVID-19 outcomes.  People above 60 years old make up about 20% of the population in the USA.

About 10% of the population has diabetes. 

Hypertension? More than 30%

Sure there is overlap, maybe significant, but no amount of overlap will get you under 35%.

[TheDrake]

What, your double redirect link to a static chart graphic with no context or sources? Love it.

What is the current situation?
COVID-19 risk in Sweden is high. CDC recommends travelers avoid all nonessential international travel to Sweden. Some examples of essential travel may include traveling for humanitarian aid work, medical reasons, or family emergencies. Older adults, people of any age with certain underlying medical conditions, and others at increased risk for severe illness should consider postponing all travel, including essential travel, to Sweden.

If you get sick in Sweden and need medical care, resources may be limited. Plan ahead and learn more about Getting Health Care Abroad.

If you get sick with COVID-19 (or test positive for COVID-19, even if you have no symptoms) while abroad, you may be isolated or not be permitted to return to the United States until you have recovered fully from your illness. If you get exposed to a person with COVID-19 while abroad, you may be quarantined or not be permitted to return to the United States until 14 days after your last exposure.

cdc.gov

share to facebook
share to twitter
share to linkedin
email article
A woman wearing a protective mask and giving the thumbs up sign in front of the flag of Sweden
Despite never implementing a full-scale lockdown, Sweden has managed to flatten its curve, prompting its health leadership to claim victory -- but others question the cost of the strategy, as the country has a far higher death toll than its Scandinavian neighbors.

In late July, Sweden's 7-day moving average of new cases was about 200, down from a peak of around 1,140 in mid-June. Its daily death totals have been in the single digits for two weeks, well below its mid-April peak of 115 deaths in a single day.


However, on a per-capita basis, Sweden far outpaces its Scandinavian neighbors in COVID deaths, with 567 deaths per million people compared with Denmark's 106 deaths per million, Finland's 59 deaths per million, and Norway's 47 deaths per million. The Swedish figure is closer to Italy's 581 deaths per million.

While the positive trends have led Anders Tegnell, PhD, chief epidemiologist at the Swedish Public Health Agency and architect of Sweden's coronavirus strategy, to state that the "Swedish strategy is working," others have criticized the approach, including two dozen Swedish academics who published a recent USA Today editorial.

"In Sweden, the strategy has led to death, grief, and suffering," they wrote. "On top of that, there are no indications that the Swedish economy has fared better than in many other countries. At the moment, we have set an example for the rest of the world on how not to deal with a deadly infectious disease."

How Did Sweden Flatten Its Curve Without a Lockdown?

"Swedes in general have changed their behavior to a great extent during the pandemic and the practice of social distancing as well as physical distancing in public places and at work has been widespread," said Maria Furberg, MD, PhD, an infectious diseases expert at Umea University Hospital in northeastern Sweden.

"During the months of March to early June, all shops were practically empty, people stopped dining with friends, and families stopped seeing even their closest relatives," Furberg told MedPage Today. "A lock-down could not have been more effective. Handwashing, excessive use of hand sanitizers, and staying home at the first sign of a cold became the new normal very quickly."


Mozhu Ding, PhD, an epidemiologist at the famed Karolinska Institute, said the decline is "likely to be a combination of measures taken by individuals, businesses and a widespread information campaign launched by the government."

"Even without a strict lockdown order, many businesses allowed employees to work from home, and universities are offering distance courses to the students," Ding told MedPage Today. "Individuals are also taking personal hygiene more seriously, as items like hand sanitizers and single-use gloves are often sold out in pharmacies and grocery stores."

There is no indication that the Swedes held contamination parties that I could find. They acted responsibly on their own.

[TheDrake]

Yes, 25% was hand-waving, but not the way you think.

Obesity is considered a risk factor for negative COVID-19 outcomes. The obesity rate in the USA? 36%

Age above 60 years old is also considered a risk factor for negative COVID-19 outcomes.  People above 60 years old make up about 20% of the population in the USA.

About 10% of the population has diabetes. 

Hypertension? More than 30%

Sure there is overlap, maybe significant, but no amount of overlap will get you under 35%.

Also this.

More than 25 million Americans have asthma. This is 7.7 percent of adults and 8.4 percent of children.

[wmLambert]

What you're deliberately missing is that the Swedes addressed the threat to the endangered - not everyone. They also allowed voluntary measures, and not use of Gestapo tactics. They also didn't let hardened criminals out of prison or ignore protecting those in nursing homes. NY is panicking because people have learned they can work from a distance, which means they don't have to live in the city and pay the exorbitant taxes and high rents. The mayor wants to outlaw workers from the hinterlands, the opposite of what he filed a lawsuit  against earlier. So much hypocrisy.

You know that as soon as the election is over, the Dems will suddenly allow people to return to work. However; that may depend upon them winning so they can claim the good results. If not, they may continue to drag their feet.

[TheDrake]

What you're deliberately missing is that the Swedes addressed the threat to the endangered - not everyone. They also allowed voluntary measures, and not use of Gestapo tactics. They also didn't let hardened criminals out of prison or ignore protecting those in nursing homes. NY is panicking because people have learned they can work from a distance, which means they don't have to live in the city and pay the exorbitant taxes and high rents. The mayor wants to outlaw workers from the hinterlands, the opposite of what he filed a lawsuit  against earlier. So much hypocrisy.

