Trump outrage of the day

[Travis]

Laws exist for libel and slander.  People can't just make up nasty stuff without repercussions.

One would think so, as that's a reasonable position.

New York Times Company v. Sullivan set the bar very high, however, for comments about public figures: "When a statement concerns a public figure, the Court held, it is not enough to show that it is false for the press to be liable for libel. Instead, the target of the statement must show that it was made with knowledge of or reckless disregard for its falsity."

In practice, it has been very difficult to prove "reckless disregard for its falsity" regardless of who has said what about whom, as long as "whom" is a public figure.

That Nick Sandmann was not a public figure may have made the Post leery of a trial, although it's also possible that suit was settled for very low sum.

Lies as a form of entertainment have some protections.  Of course this "entertainment" disclaimer is only used after the lawsuit, not at the time of airing/publication.

[nereo]

Laws exist for libel and slander.  People can't just make up nasty stuff without repercussions.

This is true.  Both the Canadian and US legal systems are underpinned by centuries of British Common Law. Libel (untrue written statements) and slander (verbal) laws protects against things which are demonstrably untrue (i.e. objective or quantitative statements refuted by facts), but the individual or group(s) alleging slander must file the lawsuit, and they have to show harm, and they must prove the defendant knew what was being said was untrue (i.e ‘duty - breach - cause - harm’).

There’s also a legal concept called “puffery” - used extensively in advertising And politics, which allows even extreme subjective statements.  This is why products can be marketed as “the greatest ____ on the market” or an opponent can be derided as wanting to “destroy America”.  It’s an opinion and subjective, so legally it isn’t slander, no matter how contrary it is to available facts. 

In the US the FCC (Federal Communication Commission) can regulate what is said over broadcast television and radio, but they lack any jurisdiction over the internet (including Twitter, FB etc).  It also has no jurisdiction over print-media.  In short, federal regulation hasn’t caught up to modern platforms of speech, and using the legal system is tedious, expensive and limited to victims.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Laws exist for libel and slander.  People can't just make up nasty stuff without repercussions.

And yet they do, every day of the year. I mean, hell, weapons of mass destruction!

[RetiredAt63]

Laws exist for libel and slander.  People can't just make up nasty stuff without repercussions.

And yet they do, every day of the year. I mean, hell, weapons of mass destruction!

True, I seem to have misplaced my cynicism. Must find it, where did I put it?

[Kris]

Trump will not be paying his respects to John Lewis.

https://www.axios.com/trump-john-lewis-rotunda-29626875-bd8b-4959-82d9-e01f47d7219c.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100&fbclid=IwAR0AKTwBE9QwcO1R19v6f_Dxb_-OQqwA4omC7VTg2g4VM0yybeweWAV78t8

To be honest, I'm sure there are a lot of civil rights people and BIPOC who are happy about this. But my God, this is where we are. When an American president is so beholden to a base that hates civil rights and so despised by people of color that he refuses to pay his respects to such a great man. It's just horrific.

[Glenstache]

Trump will not be paying his respects to John Lewis.

https://www.axios.com/trump-john-lewis-rotunda-29626875-bd8b-4959-82d9-e01f47d7219c.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100&fbclid=IwAR0AKTwBE9QwcO1R19v6f_Dxb_-OQqwA4omC7VTg2g4VM0yybeweWAV78t8

To be honest, I'm sure there are a lot of civil rights people and BIPOC who are happy about this. But my God, this is where we are. When an American president is so beholden to a base that hates civil rights and so despised by people of color that he refuses to pay his respects to such a great man. It's just horrific.

Shall we put down bets on if it conflicted with a tee time?

[talltexan]

Trump is bound to attract criticism no matter how he spends his time.

The scene around Congressman Lewis is probably more solemn without the President, however. I think everyone is happier this way.

[AnnaGrowsAMustache]

Laws exist for libel and slander.  People can't just make up nasty stuff without repercussions.

And yet they do, every day of the year. I mean, hell, weapons of mass destruction!

True, I seem to have misplaced my cynicism. Must find it, where did I put it?

I find you can get an endless supply of it by reading the Fox news site.

