Militarization of Police

Department of Homeland Security Reportedly Sending 150 Agents to Chicago in Expansion of Federal Crackdown

Trump and other White House officials say the feds may soon be coming to other major cities as well.

|

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) intends to send around 150 federal agents to Chicago, the Chicago Tribune reported today. The plan is an escalation of the Trump administration's efforts to crack down on protests and unrest in major U.S. cities.

The planned deployment comes amid national backlash over the use of federal agents in Portland, Oregon, where news reports and videos have shown the feds beating a nonviolent Navy veteran, shooting an unarmed protester in the face with an impact weapon, and using unmarked vehicles to snatch protesters off the street. Last night, federal agents tear- gassed a crowd of moms.

Camouflaged agents from Customs and Border Protection and the U.S. Marshals Service have been deployed to Portland—where protests and unrest over the police killing of George Floyd have been happening for more than 50 days—under a June 26 executive order to protect federal monuments and property. The Trump administration claims it is protecting the city's federal courthouse and other property from "lawless anarchists" who have vandalized and attacked the building.

In a news conference this morning, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said she spoke with Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler on Sunday "to get a sense of what's happened there."

"We don't need federal agents without any insignia taking people off the street and holding them I think unlawfully," Lightfoot said.

Federal agents' strong-arm tactics in Portland have led to a flurry of lawsuits, investigations, and demands for investigations from state and local officials. Colleen Connell, head of the Illinois branch of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), warned that similar problems will arise in Chicago.

"Make no mistake: Trump's federal troops will not be a constructive force in Chicago," Connell said in a press release. "As our colleagues have seen in Portland, Trump's secret forces will terrorize communities, and create chaos. This is not law and order. This is an assault on the people of this country, and the specific protections of protest and press in the First Amendment."

The ACLU of Oregon sought a temporary restraining order last week against federal agents stationed in Portland, in what it says is the first of many lawsuits.

Oregon Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum announced Sunday that she is suing DHS, the U.S. Marshals Service, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and the Federal Protection Service, alleging that "they seized and detained Oregonians without probable cause."

The U.S. attorney for the District of Oregon—Billy Williams, a Trump appointee—has called for an inspector general to investigate the agents' actions.

Oregon's Democratic senators, Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, say they'll be introducing an amendment to a defense bill to stop the Trump administration "from sending its paramilitary squads onto America's streets."

Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) also criticized the use of federal agents.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D–N.Y.) and Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D–D.C.) will also be introducing legislation this week that would require federal law enforcement officials to clearly identify themselves, The Nation reported today.

DHS did not immediately respond to a request for comment for this story. But in an interview on Fox News this morning, Acting DHS Secretary Chad Wolf said, "I don't need invitations by the state, state mayors, or state governors to do our job. We're going to do that, whether they like us there or not."

Trump also indicated in a White House interview today that his administration may send federal agents to many more U.S. cities.

"We're not going to let New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Baltimore—Oakland is a mess—we're not going to let this happen in our country," Trump said. "More federal law enforcement, that I can tell you."

"In Portland, they've done a fantastic job," Trump continued. "These are anarchists. These aren't protesters. These are people that hate our country, and we're not going to let it go forward."

Advertisement

NEXT: Why does the Supreme Court use different language for remands to state court and federal court?

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. >Using unmarked vehicles
    I’m sure they would like to use the vehicles marked police, but are unable to since they are on fire.

    1. I quit working at shoprite and now I make $65-85 per/h. How? I’m working online! My work didn’t exactly make me happy so I decided to take a chance on something new…YRf after 4 years it was so hard to quit my day job but now I couldn’t be happier.

      Here’s what I do………………Home Profit System

    2. Here’s what I wrote on a Yahoo story.
      Was there a real arrest or even a crime here? I suspect a false flag. The whole thing boils down to “One protester said…”
      The video of the actual arrest (third one down) is grainy, around twenty seconds long in total, and has no sound. Two masked people in official-looking, easily-duplicated clothing with no visible (I didn’t see one) shiny badges, walk away holding another masked person who appears to be handcuffed. We can the protester’s eyes for about two seconds, the cops’ faces not at all. No other cops were nearby or in the background.
      There’s no front license plate on the police vehicle, though Oregon has required a front license plate since March 19th, 2020. Of course not displaying a front license plate might be common in Oregon. I don’t live there, and I can’t find any pictures that show it one way or the other (I’m still looking), but judging from pictures of cars for sale or sold in Portland since May, at least some cars don’t display a front plate. A couple didn’t even have a place to mount one, though every picture of the front of an Oregon cop car that I found had a front plate. I imagine that the cops would let someone slide over such a picayune offense if they noticed at all- I’m afraid to get out of the house and go to the post office because of virus and riots, things are working slowly everywhere because of the virus, didn’t pay attention because of recent troubles, I didn’t have money for new plates because I haven’t been working, and so on. The cops have probably heard every excuse that there is, and all of them could be true, or might not notice because they’re a bit busy right now. Wheeler’s statement is also true , unless he’s a co-conspirator. “They don’t even know who’s pulling them into the vans,” he continued. “The people aren’t identifying themselves. And, as far as I can see, this is completely unconstitutional.”
      The “protestor” doesn’t even seem to show any surprise or provide any, not even passive, resistance, except for a half-wiggle half-way to the vehicle and it looks like he knows where to go. Hell, it looks like he’s leading the way! Then the video cuts off right before they enter the vehicle, where cops are most likely to see resistance, but doesn’t show them getting in nor how many people get in the back door. Has an arrest ever gone so smoothly? I’ve never seen such a case of police competence. I think that they piled into the back and started laughing!

      1. *We can see the protester’s eyes…

        1. Since I started with my online business I earn $90 every 15 minutes. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it out.

          FOR MORE DETAILS….⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢⇢Rich Life.

      2. Would note that vehicles used by federal agencies are not registered in the state. So the front plate thing is irrelevant.

    3. It is truly bizarre to see so many names in this comment section who frequently espouse Libertarian views now supporting unidentified gestapo sent in without warning the mayors or governors into cities. Without identification other than a patch that says “POLICE” the gestapo is grabbing people seemingly almost randomly. How does this mesh? What kind of cognitive dissonance must these morons be living with?

      1. These guys have badge numbers as well as their agency displayed, so they are individually identifiable….and therefore accountable. What they don’t have displayed is their name plates….because too many of these terrorists who portray themselves as “protesters” have taken to targeting these officers homes and families once they have the names. Anyone with a legitimate grievance can use the badge number to hold them individually accountable in the Court system.

