Six U.S. mayors urge Congress to block Trump federal deployment

[Cryingdick]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

 

 

As far as I'm aware, no city was actually burnt down.

 

Tell that to the people living in Minneapolis. That's the problem. Most the comments on this site are from people overseas who are completely unaware of what is happening. 

 

Meanwhile on local sites like city data you hear from people in the locations being discussed and its alarming. 

 

 

Edited July 28, 2020 by Cryingdick

[nattaya09]

Congress can't force the Executive Branch to discontinue enforcing federal law and protecting federal assets.  

[scammed]

it strikes me as a collaboration between the democrats and the blm,

the blm instills fear and unhappiness through the riots in the US public and that benefit

whomever arent president,

this is why democrats dont want a return to law and order, but instead are actively

preventing law enforcement to act

[simple1]

2 hours ago, scammed said:

it strikes me as a collaboration between the democrats and the blm,

the blm instills fear and unhappiness through the riots in the US public and that benefit

whomever arent president,

this is why democrats dont want a return to law and order, but instead are actively

preventing law enforcement to act

 

 

 

 

Please show here Democrats are 'actively preventing law enforcement to act". Democrat city administrators don't agree with trump administration's use of federal forces, considered counterproductive, not that they trying to actually prevent law enforcement.

[simple1]

8 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Tell that to the people living in Minneapolis. That's the problem. Most the comments on this site are from people overseas who are completely unaware of what is happening. 

 

Meanwhile on local sites like city data you hear from people in the locations being discussed and its alarming. 

 

 

A report dated early June below. Has any credible source/s from local law enforcement identified the ongoing participants causing the damage? Were they criminals or politically motivated by the likes of Antifa or?

 

The city of Minneapolis says the looting and property damage that following the death of George Floyd in police custody has caused least $55 million in destruction so far.

 

https://apnews.com/d45e7d7ecc7c9d7dffa1fbec960846fb#:~:text=MINNEAPOLIS (AP) — The city,million in destruction so far.

[scammed]

20 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Please show here Democrats are 'actively preventing law enforcement to act". Democrat city administrators don't agree with trump administration's use of federal forces, considered counterproductive, not that they trying to actually prevent law enforcement.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/defund-police-protests-democrats.html

Edited July 28, 2020 by scammed

[simple1]

59 minutes ago, scammed said:

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/26/us/politics/defund-police-protests-democrats.html

The link has a paywall block. I assume they are talking to redirecting more money toward social services, education and mental health agencies as police often are required take on the roles due to lack of resources i.e. insufficient funding for the responsible agencies, not actually defunding policing activity. if there are a few democrats who have an aggressive agenda to actually defund policing core activities it will never get enacted - in reality a nonsensical stance to gain a bit of attention.

 

EDIT:

 

Can now access your link. In summary concerning Dems political platform on law enforcement>>>

 

 In the end, though, the group’s recommendations to the Biden campaign and the D.N.C.’s platform committee will not include reducing money for law enforcement, according to people familiar with its plans.

Edited July 29, 2020 by simple1

[scammed]

8 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The link has a paywall block. I assume they are talking to redirecting more money toward social services, education and mental health agencies as police often are required take on the roles due to lack of resources i.e. insufficient funding for the responsible agencies, not actually defunding policing activity. if there are a few democrats who have an aggressive agenda to actually defund policing core activities it will never get enacted - in reality a nonsensical stance to gain a bit of attention.

acording to the article, its not 'a few' but near consensus,

rumors has it 97% of democrats are in unanimous sensus, the debate is over

 

nterviews with superdelegates and members of a Biden-Sanders task force found near-unanimous sentiment for redirecting money away from policing, with positions beyond what Joseph R. Biden Jr. has proposed.

[TopDeadSenter]

 

10 minutes ago, simple1 said:

I assume they are talking to redirecting more money toward social services, education and mental health agencies as police often are required take on the roles due to lack of resources i.e. insufficient funding for the responsible agencies, not actually defunding policing activity.

Your assumption is wrong. Scammed is spot on. Here is a brief snippet, funny it is not behind a paywall for me.