[RetiredAt63]

Laws exist for libel and slander.  People can't just make up nasty stuff without repercussions.

And yet they do, every day of the year. I mean, hell, weapons of mass destruction!

True, I seem to have misplaced my cynicism. Must find it, where did I put it?

I find you can get an endless supply of it by reading the Fox news site.

There are limits.  I'm sure I've just misplaced it.

[John Galt incarnate!]

This is true.  Both the Canadian and US legal systems are underpinned by centuries of British Common Law. Libel (untrue written statements) and slander (verbal) laws protects against things which are demonstrably untrue (i.e. objective or quantitative statements refuted by facts), but the individual or group(s) alleging slander must file the lawsuit, and they have to show harm, and they must prove the defendant knew what was being said was untrue (i.e ‘duty - breach - cause - harm’).

A politician is the quintessential public figure.

The First Amendment's guarantee of free speech is at its maximum when  political speech is aimed at politicians and public officers.

So much so that the First Amendment's Freedom of  Speech Clause protects  mendacious political candidates who lie about other political candidates.

The Free Speech Clause also protects unrelenting vituperation, exaggerative vilification, and venomous denouncement of politicians and public officers.

"Politics ain't beanbag."









In Rickert v. Washington (2007), the Washington Supreme Court struck down  a state law that punished candidates for political office who knowingly made "a false statement of material fact about a candidate for public office."

The Court found that “The notion that the government, rather than the people, may be the final arbiter of truth in political debate is fundamentally at odds with the First Amendment" and that  the law  "naively assumes that the government is capable of correctly and consistently negotiating the thin line between fact and opinion in political speech."

[talltexan]

Ah, yes, an early victory for the Roberts Court

[OtherJen]

So much for "masks are patriotic."

Facebook deleted a viral video full of false coronavirus claims. Then Trump shared it on Twitter.

Trump shared the video — which claims that face masks and lockdowns are not needed to stop the disease — as he shared 14 tweets over a half-hour span defending the use of hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug that the president has repeatedly promoted, and attacking Anthony S. Fauci, the nation’s top infectious-diseases expert.

[talltexan]

you can predict what he does by assuming lack of discipline. every time.

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

This weekend, Sinclair Broadcast Group is going to broadcast in local stations across the country a conspiracy theory that Dr. Fauci created the coronavirus.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/07/24/media/sinclair-fauci-conspiracy-bolling/index.html

This is so fucking disgusting that I'm at a loss for words.

WOW!
The Chinese must have remarkable face changing technology to make the creator of the China Virus look like that!

I know that the US is a proponent of free speech even when it's to the detriment of society . . . but that is ridiculous.  Blatant and provable lying should not be allowable in television news broadcasts.

I do wonder if this could be pursued for slander. You comment as this being a specific US problem with our emphasis on free speech, but this, making the logical assumption that it provides 0 proof or easily disprovable "proof," it is actually against the law, right? If so, how would other countries handle it differently? The underlying implication (I believe) from what you said is that in other countries, it wouldn't even be aired. Is this the case, and if so, when would it be stopped?

Under Canadian laws, limiting freedom of expression is permissible if the limit is "reasonable and can be justified in a free and democratic society".  Limiting blatant lies concerning the person in charge of providing information about an ongoing pandemic would seem to fit there.

Right, I mean, I have no doubt that the bar is probably higher than Canada for example for people to prove slander in the US given our emphasis on free speech. What I am wondering, though, is would this truly be banned pre-emptively in many(any) countries? Or is the line of reasoning that with the more likely chances of getting in actual trouble that they would be more likely to self-censure?

[Norioch]

Lawsuit alleges Trump campaign, fundraising committee shielded millions in payments

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lawsuit-alleges-trump-campaign-fundraising-committee-shielded-millions-in-payments/2020/07/28/2a9a5fd0-d03a-11ea-8d32-1ebf4e9d8e0d_story.html

[talltexan]

Because of course they did.

[nereo]

Because of course they did.

You’ve seemed even more cynical as of late. Fatigue?

