“I Can’t Breathe” Walk Through Leesburg | Face Masks

To limit the spread of the coronavirus, protesters wore face masks at the May 31 "I Can't Breathe" walk in Leesburg. The walk was in honor of George Floyd, a black man killed by a Minneapolis police officer earlier last week.

It is unconscionable that unmarked, black-shirted thugs are going into some of our cities pulling demonstrators and others off the streets, or beating them within an inch of their lives. Nominally cited by locals and the press as being from the Department of Homeland Security, these thugs are being deployed to quell dissent. Portland and Lafayette Park are the most visible evidence of their activities.

For those who are history-challenged, does this remind you of anything? The Nazis deployed black shirts to squash dissenters of the Third Reich. They pulled Jews, intellectuals, teachers and others off the streets and sent them to concentration camps or outright executed them merely because they might object – or actually did object – to Hitler’s policies in the 1930s. The Gestapo was very effective in its day. The Third Reich flourished for a time.

We must not allow this activity. The people and many local elected folks in these localities are fighting back. We must support their efforts. We must stand together against these totalitarian tactics, or surely we will fall together. The black shirts will be in our communities next.

Imagine the unimaginable … the black shirts on the streets of Leesburg or Purcellville, the sites of peaceful Black Lives Matter marches. I would never have believed this possible in the United States of America. But, it has come to pass. Let us be more vigilant. Our democracy is a fragile thing because it largely depends on the goodwill and vigilance of the American people. It is something worth fighting for.

M. Maureen Skahan

Round Hill

(87) comments

LetsBreal

Thank you Jim Jordan for finally pointing the progressive democrat's hypocrisy out !!

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1289211483709202437

amerigirl

Funny how Jordan left off the part where Fauci said the crowds at the protest were wearing a mask. And what is he pushing, trying to make a doctor make government decisions. As his usual trying to start a conspiracy self and trying to force him to agree when he wouldn’t, it was total BS. Jordan failed. It went so far that Fauci eventually literally waved off the congressman and laughed at him https://mashable.com/article/fauci-jim-jordan-wave/ How could anyone have respect for a man that tried to cover up the sexual abuse that was going on while he was a coach? https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/jim-jordan-accused-of-begging-former-ohio-state-wrestler-not-to-support-reports-of-sexual-abuse/2020/02/12/395e7314-4ded-11ea-bf44-f5043eb3918a_story.html

Notalib

Stalker

ace10

I have super-duper-secret info that somebody who knows somebody's mom who overheard something at the grocery checkout line.

Trust me... it's totally credible.

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLL

Voltaire

Ace10--this post is definitely a winner! Excellent!

More Cowbell

Another uninformed opinion. Working Intel, some protests are peaceful, but many are not. The media is trying it's hardest to cover up the facts of burning buildings, looting, protesters burning cars, throwing objects at state/federal/local taxpayer funded buildings. And they're being funded by several groups, which are all being investigated. Some of these cities look more like a war zone. most of these protesters don't work, they are paid to be a protester.

amerigirl

It is the opposite, you think the peaceful protest make the news? Nope, but the burning buildings, looting, protesters burning cars, throwing objects are on it every night. Please inform us who is funding this. https://abcnews.go.com/US/man-helped-ignite-george-floyd-riots-identified-white/story?id=72051536 Maybe it was the white supremacy group Aryan Cowboys that was backing the umbrella man.

Voltaire

AG--I do agree with you that the peaceful demonstrations do not generate half of the excitement that would generate ratings for TV news outlets. That is unfortunate as that is not really helping allow the public to see your point. All people see are rioters who don't care about what the peaceful demonstrations are all about. It is more fun to cause havoc and destruction than try to do something constructive. It also probably doesn't help to have "paid" rioters instigating problems either.

More Cowbell

Look AG, I'm giving facts from Intel reports. You get your info from 2nd hand news that manipulates it into their agenda. The way to find out where the money is coming is you have to become one of them....hint hint..... Of course when we, Intel, release the report, most of the media won't report on it....

amerigirl

Sorry but you are wrong. I get my news pretty much directly. You think you are the only person that is privy to what is going on you are sadly mistaken, I could tell you stories right from the white house that are so confounding, but I have promised not to repeat any of what I have been told. If you are really intel than what department are you with? hint hint? that is crazy, you think only you have the answers? wrong.

More Cowbell

AG you're a gossip person, with 90% BS/false information. Not 1 news agency gives out 100% real news. Most are lucky if they're at 50% and some are closer to 25% or less. TMZ gives out more facts than the news you watch.

amerigirl

Cow, first that news in not public info you could get from a news cast, second you don’t know what news I get or where I get it from. That makes your statement BS. Like I said if you are privy to info then you should say which dept you work for. So hint hint who do you work for?

LetsBreal

If ABC News tells you that water is not wet, you'll be wide-eyed nodding in agreement.

amerigirl

That's the difference between real news and what ever it is you use. Regular news has ethics and news like OAN (One America News) which 'Conspiracy Watch' has said One America News is a conspiracy machine masquerading as a news outlet.

LetsBreal

Oh yes, real news. //rolleyes//

"Why I’m now leaving MSNBC", Ariana Pekary

https://www.arianapekary.net/post/personal-news-why-i-m-now-leaving-msnbc

RoundHillGuy

Austin BLM peaceful protestor approaches car with AK-47, immediately gets ventilated. Stupid games- stupid prizes.

ace10

The "peaceful" protesters have moved from fire bombs to real ones.

An IED was thrown at the Mark O. Hatfield federal courthouse.

amerigirl

Do you know the difference between a man firing a gun at a shooting range and a criminal firing a gun during a crime? The learn the difference between a "peaceful" protester and a rioter.