You know that as soon as the election is over, the Dems will suddenly allow people to return to work. However; that may depend upon them winning so they can claim the good results. If not, they may continue to drag their feet.

I'm sure it will fit your narrative neatly when Democrats win and people return to work, but it will be because of a vaccine, not some nefarious plot.

[wmLambert]

,,,I'm sure it will fit your narrative neatly when Democrats win and people return to work, but it will be because of a vaccine, not some nefarious plot.

Th only narrative is the Democrat one that the economy must be destroyed before the election to blame on Trump. How can you not see that? If they were anticipating a vaccine coming to the rescue, then they would ballyhoo it now. Instead, they play it down, and their only statements are how Trump has done a bad job of corralling Covid, neh?

Timing is what proves the plot. When Obama took office, everything he did wrong, he blamed on Bush, even though it was the Democrat House majority that tried to wreck the economy under Bush. Obama hurt the economy worse and worse until the GOP gained the House, then when they brought the economy back it was him and not them. Trump did great, but when the Dems gained the House, they started doing the same thing and fought every step to help. Obama claimed it was his successes that let Trump do all the good he did, but never used the word good in the same sentence with Trump. The sad truth is that it was Trump undoing the Obama Executive Orders that did the most good. Destroying the Obama legacy did the most  good. Obama claims everything was his idea, except getting rid of his ideas is what saved the economy. Same timing now. Trump creates new ways to get vaccines, and it is not mentioned - but if they win in November they will claim all the success.

[TheDeamon]

As a mostly lurker have to say that the whole hearted support of beating the living *censored* out of people for being in a general area around others who allegedly did bad things is not something I expected out of you Daemon.

I guess I need to go digging. There was a certain street preacher who had an unpleasant encounter with those "peaceful protesters" about a month ago. He's chained himself to a traffic light pole prior to their arrival. Never saw the footage of him getting taken off the pole, but they subsequently knocked him unconscious. then carried him into a side-alley where one of the women involved asked if she could kick his face in.

But yeah, it was only the Feds who were out of control. I've already commented on that Navy Veteran, I think there is more to the story than what the press has covered and I'm withholding judgement until the IG report comes back on that.

[TheDeamon]

Also missed this one yesterday:
https://www.kptv.com/news/mayor-wheeler-on-rioters-setting-fire-at-portland-police-building-you-are-attempting-to-commit/article_8e01541e-d839-11ea-8736-4b746b521476.html

Mayor Ted Wheeler had strong words for rioters who blocked exits and started a fire at the Portland Police Bureau’s East Precinct building.

“When you commit arson with an accelerant in an attempt to burn down a building that is occupied by people who you have intentionally trapped inside, you are not demonstrating, you are attempting to commit murder,” Wheeler said during an online press conference Thursday.

[TheDrake]

As a mostly lurker have to say that the whole hearted support of beating the living *censored* out of people for being in a general area around others who allegedly did bad things is not something I expected out of you Daemon.

I guess I need to go digging. There was a certain street preacher who had an unpleasant encounter with those "peaceful protesters" about a month ago. He's chained himself to a traffic light pole prior to their arrival. Never saw the footage of him getting taken off the pole, but they subsequently knocked him unconscious. then carried him into a side-alley where one of the women involved asked if she could kick his face in.

But yeah, it was only the Feds who were out of control. I've already commented on that Navy Veteran, I think there is more to the story than what the press has covered and I'm withholding judgement until the IG report comes back on that.

What more do you need? Even if he had been committing arson five minutes before hand and the cops watched him do it, it doesn't justify corporal punishment. And if he committed a crime, why wasn't he arrested?

[DJQuag]

As a mostly lurker have to say that the whole hearted support of beating the living *censored* out of people for being in a general area around others who allegedly did bad things is not something I expected out of you Daemon.

I guess I need to go digging. There was a certain street preacher who had an unpleasant encounter with those "peaceful protesters" about a month ago. He's chained himself to a traffic light pole prior to their arrival. Never saw the footage of him getting taken off the pole, but they subsequently knocked him unconscious. then carried him into a side-alley where one of the women involved asked if she could kick his face in.

But yeah, it was only the Feds who were out of control. I've already commented on that Navy Veteran, I think there is more to the story than what the press has covered and I'm withholding judgement until the IG report comes back on that.

I'm sure you've got links to back up your narrative.

All I'm saying is that as someone who normally doesn't post but does watch the threads that you chose this hill to die on surprised me. Like, you're *invested* or at least acting like it and I don't get why.

[TheDeamon]

https://www.fox6now.com/news/wauwatosas-mayor-to-meet-with-police-chief-discuss-how-to-keep-officer-joseph-mensah-safe

[TheDrake]

https://www.fox6now.com/news/wauwatosas-mayor-to-meet-with-police-chief-discuss-how-to-keep-officer-joseph-mensah-safe

That's not good, but it is result of the erosion of trust in police.

[TheDeamon]

Seattle's City Council just cut their police budget, despite wide spread community outcry NOT to do so, their (Black and female) Police Chief has resigned in protest. And the rioting continues in Seattle.