[gentmach]

Here we go. Chicago, Kansas City, and Albuquerque (or at least those are the ones advertised).

BBCNews: Trump to send 'surge' of federal agents to US cities

Election timing and city selection aside (and assuming that this really is related to "real crime" and not to protests) to send federal law enforcement man power and resources to assist local law enforcement where crime is a big problem seems like generally a good thing?

(I'm not american, so I don't really know how these things are normally handled and what problems I don't see).

Feds are being sent to cities as part of operation "Legend" to assist law enforcement.

The Feds in Portland are part of operation "Diligent Valor."

What the poster that followed you failed to mention was that for, 60 days at this point, the protestors have attempted to break into the Federal courthouse.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1288014201240162304

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1287919951882227712

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1287921472304865280

Also Oregon attempted to bring a Federal lawsuit to prevent the feds from operating at the courthouse.

The judge pointed out that CBP has "Police" clearly marked on their uniforms, a form of ID is also clearly prevalent, and the AG of Oregon could only find two cases of people being picked up by unmarked vehicles. (The point here being if this was happening in larger numbers then they should have more than two.)

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ord.153632/gov.uscourts.ord.153632.23.0_2.pdf

That Oregon woman was most likely not read her rights because she was told to disperse and refused to. She was caught in doing a criminal act and was not being investigated.

[lost_in_the_endless_aisle]

Also Oregon attempted to bring a Federal lawsuit to prevent the feds from operating at the courthouse.

This makes my head hurt. They are bringing a lawsuit to Federal court to shut down the Federal court? I'm going to re-read Kafka's The Trial for further insight.

I'm also confused as to what the Federal court represents in all of this and what the protesters plan to do if they manage to occupy it. Is it a proxy for Trump? I can't seem to remember the multitudinous branches of government but they might be missing a little bit back and to the left of the Executive. I guess not only is it the case that ACAB, but also, ACAF (All Courthouses Are Fascist)?

[OtherJen]

Also Oregon attempted to bring a Federal lawsuit to prevent the feds from operating at the courthouse.

This makes my head hurt. They are bringing a lawsuit to Federal court to shut down the Federal court? I'm going to re-read Kafka's The Trial for further insight.

I'm also confused as to what the Federal court represents in all of this and what the protesters plan to do if they manage to occupy it. Is it a proxy for Trump? I can't seem to remember the multitudinous branches of government but they might be missing a little bit back and to the left of the Executive. I guess not only is it the case that ACAB, but also, ACAF (All Courthouses Are Fascist)?

Maybe the same thing that Cliven Bundy and his mob did when they took over a federal building to protest their "right" to steal federal land? But they were allowed to walk free and unharmed. Go figure.

[lost_in_the_endless_aisle]

Also Oregon attempted to bring a Federal lawsuit to prevent the feds from operating at the courthouse.

This makes my head hurt. They are bringing a lawsuit to Federal court to shut down the Federal court? I'm going to re-read Kafka's The Trial for further insight.

I'm also confused as to what the Federal court represents in all of this and what the protesters plan to do if they manage to occupy it. Is it a proxy for Trump? I can't seem to remember the multitudinous branches of government but they might be missing a little bit back and to the left of the Executive. I guess not only is it the case that ACAB, but also, ACAF (All Courthouses Are Fascist)?

Maybe the same thing that Cliven Bundy and his mob did when they took over a federal building to protest their "right" to steal federal land? But they were allowed to walk free and unharmed. Go figure.

Well gosh, I hope those Portlandians get their cattle back.

[Norioch]

Trump is now going full Andrew Jackson and just openly defying the Supreme Court.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/daca-donald-trump-supreme-court.html

As long as Trump is president we do not have rule of law in this country.

[Glenstache]

Here we go. Chicago, Kansas City, and Albuquerque (or at least those are the ones advertised).

BBCNews: Trump to send 'surge' of federal agents to US cities

Election timing and city selection aside (and assuming that this really is related to "real crime" and not to protests) to send federal law enforcement man power and resources to assist local law enforcement where crime is a big problem seems like generally a good thing?

(I'm not american, so I don't really know how these things are normally handled and what problems I don't see).

