• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W: 406]Report: Federal officers using unmarked cars to pull protesters off streets

Top Cat said:
I don't agree with your interpretation of his sentiment. But assume for a minute that you are right. Do you actually believe he speaks for all left of center people? Because you are way off base there. I promise you I am certainly not in favor of violence or looting.
Click to expand...

If you go back and re-read my last comment, you'd see that I never said he speaks for all left-of-center people, nor did I suggest that you are all in favor of rioting and looting.

But his comments do seem to give a pass to rioting, looting and massive property damage because it's for a good cause.

Unitedwestand13 said:
Damage can be repaired and rebuilt.

What the protesters want is police to reform itself and make sure George Floyd’s death was not in vain.
Click to expand...
 
braindrain said:
What kind of nonsensical ramblings is this.

Who said they are accountable to know one. Oh thats right no one

But I guess if all we are doing is making things up then fine.


You want the rioters to be utterly unaccountable to the citizenry.

They could rape anyone to death. Execute someone at will.

We used to be about law and order and accountability.

What happened to you guys?


And have you figured out yet that no one is talking about soldiers.

And I noticed you didnt try and defend your claim of racism. Not to surprising. It was pretty dumb.
Click to expand...

So one of these clowns runs over your kid.

What do you do about it?

How is he held accountable?
 
braindrain said:
You claimed you knew what Trump ordered those federal LE agencies to do. If you didn't want to be called on it you shouldn't have made that claim. Not my fault you can't back up your crap.

And yes you are grasping at straws. Federal LE use plain clothes and unmarked cars all the time. Proving just what nonsense your post was.
Click to expand...

Welp these guys were not plain clothed at all. They were uniformed but purposely omitted all identification except the word police.

And dude calm your panties Trump admitted sending them himself and we saw what they did. And Trump has as of yet denounced what they did. So given that Im not stupid I can figure it out pretty obviously what happened. In other words even an idiot like me understood why trump did what he did. But hey go ahead try to debate me lol.
 
braindrain said:
So you can't back up your claims and just admit you made it up.

Guess what the person making up claims but is a able to back them up is tte one who sucks at debating.
Click to expand...

Didnt make anything up just shared my observations. Or are you here trying to deny that our President sent troops to **** with US citizens?


I may suck at debating, but I am not wrong on this and I cannot help to notice that your lame attempt at a gotcha, failed like Trump does all the time. Get back to me when you understand that what happened is not the American way and never has been. Go ahead go look up the "American Way". Bet you do not find anything about secret police in it except to explain why Americans have always been sternly ready to bear arms against such behavior.
 
braindrain said:
Can you pint to where in the constitution it allows people to riot and loot and be free from facing consequences from those actions.

Because if you can't then you have no point.

I think we both know the answer.

But it's good to see you exposing just how little you actually know. Federal law enforcement do a lot more then defend the country. You realize this includes agencies like the FBI DEA and DHS. Right. No one is talking about soldiers. Please try and keep up. Otherwise you are just embarrassing yourself.

And how exactly is it racism when the majority of the protesters are white. But I get it. You have nothing else so might as well as try and play the racism card. How unsurprising.
Click to expand...

Wow! What a false argument. A total non sequester.

Not only does the Constitution NOT delegated public law enforcement to the Federal government, no court has either.

And they certainly don’t show up unannounced, .uninvited, and behave like specter police in a military dictatorship.

That is exactly what this is. You’re promoting it.
 
KevinKohler said:
not to onlookers, no, but the detainee. If there is reasonable suspicion, the officer is required to answer what that is. The detainee was also not told their Miranda rights. To which you'll respond, they weren't arrested.

To which I'll respond, yeah, the dude was just grabbed off the street for no apparent reason and carted off somewhere. Officers are also legally required to show identification when asked.

Lots of stuffxwrong here.
Click to expand...

So we agree, they have no obligation to explain anything to onlookers. You can continue your other argument with yourself.


Sent from my iPhone XX Turbo using Tapacrap
 
Bodecea said:
Why would Russia torpedo their own guy?
Click to expand...

Seems “their own guy” was Obama. He’s the one that did nothing about the tampering. They’ll take him over Trump and his sanctions any day.


Sent from my iPhone XX Turbo using Tapacrap
 
beerftw said:
Can you prove they were enforcing local laws against graffiti, also there are many federal laws which cover rioting and destruction of property and assault, so federal officers have many laws on their side doing such, historically states are supposed to enforce such laws as it is a waste of federal resources to do the same job local police should be doin, but in oregon and other places, they are allowing criminals to riot loot and assault unhindered and their biggest issue seems to be not with lawbreakers but other agencies stepping in when the local law was told to step down.
Click to expand...
Let me just understand your position. You think that Trump sending men in green military fatigues with no clear agency affiliation or identification grabbing (kidnapping) anti-racist protesters and tossing them in unmarked SUV's and shooting other people with rubber bullets who were merely standing on the street, is just fine.

This happens in dictatorships and sounds a lot like what happened in the Nazi Germany regime. Dissenters were hauled off for no legitimate reason. The US spent a lot of money and lives defeating Fascism in Europe in WWII. If these protesters are against Fascism, then count me in.
 
