Summations Only

For further informationBuzzfeed reports Videos Appear to Show Federal Officers Shooting and Macing Reporters and Legal Observers, Despite a Judge’s OrderAnd Lawfare blog reports on cases filed against the Federal Government Litigating the Federal Government’s Conduct in Portland ProtestsIt includes the case mentioned by Buzzfeed and others - I’ll quote two I find especially clear from the information available in the article.

quote:

---

To the extent to which the Portland Police Bureau or Seattle Police Department is shackled by mayors and a City Council playing to the crowd, at what point should order be restored? How many liberally-owned or black-owned businesses have been senselessly destroyed because its opportunism at its finest? A legitimate outrage has spilled over into blind rage and indiscriminate violence and if you don't cut it off at the knees it emboldens morons to not only continue the cycle of violence but to ratchet it up.

---

None of which excuses the police brutality against those who were not rioting.

quote:

---

You're also not taking into consideration that the federal government did nothing for two months waiting for the violence to die down but never did. Night after night after night the looting, the rioting, the violence continued in places like Portland and Seattle. So this should just go on indefinitely?

---

They don’t seem to have helped much.

quote:

---

Yeah, and the actual peaceful protesters are getting tired of people seizing this moment to sow as much chaos and disorder as possible.

---

In other words you are going to ignore all the reports of peaceful protestors getting tear gassed.You know, covering up the problems never leads to a solution.

quote:

---

A chicken/egg problem, much like the Boston Massacre. Who was it that drew first blood that day?

---

Is it? In every case? There isn’t one where the police - or federal officers - didn’t attack people who were clearly peaceful ?

quote:

---

Right back at ya

---

I’m not covering up anything.

quote:

---

Whether any of it is true, does it invalidate the need for social order?

---

Attacking peaceful protestors does nothing to preserve the social order.

quote:

---

Your argument seems to be that if 100 people are throwing molotov cocktails and 100 people aren't but are standing in proximity of those that are, that if police use any force that is indiscriminate in nature (tear gas) that the police are somehow bad.

---

I don’t see how you can get that out of attacking people who were clearly peaceful.

quote:

---

Oh, but is Paul able to distinguish between 100 officers who used force versus another 100 officers that didn't? No, because Paul now has the impetus to lump them all together as a mass of violence. They no longer have agency or individuality. They are all stormtroopers to Paul

---

And now you are just making things up.

quote:

---

At this point I think its fair to ask what has been said today that hasn't already been said for the last 50 + days? You are naive to think that the remaining body of protesters are there because of George Floyd. Spoiler alert: They aren't. The only remaining protesters at this point are the ones seeking to completely transform Western Civilization through an endless stream of complaints -- complaints that, mind you, will never be ameliorated because the objective isn't to resolve the complaint. No, the complaint itself is the objective

---

Even if that is true, if the complaints are justifiable they have the right to complain and protest. But I’m hardly convinced that it is true, given the ongoing instances of police brutality.

quote:

---

You're excusing shitty, petulant, childish and destructive behavior and trying to pass it off as legitimate protest

---

So you get to declare peaceful protest illegitimate and that justifies the use of violence to suppress it.

quote:

---

What's going on in Portland, OR is not a fucking protest. Its a goddamn riot that isn't just causing minor inconveniences, its literally destroying lives. It may have begun as a protest with an honorable message... but we're passed that point now.

---

And we get to see who really lumps everyone on the other side together. Funny how it’s illegitimate when you pretend I’m doing it but just fine when you do it.

quote:

---

That you don't see or don't want to see the distinction is your complicity in this cover up.

---

You’ve decided that they’re all guilty and deserve it - without looking at the evidence - and anyone who disagrees is covering it up.Thanks for illustrating the problem with the police in America.

quote:

---

Qualify what a peaceful protester is during the middle of an actual riot. If you’re there caught up in the melee then it’s your own damn faul

---

Who says that the use of tear gas is restricted to ‘actual riots? We know that the lower grades of tear gas were used on peaceful protestors in Washington when Trump wanted to go out to deliver a speech.

quote:

---

Even if half of the complaints were justifiable what you’re failing to see is that there is no right answer that’s going to make people suddenly stop asking for greater and greater demands. Nothing is ever enough.... that’s the problem. Maybe not for you, maybe your demands are quite reasonable and I hope that they are. But as I said the overwhelming majority of remaining protesters are agitators who don’t want an answer, don’t even know what it looks like in practical terms, and is basically seizing upon the opportunity.

