SATURDAY: Antifa Cells Announce Day Of Retribution Across US

a reply to: Hefficide

What a joke. It has *nothing* to do with George Floyd and never did. BLM and others even admit this.

How does rioting and looting advance that objective?

a reply to: JBurns

Exactly how is pointing out your very clear bias and double standard gloss over the valid arguments?

If one group has the right to do a thing then all groups do. Anything short of that is discrimination and, again, that is the very reason that the protests are happening. Double standards.

a reply to: Hefficide

The behavior I mentioned is *not* protesting nor is it an exercise of free speech.

It is criminality cloaked in a protected activity.

Rioting, looting, assault, battery, arson, murder and open insurrection are NOT forms of protest.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Ya I am reluctantly agreeing with this, because I understand my constitutional rights, but presently peaceful protesting as factually being explained in a court of law is peaceful all the time, not just sometimes.....

You see you can’t call yourself a peaceful protestor for a group that has become notorious for violence crime and destruction, you represent those actions.. No matter how naive you may be...

originally posted by: Hefficide

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Hefficide

You have a right to lawfully assemble, yes. This requires permitting, limited to location, time of day etc.

Riots in the middle of the night are *not* protests. Every attendee then becomes a rioter/unlawful assembler (a criminal)

***Citation needed.

Specifically can you please show me in the Constitution where your, my or anyone else's First Amendment rights have some sort of Cinderalla clause and are not applicable "in the middle of the night" - and - where it says that if one person commits a crime, everyone around them is complicit. I mean if this is the case then every attendee at the Unite The Right rally a couple of years back is, by your logic, culpable for the death of Heather Hyer.

The Bill of Rights in the Constitution is there to instruct what the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT cannot do. It does not necessarily reach over to corporations, state or local governments or individuals. Name me one case where a single private citizen won a court case against another single private citizen where the "charge" was lose of 1st amendment rights.

There is civil law to award damages in that case.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: Guyfriday

I'll have to research some of the specifics you've cited as time permits, but in a general sense I tend to disagree with your statement that only three options, all negative, exist.

If Washington's State and Seattle's local governments are in a state of dysfunction, that seems like a matter for the ballot box and grass roots solutions. Leadership is elected and I am hesitant to trust that homeless people are the swing vote in any state.

As previously stated, the National Guard exists and is the Constitutional remedy for riots.

Sorry let me correct myself by citing the news story.
From: Seattle times

Sinse it may be behind a paywall, I'll quote the report

OLYMPIA — A federal judge Friday denied a request for a preliminary injunction against Gov. Jay Inslee’s emergency coronavirus orders that had been brought by some Republican state lawmakers.

Filed in May by those legislators and other plaintiffs, the legal challenge contended “the emergency has been contained” and that ongoing restrictions for businesses, workers and residents weren’t legally justified.

The legal challenge — one of several seeking to stop Inslee’s use of emergency powers to slow the spread of the virus — was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington.

In a court order dated Friday, Judge Benjamin Settle wrote that federal lawsuits against state officials are allowed in certain instances where the state official being sued has a connection with the enforcement of an allegedly unconstitutional act.

But attorneys for Inslee persuasively argued that while the governor issues emergency orders, Settle wrote, it is other officials who actually enforce those orders.

Since the pandemic began in March there has been little enforcement of Inslee’s emergency orders.

The key there is "But attorneys for Inslee persuasively argued that while the governor issues emergency orders, Settle wrote, it is other officials who actually enforce those orders."

For the bolded part, it's impossible for the voters in the state to get anything done to remove these people when these people have set up a system that makes it virtually impossible to kick them out of office without some kind of massive media push to embarrass them out. Inslee for example has state employees that openly used a program for low income people to buy homes for their own rental properties ( As seen here, and here) his reaction was to do nothing to them for exploiting the system.

Then to the National Guard. They should have been called out to assist the police when the riots started. Inslee ordered 600 Guardsmen to assists law enforcement across the state, while in places like Atlanta Georgia over a thousand were called out for one city. Inslee has been using the NG though for processing unemployment files, and for contract tracing efforts, but when it comes down to providing assistance to the police he so slow to do anything. Hell when everyone in the nation knew about the CHOP/CHAZ event, Inslee claimed that he didn't know anything about it (of course he smiled about it on a live stream presser though) Inslee is just doing whatever "Socialist Alternative" tells him to I think.

a reply to: Bicent

Indeed! And despite the fact that many people do go there with the intent protest and exercise their lawful first amendment rights and that is great.