Feds are being sent to cities as part of operation "Legend" to assist law enforcement.

The Feds in Portland are part of operation "Diligent Valor."

What the poster that followed you failed to mention was that for, 60 days at this point, the protestors have attempted to break into the Federal courthouse.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1288014201240162304

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1287919951882227712

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1287921472304865280

Also Oregon attempted to bring a Federal lawsuit to prevent the feds from operating at the courthouse.

The judge pointed out that CBP has "Police" clearly marked on their uniforms, a form of ID is also clearly prevalent, and the AG of Oregon could only find two cases of people being picked up by unmarked vehicles. (The point here being if this was happening in larger numbers then they should have more than two.)

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ord.153632/gov.uscourts.ord.153632.23.0_2.pdf

That Oregon woman was most likely not read her rights because she was told to disperse and refused to. She was caught in doing a criminal act and was not being investigated.

When making a law and order case, order is not necessarily more important than law. "only 2" cases of citizens being pulled off the street into unmarked vans brought to trial is okay?

Also, there is a not so subtle bias in the reporting by Andy Ngo, linked via twitter above. He consistently refers to what is happening as antifa/BLM riots. This is a poor lumping and phrasing. But, even his reporting shows that others are exploiting the protests to do their own thing. See:
https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1288196141641687040

And there are plenty of twitter feeds out there showing excessive force used by the Feds. I think that Trump has been successful in shifting the tone and purpose of the protests in Portland. He has shifted them, so varying degrees, from being about BLM to being about Trump. That has opened the door for even more co-opting of the protests by non-aligned interests. This is why Andy Ngo's labeling is so problematic. There are plenty of people showing up in Portland peacefully for the purpose of advocating for equality and BLM. They are not "antifa" any more than I would assume you are in hating Nazis and other flavors of supremacists.

The best way to bring order is not always through the actions taken by hte Feds in Portland. I think the example of the occupation at Malheur was a good example of patience and reservation of force to prevent loss of life (and LaVoy is certainly no martyr). The difference in response here is, in fact, telling... especially given that the Bundy's have unquestionably been a part of actions that have included live weapons directed at Federal officers.

[gentmach]

Here we go. Chicago, Kansas City, and Albuquerque (or at least those are the ones advertised).

BBCNews: Trump to send 'surge' of federal agents to US cities

Election timing and city selection aside (and assuming that this really is related to "real crime" and not to protests) to send federal law enforcement man power and resources to assist local law enforcement where crime is a big problem seems like generally a good thing?

(I'm not american, so I don't really know how these things are normally handled and what problems I don't see).

Feds are being sent to cities as part of operation "Legend" to assist law enforcement.

The Feds in Portland are part of operation "Diligent Valor."

What the poster that followed you failed to mention was that for, 60 days at this point, the protestors have attempted to break into the Federal courthouse.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1288014201240162304

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1287919951882227712

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1287921472304865280

Also Oregon attempted to bring a Federal lawsuit to prevent the feds from operating at the courthouse.

The judge pointed out that CBP has "Police" clearly marked on their uniforms, a form of ID is also clearly prevalent, and the AG of Oregon could only find two cases of people being picked up by unmarked vehicles. (The point here being if this was happening in larger numbers then they should have more than two.)

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.ord.153632/gov.uscourts.ord.153632.23.0_2.pdf

That Oregon woman was most likely not read her rights because she was told to disperse and refused to. She was caught in doing a criminal act and was not being investigated.

When making a law and order case, order is not necessarily more important than law. "only 2" cases of citizens being pulled off the street into unmarked vans brought to trial is okay?

Also, there is a not so subtle bias in the reporting by Andy Ngo, linked via twitter above. He consistently refers to what is happening as antifa/BLM riots. This is a poor lumping and phrasing. But, even his reporting shows that others are exploiting the protests to do their own thing. See:
https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1288196141641687040

And there are plenty of twitter feeds out there showing excessive force used by the Feds. I think that Trump has been successful in shifting the tone and purpose of the protests in Portland. He has shifted them, so varying degrees, from being about BLM to being about Trump. That has opened the door for even more co-opting of the protests by non-aligned interests. This is why Andy Ngo's labeling is so problematic. There are plenty of people showing up in Portland peacefully for the purpose of advocating for equality and BLM. They are not "antifa" any more than I would assume you are in hating Nazis and other flavors of supremacists.