---

My demands? How about more efforts to stop the police brutality.And your opinions of the demonstrators does not remove their right to peacefully demonstrate nor does it justify the intentional targeting of journalists, legal observers or people giving medical aid away from the violence.

quote:

---

This very Saturday multiple left wing extremist groups have vowed to bus in to different cities with the sole intention of causing riots and sowing discord.

---

That’s what you say.

quote:

---

That you whitewash all the shitty behavior gives away your motives and your rationale. Thanks for illustrating the most aberrant side of leftwing demagoguery.

---

But I don’r do that, do I? What you mean is that I refuse to join you in endorsing police thuggery.

quote:

---

And what does radical leftwing ideology promote? Reactionary and Radical right wing ideology. We can’t go down this path to destruction. Qui Bono from this division?

---

And too many police are on that side. Ever think about that?

quote:

---

I asked if you would qualify what a peaceful protester is during a legitimate riot.

---

And? I was saying that the police - or federal agents - shouldn’t be attacking obviously peaceful protestors. Please explain how your question fits into that.

quote:

---

You seem to be caught up on tear gas, as if its on par with Mustard Gas of WWI. Every US serviceman is required to be subjected to CS gas as part of bootcamp training. You know why? Because while causing extreme discomfort in the moment, it has no lasting effects. Are you wanting to ban the use of CS?

---

What I want is more restraint in it’s use. Which by the reports I’ve seen is obviously needed.

quote:

---

What would that effort look like in practical terms? We've all seen images of police brutality but perhaps what seems objectively reasonable to some may be objectively unreasonable to others. I'll tell you what it looks like per the Austin City Council. They want zero uses of force by the year 2023. Yeah, isn't the use of force kind of dependent on the actions of the other party?

---

I can make a few suggestions. Better training, especially in deescalating situations. Less militarisation. More firing of guilty officers, more checks on hires so they can’t just walk into another police job, more willingness of other officers to testify against them.

quote:

---

Nor am I suggesting that it should.

---

Well that’s rather odd, since I haven’t seen any sign of you acknowledging wrongdoing on the part of the police up to now.

quote:

---

What I am suggesting is that the majority of remaining protesters at this stage are either paid protesters or they are agitators and instigators. Because of Covid there's a whole lot of people out there with no money and nothing better to do. Some of you said it was rightwing propaganda that there was such a thing as "paid protesters." Its real. Its very real and its quite lucrative because their donors usually have deep pockets.

---

Even if that were true - and what I’ve seen makes it unlikely - they still have the right to peacefully protest. Physically attacking them is not the answer.

quote:

---

quote:

---

This very Saturday multiple left wing extremist groups have vowed to bus in to different cities with the sole intention of causing riots and sowing discord.

---

​

That’s what you say.

​

That's what I know.

​

Antifa mobilizes agitators for nationwide riots on Saturday | The Post Millennial

---

That’s what the headline says. It’s not what the quoted messages say (one mentions fighting which may be meant literally, but another announces a COVID-mindful picnic). And there’s very little mention of bussing people in. The vast majority just look like people calling for peaceful protests.The fact that your source is pretty far-right makes it’s editorialising rather suspect, too. WikipediaI wouldn’t claim to know something just because such a source said so.

quote:

---

I suppose we can continue to go in circles where you say police shouldn't attack obvious peaceful protesters (which I obviously agree)

---

What you wrote didn’t look like agreement, it looked like making up excuses to justify attacking obviously peaceful protestors. This is the first point where you’ve said you agree.

quote:

---

So lets try this: for non-peaceful protesters using force, is it acceptable for police to use commensurate force to effect an arrest?