But there are also quite a few who go, night after night, with the intent to destroy, maim, disrupt and generally engage in unlawful behavior.

Look at the antifa thugs trying to burn down the US Court. Or those burning, looting, destroying private property and businesses. I can't believe there is anybody defending that nonsense

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: infolurker
a reply to: Black_Fox

Day of retribution in a few Progressive crap-hole cities maybe. The 99.9999% of the rest of the nation will not see Antifa. They know where they are safe to pull this kind of crap. It won't be tolerated in many places unless there is a willing Progressive leadership assisting them.

For now.

At some point soon, if the Feds and/or local officials DON'T put an end to this terrorism and anarchy, good people will feel they have no choice but to assume that responsibility... and I won't blame them at all. And not so good people will feel it's a perfect opportunity to play Rambo. I don't see any scenario in which it ends well.

We have law enforcement to deal with these situations. The Feds have law enforcement powers across the nation to deal with these situations. I do not believe for one minute that they could not have ended this if they wanted to do so. The more they drag their feet, the more I suspect their true purposes/orders.

But the feds really don't have the authority you claim. There are states rights issues here that even a conservative SCOTUS would have no choice but to recognize.

Not saying that they are powerless under the circumstances, but thier authority is limited. If they don't have the cooperation of state and local entities, there isn't much they can do legally. Even executive orders would be struck down on the basis of adherence to the Constitution.

a reply to: JBurns

Either they don’t have enough data to come to a logical conclusion to realize they are wrong, or they support the political movement, trying to weaponize the constitution to justify it.

I disagree with the narrative of the protests. I believe it to be a highly misinformed section of the public being lead into nonsense, however, I fully agree with their right to protest (albeit I would like a lot more organization).

I do not agree with the rioting of course and that is unfortunately part of most protests. Always gonna be some a-holes at every party.

Since this is a conspiracy website, then lets think about this...who are the rioters? Many are moronic liberals and anarchists just looking for an excuse to break stuff, but we also see the optics and know full well that many right wing groups would very much like to see peaceful protests turn violent and so would definately want to turn things to violence, posing as a lefty.

So, what do we then do as a society? The most american thing we can do is protest, and so the idea of trying to shut that down should anger any patriot, regardless of agreement of the message. Whats the answer here? BLM is the (flawed?) protest. Antifa is the people co-opting the protest to turn it into a s--t show.

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: burdman30ott6

These protests were over a police officer killing an unarmed black man. Exactly what about that is "bullying" people or seeking to undermine the Constitution.

The "unwashed savage horde" is a large part of "We The People" and have the same rights as everyone else.

They were not over the police killing an unarmed black man. The majority of the actors involved have spent the past 4 years in a constant state of protest and civil disturbance, picking (among other things) the outcome of an election, enforcement of national border security, counter demonstrations to the political rallies of their opposition, a homosexual man speaking before an organized crowd about his support of that opposing party, failure to adhere to a demonstrably false environmental science narrative, failure to adhere to a surrender of national sovereignty to a globalist system, etc... 4 years of it, but we're to believe that the death of one worthless, anonymous, convicted felon POS sparked this whole mess? No. We are seeing the same horse# we saw in 2017, Heff... young people unable to accept the fact that they lost a national election in 2016 and doing everything they can to bully the nation into giving them what they want in the 2020 election.

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Ya I am reluctantly agreeing with this, because I understand my constitutional rights, but presently peaceful protesting as factually being explained in a court of law is peaceful all the time, not just sometimes.....

You see you can’t call yourself a peaceful protestor for a group that has become notorious for violence crime and destruction, you represent those actions.. No matter how naive you may be...

A man is judged by the character of the company he keeps.
-Aesop

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not really because they're not. They're protesting a lopsided justice system.

FTR if any of the right wing's claims that they're being downtrodden ever hold validity I'll be here ( or elsewhere ) standing up for their rights as well.

Enumerated rights are not a partisan issue. They're universal and failing to protect the rights of those you disagree with enabled the dimineshment of freedom for all.

You have to look at the people standing behind that dimineshment. Our founders created a darn near perfect system to uphold our individual rights. When those rights are threatened, it is always because a living, breathing human being is behind that effort.

I don't know about you, but I'd prefer to change their "living, breathing" status to ensure they are no longer in place to threaten those rights.

This is why I won't lift a finger to defend antifa. The people who make up the ranks of antifa are the *exact* same people behind the push to infringe on the bill of rights, limit private property, confiscate guns, suppress dissenting free speech, use the government to investigate and harass political opponents, ban strong cryptography, police our thoughts and ruin your life if you *DARE* to resist their agenda of fundamental change

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: JBurns

Either they don’t have enough data to come to a logical conclusion to realize they are wrong, or they support the political movement, trying to weaponize the constitution to justify it.

Many BLM protesters stand up to the rioters when they start. Most just go home and let the "night shift" take over...night shift being a completely different set of idiots that are all about the mayhem.

What does "weaponize the constitution" mean btw? I always seen the constitution as a shield.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Hefficide
a reply to: burdman30ott6

These protests were over a police officer killing an unarmed black man. Exactly what about that is "bullying" people or seeking to undermine the Constitution.

The "unwashed savage horde" is a large part of "We The People" and have the same rights as everyone else.

They were not over the police killing an unarmed black man. The majority of the actors involved have spent the past 4 years in a constant state of protest and civil disturbance, picking (among other things) the outcome of an election, enforcement of national border security, counter demonstrations to the political rallies of their opposition, a homosexual man speaking before an organized crowd about his support of that opposing party, failure to adhere to a demonstrably false environmental science narrative, failure to adhere to a surrender of national sovereignty to a globalist system, etc... 4 years of it, but we're to believe that the death of one worthless, anonymous, convicted felon POS sparked this whole mess? No. We are seeing the same horse# we saw in 2017, Heff... young people unable to accept the fact that they lost a national election in 2016 and doing everything they can to bully the nation into giving them what they want in the 2020 election.

Some of this might hurt to read and remember, but darn it every last word is the TRUTH.

The raw, uncensored truth.

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: JBurns

Either they don’t have enough data to come to a logical conclusion to realize they are wrong, or they support the political movement, trying to weaponize the constitution to justify it.

I have to disagree here. There is no "weaponization" of the Constitution. It is what it is, and there is a mechanism in place to alter it.

What there is, are ppl that try to undermine the Constitution through lawsuits brought before activist judges.

a reply to: SaturnFX

For starters we should enforce the law in Portland and other cities where anarchy occurs when the sun sets. Also since we don’t really know what the rioters want besides death to cops, and those that support them, I don’t really understand how we are to negotiate with that. Bastardizing law enforcement because mobs of thugs in cities demand it, is not a logical answer to their demands.

a reply to: SaturnFX

I've seen this SaturnFX. And they should be commended for doing so. I wish they understand that it is the left and their policies that put them where they are. Look at the laws behind the policing that lead us here, and you'll find a majority of democrat signatures on every single one.

Look at the FBI, who notoriously harassed civil rights leaders in the 60's and tried to get Dr. King (my personal hero) to kill himself. Under Trump, who experienced this BS, they could've been dismantled or severely punished. FINALLY someone in power had experienced the same level of "dirty tricks" and harassment and what's the left do? THEY OPPOSE HIM because "orange man won in 2016 and we're butt hurt about it" "orange man said mean things about hillary or obama" et al

We aren't their enemy! We are the party of Lincoln who believes all Americans deserve a chance to achieve success by pulling themselves up by their bootstraps, dumping their inempt liberal 'leadership' in the cities and making something of themselves! So many of their fellow citizens have done it and they can to

The wealth inequality is universally caused by failed democrat pet projects which only exist because of lobbyists, special interest groups and loud-mouth reactionaries like the young black-clad socialists who *claim* to know, at their young tender age, what's best for a country of 340,000,000

Who do you think is hurt MOST by lawlessness? Conservatives in the suburbs or rural areas? Or downtrodden urbanites, the poor, minorities and all those impacted by violent crime, theft, and mass mayhem. Failed liberal policies are to blame, not Republicans which haven't governored the major cities in 50+ years. Its time for a real change, and that change is DUMPING DEMS

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Ya I am reluctantly agreeing with this, because I understand my constitutional rights, but presently peaceful protesting as factually being explained in a court of law is peaceful all the time, not just sometimes.....

You see you can’t call yourself a peaceful protestor for a group that has become notorious for violence crime and destruction, you represent those actions.. No matter how naive you may be...

A man is judged by the character of the company he keeps.
-Aesop

Didn't Jesus hang out with a bunch of lowlifes?

2 And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”

a reply to: Mach2

Call it LAWYER’s then employed to try to weaponize the constitution.