The best way to bring order is not always through the actions taken by hte Feds in Portland. I think the example of the occupation at Malheur was a good example of patience and reservation of force to prevent loss of life (and LaVoy is certainly no martyr). The difference in response here is, in fact, telling... especially given that the Bundy's have unquestionably been a part of actions that have included live weapons directed at Federal officers.

The problem with only two cases is that you have the alternative explanation that they are police informants being extracted to talk to the police.

I chose Andy Ngo because he has helpfully curated videos. As I explained in the CHOP thread, these people are recording and live streaming everything. When video appears of an angle grinder being brought in to damage the fence at the courthouse, I don't think "angle grinder of peaceful protest."

[nereo]

I chose Andy Ngo because he has helpfully curated videos. As I explained in the CHOP thread, these people are recording and live streaming everything. When video appears of an angle grinder being brought in to damage the fence at the courthouse, I don't think "angle grinder of peaceful protest."

I’ve never seen someone with an angle grinder on the street and felt physically threatened.

Assault rifles? Yup.  Angle Grinder? Nope.

[talltexan]

Trump is now going full Andrew Jackson and just openly defying the Supreme Court.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/07/daca-donald-trump-supreme-court.html

As long as Trump is president we do not have rule of law in this country.

I happened to read this article in my morning news sweep. Roberts has walked the tightrope he has because--presumably--he was afraid that our country's liberals would just treat the Court as illegitimate if he eviscerated the Affordable Care Act. Seems ironic that it's the Republicans in the executive branch who are telling him to stuff it. Take that, textualists!

[gentmach]

I chose Andy Ngo because he has helpfully curated videos. As I explained in the CHOP thread, these people are recording and live streaming everything. When video appears of an angle grinder being brought in to damage the fence at the courthouse, I don't think "angle grinder of peaceful protest."

I’ve never seen someone with an angle grinder on the street and felt physically threatened.

Assault rifles? Yup.  Angle Grinder? Nope.

https://mobile.twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1286915433828724736

Were they using the angle grinder to commit criminal activity? No? That changes things just a bit, doesn't it?

[LennStar]

Because rifles are never used for criminal activities??

I am just glad it wasn't an angel grinder as I first read. Well, new word learned.


Maybe instead of nitpicking who does which (il)legal activity, we should think about the why?
Generally thinks like storming a courthouse or week long protests (or for that matter, kidnappings by "police") don't happen out of thin air.
So why are those things happening? What do the people think and (probably more important) feel?

[ctuser1]

So - we get a police committed murder that highlights such lynching going on for centuries.

People start protesting.

And... there are some people who wants to spend more time talking about the opportunists in that protest than the centuries long injustice going on with fellow Americans!!!!

I'll have more respect for y'all if you straight up owned up to the KKK brand of White Supremacist rhetoric!!!

Or, would you have me believe that fence cutting with angle grinders is now a bigger crisis than the continuing incidents of police on someone's neck shouting "I can't breathe"???

[OtherJen]

So - we get a police committed murder that highlights such lynching going on for centuries.

People start protesting.

And... there are some people who wants to spend more time talking about the opportunists in that protest than the centuries long injustice going on with fellow Americans!!!!

I'll have more respect for y'all if you straight up owned up to the KKK brand of White Supremacist rhetoric!!!

Or, would you have me believe that fence cutting with angle grinders is now a bigger crisis than the continuing incidents of police on someone's neck shouting "I can't breathe"???

One of the most depressing things I've learned this year is how many people in this country value property/profits over people. It applies to both our national response to COVID-19 and to the racial horrors highlighted by George Floyd's (and others') murder.

[talltexan]

I think it's more subtle than that.

People aren't putting profits ahead of life, so much as they are putting the economic freedom to create profit ahead of the social obligation to protect the health of others.