---

Maybe. But that’s going to be difficult in the middle of a riot and even worse if there are innocent people caught up in it.

quote:

---

So give me an example of an acceptable use so that there's some kind of metric for when it should be allowed and when it shouldn't

---

Once the police are under sustained attack, or other people,present are being attacked. A few missiles aimed at police shouldn’t be sufficient. And certainly not for clearing peaceful protestors out of Trump’s way.

quote:

---

Nonsense. I have been critical of police numerous times on this thread and others similar to them, acknowledging failures when they arise. I am simply differentiating between what you make call inappropriate and I say is appropriate. There we would likely disagree on a few line items.

---

I was, of course, referring to this discussion. [quote]If it were true? It is true, despite the leftwing media's attempt to deny it. Its subterfuge, Paul. And you cavalier dismissal of its relevance is actually hilarious.

quote:

---

LOL, yeah, attack the source not the substance

---

Pointing out that their evidence does not support their claim IS addressing the substance.

quote:

---

That's literally what you just did!

---

No, it isn’t. I referred to the supposed evidence provided by your source. Are you going to claim that it all really means something other than what it says? That is MUST be read as supporting the claims of your source ?

quote:

---

I think we're done here, Paul. We're going around in circles and your inability to debate with a modicum of honesty and integrity is growing tiresome.

---

Well I guess you had to get out one last hypocritical lie.

quote:

---

Good luck to you and your fantasy world.

---

I will not wish you the same, since your fantasies are there to justify violence and repression.

And let’s just add. The protests in Portland last night were peaceful.Perhaps it was because the demonstrators weren’t attacked by federal agents.

quote:

---

Crazy peaceful.... it was basically a huge love-fest.

---

So one stabbing, no riot.

quote:

---

What a stupid argument!

---

Oh it’s quite sensible. Violence will trigger violence.

quote:

---

Why were federal agents even out there to begin with?

---

It really doesn’t matter. There’s no certainty of prediction here. You can’t know what would have happened the previous night if the Feds hadn’t opened up with the tear gas (according to a report I’ve seen the Feds were the ones to open the attack that night).

quote:

---

You have said a few times that haven't said anything about police misconduct, which I have. I have not once heard you disavow or even accept Antifa's role in this

---

I’ve been concentrating on those that were wrongfully attacked, while admitting that there were others there. Do you class Antifa (a label, not an organisation) among the former or the latter?Edited by PaulK, : No reason given.

The OregonianAnd they have some commitments from local government The Oregonian 28 JulyNever rely on the propaganda from the far-right.

quote:

---

What civil rights are you talking about? No one and I mean no one has any right to destroy or even try to destroy someone else's property. It makes no difference if it is a Federal property, or a local government's property because both belong to the taxpayers that paid for it.

---

For a start the Fourth Amendment right not to be arrested without adequate cause. Simply accusing the victims of crimes without adequate evidence as you are doing is not sufficient. In fact it’s evil.

quote:

---

If an officer approaches you and gives you an order and you do not comply he/she can arrest you

---

You may think you live in a police state but you don’t. Police authority is not unlimited. That can’t just give any orders they like and expect to be obeyed.

quote:

---

So if they have a suspicion you have done something they can arrest you and hold you for the duration that the particular state's laws allows.

---

Well I’m glad something I said got through, but you still haven’t noticed that in this case they did NOT have adequate grounds for suspicion. Or in fact have any real suspicion.

quote:

---

So how do you determine if the officer has a suspicion or not? If an officer sees someone throw a rock at a crowd he/she can arrest the person and charge them with assault with a deadly weapon.

---

In this case, because they said so.

quote:

---

How do you determine if it is a legal or illegal detention? Wouldn't that be up to the judge at the booking hearing?

---

There was no booking hearing. Are you suggesting that the police simply need to avoid that to get away with illegal detention? (The way you argue it’s quite possible you do).

quote:

---

It sure is not the place to do it at the scene of the arrest. Resisting arrest is a crime.