 

"I’ve been advocating the abolition of the police for years. Regardless of your view on police power — whether you want to get rid of the police or simply to make them less violent — here’s an immediate demand we can all make: Cut the number of police in half and cut their budget in half. Fewer police officers equals fewer opportunities for them to brutalize and kill people. "

 

 

[simple1]

1 minute ago, TopDeadSenter said:

 

Your assumption is wrong. Scammed is spot on. Here is a brief snippet, funny it is not behind a paywall for me.

 

"I’ve been advocating the abolition of the police for years. Regardless of your view on police power — whether you want to get rid of the police or simply to make them less violent — here’s an immediate demand we can all make: Cut the number of police in half and cut their budget in half. Fewer police officers equals fewer opportunities for them to brutalize and kill people. "

 

 

Your post above represents a minority POV, not the Dems actual law enforcement policy platform for the election as below. if it's OK to misrepresent actual Dems policy as a matter of opinion, as does trump, so be it, but to repeat...

 

In the end, though, the group’s recommendations to the Biden campaign and the D.N.C.’s platform committee will not include reducing money for law enforcement, according to people familiar with its plans.

[simple1]

7 minutes ago, TopDeadSenter said:

<SNIP> funny it is not behind a paywall for me <SNIP>

refer my post #37

[brianp0803]

Taking money from the police department and giving it to all the social programs in the black community for the people that aren’t working will possibly reduce the number of deaths from policeman killing potentially violent black criminals.
 

But the side effect may be a huge escalation of black on black killing because the police will not have the resources to protect, defend, and prosecute violent offenders. 
But there might be increase in resources, added to the already available unused resources, to improve their education and job skills.

But I think they are saying they want reparations (free money), more than increased in programs aimed at improving their education and work skills.

[Morch]

20 hours ago, Cryingdick said:

 

Tell that to the people living in Minneapolis. That's the problem. Most the comments on this site are from people overseas who are completely unaware of what is happening. 

 

Meanwhile on local sites like city data you hear from people in the locations being discussed and its alarming. 

 

 

 

How many buildings were burnt down? How many neighborhoods? How many casualties? I don't argue that there weren't fires, and never posted anything supporting such violence. My comment was addressing the usual hyperbole, such as "cities burning". There's that gap between what you try to paint and reality.

 

This is an overseas based forum, and complaints such as you aired are not usually welcome. There is no requirement of being in the country discussed at the time of commenting, and obviously, you do not have such issues with "overseas" posters aligned with your point of view.

 

Unless you missed it, websites do not generally require you to be in country in order to access them.

 

You cannot back up your post, hence the deflections and irrelevant complaint.

 

 

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/28/2020 at 5:59 PM, stevenl said:

According to the local authorities, who I would trust a lot more than Trump cs and anonymous tvf posters, the feds have done the opposite, only made dying down protests lively again.

In a way I hope they succeed in banning federal police and seeing their cities burn. While it would be tragic for the citizens of those cities, it would prove what happens when law and order is abandoned for political reasons and would focus the minds of the voters on what they want in the future.

 

Although that probably won't happen, I will not be surprised if the working middle class abandons such cities and move to states that do enforce law and order.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 7/29/2020 at 12:29 PM, simple1 said:

Your post above represents a minority POV, not the Dems actual law enforcement policy platform for the election as below. if it's OK to misrepresent actual Dems policy as a matter of opinion, as does trump, so be it, but to repeat...

 

In the end, though, the group’s recommendations to the Biden campaign and the D.N.C.’s platform committee will not include reducing money for law enforcement, according to people familiar with its plans.

Irrelevant if the city authorities prevent the police from enforcing law and order ( or denying them non lethal means of protecting themselves ) for political reasons, as has apparently happened in some cases.

[simple1]

9 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Irrelevant if the city authorities prevent the police from enforcing law and order ( or denying them non lethal means of protecting themselves ) for political reasons, as has apparently happened in some cases.

 

Portland had an experiment with self-policing by protesters in a limited area, which failed due to criminal elements which required police intervention. Another way of looking at the situation is an experiment with de-escalation tactic. Personally, I believe it is hyperbole to claim 'city authorities prevent the police from enforcing law and order". Unfortunately, it is proven that so called non-lethal weapons do sometimes cause serious injury or death, it does appear police require more stringent training and policies as to when to authorise their use. e.g. don't shoot reporters or others in the head with a 'non-lethal' weapon.