  2. Waiting for Trumpistas to explain how the secret police snatch-n-grabs are there for our freedoms.

    1. Waiting for anti-Trumpers to explain how roving mobs are the height of freedom.

      1. There is a huge difference between violence by the government and violence by private individuals.

        1. It’s a distinction without a difference, Ms. Double Standard. Whether your property is destroyed by the government or Antifa, it’s still destroyed. Whether you’re killed by Officer Friendly or CHAZ-tards, you’re still dead.

          1. It’s a distinction without a difference on a fucking libertarian site?

            1. Per the Non-Aggression Principle, the test is for who aggresses first – there are no qualifiers on any traits the aggressor has (such as group memberships – e.g. Antifa, a government org., or local tennis club.) If you or I are victims of aggression then we or our designated agents are allowed to respond with aggression. That is the simplest analysis I can work out without writing a book that encompasses the other principles and factors at play.

              1. In which libertarians calmly justify the use of federal mercenaries to enforce local law and order. Joe Biden certainly will have a lot of tools at his disposal won’t he? Tools that you have explicitly endorsed…

                1. Do you seriously think that Joe Biden (or the people who will be using Joe as a figurehead once he’s sworn in) was going to be restrained and moderate in his use of federal law enforcement, or that his failure to do so will have anything to do with what libertarians are saying now?

                  1. No I’m just saying that you people won’t have a leg to stand on when you try to criticize it.

                    Not supporting uninvited federal goons rounding up citizens is like the easiest thing to do if you’re a libertarian. Pity you couldn’t handle even that much.

                2. They are protecting Federal Property and enforcing Federal Laws. They have proper jurisdiction over both.

                  One could even say they are protecting the Civil Liberties of individual citizens who are being denied equal protection of the law by their own local government….because that local government seems to approve of the politics of the violent mobs of anarchists that are infringing upon those liberties and therefore declining to enforce the law and protect it’s citizens.

                  See how quickly that same Democrat mayor would order his police to crack down on those “protesters” if they were a bunch of right wing “free staters” doing the exact same thing instead of Left wing Antifa.

              2. We are living through a scenario that illustrates why the NAP leads to absurdities.

                First of all, who initiated violence? The protests were about unjust cop violence. If we start the clock at Christopher Columbus getting paint thrown on him, it seems a bit arbitrary, no?

                And since we’re being very careful about determining who is initially to blame for the violence and counter-violence, we must surely be as careful in determining what response counts a proportional and just and what counts as a whole new initiation of non-permitted violence.

                Because who initiated violence is interesting to a point, but if it justifies all manner of response, then how are you being useful with this philosophy?

                Let’s just go all the way back to the beginning so we are all justified in all our violence. Funny enough, we arrive once again at Christopher Columbus.

                1. Once the victims and the aggressors are all dead, you have to invent a principle of inherited guilt and victimhood. Is that what you are proposing? The NAP is fine, as without it is difficult to develop any reasonable working system – what is left are invented ad hoc ephemeral rules which lead to chaos. At best all you have identified is the case that libertarian philosophy is still incomplete, not that its core principles are wrong. An analogy exists in physics: the conservation of momentum is seen to be valid in experiments, but you cannot use it to determine the trajectory of two balls after they collide. An infinite number of valid solutions exist. It requires the discovery of another principle, conservation of energy, to reduce the set to one solution.

            2. Yes, you little bitch.

              1. Do you have any idea just how small the portion of the American public is that still supports Trump’s actions? You’re still beclowning yourself with this nonsense when other lesser goobers have already walked away.

        2. If you get murdered by an angry mob I suspect you don’t care whether they’re wearing badges or not; you’re just as dead either way. Same if your store gets burned down, it’s small consolation that it was done by social justice protestors seeking racial equity when you’re still on the hook for the mortgage payment.

          1. Has anyone been “murdered by an angry crowd” in Portland? As far as I know, all these protesters have done is graffiti some statues. That hardly justifies snatching people off the street into unmarked vehicles, covering their eyes and driving them around to disorient them, etc. In fact, nothing justifies that. It’s the kind of thing dictatorships do. Here, there needs to be probable cause before someone is arrested, and the arrest is supposed to be a matter of public record.

            1. So we’re just ignoring the assaults (utilizing hammers, fireworks, and lasers among other things) and arson?
              Petty vandalism is all you see?

              This whole thing is absurd.
              No calls from the msm to put down months of rioting, but we’re going to bitch about minor procedure violations in the few arrests of .001% of the rioters…

            2. I’d hardly call firebombing occupied buildings as well as assaults on persons with deadly weapons “vandalism”.

            3. The mayor of Portland himself was decrying the violence and arson of the rallies until federal agents showed up. Now he’s defaulted to: Trump’s a monster.

              p.s. Seattle mayor being sued for aiding and sbetting murder, re CHOP victim Lorenzo.

        3. Really? Because all the hits I’ve taken over the years didn’t really leave an impression that their are different types other then degree of force.

        4. Not really. If the government or a random thug smashes up my property, there is zero appreciable difference to me.

        5. Ah yes, the “oppression is fine as long as it’s not the government” libertarian. A surprisingly common breed.

          1. Keep up with the times. As has been clearly articulated on this very thread, oppression is fine especially if it’s done by the government.

        6. IF we were allowed to defend ourselves and property from mobs that would be one thing but those who have tried are being arrested and charged with crimes. Until then we have to rely on the federal authorities since the police are not doing their job. I would be in favor of not brining in the feds if you allowed citizens to defend both life and property. but that would look like all out civil war but at least it would end quicker.

          1. But but but exception exception blah blah blah.

        7. The difference is you favor mob violence by communist, and non traitors just want to be free of you traitors and your violence.

          1. By „communist“? Do you think this is 1962? There are no Communists anymore. Portland has a bunch of disaffected underemployed youth looking to cause trouble and the lockdowns didn’t help. Sending in the Feds just makes it worse.

            1. Perhaps these underemployed youth should do laundry, head back to school and/or some other productive activity. Who pays these people?

        8. Not if the local government isn’t taking any steps to stop the continued violence. The only reason Chaz came down was because they threatened the mayor personally by showing up at her house. Which, amusingly, was a protest led by a rival politico.

          1. And, the black father of CHAZ murder victim scorched the mayor in a TV interview. That dead kid’s mother is now suing the city.

            We talk about stripping cops of immunity, how about politicians who tell cops to stop enforcing the law?
            Durkan = criminally liable

        9. Unprovoked violence, whether it’s done by private individuals or by the government is unprovoked violence, and is totally inexcusable in either case.

      2. I don’t remember anyone claiming it’s the “height of freedom” any more than I remember any governor begging for the gestapo to be brought in to their states. Mayors and Governors are the local government. This is a local or at most, State issue. The National Guard could be called up if those leaders thought it was necessary.
        When Trump sends in his Secret Police without telling local or state officials every American should be scared in to action.

        1. Rioters are attacking federal property. Local and state authorities are allowing it. Thus federal law enforcement.

      3. Portland has an ongoing “roving mob” situation, but not even Trump’s claim to authority to intervene has anything to do with the “roving mob.”

        As for the other cities where he’s threatening to send federal poliace – there aren’t even “roving mobs.” The pretext for intervention in Chicago, Philadelphia, New York, etc., has nothing to do with protecting federal property, because federal property in those cities is not meaningfully under threat. The pretext has to do with violent crime.

        Violent crime has spiked in a distressing way in these cities, but this is not surprising when unemployment spikes like it has, businesses have shuttered, and our streets have emptied out due to everything being shut down – to say nothing of the pandemic itself. The way you address these crime spikes is to address the underlying conditions and increase community policing. You don’t do that by layering on arbitrary detentions of protesters and provoking tensions with an unaccountable border police force.

        1. Like lifting lockdowns?
          Agreed.

      4. So a few bad apples justifies Latin America style police thuggery?

    2. Mobs reduce my freedom by taking away my right to move freely.

      And rioters destroy property which ultimately I pay for, either through taxes or higher prices

    3. secret police snatch-n-grabs

      When you’re rich, they just let you do it…

    4. They will almost certainly use some silly line like “how can they be secret if they are filmed and posted all over social media?

      1. Nor are they secret to those detained.

        Paperwork being what it is.

    5. If by ‘secret police’ you mean uniformed police and by ‘snatch-n-grabs’ you mean arrests for violent crimes, then yes, these are totally secret police snatch-n-grabs, and they are there for our freedoms because the rule of law is the basis of a free society, as it is necessary to protect peoples lives and property.

      1. Brandy did not come here for your factual response.

      2. The Gestapo and Stazi had uniforms too. That’s hardly a benchmark we should accept as legitimate.

    6. Did these “secret” police have probable cause?

      1. Good question. Seems like they didn’t in a lot of cases.

        1. Evidence for that…other then media speculation and that of opposing politicians?

    7. Waiting for ignorant sluts to appreciate liberty rather than trash it. Death to commies and fascists and Democrats.

      1. What the fuck are you trying to say?

  3. Guess they don’t matter that much after all.
    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/07/19/redwood-city-street-mural-blm-trump-maga/

    Redwood City resident Dan Pease got permission from city officials to paint the “Black Lives Matter” sign on Broadway as part of a Fourth of July public art celebration. The city even supplied him with yellow poster board paint to do it.

    But, last Thursday, the city washed the sign away after being contacted by local real estate attorney Maria Rutenburg, who said that if the street was now a public forum, she wanted a sign of her own reading “MAGA 2020.”

    1. They don’t seem to have been very serious in the first place if all they gave him was poster board paint. In NYC I’m pretty sure we used regular road paint.

      I wonder if that’s what the Operation Paint Drop folks use too, for their black paint. I also wonder whether they have a legal case that the state cannot permit the vandalism of some public monuments and not others.

      1. That’s why I applaud this woman, turnabout is fair play.

        If there is a process by which you can get the state to pay for you to paint your political message in the middle of the road, that process must be accessible to everyone. This is why the State has to issue the KKK a parade permit; almost no one actually wants the KKK to have a parade but equality is a motherfucker sometimes.

        1. That was supposed to be the whole point of those anti-hood laws that were passed in the wake of all the KKK marches–it’s a lot harder to wreak havoc and be a nuisance if the po-po have a picture of your face and Mayor Quimby is telling them to find out who you and your buddies are so they can press charges.

      2. I imagine that they would have a case that the state cannot use public funds to pay for advertisement for a political party…. which is what BLM actually is.

    2. I’m actually impressed that they didn’t simply tell her, “Fuck you, that’s why” and cancelled the whole effort.

    3. Tbh, everything is stupid. Of course you can’t declare streets public forums for only one side, and at the same time does spray painting big signs in the street accomplish anything?

    4. I would have gone for HAIL SATAN, but nice move.

    5. Damn right. If streets are now spaces for political speech, then every viewpoint must be allowed!

  4. Here are your peaceful protestors

    https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo

    1. According to the communists, he had it coming for writing critical stories about them.

  5. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use these.Make 5000 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website…………………… CLICK HERE.

    1. Good, our local government is not capable of protecting all of its citizens

  6. What could possibly go wrong?

  7. Did the “snatchers” have warrants on the “protesters” or not? Seems like a simple thing for media to verify. If there were warrants, then isn’t street arrests preferable to 5am SWAT raids on someone’s house?

    1. Funny how none of the journalists seem to be asking that very pertinent question, isn’t it? One interesting thing–and you have to take this with a huge grain of salt, because these fuckers lie as naturally as they breathe–is that some of them were supposedly snatched up, taken to the police station, were allowed to stew for a couple hours, and then were let go without charges being pressed.

      The only way that makes sense is if the feds actually have warrants for the phones, not necessarily their owners, and are sweeping their phones for contact info.

      1. I was asking the same question on the previous article, the second of three on this subject within a few hours. I do have to say if Rand Paul seems to think it’s a big deal I’m inclined to take a second look at it. (If Tom Massie does as well I’ll really be concerned!) But I’m not at all clear what precisely is supposed to be wrong with these actions. There should be something specific, because I’m not really getting this abstract bad police-state feelies that it seems I’m supposed to. If I’m going to be contemptuous of Trump it’s because he’s been too much of a pussy to truly wreak full scorched-earth revenge on the abusive spook interests who happen to have tried to destroy him personally. Not because he’s being ruthless against those who have been openly destroying, among others’, the property of the Federal government.

        1. Warrants for phones would explain how they could serve them consistently on the streets with GPD tracking. But this creates two bigger questions: what court is issuing the warrants, and was it legal to arrest the individual in lieu of just seizing the phone. After all, I have heard no reports that they attempted to take a phone before arresting, which would make the arrest illegal if the warrant were merely for the phone.

          1. They aren’t after the phones and indeed many of the videos are from people who weren’t detained.

            They’re seizing instigators and perpetrators. Some/many/most/all are being release within 24 hrs. without charge as per the law. Honestly, barring some other evidence like them whisking the alleged perpetrators away to undisclosed black sites (like Chicago PD’s Logan Square site) it seems like a completely legal and effective ‘loophole’. Better than Freddie Gray’s dime ride or George Floyd’s arrest at the very least.

        2. I do have to say if Rand Paul seems to think it’s a big deal I’m inclined to take a second look at it.

          I’ve taken several looks. Paul seems be taking the “narrative at face value” look and responded based on *that* narrative.

          Local police *should* be able and allowed to handle this. *If* federal officers are kidnapping people willy nilly that would be bad.

          It’s pretty clear to me that the *should* fails the is-ought fallacy and the *if* conditional is untrue.

        3. By some interpretations the actions are legal under the Homeland Security Act. And as all libertarians know, if it’s legal it’s good.

      2. Tinfoil hat time; they’re creating informants.

        You observe some antifa goon for a bit and discover he’s a kiddy diddler. You could take the easy win and prosecute, or you could snatch him up and make it clear to him he’ll be spending the next decade in federal prison (as a known kiddy diddler) if he doesn’t start talking.

        If you do turn him, you want him back out in that protest ASAP.

        1. You observe some antifa goon for a bit and discover he’s a kiddy diddler.

          What a strange example to pick.

          1. It’s really not.
            They’re surprisingly common in the antifa ranks

            1. So PB and Jeffy are Antifa?

              1. So is Nardz, apparently.

                1. Incorrect, and low energy

        2. That was one of the possibilities I brought up yesterday–that if these guys weren’t already informers, then it’s possible that the feds pulled out a list of potential charges, said “You’re going to be a sword-swallower for Jose and/or Delmar if you don’t start singing.”

          Apparently some protesters in other areas who can’t get bailed out right away are getting thrown into jail with legitimate hardasses that are treating them like they would any new fish. These cotton balls are so soft from a lifetime of being coddled by every single authority figure that they’re getting seriously traumatized being next to real, live badasses who don’t give a shit about intersectionality or “fighting the system.”

          1. Well. That’s the thing. They never had anyone to guide them proper and slap them off the side of the head when they went astray. I had a couple in my life when I was acting like an idiot. My father’s look of disgust was enough for me to sometimes dial it back.

            Judging by those mothers fricken protesting, these kids were indeed brought up in some kind of retard bubble.

            Now REALITY has hit them straight in the face in an extreme way.

            Good job moms.

        3. I still suspect it’s true that Antifa proper really doesn’t exist much above the ground level, that above that all you have is the funding organizations that are using their sad LARPing as a tool to help destabilize society. Then above those you have maybe a further super-funding layer of increasing respectability, until you get to the whales like Soros and Google. So gaining assets (or planting agents) in these various antifas is probably more like infiltrating the various KKKs in the late 20th century, than it is like infiltrating anything that with the potential to access any real “big dogs.” Infiltrating the saddest little, has-been, aging-membership one-set inner city street gang is probably more big time than infiltrating these pasty pencil necks.

          1. You beat me to it. I was just about to comment that this “snatch and flip” tactic was very common when the FBI was crushing the Klan groups. The accusations of kiddy diddling that Nardz mentioned were used then, too. You don’t even have to know that your suspect is kiddy diddling—you just accuse them of it, and you’ll be right often enough to terrify a significant number of them.

          2. Antifa = Samsquanch.

            1. They can certainly very much exist, and be dangerous and destructive, strictly at the street level, without being the brains or command structure behind the operation. They are all puppet and no puppeteer.

        4. Creating informants or agents provocateurs?

          1. Bringing in androids for upgrades?

      3. For the most part, journalism doesn’t exist anymore. When every story is riddled with false/distorted information, emotive phrasing, and clear narrative crafting it is clear their job is propaganda. I’ve gotten fed up with most news because they don’t ask the questions I find completely obvious for context. The silence on any avenue unfavorable to the left is deafening

    2. Also a good question. I can find no information that they did, and I’m not sure how you serve a warrant on the street like that with any consistency, so it seems unlikely. But if they do, that would justify them.

      By the same token, if it turns out don’t, you should probably reconsider this automatic defense of their actions.

      1. This is buying into the ‘wet roads cause rain’, Gel-Mann (or whatever) propaganda.

        I said this in the other thread. On public property they don’t need a warrant if they have probable cause (see stop-and-frisk). It’s how traffic stops and roadside sobriety checks work and it extends well beyond just these two applications. If the cops show up to Kato Kaelin performing CPR on Nicole Brown’s dead body, and Kaelin says “OJ did it.” the police don’t need a warrant to seek out and arrest OJ. If they believe OJ is hiding on someone’s private property they need a warrant to get him. If they find him cruising down the highway in his Bronco, they can stop him and arrest him. This is nothing new or particularly Earth-shattering.

        The idea that police absolutely need a warrant to arrest someone on public property, like it or not, hasn’t been true in this country ever and probably not back into antiquity in English Common Law. The idea that every arrest requires a warrant was fabricated on the spot in one of these videos and doesn’t make any reasonable sense when applied to situations like the one above.

        1. Traffic stops are different contextually because, as stupid as it is, driving on public roads is not considered a “right,” it’s a privilege contingent on following certain procedures. And those procedures include stopping when pulled over and providing identification and proof of insurance. Police don’t even need probably cause to pull over any vehicle at nearly any time, just the barest amounts of “reasonable suspicion.”

          They do still need to reach the threshold of probable cause for an arrest. So it’s reasonable to ask if these arrests are morally and legally justified. It’s NOT reasonable to call them “Secret Police Kidnappers.”

          1. Traffic stops are different contextually because, as stupid as it is, driving on public roads is not considered a “right,” it’s a privilege contingent on following certain procedures. And those procedures include stopping when pulled over and providing identification and proof of insurance. Police don’t even need probably cause to pull over any vehicle at nearly any time, just the barest amounts of “reasonable suspicion.”

            Freely admitted as the textbook correct answer and still renders the question “How do you serve a warrant on a public street?” moot.

            Officers can see you j-walking, snatch you off the curb, Mirandize you, run a background check, and take you down town without so much as word to anyone else on the street. They can pull up to the curb, say “Please come with us to answer a few questions, or else.” and drive off with you. Whether we like it or not, it’s real, legally backed, and has been for some time.

            The idea that the police always need a warrant to detain people walking on a public sidewalk is treating these protestor’s hypocritical false narrative as truth.

    3. If there were warrants, then isn’t street arrests preferable to 5am SWAT raids on someone’s house?

      Remember when the problem was uniformed police officers standing on the black guys’ necks until they died?

      I have yet to see any videos of federal agents standing on these white rioters necks until they were dead. Snatch-n-grabs are a nice touch but if we’re shooting for equality of outcomes here…

  8. Let it burn.

  9. HEADLINE: Unidentified Federal Agents Are Detaining Protesters in Portland.
    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/388347/
    Accompanying photo: Agent with face fully exposed, in uniform with U.S. Border Patrol insignia and an identifying number.

    1. Hush, Reason has a narrative to peddle

    2. We don’t know who they are because they’re being paid in bitcoin. I blame Trump for not implementing contact tracing.

  10. Good hope they catch the ringleaders. Apparently faux libertarians like watching cities burn.

  11. When I become to administrator of a reeducation camp managed by AOC my first question to the “libertarians” that I am poking with a bayonet to sing “I Love My Beautiful Tractor” in a more loud voice and mellifluous tone is where exactly were you when Dear Leader started putting federal troops in major cities. You see, I’ll say, you are *exactly* where you fucking belong, you fucking hypocrits. Move those rocks faster, capitalist wreckers! {rubs hands together} I can’t wait!

    1. That’s going to be kind of hard to do when you’re missing your head.

    2. Like you have the arm strength to lift a bayonet.

    3. It’s cute you think that your own kind won’t turn on you.

    4. Comrade, you’re being too generous and kind to these capitalist swine.
      You must harden your heart and allow your imagination to grow when it comes to punishing the masses.
      Instead of bullets, use a rope.
      Instead of using socialist reasoning, use a bayonet.
      Instead using them as slaves at the local Nike sweat shop, kill them and use them as fertilizer.
      You must do better if you’re going to climb The Party ladder.

    5. When you become administrator you will be putting bullets in the back of the necks of innocent people.

  12. We cannot give up liberty for security. Local law enforcement can and should be handling these situations in our cities but there is no place for federal troops or unidentified federal agents rounding people up at will.

    I agree Rand unfortunately the local government isn’t do those things and people’s civil rights are being violated which the federal government (all government) has a duty to protect. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

    Now I don’t know if the Trump admin strategy is all that sound – I doubt it – but the fact remains that fires are being set, violence is being perpetrated and businesses are being destroyed.

    “We’re not going to let New York, Chicago, Philadelphia, Detroit, and Baltimore—Oakland is a mess—we’re not going to let this happen in our country,” Trump said. “More federal law enforcement, that I can tell you.”

    Hey dumbass, Baltimore maybe a mess but it isn’t due to unrest. Take some Ritalin and focus.

    1. A government certainly has no duty to protect any person or thing outside the purview of its sovereignty. For instance under the Articles of Confederation unrest in e.g. Massachusetts certainly would have occurred territorially within the USA but were decidedly not the concern of the Federal government. Even under the Constitution, before the 14A, the Federal government had no general right to intervene to protect any state’s citizens rights from being violated by either private parties or the state itself! And I know Rand’s dad takes the consistently extremely limited Mises Institute reading of the 14A that I personally disagree with but think is plausible and principled. If Rand is willing to condemn Federal intervention to protect blacks’ rights in the 1960s, for example, he surely has earned the “right” to oppose it here with consistency; don’t know if he does.

      1. Yeah, I assumed Rand was for 60s intervention but I could be wrong. I certainly am for it and its one of the main reasons I am ok with Trump sending in the feds now.

  13. Good to know that a significant portion of the commentariat here is ok with this:

    ““I stood there with my hands down by my sides and they just started whaling on me,” said David.

    He said he had taken the bus downtown to attend the protest and wanted to ask federal officers a specific question.

    “I stood in the street in front of them and I started asking them if it was okay to violate their oath of the Constitution,” said David. He said one of the men shoved him backward.

    “I lose my balance and fall backwards a bit, and then plant myself,” described David. “That’s right when they start beating me.”

    Honestly, this is showing that all those “oath” type folks were full of hot air. If their bite matched half their bluster they’d have the Feds’ SS goons crying like babies.

    1. If their bite matched half their bluster they’d have the Feds’ SS goons crying like babies.

      Meant to read “If their bite matched half their bluster they’d be in Portland already and have the Feds’ SS goons crying like babies.

      1. You do realize that a lot of those “SS goons” likely have combat experience themselves, right? The guys who were guarding the CIA compound in Benghazi were all ex-spec ops dudes.

        That’s something ex-soldiers have done for milennia when the wars end, or at least end for them–go merc for the highest bidder. Some POG who spent his time handing out uniforms at base supply isn’t in the same league as these guys, and most ex-military aren’t going to martyr themselves for Antifa.

    2. Aaaaand of course forgot the actual link.

      1. I don’t really need a link to some guys lying about the cops.

        1. Lol. You do realize it’s 2020 and everything is on video. But you won’t click on a link that you suspect won’t confirm what you already think. Stay classy.

          1. You’re referring to all the videos over the past two months that prove the “protesters” are in almost every single instance full of shit and/or lying?

          2. You do realize it’s 2020 and everything is on video.

            If I showed you a live broadcast of David Copperfield openly stealing the Statue of Liberty in 1983, would you agree that we should open a federal investigation and/or issue a warrant?

    3. stood there asking them questions after throwing rocks and water bottles filled with piss. see how that works. i was only trying to talk while burning down their house

    4. I never thought I would defend the feds but rioters need to be stopped. Baltimore after the 68 riots was never the same. The misery that followed can still be felt today. I also want to see meaningful legislation that curbs police violence and I fear that won’t happen if this insanity continues.

      1. Baltimore, Detroit, Memphis–these places don’t have the same financial or cultural cachet as Chicago, LA, or NYC. Even NYC was an utter fucking shithole for well over 20 years until Guilani took office and started turning it into the world’s glitziest tourist trap. Minneapolis is going to do down this road, and only the fact that Seattle and Portland are occupied by SO MANY white people to begin with is going to save them from white flight.

        I also want to see meaningful legislation that curbs police violence and I fear that won’t happen if this insanity continues.

        The longer this goes on, the less normies are going to care, and will in fact become increasingly hostile to the protesters. That’s why the press has gone on this “peaceful protesters are getting disappeared” kick, in order to try and wrench some sympathy back towards the protesters, to try and deflect from the fact that this is going on 50 days or so of non-stop stupidity.

        1. I’m amazed reading Seattle Times comments sections, just how hostile 99% of them are toward protesters and the city council.

      2. I also want to see meaningful legislation that curbs police violence and I fear that won’t happen if this insanity continues.

        Remember. The original message was to defund police because uniformed were disproportionately killing black people across the country. But, suddenly, peacefully apprehending a few white kids in Portland is the bigger concern.

        It’s as hokey as any 90s era news cycle that started with black death tolls in D.C., Chicago, or L.A. and ended with a 5 minute segment on Elizabeth Smart’s disappearance.

    5. If David there is telling the 100% truth there, I’ll eat my hat (probably won’t need it for a football game this year anyways). But at the same time, if he’s not actively threatening the officer, the officer is out of line beating him. We don’t have all the context for sure, but it sure looks like that officer should be facing assault charges.

      The problem is, even if we had all the context and that officer was 100% out of line, I doubt he’d face charges as a fed. And that’s the problem. It’s harder to prosecute feds for wrongdoing than even regular cops.

      1. If David there is telling the 100% truth there, I’ll eat my hat (probably won’t need it for a football game this year anyways). But at the same time, if he’s not actively threatening the officer,

        I swear, does no one watch video? He is standing. Still. Arms down.

        1. I swear, does no one watch video? He is standing. Still. Arms down.

          What’s he saying?

          The kid with the speaker overhead that ate a bean bag was shouting “We’re going to fucking kill you!” through the speaker.

          If the guy walked up to federal officers and said “I’m going to kill you Officer Smith!” a baton to the knee isn’t necessarily an illegal act. Certainly ill-conceived but not in defensible and no more ill-conceived than walking up to federal officers in riot gear in the middle of a riot and “Just asking a question.”

  14. I commend the federal government for what they are doing. If local libtard mayors bought and paid for by George Soros won’t do their jobs, then the feds have to step in and defend federal property. In Portland the Federal Court House was threatened, so the feds had jurisdiction and every right to go after those CRIMINAL TERRORISTS.

    1. Agreed. If local pols want their property vandalized, so be it. But federal property is mine, and I want it protected.

  15. I hope President Trump sends in whatever manpower AND WEAPONRY is necessary to ABSOLUTELY CRUSH ANTIFA/BLM! These domestic terrorists have NOTHING to do with peaceful demonstrations. They are COMMITTING ACTS OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM and should be treated as such. I say kill as many of these ANTIFA/BLM terrorists as it takes to put the unrest down for good.

    1. I was unconvinced, but then you started capitalizing a bunch of words to prove your sanity. Now I’m 10000% on your side. Pls disregard all my previous posts.

    2. They’re largely communists. I hope they get what’s coming to them.

    3. Don’t need to kill anyone. Just enforcing laws agaist arson, rock throwing, vandalism should suffice. Federal charges if locals won’t prosecute.

  16. The stupid here, it burns. According to the TDS crowd, we might as well as call undercover police officers Hitlter’s private Ginyu force. Commit federal crime or vandalize property on federal jurisdiction, and federal agents may arrive to arrest you.

    A violent anarchist cabal “occupied” public space without permission, and then executed two people without justification. The city does nothing to stop them, and actually provides them with supplies. They remain silent as they vandalize a courthouse and set things on fire.

    But oh no, but because DHS agents arrived in unmarked rental vans and wore masks for their own safety, the third Reich is here again.

    There are two kinds of people in this country – sane people worried about lunatics gunning down children in a society where cops are discouraged and held out, and the freakish retards who say “DUR antifa isn’t violent and property damage isn’t violence DUR” Only a week ago some African immigrant ran right into a group of protesters on a deserted freeway. In a vacuum, things could go tragically wrong with a flick of a wrist.

    And the libertarians at establishment level sides with the anarchists. I swear, they’re revealing themselves to be jacobins at every turn, unfit to govern because they cannot find a way to apply their good ideas in real life governance and practical situation. I can fold my arm and say “nope the feds shouldn’t involved with reducing childhood obesity”. When cities are burning and the incompetent local government won’t do their job you have to say “OK that’s enough”

    Why do you consider federal officers as some “occupying force”? Weren’t the feds called when the south refused integration? Where was this righteous outrage from Reason when the FBI was caught lying to obtain surveillance visa and held back exculpatory evidence? New notes emerge everyday revealing that anything they did on Flynn was full of crap.

    “Oh come on, he admitted to lying, it doesn’t even matter what the government did”

    Oh I wish I could quit this place.

    1. Hitlter’s private Ginyu force

      + <9000

    2. ENB hardest hit.

      It’s pretty amazing.

      It’s sanctioned nihilism at this point in those places.

      They’re literally run by woke-commies.

    3. A violent anarchist cabal “occupied” public space without permission, and then executed two people without justification. The city does nothing to stop them, and actually provides them with supplies. They remain silent as they vandalize a courthouse and set things on fire.

      A violent cabal seizes a public space, kills to black people, and posts the videos to the internet. The City and State turn a blind eye to their actions.

      1. So at the first sign of a local government making a decision you disagree with, send in the feds.

        1. That is, not surprisingly, a comment worthy of a lefty ignoramus, shitstain.

          1. I believe against all the forces of evidence and nature that you have it within you to examine why you all of a sudden support the feds interfering in local law enforcement against their will. I want to believe it’s merely mindless Trump worship that you’ll get over the day he’s shipped upstate to a farm for senile cartoon characters and a guy with a (D) after his name takes over.

            But part of me also believed that you have no principles whatsoever with respect to using federal government force as long as black people are the ones getting fucked.

            1. Those folks in Portland are the lightest skinned “black people” I’ve ever seen.

              1. Exactly how many black men in Portland have been suffocated by Federal Officers for selling loosies?

        2. So at the first sign of a local government making a decision you disagree with, send in the feds.

          So your real opposition to a self-restrained racist would be that he’s self-restraining?

        3. The “first sign”?

          I think that ship sailed a couple of months ago, and the fact that you would post a comment like this says a lot about you and your blind spots.

          1. Nobody thinks this is a good idea except Trump and those few hangers-on who support literally anything he could ever do. You think the Republican Party supports this action?

  17. When leftists regain total power, they’re going to actually employee secret police to kidnap political dissidents.
    They have never not done that in over a century of history.
    When that time comes, everyone who values liberty to any extent and/or opposes totalitarianism needs to be ready to go all in on revolution, because the peaceful approach of protesting and voting isn’t going to be enough.
    Maybe the left will change course after an electoral beat down in November, but I doubt it.
    And if they are victorious this go around, the last 5 years, and especially this year, should be enough to convince you of exactly what they intend to do.
    The storm is here

    1. *employ secret police

      And they will cite this entirely legitimate response to derelict local governments and sustained rioting as precedent

    2. You are accusing the “left” of an action that they have never done in this country, yet the “right” is actively doing now.

      1. The left most certainly has done it – see the KKK and the Obamagate fiasco

    3. The storm is here

      Again, public polling indicates republican-identifying voter numbers are down but firearm sales, including first time gun owners, are at record levels.

      One way or the other, this revolution is not going to end the way the revolutionaries think it will.

      1. And this is especially poignant in my area where such purchases require a special license *and* a 72 hour waiting period.

        People who presumably don’t identify as Republican, won’t stand in line to vote against Democrats, can’t mail in their ballots, and can’t be hassled with voter IDs will sign up for their FOID, drive an hour out of the city, spend several hundred dollars on a gun, fill out a background check form, pay the background check processing fee, only to have to drive back 3 days later to actually pick up the gun? Come back when you’ve got some believable facts.

  18. Hey!
    Leave Mayor Lightweight’s Chicago alone.
    Her depopulation program has been working out very well without any assistance from the feds.
    Plus, how can the mayor and city council make any money from the feds invading their lovely utopia?
    You can’t have one of the highest homicide rates in the world without some money being passed under the table in this day and age.

  19. “In a news conference this morning, Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot said she spoke with Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler on Sunday “to get a sense of what’s happened there.”

    Tim-meh!

  20. The problem Sen. Paul is they’re not handling it.

    1. I will stick with Sen. Paul. Go your own way.

      1. He’s right but you don’t think the situation is to the point it demands action? Those leaders are unwilling.

      2. Your comment is, as usual, completely worthless

      3. Generally, I am a Rand Paul fan. And, at some level, he is correct – ‘Local law enforcement can and should be handling these situations in our cities’. Yes, they should. But in this situation, leftist local leadership are preventing local law enforcement from doing this, and instead encouraging violence and destruction. Sometimes the real world doesn’t comply with our ideals.

        1. And ’rounding people up at will’ is a bit of a stretch, I think. Maybe he means ‘making arrests based on probable cause in a manner that does not further escalate the violence’. Words these days seem not to mean what they once meant.

        2. What a joke. Phantom scary blacks on FOX News is enough for you to throw away liberty for a little security (but for other people). You are all terrible libertarians.

          1. You find blacks scary, Tony, or just these particular blacks?

            1. There must be something scary about blacks because, the clerks have to follow them in stores, they frighten women by telling them to lease dogs in parks, and jog in our street if we fail to confront them. Black women are always asking President Trump question he doesn’t want to answer. No matter what we do to stop them they insist on voting, sometime standing in line for hours. Black are scary enough that even trained and armed police officers feel they have to shoot or subdue them.

              1. But enough about your social life.

              2. Why are you scared of black people, m4e?

  21. Lightfoot looks like she’d fit right into the drunken bar scene in Gremlins.

    1. My dad says she looks like the cryptkeeper from Tales from the Crypt.

      http://www.followingthenerd.com/site/wp-content/uploads/cryptkeeper.jpg

      1. Yeeesh.

    2. To me she looks like she just “walked” off the set of the walking dead.

  22. If federal police deploy to Chicago it will be interesting to see what impact, if any, their presence have on the daily body count. If the violence is reduced or quelled what will the BLM advocates say?

    1. Well Latin Disciples have them outnumbered 10:1. They are not even the largest Chicago gang.

      The feds best should have some inside intel and deals going on.

      1. “The feds best should have some inside intel and deals going on.”

        Sure. Someone’s gotta supply the protestors with the IEDs needed to bump this up to the next level.

        1. Fuck off, you pathetic piece of lefty shit.

  23. What’s the ratio of area-hours under federal control per civilian death in Portland vs. area-hours under ‘private’ control per civilian death in CHAZ?

    Doesn’t precendence dictate that we give any random bunch of halfwits who seize control of a building four unanswerable civilian deaths before we pull the plug?

      1. Who’s “STUPID”,
        Oh, don’t bother, stupid.

  24. This is Trump being manipulated into escalating the confrontation between protestors and the state, increasingly Trump himself. Not the sharpest move on his part since we all know his threats are bluffs.

    1. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work n my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home. Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page…ReadMore.

    2. Yep, Trump is a 6D chess master, except when the purveyor of bullshit and sophistry shows up to claim otherwise.
      Fuck off, you pathetic piece of lefty shit.

      1. I agree Eleanor. The GOP convention in Jacksonville, Florida should be fun to watch. It’s a tempting trap Trump can’t help but fall into.

    3. So, you’re saying Lightfoot and wheeler are sacrificing their cities to manipulate trump into a trap? Wow.

      That’s some evil shit.

      1. Evil like killing 100s of millions of people? Almost.

  25. Good grief. Can we please quit conflating rioters and vandals with “protesters”? Frickin height of disingenuous, vacuous reasoning.

  26. How many people are shot in Chicago every weekend? If local govt cannot protect citizens then the Fed needs to…portland has been taken over by bolsheviks..time for federal liberators to free the people…as Abe did and Ike did…

    The little wokes at Reason were fine when federal troops under obama’s federal troops killed rural libertarians now federal troops are being used to free people and your complaining? Bolshevik …

    1. 65 last weekend, with 11 fatalities, is what I’ve heard

    2. They’re throwing them in unmarked vans for their freedom. Are you a cartoon?

      1. Maybe they should stop sperging out and destroying public property like barbarians.

        1. So your argument is that Trump is not being tyrannical, merely incompetent? You think these actions will quell protests (which are about undue government force, something you sad pandas used to care about almost more than anything else)? You think they’re even meant to quell the protests?

          Stop being a willing pawn in Trump’s doomed but very fascist campaign game.

          1. Those officials seem pretty competent at party-vanning your allies.

            I actually hope the protests get worse. I want to see these guys get Kent Stated from the comfort of my couch.

  27. ‘The Trump administration claims it is protecting the city’s federal courthouse and other property from “lawless anarchists” who have vandalized and attacked the building.’ I note that the phrase lawless anarchists is in quotes in the original article. Do quotes in this context mean something different than they used to mean? Are they not in fact lawless anarchists?

  28. Department of Homeland Security Reportedly Sending 150 Agents to Chicago in Expansion of Federal Crackdown, in other news, Uber and Lyft are looking for up to 100 new drivers, Spectrum telecom also signaled it needed to fill so open positions.

  29. 150 Federal agents seems to be a bit low. I suggest about 1,000 might be more appropriate with each having the green light to intercede to stop illegal acts such as rioting, assault, arson, looting, and similar. Furthermore, I suggest that each of these agents be encouraged and ordered to arrest as many lawbreakers as possible if they commit a violation of any federal law. Federal arrest process is not the same as local or state arrests — there is no ‘revolving door’ and ‘no cash bail’ provisions!

  30. Since Trump’s escalation has spawned more protests that were otherwise dying down, every argument why this is actually a good plan for reducing protests is invalid. Why libertarians think jackbooted federal thugs ought to be putting down protests is another question entirely.

    Trump is a common rightwing internet troll, much like many of you, except with power. He is sending Homeland Security to assault cities for being too black.

    1. “Since Trump’s escalation has spawned more protests that were otherwise dying down,…”

      Shitstain claiming facts not in evidence, and also not surprising from drunk lefty ignoramus.

      1. Since you think that evidence only counts if Laura Ingraham shits it out of her mouth, would you at least acknowledge the possibility that a violent government response to protests about government violence might spawn extra protests?

        1. “Since you think that evidence only counts if Laura Ingraham shits it out of her mouth, would you at least acknowledge the possibility that a violent government response to protests about government violence might spawn extra protests?”

          Since you post idiotic comments such as you did here, would you kindly fuck off an die, shitstain?
          Really. Your family will be proud and the world will be a better place.

        2. I happen to be watching a vid of people producing an economic good from raw material; turning a low-value material into a higher value one, and thereby increasing the wealth of humanity, which pretty much defines the activities of the company which I own.
          I have a strong suspicion you have not the least idea of what that means or why it matters, right, shitstain?

          1. I do apologize for changing the subject, but I am curious as to whether your idiocy even accepts that fact.

          2. Word of advice: if you like your calm, productive capitalist society, don’t put fascists in charge of it.

            1. If fascists were in charge, your dumb ass would have been lined up against a wall and shot already.

        3. You clearly watch Fox News more than any commenter on this board.

          1. It’s become increasingly hard to tell which subsidiary of Hillbilly Pravda you all get your identical thoughts from.

            1. I don’t even have cable TV, so your whinging falls a little flat. I realize you think your side gets to do whatever it wants without repercussions, but that only works with indulgent parents or politicians.

              1. So your calls for people who disagree with you politically to be murdered by the state—came up with that all on your own did you?

                1. Tony’s very offended that the State murdered those Nazis who were just peacefully protesting in France

                  1. It’s not normal to call for your political opponents to be murdered by the state. It kind of makes you the definition of evil.

    2. Portland is too black for Trump?

    3. Good, get all the rioters and their moms in the open where they can be seen and shamed.

  31. Good. Local officials are doing nothing to curb the violence.

    1. ^^ See Red Rocks, it’s all the same mindless repetition. This person doesn’t know what local law enforcement is doing. This pitiful creature has not been to these places or read their local news. He just repeats the words. He might as well be cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs and get a check out of the deal. But we know Trump doesn’t like to pay his sluts.

      1. Over 50 days of rioting says otherwise.

        1. How many days are people limited to having a first amendment?

  32. I am again surprised by how easy it is to justify Federal intervention by people commenting on a libertarian site. People who would say the government has no business protecting our population’s health, the global environment, the right of minorities, or immigrant children, but we have to protect statues and buildings. This isn’t philosophy, this is tribal.

    1. ” this is tribal”

      And you shouldn’t be surprised. Every day is tribal day.

    2. The rioters are just hearkening back to your 60s-era forebears when they were bombing various government buildings. Don’t try and pretend you actually give a shit about the lengths of federal authority when you consistently pimp a tribe that demands an ever-increasing amount of it.

      If you don’t like the feds party-vanning your allies, stop demanding that they control every aspect of our lives. For now, you and your boos can take the mildly-lubed ass-fucking that’s happening right now.

      1. A lot of the sixties was peaceful protesting. These were meet with tear gas, dogs and batons. Or in the case of Kent State with gunfire. My parents were God fearing, law abiding American citizens. But what they saw in the street convinced them things had to change. The young people protesting did not bring civil rights or end the Vietnam War it was people like my parents sick of how their country was being tore apart.

        1. What was happening at Kent State was NOT peaceful protesting.

        2. George Floyd =/= Vietnam

    3. There’s a balance point for everything.
      Do Libertarians really belive the govt has no role in public health? Or, just that maybe they get too involved?

  33. STAY HOME AND STARTING WORK AT HOME EASILY… MORE AND MORE EARNING DAILY BY JUST FOLLOW THESE STEPS, I am a student and i work daily on this site and earn money..HERE══════►►USA Dollars.com

  34. I don’t know what to say really what you share is so good and helpful to the community, I feel that it makes our community much more developed, thanks. Heres what I do…Heres what I do …. Heres what I do۔۔۔۔۔Read More.

  35. The plan is an escalation of the Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on protests

    There have been no such efforts. There has been talk and weak efforts about cracking down on rioting and looting.

  36. “Federal police authority to “protect monuments” has instead delivered a substantial challenge to civil liberties. Patrick Eddington discusses the current federal police action in Portland, Oregon. ”

    https://www.cato.org/multimedia/cato-daily-podcast/civil-liberties-vs-federal-cops-portland

    The two big libertarian outlets seem to have flipped tones; as Reason pulls on extra plush velvet gloves to report and comment on Trump’s goon squad attacks on liberty, Cato has taken off its velvet gloves.

  37. Trump and other White House officials say the feds may soon be coming to other major cities as well.

    ANTIFA is terrorist organization. BLM might be declared one as well.

  38. Can’t give up liberty for safety?
    Gee, sen Wyden, will you say the same about COVID lockdowns?
    The feds are threatening neighborhoods? Really?? I thought they were just surrounding the block of the federal building? “protesters” leave citizen property aline…problem solved.

Please to post comments