[OtherJen]

I think it's more subtle than that.

People aren't putting profits ahead of life, so much as they are putting the economic freedom to create profit ahead of the social obligation to protect the health of others.

It seems like a difference in semantics rather than ethics, honestly.

[Glenstache]

I think it's more subtle than that.

People aren't putting profits ahead of life, so much as they are putting the economic freedom to create profit ahead of the social obligation to protect the health of others.

To me, this idea echoes two parallel trends in our society. One is the Reagan-esque concept of rugged individualism in which a person's ability to go it on their own, pull themselves up by their bootstraps, "greed is good" (Gordon Gecko, which had the opposite effect of what Oliver Stone intended), versus the traditional concepts of duty to society. This shift sets up a condition in which the balance of personal decision making emphasizes what is good for the individual versus others with the expectation that as long as the others are also doing that things will work out okay. Economics has long shown that there is a disconnect between this at the micro and macro level. So too in public health. The second theme is the massive wealth redistribution over the last 30 years and economic fragility of many households and individuals that is a part of that. Yes, the irony of that versus the first theme is not lost on me. And also one of the main pastimes of this forum is being aghast at the personal finances of most who have not taken on the MMM lifestyle. Regardless, this puts many people in a position where they simply don't have the financial backup to miss a week of work without missing making rent. People feel *a lot* of pressure to go back to work. Those with economic power also want their workers to go back to work (and with liability protections to immunize them economically, as requested via the GOP). The mask thing is more an extension of the former than the latter, but it is also all embedded in the broader cultural divides. Not wearing a mask is the public health equivalent of rolling coal. People feel like they are being left behind and push back on anything that they see as boxing them in further regardless of how those individual regulations/mandates make sense at the macro level. Honestly, this is a BIG part of why Trump got elected... and likely a big part of why Trump has been stoking those flames. He is playing people because electoral gains through cheap shots are more important than actually doing a good job. And that, my fellow MMMers, is outrageous (to get back on thread topic).

[ctuser1]

I think it's more subtle than that.

People aren't putting profits ahead of life, so much as they are putting the economic freedom to create profit ahead of the social obligation to protect the health of others.

To me, this idea echoes two parallel trends in our society. One is the Reagan-esque concept of rugged individualism in which a person's ability to go it on their own, pull themselves up by their bootstraps, "greed is good" (Gordon Gecko, which had the opposite effect of what Oliver Stone intended), versus the traditional concepts of duty to society. This shift sets up a condition in which the balance of personal decision making emphasizes what is good for the individual versus others with the expectation that as long as the others are also doing that things will work out okay. Economics has long shown that there is a disconnect between this at the micro and macro level. So too in public health. The second theme is the massive wealth redistribution over the last 30 years and economic fragility of many households and individuals that is a part of that. Yes, the irony of that versus the first theme is not lost on me. And also one of the main pastimes of this forum is being aghast at the personal finances of most who have not taken on the MMM lifestyle. Regardless, this puts many people in a position where they simply don't have the financial backup to miss a week of work without missing making rent. People feel *a lot* of pressure to go back to work. Those with economic power also want their workers to go back to work (and with liability protections to immunize them economically, as requested via the GOP). The mask thing is more an extension of the former than the latter, but it is also all embedded in the broader cultural divides. Not wearing a mask is the public health equivalent of rolling coal. People feel like they are being left behind and push back on anything that they see as boxing them in further regardless of how those individual regulations/mandates make sense at the macro level. Honestly, this is a BIG part of why Trump got elected... and likely a big part of why Trump has been stoking those flames. He is playing people because electoral gains through cheap shots are more important than actually doing a good job. And that, my fellow MMMers, is outrageous (to get back on thread topic).

Summary:

rights - responsibilities == freeloading

[former player]

Summary:

rights - responsibilities == freeloading

With all the rights and none of the responsibilities going to the rich rather than the underclass, yes?

[gentmach]

Because rifles are never used for criminal activities??

I am just glad it wasn't an angel grinder as I first read. Well, new word learned.