[Morch]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

In a way I hope they succeed in banning federal police and seeing their cities burn. While it would be tragic for the citizens of those cities, it would prove what happens when law and order is abandoned for political reasons and would focus the minds of the voters on what they want in the future.

 

Although that probably won't happen, I will not be surprised if the working middle class abandons such cities and move to states that do enforce law and order.

 

Essentially, you're hoping for cities to burn and people you've never known or met to suffer, so that it would, maybe, score a political point. Nothing to do with "law and order".

 

 

[EVENKEEL]

3 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Essentially, you're hoping for cities to burn and people you've never known or met to suffer, so that it would, maybe, score a political point. Nothing to do with "law and order".

 

 

At least you're starting to acknowledge that cities are burning, good on you.

[stevenl]

36 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

At least you're starting to acknowledge that cities are burning, good on you.

It was a reply to a post wishing for cities to burn.

So no, your conclusion is totally wrong.

[Morch]

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

At least you're starting to acknowledge that cities are burning, good on you.

 

No. There are fires, which wasn't denied. Whole cities burning? Only in Trump supporters scaremongering fantasies. Regardless, rather doubt you missed the context in which the post was made - replying to a comment as to what may happen.

[johnnybangkok]

1 hour ago, EVENKEEL said:

At least you're starting to acknowledge that cities are burning, good on you.

Cities are not burning. Stop your transparant fear mongering.

For example, the trouble in Portland is confined to a 2 city block radius   https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/31/us/portland-protests-map-photos.html and the protest usually start out peaceful until the hooligan element takes over at night. The point being though is the Portland major and 5 other majors are all saying the same thing; yes there has been damage and a hooligan element BUT we had it under control and all Trump is doing is escalating what was a dying protest.

Obviously the more sycophantic of you Trump fans are going to jump on this as 'society going to hell' and 'cities are burning' but the reality is that in a last ditched attempt to save his re-election, Trump is doubling down on the BLM protestors and trying desperately to incite as much trouble as he can.

It's a pathetic attempt by a dying president to yet again appeal to a dwindling base, easily fooled by right wing media into thinking that the minority of protestors represent the majority of those protesting. They don't and never will but just you go on with your exagerations and hyperbole to see if it will still fit into your already confirmed bias.  

[EVENKEEL]

4 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

Cities are not burning. Stop your transparant fear mongering.

For example, the trouble in Portland is confined to a 2 city block radius   https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/31/us/portland-protests-map-photos.html and the protest usually start out peaceful until the hooligan element takes over at night. The point being though is the Portland major and 5 other majors are all saying the same thing; yes there has been damage and a hooligan element BUT we had it under control and all Trump is doing is escalating what was a dying protest.

Obviously the more sycophantic of you Trump fans are going to jump on this as 'society going to hell' and 'cities are burning' but the reality is that in a last ditched attempt to save his re-election, Trump is doubling down on the BLM protestors and trying desperately to incite as much trouble as he can.

It's a pathetic attempt by a dying president to yet again appeal to a dwindling base, easily fooled by right wing media into thinking that the minority of protestors represent the majority of those protesting. They don't and never will but just you go on with your exagerations and hyperbole to see if it will still fit into your already confirmed bias.  

Two city blocks burning ins't "under control" 

 

Nothing to see here folks, only 2 blocks burning.....we've got it under control. Hilarious......

[johnnybangkok]

4 minutes ago, EVENKEEL said:

Two city blocks burning ins't "under control" 

 

Nothing to see here folks, only 2 blocks burning.....we've got it under control. Hilarious......

And two city blocks are not burning either. So far all thats burned is a police union building and the inner fence of the courthouse - not the actual courthouse itself. The majority of fires have been set in dumpsters.

These are not difficult facts to find out. Google is your friend. 

[Scott]

Off-topic posts and replies removed.  It's a discussion forum.  Memes are not generally a part of a discussion.