Last edited:
Anthony60 said:
So we agree, they {the federal government} have no obligation to explain anything to onlookers. You can continue your other argument with yourself.
Click to expand...
Coming from someone who sides with the people who think government requiring citizens to wear masks is totalitarianism and tyranny, you seem rather soft on constitutional liberties when you sanction the federal government hailing people away in unmarked SUVs without the “obligation” to say why they are doing it.

Why don’t you just be honest with us. You think that actions you would have howled at the moon had it been done by a Democrat is just fine if Trump, your messiah, does it.
 
Top Cat said:
Oh you mean other than DHS verifying it as true? Do you ever tire apologizing for Trump? I mean seriously. It must be taxing. Fake Noos my ass.
Click to expand...

... So by "unmarked cars and wearing no insignia" you really meant "marked cards and wearing insignia"? :roll:
 
What if...? said:
So one of these clowns runs over your kid.

What do you do about it?

How is he held accountable?
Click to expand...
So one of these clowns protesting pushes your kid down he busts his skull.

How is he held accountable

What do you do about it.

And you would hold the police accountable the say way you do any other day.


Have you figured out yet that we are not talking about soldiers.

And I noticed you still haven't tried to explain the race card you tried to play. Rather obvious you were just throwing crap out hopping it would stick.
 
Last edited:
FreedomFromAll said:
Welp these guys were not plain clothed at all. They were uniformed but purposely omitted all identification except the word police.

And dude calm your panties Trump admitted sending them himself and we saw what they did. And Trump has as of yet denounced what they did. So given that Im not stupid I can figure it out pretty obviously what happened. In other words even an idiot like me understood why trump did what he did. But hey go ahead try to debate me lol.
Click to expand...


So in your mind plain clothes in unmarked cars is fine but in uniforms with the words police on it is somehow wrong. Do you actually think this stuff through our just type of what ever pops in your head.

No like I said you are just making crap up and trying to pass it off as fact.

The president ordering LE to an area is not the same as the president telling those LE how to go about their job.

Unless you think when Obama ordered troops into Syria that he also ordered them to kill the civilians that have been killed over there. I mean according to you if the president send people to an area he has then told them how to do everything.
 
FreedomFromAll said:
Didnt make anything up just shared my observations. Or are you here trying to deny that our President sent troops to **** with US citizens?


I may suck at debating, but I am not wrong on this and I cannot help to notice that your lame attempt at a gotcha, failed like Trump does all the time. Get back to me when you understand that what happened is not the American way and never has been. Go ahead go look up the "American Way". Bet you do not find anything about secret police in it except to explain why Americans have always been sternly ready to bear arms against such behavior.
Click to expand...
No you made it up and tried to act like it's fact. You are even still doing it.

But we do agree on one thing. You suck at debating.
 
TomFitz said:
Wow! What a false argument. A total non sequester.

Not only does the Constitution NOT delegated public law enforcement to the Federal government, no court has either.

And they certainly don’t show up unannounced, .uninvited, and behave like specter police in a military dictatorship.

That is exactly what this is. You’re promoting it.
Click to expand...

The fact that federal law enforcement is authorized to enforce federal law makes all your crying nothing other then the scream of a pouting child.
 
Top Cat said:
Oh look squirrel!
Click to expand...

Literally the opposite.

I am am responding to your original false claim. You appear to be the one who is having trouble focusing. :lol:

I guess I could take your response as you shouting squirrel, hoping to change the subject. :lamo
 
MTAtech said:
Coming from someone who sides with the people who think government requiring citizens to wear masks is totalitarianism and tyranny, you seem rather soft on constitutional liberties when you sanction the federal government hailing people away in unmarked SUVs without the “obligation” to say why they are doing it.

Why don’t you just be honest with us. You think that actions you would have howled at the moon had it been done by a Democrat is just fine if Trump, your messiah, does it.
Click to expand...

You said I side with “people who think government requiring them to wear masks is totalitarianism and tyranny”. What is that based on? Do you have a quote? Or is it the standard liberal tactic to mislead people, such as “Hitler says ice cream is good, so you are siding with Hitler” type of thing.


Sent from my iPhone XX Turbo using Tapacrap
 
KevinKohler said:
They're grabbing people with no explanation and detaining them. No warrant, no Miranda rights, nothing.

Explain how that ISNT like the Gestapo?
Click to expand...

They are allowed to detain people.

What do you mean that they are "grabbing people"? Makes it sound like the Invasion of the Body Snatchers or something. Is that what you are going for? In other words, what is different about it from any other time someone is taken into custody?

I mean, they sent boats and SWAT teams, weapons drawn to take in Roger Stone, a person that had zero potential for violence/resistance. So, that would be the level, or higher, of force they could use against people with a very high chance to be violent.
 
Questerr said:
In case you didn’t both to read any of the stories, these aren’t local police. They are Federal cops disappearing people off the street.
Click to expand...

So, they are not just being taken in, they are "disappearing"??? Into thin air? Please explain the difference.
 
braindrain said:
The fact that federal law enforcement is authorized to enforce federal law makes all your crying nothing other then the scream of a pouting child.
Click to expand...

Anthony60 said:
They are allowed to detain people.

.
Click to expand...


Well, the Oregon AG thinks the feds had no probable cause.

Pamplin Media Group - Oregon AG sues feds over arrests of Portland protesters

“Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum will take the feds to court — alleging that law enforcement officers working for several national agencies arrested local demonstrators without probable cause.”
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom