Printable View
You don't know your history. The US President has wide ill-defined emergency powers. It is these emergency powers which Roosevelt used to place Japanese Americans in Internment camps in WW2. (EO 9066)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mabouya
These powers are only implied by the constitution but they exist. He just needs to declare a public emergency or some other thing with Bill Barr & Co giving him legal cover.
Opinion | Trump’s Occupation of American Cities Has Begun - The New York Times
"The month after Donald Trump’s inauguration, the Yale historian Timothy Snyder published the best-selling book “On Tyranny: Twenty Lessons From the Twentieth Century.” It was part of a small flood of titles meant to help Americans find their bearings as the new president laid siege to liberal democracy.
One of Snyder’s lessons was, “Be wary of paramilitaries.” He wrote, “When the pro-leader paramilitary and the official police and military intermingle, the end has come.” In 2017, the idea of unidentified agents in camouflage snatching leftists off the streets without warrants might have seemed like a febrile Resistance fantasy. Now it’s happening.
According to a lawsuit filed by Oregon’s attorney general, Ellen Rosenblum, on Friday, federal agents “have been using unmarked vehicles to drive around downtown Portland, detain protesters, and place them into the officers’ unmarked vehicles” since at least last Tuesday. The protesters are neither arrested nor told why they’re being held.
There’s no way to know the affiliation of all the agents — they’ve been wearing military fatigues with patches that just say “Police” — but The Times reported that some of them are part of a specialized Border Patrol group “that normally is tasked with investigating drug smuggling organizations.”
The Trump administration has announced that it intends to send a similar force to other cities; on Monday, The Chicago Tribune reported on plans to deploy about 150 federal agents to Chicago. “I don’t need invitations by the state,” Chad Wolf, acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, said on Fox News Monday, adding, “We’re going to do that whether they like us there or not.”
In Portland, we see what such an occupation looks like. Oregon Public Broadcasting reported on 29-year-old Mark Pettibone, who early last Wednesday was grabbed off the street by unidentified men, hustled into an unmarked minivan and taken to a holding cell in the federal courthouse. He was eventually released without learning who had abducted him.
A federal agent shot 26-year-old Donavan La Bella in the head with an impact munition; he was hospitalized and needed reconstructive surgery. In a widely circulated video, a 53-year-old Navy veteran was pepper sprayed and beaten after approaching federal agents to ask them about their oaths to the Constitution, leaving him with two broken bones.
There’s something particularly terrifying in the use of Border Patrol agents against American dissidents. After the attack on protesters near the White House last month, the military pushed back on Trump’s attempts to turn it against the citizenry. Police officers in many cities are willing to brutalize demonstrators, but they’re under local control. U.S. Customs and Border Protection, however, is under federal authority, has leadership that’s fanatically devoted to Trump and is saturated with far-right politics.
“It doesn’t surprise me that Donald Trump picked C.B.P. to be the ones to go over to Portland and do this,” Representative Joaquin Castro, Democrat of Texas, told me. “It has been a very problematic agency in terms of respecting human rights and in terms of respecting the law.”
It is true that C.B.P. is not an extragovernmental militia, and so might not fit precisely into Snyder’s “On Tyranny” schema. But when I spoke to Snyder on Monday, he suggested the distinction isn’t that significant. “The state is allowed to use force, but the state is allowed to use force according to rules,” he said. These agents, operating outside their normal roles, are by all appearances behaving lawlessly.
Snyder pointed out that the history of autocracy offers several examples of border agents being used against regime enemies.
“This is a classic way that violence happens in authoritarian regimes, whether it’s Franco’s Spain or whether it’s the Russian Empire,” said Snyder. “The people who are getting used to committing violence on the border are then brought in to commit violence against people in the interior.”
Castro worries that since the agents are unidentified, far-right groups could easily masquerade as them to go after their enemies on the left. “It becomes more likely the more that this tactic is used,” he said. “I think it’s unconstitutional and dangerous and heading towards fascism.”
On Friday, the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, tweeted about what’s happening in Portland: “Trump and his storm troopers must be stopped.” She didn’t mention what Congress plans to do to stop them, but the House will soon vote on a homeland security appropriations bill. People outraged about the administration’s police-state tactics should demand, at a minimum, that Congress hold up the department’s funding until those tactics are halted."
Portland protests and unmarked federal agents arresting people, explained - Vox
"Oregon’s governor doesn’t want them. Oregon’s senators don’t want them. Portland’s mayor and city commissioners don’t want them. And Portland’s residents don’t want them.
And yet, at the urging of President Donald Trump, federal officers are roaming the streets of Oregon’s biggest city in unmarked vehicles, detaining protesters without identifying themselves.
Multiple reports and videos clearly show heavily armed federal law enforcement officers dressed in camouflage stepping out of unmarked civilian vans and forcibly detaining anti-racism and anti-police brutality demonstrators on the streets of Portland, often far away from any federal property (where federal officials have jurisdiction). In many instances, those taken into custody hadn’t clearly violated any laws.
After several days of fear and confusion as reports of these mysterious activities piled up, the Trump administration acknowledged that the Department of Homeland Security sent officers from Border Patrol and other agencies to Portland last week to protect federal property, namely a federal courthouse in the heart of the city, which has been tagged by graffiti and had a small fire and broken windows.
Trump administration officials, especially acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Chad Wolf, have defended the aggressive tactics. They’ve portrayed the largely peaceful George Floyd-inspired protests in the city, which have lasted over 50 days and at times led to some property destruction and minor attacks on authorities, as a “violent mob” of “lawless anarchists.”
“The city of Portland has been under siege ... by a violent mob while local political leaders refuse to restore order to protect their city,” he said in a lengthy July 16 statement. “Each night, lawless anarchists destroy and desecrate property, including the federal courthouse, and attack the brave law enforcement officers protecting it.”
“DHS will not abdicate its solemn duty to protect federal facilities and those within them,” he added.
But critics say the heavy-handed approach is an overreaction to mostly peaceful protests and detrimental to the rule of law. “This is the stuff of fascist regimes, not American democracy,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) told me. “It’s important that we don’t have secret police in America,” Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR) also said in an interview.
Two direct consequences have come out of the national controversy.
First, activists and the lawyers who represent them say the once-dwindling crowds are growing again in response to the federal government’s actions. “More and more protesters are coming out each night,” said Ashlee Albies, a local attorney who represents Don’t Shoot Portland, a civil rights organization. “There are more protesters now than there are feds.”
A mounting standoff, some worry, could potentially lead to even more tensions and violence. In just the past day, demonstrators burned the Portland police union’s building and federal officers fired tear gas at mothers peacefully protesting.
Second, a legal battle is now underway, pitting Portland’s citizens against a federal government with broad statutory authorities. Few, though, believe the courts will compel the Trump administration to stand down. At most, it might lead federal law enforcement to act more cautiously, but they’ll still operate in areas where locals don’t want them to.
Which means the events in Portland are likely to persist for quite some time, testing the limits of federal authority in American cities and the resolve of those who live in them. “At this point, we’re already in a constitutional crisis,” said Juan Chávez, a lawyer and director of the civil rights project at the Oregon Justice Resource Center."
As a follow on to what @guido posted above....truly crazy and scary....now coming to NYC, Baltimore,Chicago....http://https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-trump-federal-squads-nyc-protests-20200720-3hdswhvilvg2jd4bs3nbcsgame-story.html
Seems he's including Detroit because of our Governor, not due to all the wild unrest in Detroit. He's doing it to inflame things and create problems. Continuing the pattern he started in Portland.
"Detroit's protests have been mostly peaceful and have not resulted in recent violence. Mayor Mike Duggan's office did not agree that more help is needed in Detroit.
Following quote is from Detroit News, doesn't appear that Detroit is in need of any outside force (that so far in Portland seems to be inflaming tensions).
"Detroit is one of the few large cities in the country that has experienced no fires, no stores looted and never requested the National Guard during the protests," Duggan spokesman John Roach said. "Not sure where the president is getting his information.""
https://www.detroitnews.com/.../trump.../3287770001/
Here's a reasonably good overview of the legal aspects of feds in Portland. What the Heck Are Federal Law Enforcement Officers Doing in Portland? - Lawfare
The people working behind the scenes in the Trump administration are not idiots. They've been beavering away at the various powers created in the name of anti-terrorism by legislative action and finding all the spaces that at least allow them to argue that they have the legal authority to mix things up to their benefit. Their central argument now seems to be that they have the legal authority to protect federal property. What they define as federal property may be expansive, as shown by the willingness of federal agents to apprehend protestors not in the immediate presence of federal buildings. There will be suits coming on whether or not they actually do have that legal authority, but I will guess that there will also be attempts to get injunctions to make the feds stand down or stay out of cities where they are not invited. I also don't think it is likely that Trump will obey those injunctions. Nor do I think it is likely that the states and cities will be able to keep federal agents out while the legal proceedings churn slowly away.
How many of these cities are no longer on speaking terms with their municipal police forces? What Portland could do if they wanted to press the issue is cordon off the federal property and state that they will recognize federal authority up to a particular boundary beyond which the feds are outside their legal jurisdiction and will be arrested if they attempt to enforce the law. But what municipal police force is going to be willing to take on the feds at this point?
Question: if law enforcement officers, federal or otherwise, do not identify themselves, are the public to supposed to know that they are law enforcement officers as opposed to, say, militia?
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/21/o...d%20Columnists
"Something dangerous is taking shape within the Department of Homeland Security.
We got our first glimpse of it last week in Oregon, when unidentified federal agents clad in camouflage and tactical gear descended on Portland, beat and tear-gassed protesters and pulled others into unmarked vehicles for arrest and questioning.
Apparently cobbled together using personnel from Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Transportation Security Administration and the Coast Guard, these “rapid deployment teams” are formally tasked with securing federal buildings from graffiti and vandalism in tandem with the Federal Protective Agency, which is ordinarily responsible for the job. But they’re being used to suppress protests in what appears to be an election year gambit by the Trump administration to create images of disorder and chaos on which the president can then campaign. “This political theater from President Trump has nothing to do with public safety,” Kate Brown, the Democratic governor of Oregon, said last week, “Trump is looking for a confrontation in Oregon in the hopes of winning political points in Ohio or Iowa.”
The official tasked with coordinating all this action, the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Chad Wolf, is an enthusiastic participant, casting protesters as “violent anarchists and extremists” in order to justify what’s been done to them. “The city of Portland has been under siege for 47 straight days by a violent mob while local political leaders refuse to restore order to protect their city,” Wolf said. “This siege can end if state and local officials decide to take appropriate action instead of refusing to enforce the law.”
On Sunday, Wolf’s deputy, Ken Cuccinelli (whose official title is “Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Deputy Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security”), told NPR that Homeland Security would be taking these tactics nationwide. Wolf affirmed this, telling Fox News that his agency can act with or without local cooperation. “I don’t need invitations by the state, state mayors or state governors to do our job,” he said. “We’re going to do that, whether they like us there or not.” President Trump likewise vowed to send federal law enforcement agents to several more cities, amid reports that a Portland-like force was headed to Chicago.
There’s more. In addition to its rapid deployment teams, the Department of Homeland Security has also authorized domestic surveillance of Americans on the basis of the president’s June executive order on the protection of statues and monuments. Writing for the Lawfare blog, the legal scholars Steve Vladeck and Benjamin Wittes explain that the “animating premise” of the new rules “is that the threat to monuments and statues is a homeland security threat warranting intelligence analysis and collection by federal officials.” The administration, they continue, is using the “cover of minor property damage” to “justify intelligence gathering against ordinary Americans” for “peacefully protesting their government.”
The United States is no stranger to the use of military or quasi-military force against protesters. During the Whiskey Rebellion, a tax revolt of framers and distillers in western Pennsylvania that culminated in 1794, President George Washington raised a federal militia to meet insurgents in the field. To break the Pullman Strike of 1894, during which workers shut down rail traffic in much of the country, President Grover Cleveland deployed federal troops to Chicago, sparking a confrontation that ended in the deaths of 30 workers. And in 1932, under orders from President Herbert Hoover, Gen. Douglas MacArthur confronted the Bonus Army — a group of World War I veterans who camped out in Washington, D.C., petitioning the government for their promised bonuses for military service — with infantry, cavalry and tanks.
The difference lies less in the acts themselves than in the ways these events developed. Use of military force against strikers and protesters is certainly controversial, but for the most part it unfolds along clear lines of responsibility and involves powers expressly granted to the president. As the example of Washington and the Whiskey rebellion demonstrates, it was part of the constitutional design. President Trump’s internal security force was, by contrast, created out of public view, using loopholes and expansive interpretations of the law. The reason Customs and Border Protection can be used to police a protest in Portland is, for example, because the Department of Homeland Security can supplement law enforcement from one agency with personnel from another.
Editors’ Picks
He Kept a Community’s Bears in Check, but He Won’t Anymore
Alex Trebek Is Still in the Game
Vacation in the Summer of Covid-19
There are other elements beyond the fact of its existence that make the emergence of an internal security force extremely troubling. As a candidate, Trump actively cultivated both the leadership and the rank-and-file at of the border police and ICE. In turn, they gave him his support — unions for both agencies endorsed Trump for president. Under his leadership, these agencies have shown themselves to be deeply simpatico with the administration’s draconian approach to immigration at the southern border, with aggressive action against migrants, asylum-seekers and unauthorized immigrants.
A secretive, nationwide police force — created without congressional input or authorization, formed from highly politicized agencies, tasked with rooting out vague threats and answerable only to the president — is a nightmare out of the fever dreams of the founding generation, federalists and antifederalists alike. It’s something Americans continue to fear and for good reason. It is a power that cannot and should not exist in a democracy, lest it undermine and destroy the entire project.
Democrats, thankfully, seem to recognize this. “We live in a democracy, not a banana republic. We will not tolerate the use of Oregonians, Washingtonians — or any other Americans — as props in President Trump’s political games,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Saturday, in a joint statement with Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon. “The House is committed to moving swiftly to curb these egregious abuses of power immediately.”
But rhetoric isn’t enough. The House must act and act now. In addition to holding hearings and investigations — including eliciting testimony from Wolf and other officials — Democrats should condition final passage of its Homeland Security appropriations bill on a complete halt to operations in Portland and other cities and the dissolution of the response force. Should Democrats find themselves in control of both legislative branches and the White House next year, they should also use the opportunity to amend the relatively obscure Federal Vacancies Reform Act, which Trump has used to install loyalists in high-level positions without Senate confirmation.
There’s also the issue of the Department of Homeland Security itself. Since its creation in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, the department has been criticized for its size, scope and waste. “It goes without saying that I observed up-close the dysfunction, turf battles, and inherent limitations in an entity that does so much,” Matt Mayer, a Homeland Security official under George W. Bush, wrote in 2015. Report after report — from congressional oversight committees, from the Government Accountability Office — show an agency practically defined by waste and dysfunction. And if the Trump years have shown anything, it is that the agencies within D.H.S., and especially ICE and C.B.P., are in desperate need of root-and-branch reform or some other fundamental change.
Should President Trump fail to win re-election, perhaps the way to prevent a replay of the abuse in Portland is to dismantle the institution behind it. Just as local communities do not need militarized police officers, the federal government does not need an alphabet soup of militarized law enforcement agencies, as well as the cultures of prejudice and brutality that have gone along with them. If and when we close the book on Trump, perhaps we should use the opportunity to close the book on Homeland Security too.
Jamelle Bouie became a New York Times Opinion columnist in 2019. Before that he was the chief political correspondent for Slate magazine. He is based in Charlottesville, Va., and Washington. @jbouie "
Opinion | The Border War in Portland - The New York Times
"Something dangerous is taking shape within the Department of Homeland Security.
We got our first glimpse of it last week in Oregon, when unidentified federal agents clad in camouflage and tactical gear descended on Portland, beat and tear-gassed protesters and pulled others into unmarked vehicles for arrest and questioning.
Apparently cobbled together using personnel from Customs and Border Protection, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Transportation Security Administration and the Coast Guard, these “rapid deployment teams” are formally tasked with securing federal buildings from graffiti and vandalism in tandem with the Federal Protective Agency, which is ordinarily responsible for the job. But they’re being used to suppress protests in what appears to be an election year gambit by the Trump administration to create images of disorder and chaos on which the president can then campaign. “This political theater from President Trump has nothing to do with public safety,” Kate Brown, the Democratic governor of Oregon, said last week, “Trump is looking for a confrontation in Oregon in the hopes of winning political points in Ohio or Iowa.”
The official tasked with coordinating all this action, the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, Chad Wolf, is an enthusiastic participant, casting protesters as “violent anarchists and extremists” in order to justify what’s been done to them. “The city of Portland has been under siege for 47 straight days by a violent mob while local political leaders refuse to restore order to protect their city,” Wolf said. “This siege can end if state and local officials decide to take appropriate action instead of refusing to enforce the law.”
On Sunday, Wolf’s deputy, Ken Cuccinelli (whose official title is “Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Deputy Secretary for the Department of Homeland Security”), told NPR that Homeland Security would be taking these tactics nationwide. Wolf affirmed this, telling Fox News that his agency can act with or without local cooperation. “I don’t need invitations by the state, state mayors or state governors to do our job,” he said. “We’re going to do that, whether they like us there or not.” President Trump likewise vowed to send federal law enforcement agents to several more cities, amid reports that a Portland-like force was headed to Chicago.
There’s more. In addition to its rapid deployment teams, the Department of Homeland Security has also authorized domestic surveillance of Americans on the basis of the president’s June executive order on the protection of statues and monuments. Writing for the Lawfare blog, the legal scholars Steve Vladeck and Benjamin Wittes explain that the “animating premise” of the new rules “is that the threat to monuments and statues is a homeland security threat warranting intelligence analysis and collection by federal officials.” The administration, they continue, is using the “cover of minor property damage” to “justify intelligence gathering against ordinary Americans” for “peacefully protesting their government.”
The United States is no stranger to the use of military or quasi-military force against protesters. During the Whiskey Rebellion, a tax revolt of framers and distillers in western Pennsylvania that culminated in 1794, President George Washington raised a federal militia to meet insurgents in the field. To break the Pullman Strike of 1894, during which workers shut down rail traffic in much of the country, President Grover Cleveland deployed federal troops to Chicago, sparking a confrontation that ended in the deaths of 30 workers. And in 1932, under orders from President Herbert Hoover, Gen. Douglas MacArthur confronted the Bonus Army — a group of World War I veterans who camped out in Washington, D.C., petitioning the government for their promised bonuses for military service — with infantry, cavalry and tanks.
The difference lies less in the acts themselves than in the ways these events developed. Use of military force against strikers and protesters is certainly controversial, but for the most part it unfolds along clear lines of responsibility and involves powers expressly granted to the president. As the example of Washington and the Whiskey rebellion demonstrates, it was part of the constitutional design. President Trump’s internal security force was, by contrast, created out of public view, using loopholes and expansive interpretations of the law. The reason Customs and Border Protection can be used to police a protest in Portland is, for example, because the Department of Homeland Security can supplement law enforcement from one agency with personnel from another.
There are other elements beyond the fact of its existence that make the emergence of an internal security force extremely troubling. As a candidate, Trump actively cultivated both the leadership and the rank-and-file at of the border police and ICE. In turn, they gave him his support — unions for both agencies endorsed Trump for president. Under his leadership, these agencies have shown themselves to be deeply simpatico with the administration’s draconian approach to immigration at the southern border, with aggressive action against migrants, asylum-seekers and unauthorized immigrants.
A secretive, nationwide police force — created without congressional input or authorization, formed from highly politicized agencies, tasked with rooting out vague threats and answerable only to the president — is a nightmare out of the fever dreams of the founding generation, federalists and antifederalists alike. It’s something Americans continue to fear and for good reason. It is a power that cannot and should not exist in a democracy, lest it undermine and destroy the entire project.
Democrats, thankfully, seem to recognize this. “We live in a democracy, not a banana republic. We will not tolerate the use of Oregonians, Washingtonians — or any other Americans — as props in President Trump’s political games,” said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Saturday, in a joint statement with Representative Earl Blumenauer of Oregon. “The House is committed to moving swiftly to curb these egregious abuses of power immediately.”
But rhetoric isn’t enough. The House must act and act now. In addition to holding hearings and investigations — including eliciting testimony from Wolf and other officials — Democrats should condition final passage of its Homeland Security appropriations bill on a complete halt to operations in Portland and other cities and the dissolution of the response force. Should Democrats find themselves in control of both legislative branches and the White House next year, they should also use the opportunity to amend the relatively obscure Federal Vacancies Reform Act, which Trump has used to install loyalists in high-level positions without Senate confirmation.
There’s also the issue of the Department of Homeland Security itself. Since its creation in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, the department has been criticized for its size, scope and waste. “It goes without saying that I observed up-close the dysfunction, turf battles, and inherent limitations in an entity that does so much,” Matt Mayer, a Homeland Security official under George W. Bush, wrote in 2015. Report after report — from congressional oversight committees, from the Government Accountability Office — show an agency practically defined by waste and dysfunction. And if the Trump years have shown anything, it is that the agencies within D.H.S., and especially ICE and C.B.P., are in desperate need of root-and-branch reform or some other fundamental change.
Should President Trump fail to win re-election, perhaps the way to prevent a replay of the abuse in Portland is to dismantle the institution behind it. Just as local communities do not need militarized police officers, the federal government does not need an alphabet soup of militarized law enforcement agencies, as well as the cultures of prejudice and brutality that have gone along with them. If and when we close the book on Trump, perhaps we should use the opportunity to close the book on Homeland Security too.
Jamelle Bouie became a New York Times Opinion columnist in 2019. Before that he was the chief political correspondent for Slate magazine. He is based in Charlottesville, Va., and Washington. @jbouie "
I have thought for some time that all he was lacking were brownshirts, and that Eric Prince would be only too happy to supply the muscle.
But looking at the interview with Chris Wallace, he seems to be reaching the limit of his ability to pretend to be an authority figure.
All we need is for Trump to start wearing a fancy generalissimo uniform with a big feather, for the transformation to be complete. It's a mistake to underestimate this administration because no bridge is too far.Quote:
Originally Posted by ides1056
1. Since you are amalgamating 'agents' from all over into a new force, it'd be easy to bring have contract workers(mercs) in the border patrol and sneak them in this way.
2. At the end, authoritarians always use the state to arrest and prosecute the opposition candidate. Opposition is not legitimate. Expect the block buster report from the DOJ when Trump needs it the most.
I also find it fascinating the administration is sending agents from other regions to liberal cities. This is another favorite tactic of dictators. The problem with NY Police policing NY is they are still New Yorkers. These are their fellow New Yorkers. The same goes for local Chicago Police, local Seattle Police.
But if I am from the border region of Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and I am sent north to places I don't know, well I might just be willing to swing my baton a little harder and view them as the enemy.
In Tianmen square protests all those years ago in Beijing, the Chinese Gov brought in troops from the outer provinces to police the situation. Some of them hardly understood the Beijing dialect.
Chaotic Scenes in Portland as Backlash to Federal Deployment Grows - The New York Times
"By Mike Baker
July 21, 2020
Updated 7:16 p.m. ET
PORTLAND, Ore. — With a ski helmet and goggles on her head, Allison Hyder recounted how she had told relatives that she planned to stand at the rear of protests in downtown Portland. But, in the early hours of Tuesday, the grandmother of five found herself right up front, locking arms with other mothers dressed in yellow.
Standing with a pack of other protesters, she chanted in front of the boarded-up entrance to the federal courthouse. She remained resolute even as some in the crowd began prying at the wood affixed to the building, leaving Ms. Hyder uneasy about where things were headed.
“I am the face of ‘anarchy,’” Ms. Hyder declared. “The people of the U.S. need to know that moms, grandmas and nurses are out here in the middle of the night demanding rights for everybody.”
The demonstrations that have shuddered through Portland for 54 consecutive nights have drawn out a complicated mix of grievances, with a wide array of people expressing them using a multitude of tactics to make sure they get heard.
In Oregon, a state with a deep history of racism that included racial-exclusion laws that extended into the 20th century, the Portland protests have persisted since George Floyd’s killing even as Black Lives Matter demonstrations have waned in many other parts of the country.
But some leaders in the Black community, grateful for a widespread discussion on race, worry that what should be a moment for racial justice in Portland could be squandered by violence. Business owners supportive of change have been left demoralized by the mayhem the protests have brought. The city’s mayor, Ted Wheeler, despised by many of those in the streets, has now been fighting to have federal officers leave them alone.
Amid the Gordian knot of frustrations and escalations, most everyone seems to agree about one thing: The combative deployment of camouflaged federal agents has only made things worse.
President Trump, in pushing a law-and-order message for his re-election campaign, has embraced a dark vision of Portland as a lawless place filled with “anarchists” who “hate our country.” His administration’s crackdown has brought armed officers from a variety of federal agencies to the streets, including tactical units typically suited for handling drug smuggling. They have been firing tear gas and pulling protesters into unmarked vans.
The president’s portrayal of Portland and the crackdown he has unleashed have infuriated protesters who believe that Mr. Trump is trying to use the city’s unrest as political theater during an election year. He has forced a federal police presence on a city that does not want it — a city with such a rich tradition of protest that an aide to another Republican president, George H.W. Bush, reportedly referred to it as Little Beirut.
Chad F. Wolf, the acting secretary of homeland security, said at a news conference on Tuesday that he had tried to collaborate with Mayor Wheeler and Gov. Kate Brown, asking them this month whether they were overwhelmed and wanted resources, including personnel.
He said that when he asked what they needed to “bring the violence to a close and still allow the peaceful protesters to protest each and every night,” they told him to stay out of the city.
“I asked the mayor and governor, how long do you plan on having this continue?” Mr. Wolf said. “Is it 82 nights or 92 nights?”
While the protests have consumed parts of downtown after dark, much of the city has been left untouched. By day, boaters putter up the Willamette River while joggers run down the trail alongside it. On Monday evening, large groups of diners were eating on outdoor patios a few blocks away from the county’s Justice Center, where protesters were amassing for the night.
To the protesters, the president’s unusual deployment of federal power has provided yet more compelling evidence that their fears about rising fascism in the United States are justified.
In the Portland area, activists aligned with the loosely organized group known as antifa have long denounced police militarization and a punishing criminal justice system, and have clashed with the police in recent years. Some of the activists operating under the antifa umbrella, wearing all black, have embraced anarchist-style tactics, while others have shown up to demonstrate peacefully.
The protests of the last seven weeks developed a near-nightly cycle of conflict between protesters and the authorities, with officers reacting to objects being thrown by protesters and protesters expressing alarm by the use of tear gas that wafted over peaceful people.
Reflecting an oft-heard refrain, Angel Almanza, 44, said a government could only suppress people so much before they would respond in kind. “This has been an act of self-defense,” Mr. Almanza said.
The strife on the streets escalated with the arrival of federal forces, which have relied heavily on tear gas, munitions fired from paintball-style guns and batons.
Among the others concerned by the federal crackdown was Joey Gibson, a far-right activist who has long battled with Portland’s antifa demonstrators and was charged with a felony last year for his role in a street brawl with activists. He said he found it somewhat frightening to see video of one officer whacking a Navy veteran with a baton, and he worried that the Trump administration was setting a precedent that would encourage other presidents to embrace a more expansive use of federal forces.
“It is very concerning,” Mr. Gibson said.
On Tuesday morning, dozens of agents moved around the streets and at times threw people to the ground to detain them. From behind a wood facade of the federal courthouse, officers at times used small tactical holes to shoot less-lethal weapons or pepper spray. As federal officers appeared to try detaining one person, others in the crowd rushed to free the person.
The Portland authorities have cited continuing troubles with the protesters, and on Tuesday the police said a jewelry store had been looted. Protesters tried to light fires against the federal courthouse, drawing officers back out to disperse them.
The nightly protests have also alarmed the owners of downtown businesses, who were first hit with widespread looting in the aftermath of Mr. Floyd’s death in Minneapolis on Memorial Day and have struggled to navigate the weeks since. Stacey Gibson, who owns a Subway sandwich shop downtown, said the store’s windows have been boarded up much of the time, which has contributed to shrinking sales already limited by the coronavirus and related lockdowns.
Ms. Gibson said she was frustrated that the city’s Police Department did not seem to have the resources to respond when there was a problem, and she was upset that city leaders have been unable to find a resolution. She is not optimistic about the future of her store, either.
“At this point, I’m just trying to figure out how to get out and to minimize the damage,” Ms. Gibson said.
The protests after Mr. Floyd’s death drew thousands to the streets in Portland, creating powerful images of crowds lying facedown on the Burnside Bridge in honor of Mr. Floyd.
While the numbers dwindled over the subsequent weeks and Governor Brown expressed a belief that things were beginning to cool off, the crowds have surged back in recent days, with protesters chanting “Feds go home” and focusing much of their ire on the federal courthouse.
The demonstrations have continued to have a strong component of calls for racial justice, including on Monday night, when thousands chanted “Black Lives Matter” and young Black activists led the predominantly white crowd in speeches and song.
But some Black leaders have grown wary of the persistent unrest, fearing that it is distracting from the goals of racial justice. Antoinette Edwards, the former leader of the city’s Office of Youth Violence Prevention, called for peace and said she wanted to meet with protesters.
“I will be there to have a conversation with folks: What can we do to move this forward, for peace, for policy, for all of us?” she said.
The mayor and the governor have both called on federal forces to leave in order to ease tensions and give the city space to resolve the differences."
Sergio Olmos contributed reporting from Portland and Zolan Kanno-Youngs from Washington.
May have missed this if posted above but when trump was asked by Mike Wallace if he would accept a defeat at the polls and leave office he responded "we will have to wait and see". This, along with his deployed thugs, really worries me.
https://i.redd.it/uuqpmj53rac51.jpg
My how the turntables.
This is from the party of state's rights. Limited Federal involvement, my ass. I just wonder where all the 2A militia types who claim to be arming up to defend themselves from tyrannical government are. This seems like exactly what they've been waiting for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clean39T
Contest the election is plan A, winning outright is plan B. If you recall, he was complaining in 2016 the election was rigged, but when he won it was okay.Quote:
Originally Posted by claritycycler
So here is the plan.
1. Lay ground work for doubt by constantly claiming mail-in ballots to steal the election. You can't call these by there proper name, absentee ballots, because people know about absentee ballots.
2. Prior to Nov 3, you may already know some of the absentee ballot count, so expect the S**t to be hitting the fan prior to physical vote.
3. Suppress the vote in key democratic areas in tight states- Wisconsin, Florida, Georgia, Ohio
4. If that fails, file lawsuits to throw out certain ballots with state election commission
5. If that fails, have a member of congress raise objections when congress meets to declare the electoral count.
The only saving grace here is January 3 the new congress is seated. Hope for a blue wave in the senate.
Hillary had 48% to 46% of popular vote nationally and lost. I have seen analysis that shows this can go as high as 54% and you still can lose as a democrat.
Then there's these guys right here in River City,
Minnesota's Boogaloo movement: Armed, eager for societal collapse - StarTribune.com
Conunudrum:
« secretive federal agents are monitoring social media and using images from YouTube against protesters in Portland »
"As soon as our feeds go down, the protesters face fresh assaults from law enforcement."
Portland protester arrested after feds spot him in a YouTube livestream - Vox
'Been wondering the same. Why are they so scarce now when this could be their biggest showtime???Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Strongin
Most 2A militia types are also racists, so they have no interest in supporting protests that have anything to do with BLM. They're snug at home, cheering on DHS/CBP.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chik
Greg
Putting aside who they support, their enemy (the feds) is on full view. Shouldn't they be having a massive hard-on?Quote:
Originally Posted by gregl
Their purported enemy is the Government. Their real enemy is anyone who disagrees with their worldview. Militia types are typically unnamed white men with guns, the same image as the DHS/CBP stormtroopers in Portland. The militia types identify with the stormtroopers. They love the fact that the DHS/CBP agents are pulling protesters off the streets and into unmarked vehicles, to be whisked away. This is very tribal, so logic doesn't necessarily apply. Or perhaps I should say that this action by Trump and his minions appeals to the emotions of the militia types. It keeps them at home now and will likely encourage some of their numbers to vote for Trump come November. In that respect, it's a brilliant move.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chik
Greg
I have my tongue firmly in cheek, and I have a feeling Matt does too.Quote:
Originally Posted by gregl
Nailed it. If nothing else this situation in Portland and events surrounding many of the BLM protests removes the facade of the small government, "come and take 'em," defend the constitution at all costs militia-types. It's easy to hide behind slogans and rhetoric, but when the government actually turns tyrannical, suspends due process, and starts plucking people off the street for exercising their first amendment rights or even just looking like someone who might have maybe been at a constitutionally protected protest, well, then they're absent. Because it's not about protecting the constitution or ensuring the rights of the people aren't infringed upon by government. It's about playing dress up to instill fear with the hope of preserving the status quo in the face of evolving demographics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chik
And, no, I'm not in any way advocating for these militia-types to take action. I just find it interesting that we're witnessing the exact type of government overreach they claim to be against and yet....maybe it would be different if a Democrat was in office.
Agreed- much easier to "occupy" a rural bird refuge when all you have to do is displace some park rangers, and claim all the online kudos and publicity that goes with.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew Strongin
Trump’s Fake Solution to the Fake Crisis in Portland | The New Yorker
"On night fifty-two of the Portland protests, a pink beach ball, adorned with the face of a cartoon pig, bounced through Lownsdale Square. The park sits across the street from the Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse, the site of daily standoffs with federal agents sent by President Trump supposedly to quell unrest. As the sunlight began to fade, the pink, pig-festooned ball flew above the small crowd of several dozen protesters, kept aloft as it bumped from protester to protester in the way beach balls once passed from concertgoer to concertgoer, back in the time when concerts still existed.
The porcine orb sprung past demonstrators fussing over their handmade protest signs, and past demonstrators clad entirely in black. It vaulted through the smoke cloud wafting above Riot Ribs—the popup plating free barbecue ribs, sides, and sometimes ice cream for protesters—and finally came to rest at the base of a thirty-foot monument commemorating the Spanish-American War. Across the granite memorial—built to honor Oregonians killed in battle a hundred and twenty-two years ago—hailed the spray-painted rally cries from a newer era of loss: “George Floyd,” “Welcome to Porkland,” and “Get out of our city,” the latter presumably a message for the federal officers holed up in the courthouse across the street.
Since early July, dozens of agents from multiple federal agencies, lead by the Department of Homeland Security, had insinuated themselves into Portland’s weeks-long protests following the murder of George Floyd. At first, the federal agents had fired tear gas at any demonstrator who allegedly inched too close to the courthouse, which succeeded only in drawing the demonstrators’ attention there. During the July 4th weekend, the agents escalated, assaulting protesters nightly with tear gas, rubber bullets, and flashbangs."
Feds Sending Tactical Team to Seattle, Expanding Presence Beyond Portland - The New York Times
"The Trump administration, which has pledged to use the full force of the government to protect federal property, expanded that effort on Thursday by sending a team of tactical border officers to stand by for duty in Seattle.
The Special Response Team being deployed is similar to the tactical teams currently operating in Portland, Ore., where local officials have vehemently objected to their efforts to subdue street protests. Seattle officials have also said they do not want federal agents sent to target protesters.
Agents from the Special Response Team, operated under the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, are typically deployed for intense law enforcement operations, similar to the agency’s BORTAC group that has operated in Portland.
“The C.B.P. team will be on standby in the area, should they be required,” the Federal Protective Service said in a statement about the Seattle effort.
A spokesman for the agency, who requested anonymity to speak about the operation, said the border officers were sent to back up the Federal Protective Service officers charged with protecting federal buildings, and would only be used if protests expected this weekend escalate out of control.
Seattle’s mayor, Jenny Durkan, said in an interview that she spoke earlier Thursday with Chad F. Wolf, the acting secretary of homeland security. She said he had assured her that the administration had no plans to deploy a surge of agents to Seattle and would not do so without communicating with the city. She had not been alerted to plans to position the tactical team, but said that the department may be distinguishing between an active deployment and agents who are on standby.
Ms. Durkan said she made it clear that the city did not need the help of federal agents.
“Any deployment here would, in my view, undermine public safety,” Ms. Durkan said.
Trump and Portland: How His Use of Federal Forces in Cities Differs From Past Presidents - The New York Times
"Federal forces went into Los Angeles to control the Rodney King riots. They entered Washington, Chicago and Baltimore in the days after the killing of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in 1968. They went into Detroit during a race riot in 1943, and then again in 1967. They were in Little Rock, Ark., during school integration. For the Pullman Strike of 1894 in Chicago, and across numerous cities during the Great Railroad Strike of 1877, they were there, too.
So in some ways, the scenes of officers clad in riot gear this week in Portland, Ore., have a long American lineage in federal responses to domestic unrest. But there is something different in this moment, too, in President Trump’s repeated vows to send forces to other American cities for reasons that slip between protecting specific federal properties, restoring general order and combating violent crime.
“The idea of bringing in troops or law enforcement in its many forms to quell civilian protest is as American as apple pie — it is foundational to this nation,” said Heather Ann Thompson, a historian at the University of Michigan. But then the president began talking about crime in Chicago, and naming cities where protests this summer haven’t turned violent.
“This is what is alarming about where we are now,” she said. “There is a way in which he is taking this to the next level.”
Jesus H Fair Use.
I get it's behind paywalls, that's no excuse to just repost verbatim. Good journalism costs money.
You are right. Doug had posted a couple this way while I was away and I just followed that style post/reference. I'll go back to the excerpts I generally post.
Thanks for pointing that out...
While I am particularly sensitive to the fight going on across the river and down a few blocks from where I sit typing this, I'm also reflecting on the fact that Portland has consumed the protest news cycle and the t(R)umpian oliga(R)chy's move here may have been to redirect the headlines away from BLM protests and calls for police reform in other cities and toward "a bunch of leftist white kids causing trouble"..... Anybody else picking up on that?
.
.
.
Also, it looks like my fair city may fine the Feds for erecting a fence in a bike lane. That's where we draw the line around here. You can gas us, beat us, and shoot us - but infringe on our green-transportation rights and you've gone a step too far. This aggression against our commuters will not stand.
From my morning walk.
https://i.imgur.com/fQic16X.jpg
I miss him.
Federal Agents Push Into Portland Streets, Stretching Limits of Their Authority - The New York Times
"After flooding the streets around the federal courthouse in Portland with tear gas during Friday’s early morning hours, dozens of federal officers in camouflage and tactical gear stood in formation around the front of the building.
Then, as one protester blared a soundtrack of “The Imperial March,” the officers started advancing. Through the acrid haze, they continued to fire flash grenades and welt-inducing marble-size balls filled with caustic chemicals. They moved down Main Street and continued up the hill, where one of the agents announced over a loudspeaker: “This is an unlawful assembly.”
By the time the security forces halted their advance, the federal courthouse they had been sent to protect was out of sight — two blocks behind them.
The aggressive incursion of federal officers into Portland has been stretching the legal limits of federal law enforcement, as agents with batons and riot gear range deep into the streets of a city whose leadership has made it clear they are not welcome.
“I think it’s absolutely improper,” Oregon’s attorney general, Ellen Rosenblum, said in an interview on Friday. “It’s absolutely beyond their authority.”"
https://eand.co/do-americans-get-tha...w-86362b107b1c
"Yesterday, the Mayor of Portland was gassed by the secret police of storm troopers that Donald Trump has sent to occupy the city.
If I wrote that sentence five years ago, you would have laughed at me. It would have seemed impossible. Inconceivable. Outlandish. And yet here we are."
Our Mayor also didn't do anything to stop his police force from gassing and beating protestors for months before the Feds arrived - but I'm glad he got-religion. It took some stones to go down and be in that crowd with how most feel about him around here. Even if it was a photo-op and re-election bid, at least it is raising awareness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Ross
In other local news:
Dad with leaf blower arrested Tuesday, says he was taken to ground by federal officers during Portland protest - oregonlive.com
Of course, you don't have to take his word for it, there's live video evidence - let's go to the replay: Twitter
This is a middle-aged dad - an attorney - a husband.....
We have armed mercenaries* attacking and terrorizing peaceful protestors and law-abiding citizens on US soil. And it appears there is literally nothing that can be done about it since the Republican party has so eroded the rule of law in this country.
*Federal Protective Services employs contractors as guards - and I'm guessing they aren't using Paul Blart.
Everyday we are more and more like Detroit under OCP in the Robocop comics/Quote:
Originally Posted by 72gmc