---

And there’s an example. You can certainly point out that the arrest is illegal right there. That’s not a crime even if some cops would treat it as one. And there are further options later, right up to filing a civil case.

quote:

---

At the time of this posting, other cities were ratcheted up, as ANTIFA commuted to different cities in which is to besiege. As of late, the violent attacks have increased and have not subsided since the Feds moved out

---

That’s an odd thing to say when the Feds moved to other cities.However this has nothing to do with my point that there were genuine protestors at Portland all the way through, and your assertions to the contrary were false. So I take your new allegations with a grain of salt.

quote:

---

Shifting the goalposts I see... You posted specifically about Portland and how wonderfully peaceful it is as soon as the Feds left.

---

I’m shifting the goalposts? YOU started talking about other cities:

quote:

---

You even laid all of it at their feet as if violent riots hadn't been going on BEFORE they arrived and I'm now showing you that the violence continues AFTER they left.

---

I suggested that they were contributing to the violence.And again, you ignore the central point that there were peaceful protestors in Portland all along.

quote:

---

Do you have anything specific in regards to your statement?

---

The arrest of Mark Pettibone referenced previously.

quote:

---

If its a lawful order they can.

---

I.e. there are restrictions on the orders they can give, just as I said.

quote:

---

A Probable Cause affidavit under oath is filed by a police officer. That affidavit is reviewed by the magistrate. If there is insufficient cause to hold a suspect, they are released. If there is sufficient reason that probable cause has been established then they remain in jail until they are bailed out or wait for their hearing.

---

And if no affidavit is filed?

quote:

---

LOL, that is a crime...

---

Saying that the arrest is illegal is a crime? Really? Your quote says nothing about that.

quote:

---

And unless you want to get beat up and arrested I would suggest that you fight your battles in the courtroom, not on the street.

---

At least we know who the violent thugs are now. If you’ll beat up people for simply saying things you don’t like that proves it.

[quote]Where does the Fourth Amendment say anything about being arrested? [quote]It says that the citizens should be secure in their persons against unreasonable seizures.

quote:

---

They are limited by the laws that have been passed by our Congress and local governments.

​

They are not limited by what the limitation you think should be.

---

Don’t forget that there is a huge body of case law as well as the statutes. And the fact that you have trouble understanding 18th Century law doesn’t get them off the hook.

quote:

---

I would agree that in your opinion they did not have adequate grounds. But that does not limit their abilities to determine if a person is in violation of a law. The officer makes an arrest and the courts are there to make the decision of guilt or innocence through a jury.

---

Since we know that the officers admitted that they didn’t have grounds for an arrest it isn’t just my opinion.

quote:

---

So they did an interview and an agreement was made that the person or persons would not be arrested. That does not mean they were not guilty of committing a crime

---

Since Mark Pettibone wasn’t suspected of a crime when taken into custody or interviewed about anything that he had done or supposedly done this is irrelevant. But the idea that the illegality should be handled at the booking hearing is absurd when there was no booking or hearing.

quote:

---

You and I have very different ideas of where your rights end and my rights begin.

---

Indeed. You think you can take rights away be making up excuses.

quote:

---

You can walk around swinging your fists in the air all you want too. But when your swinging your fists in the air becomes a threat to me, my health, and well being your rights have ended and my rights have begun and I am at liberty to take whatever action that is necessary to insure my health and well being.

---

By which you mean you can make false accusations and expect the police to act on them. Again we are talking about the kidnap of a man who was not suspected of any crime.

quote:

---

So you want to let the rioters destroy private property, burn cars and buildings without any consequences for their action. I on the other hand think everyone should be arrested, jailed, then make restitution to the injured parties. There are people whose lives and lively hood have been destroyed by these so called peaceful protesters.

---

By which you mean that you want actual peaceful protestors arrested on false charges.

quote:

---

You say well there are only a few bad apples. When the laws are broken any person that is a peaceful protestor will leave and if they do not they become just as guilty as the person throwing the missile or firebomb and should be treated accordingly.

---

You assume that leaving will be easy. It may not even be possBible.

quote:

---

I am going to assume you did not study Civics in school rather that to think you can not understand what is written down in black and white.

---

As a matter of fact that isn’t taught as a subject over here.Nevertheless saying that an arrest is illegal would seem to be protected by the First Amendment and does not seem to qualify as resisting arrest by any reasonable standard. Despite what you say.And if it is, too bad for your country.