[simple1]

9 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

Two city blocks burning ins't "under control" 

 

Nothing to see here folks, only 2 blocks burning.....we've got it under control. Hilarious......

You've gone from 'cities are burning' to "Two city blocks burning ins't "under control" - Portland, which is still incorrect. Comes across you are just making stuff up which begs the question, why do you indulge in this behaviour as it is not contributing to understanding of events.

[GroveHillWanderer]

So if the violence was only being caused by the protestors, I wonder why it is that now the federal troops have withdrawn, calm has returned to the streets of Portland?

 

Calm returns to Portland as federal troops withdraw

Edited August 2, 2020 by GroveHillWanderer

[johnnybangkok]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

You've gone from 'cities are burning' to "Two city blocks burning ins't "under control" - Portland, which is still incorrect. Comes across you are just making stuff up which begs the question, why do you indulge in this behaviour as it is not contributing to understanding of events.

I'll tell you why. The whole Trump movement relies on fear. Fear of Mexicans. Fear of Muslims. Fear of blacks. Fear of cities burning. Fear of goddam liberals. Fear of their own shadow.

It's negative politics at it's finest and the oldest trick in the political book; get the working man to blame the immigrants/blacks/muslims for all the problems in their life even though the country is run by billionaires and corporations. Yet people can't see it or are simply too blind to want to see it. They just continue to fight among themselves for the scraps, blaming other people who in turn are fighting for even fewer scraps, meanwhile the billionaires and corporations sit back and laugh about how much they are still getting away with it and how no one is blaming them.

It's a helluva con that Trump supporters keep falling for time and time again.

Edited August 2, 2020 by johnnybangkok

[EVENKEEL]

3 hours ago, johnnybangkok said:

I'll tell you why. The whole Trump movement relies on fear. Fear of Mexicans. Fear of Muslims. Fear of blacks. Fear of cities burning. Fear of goddam liberals. Fear of their own shadow.

It's negative politics at it's finest and the oldest trick in the political book; get the working man to blame the immigrants/blacks/muslims for all the problems in their life even though the country is run by billionaires and corporations. Yet people can't see it or are simply too blind to want to see it. They just continue to fight among themselves for the scraps, blaming other people who in turn are fighting for even fewer scraps, meanwhile the billionaires and corporations sit back and laugh about how much they are still getting away with it and how no one is blaming them.

It's a helluva con that Trump supporters keep falling for time and time again.

 

 

https://www.artemis.bm/news/riots-could-turn-2020-into-a-capital-event-pcs-designates-riots-as-a-catastrophe/Update, Jun 3rd: 

 

The riots have now been designated as a catastrophe in more than 20 U.S. states by PCS, 

 

Just take a second to ponder that info, Nothing to see here folks, it's just Trump making stuff up again. The dems are pathetic.

[simple1]

2 hours ago, EVENKEEL said:

 

 

https://www.artemis.bm/news/riots-could-turn-2020-into-a-capital-event-pcs-designates-riots-as-a-catastrophe/Update, Jun 3rd: 

 

The riots have now been designated as a catastrophe in more than 20 U.S. states by PCS, 

 

Just take a second to ponder that info, Nothing to see here folks, it's just Trump making stuff up again. The dems are pathetic.

To put it in perspective, a PCS “catastrophe” level event is damage in excess of $25 million insurance cost. There have been a number of States experiencing damage and property theft so will have to wait and see the total cost to the insurance industry. 

 

The URL link has some interesting info, including how the insurance industry will react with premium increases, especially for the large national retailers. A quote from the article...

 

The highest losses from any civil disorder in the United States were associated with riots that took place after a jury acquitted police officers who were videotaped while beating Rodney King in 1992. PCS said insured losses from that event reached $775 million, or about $1.4 billion in 2020 dollars, according to the Insurance Information Institute.

 

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2020/07/08/574728.htm

[thaibeachlovers]

On 8/1/2020 at 4:15 PM, Morch said:

 

Essentially, you're hoping for cities to burn and people you've never known or met to suffer, so that it would, maybe, score a political point. Nothing to do with "law and order".

 

 

Still with the personal attacks I see.

 

Did you miss "In a way"? I suppose you did, but it was at the beginning of my post.