Maybe instead of nitpicking who does which (il)legal activity, we should think about the why?
Generally thinks like storming a courthouse or week long protests (or for that matter, kidnappings by "police") don't happen out of thin air.
So why are those things happening? What do the people think and (probably more important) feel?

So - we get a police committed murder that highlights such lynching going on for centuries.

People start protesting.

And... there are some people who wants to spend more time talking about the opportunists in that protest than the centuries long injustice going on with fellow Americans!!!!

I'll have more respect for y'all if you straight up owned up to the KKK brand of White Supremacist rhetoric!!!

Or, would you have me believe that fence cutting with angle grinders is now a bigger crisis than the continuing incidents of police on someone's neck shouting "I can't breathe"???

I was talking about how the media was claiming that these were "peaceful protestors" that the police were arresting. At what point are they no longer peacefully protesting? Or are laws suspended right now?

Here are local leaders asking for an end to the violence, for people to come and actually negotiate.
https://www.kgw.com/mobile/article/news/local/protests/community-leaders-call-for-moratorium-on-violence-ask-for-conversation-with-protesters/283-4cf063e1-08fa-4664-8a2f-1942112d772d

So it is clearly a problem.

Nereo decided to strip my post of context and say "you're worried about the tools!" That was not the point. The point was there are rioters being arrested and the media is claiming "peaceful protesters are being arrested." The media lying about the situation is the point.

[OtherJen]

Everything I think he can't sink lower: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509568578777088?s=20

[ctuser1]

Because rifles are never used for criminal activities??

I am just glad it wasn't an angel grinder as I first read. Well, new word learned.


Maybe instead of nitpicking who does which (il)legal activity, we should think about the why?
Generally thinks like storming a courthouse or week long protests (or for that matter, kidnappings by "police") don't happen out of thin air.
So why are those things happening? What do the people think and (probably more important) feel?

So - we get a police committed murder that highlights such lynching going on for centuries.

People start protesting.

And... there are some people who wants to spend more time talking about the opportunists in that protest than the centuries long injustice going on with fellow Americans!!!!

I'll have more respect for y'all if you straight up owned up to the KKK brand of White Supremacist rhetoric!!!

Or, would you have me believe that fence cutting with angle grinders is now a bigger crisis than the continuing incidents of police on someone's neck shouting "I can't breathe"???

I was talking about how the media was claiming that these were "peaceful protestors" that the police were arresting. At what point are they no longer peacefully protesting? Or are laws suspended right now?

Here are local leaders asking for an end to the violence, for people to come and actually negotiate.
https://www.kgw.com/mobile/article/news/local/protests/community-leaders-call-for-moratorium-on-violence-ask-for-conversation-with-protesters/283-4cf063e1-08fa-4664-8a2f-1942112d772d

So it is clearly a problem.

Nereo decided to strip my post of context and say "you're worried about the tools!" That was not the point. The point was there are rioters being arrested and the media is claiming "peaceful protesters are being arrested." The media lying about the situation is the point.

For the sake of the argument - let us assume the worst that you imply.

So, in this alternative world, a LOT of these protesters are violent. They have been violent for, maybe, 4 months. Before that, there were no protests. So, probably the violence won't continue for very long either.

Compare that to the issue they are protesting. A centuries long lynching and occupation of a part of the American population based on their physical attributes. Their political representation is suppressed by voter suppression. If you have a male teen, you have a much higher chance of police encounters and much higher chance of being shot during those encounters.

From all indications, this is likely to continue. Lives are likely to be lost for a few more centuries if nothing is done.

Which one is a bigger problem we should worry about? Centuries long occupation and loss of lives? Or statues and properties lost due to months long violence?

Should I start worrying about an itch on my arm when I have brain cancer??

[bacchi]

Everything I think he can't sink lower: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509568578777088?s=20

He's wildly flailing, trying to stop the suburban vote drain.

[nereo]

Everything I think he can't sink lower: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509568578777088?s=20

He's wildly flailing, trying to stop the suburban vote drain.

The ‘wildly flailing’ part is what worries me.  Biden has a larger lead at this point than Obama did in ‘08, but Trump’s shown he will push past all political norms, and few in his own party will stand up to him.  He’s certainly no shy about using leavers of government for personal gain (or to attack perceived foes).  And right now he’s got toadies sitting in all the important offices.

What outrages are yet to come as the election draws closer?

[Glenstache]

Everything I think he can't sink lower: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509568578777088?s=20

He's wildly flailing, trying to stop the suburban vote drain.

Boy. That's such an overt "fuck the poor minorities that you suburbanites are afraid of" that I'm not sure it even qualifies as dog whistle signalling. And since when is the GOP interested in interfering in town-level zoning decisions? It's almost as if none of this was ever about states rights...

[Norioch]

Right, because an overabundance of affordable housing is really the most urgent problem our nation is facing right now.

[GuitarStv]

Right, because an overabundance of affordable housing is really the most urgent problem our nation is facing right now.

From the great mind that brought you "if we stop testing for Covid our numbers will stop going up" comes "if you stop building places for the poors to live, the poors won't live anywhere!".

[OtherJen]

Everything I think he can't sink lower: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1288509568578777088?s=20

He's wildly flailing, trying to stop the suburban vote drain.

Boy. That's such an overt "fuck the poor minorities that you suburbanites are afraid of" that I'm not sure it even qualifies as dog whistle signalling. And since when is the GOP interested in interfering in town-level zoning decisions? It's almost as if none of this was ever about states rights...

He and his cult followers stopped dog whistling a long time ago, like back in 2015 with all the rhetoric about Mexicans being criminals and a Mexican-American judge not being able to do his job because of his ethnicity, the mocking of a disabled reporter during a campaign rally, calling women who disagreed with him "nasty," etc.

They've been saying the quiet parts out loud for a long time.

[talltexan]

What's especially awkward is that this housing rule has been the top priority of a qualified Medical Doctor who is in Trump's cabinet.

[sherr]

What's especially awkward is that this housing rule has been the top priority of a qualified Medical Doctor who is in Trump's cabinet.

Ben Carson is also a Climate Denier, and a Young Earth Creationist, and claimed that the pyramids were not the graves of pharaohs but were in fact Joseph's grain silos (even though they're not - you know - hollow), and equated gay people with pedophiles, and said that the ACA was the worst thing to happen to the US since slavery, and loved to call gun-control advocates and "the PC police" Nazis.

Ben Carson is an absolute nutjob. Would I rather he be president instead of Trump? Sure, but calling him a "qualified Medical Doctor" is hitting his one high and none of his lows.

[Pigeon]

Donald is an admirer of all the best doctors, not just Ben Carson.  There's Stella Immanuel, who thinks OBGYN problems stem from having sex with demons.  https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-53579773

[nereo]

What's especially awkward is that this housing rule has been the top priority of a qualified Medical Doctor who is in Trump's cabinet.

Ben Carson is also a Climate Denier, and a Young Earth Creationist, and claimed that the pyramids were not the graves of pharaohs but were in fact Joseph's grain silos (even though they're not - you know - hollow), and equated gay people with pedophiles, and said that the ACA was the worst thing to happen to the US since slavery, and loved to call gun-control advocates and "the PC police" Nazis.

Ben Carson is an absolute nutjob. Would I rather he be president instead of Trump? Sure, but calling him a "qualified Medical Doctor" is hitting his one high and none of his lows.

I believe the dig was that Trump has a surgeon in charge of urban housing, which indicates how "high a priority" it is for him.  Yes, Carson's world views are detached from science and reality.

[talltexan]

@sherr , it sounds like you're suggesting involving Carson in the pandemic response wouldn't have improved it very much.

[sherr]

@sherr , it sounds like you're suggesting involving Carson in the pandemic response wouldn't have improved it very much.

I don't know how you arrived at that conclusion, that's not at all related to what you said earlier or what I responded to.

But I mean, there are already extremely competent doctors involved in the pandemic response, like Fauci. So no, I don't think involving Carson would have helped at all. It doesn't matter who's involved if the powers that be don't listen to them or outright reject them as "the enemy" because they're saying something Trump doesn't want to hear.