LetsBreal

Maureen - stop being a chump. Big money is steering this for political gain. There ARE NO coincidences.

"Direct Action Alliance - July 19 at 8:06 PM

Thank you to everyone who has offered to donate funds to us and who have passed around this collective in your donation lists. While we appreciate it very much, this collective does not accept donations unless it is for a direct ask. (And we always have our salary from the benevolent Lord Soros to fall back on.) "

https://www.facebook.com/DirectActionPDX/photos/a.1286229244772487/3355774194484638/?type=3

Notalib

I agree with the writer of the oped but do they know what's really going on? Probably not. Looting, Rioting and destroying property is not part of a peaceful protest. The ones behaving in this manner need to be sent to China or Venezuela for a year. When they come back I'll be happy to welcome them to the Republican party.

amerigirl

Do you know that there are more peaceful protests than there are riots? Maybe republicans and trump should stop violating their constitutional rights. More threats, that's their answer to everything, threats

Chris McHale

More peaceful protest than riots, well that's a statement. I guess we should be happy that the riots are outnumbered

ace10

Shall we apply that same standard to gun owners?

More gun owners do not not break the law than do.

Good grief, somebody keeps stepping in it.

amerigirl

Just saying the truth. There haven't been any problems in Loudoun with their protests. It is unfair to compare law abiding groups with rioters.

amerigirl

Ace of course you should apply that to gun owners.Yes there are more law abiding gun owner that criminals with guns. I am one of them. protesters got permits is much like a background check for a gun then. if they follow the laws then it's okay. But at the same time look at news stories. You hear about criminals using guns not the law abiding ones, same with the protesters, you hear abut the rioters not the peaceful protesters.

Chris McHale

AG - the ones who are comparing the two are you and the Original Writer. You said there are more peaceful protests than riots, while truecthats a joke. The OW asked about black shirts in Loudoun as if the Loudoun protest are comparable to Portland.

amerigirl

Chris, actually if you follow this thread up you will see that is responding to Notalib with his remarks about protesters. I am not comparing anything with the OW. The OW never asked, but made a remark about black shirts and how anything is possible. What is so funny about there being more peaceful protesters than rioters?

LetsBreal

Do you know there are more peaceful gun owners than serial killers and those that commit mass killings?

Maybe democrats should stop rationalizing and supporting violence by leftists to get their way?

amerigirl

There are plenty on the left that have gotten permits to protest and done so peacefully. Just as gun owners who want to target soot or practice. You're biggest problem is thinking that the ones that don't are on the left.That is about the same as comparing the law abiding gun user to a criminal. I don't support violence why do you believe it is the left, did trump convince you of that with his "democratic lead cities" BS? Most cities are democratically run. Maybe you should check out the umbrella man or some of the other right-wing nationalist that have been arrested in the riots. :

Science Can Save Us

God, I would hope so though some of the comments from the gun nuttery end of the gun owner spectrum sometimes make you wonder.

This just in

Thank you once again for your opinion Amerigirl as I’ve been reading it week in and week out for months now you seem to have something to say about everything posted here so you don’t really see the rioting and looting is a problem I’ve heard many black and white announcers on MSNBC and CNN ABC talk about how we need to have an open and honest discussion about racism in America well here’s an open and honest question I’m sure everyone will find racist why is it that when something horrible happens to a black person like what happened to Rodney King or in Ferguson or George Floyd or any of the other numerous Black Lives Matter protest group situations it’s appropriate or OK for people to riot or loot or steer or set fires in the streets in anger I watched an entire year of OJ Simpson‘s arrest and imprisonment and defense and when he was found not guilty I did not run out and start burning stuff or writing or screaming at the top of my lungs no Justice no peace but when police are held accountable or not punished for their extreme behavior like Rodney King‘s police officer attack and George Floyd’s death the world comes to an end in America and people should run out in the streets and get anything they can’t drugs money pharmaceuticals sporting goods other peoples lives and livelihoods because why because they’re black because at one time our country treated Black people like slaves that was 160 years ago and people are still talking about reparations I’m Catholic Jesus Christ died on the cross where are my reparations I mean crucified and hung people beheaded or fed to the lions clearly that’s much more gruesome than slavery ever could have been and yet I am not getting reparations I’m not even getting forgiveness most of the time wake up quit feeling sorry for everyone get on with your lives open your schools quit crying that you have to go to work and you don’t want to teach because you might get sick live in another country please!!! And yes that goes for all BLM and white supremacists and people disagree with our government find a new government to worship because clearly ours is not meeting your standards move!!

amerigirl

This just in I see rioting and looting is a big problem. I think they are taking all the progress that peaceful protesters obtained. It is never okay to riot. I do think they should be punished. What I disagree on is who is doing it and how it is being done. For example, they have 3 walls of nonviolent protesters in Portland. The first is vets, then moms then dads. They have not been aggressive at all but they are being shot at and teargassed. Then the forces, nobody knows who they are, that are kidnapping people without identifying themselves. They are wearing shorts shirts and guns, no ID and won’t identify themselves, and throwing people who are not even in the crowd into unmarked vehicles and taking them for questioning. Think about how you would feel f this happened to you or a family member. They are not arrested they want to question them and let them go when they ask for a lawyer. Like one said he didn’t know if the were police or terrorist. I have not justified what anyone rioting has done; I don’t agree with what they are doing but 2 wrongs don’t make a right. I know that life was horrible for followers of Jesus, I heard all about it in school. But you have not heard the horrors of slavery. Have you heard they used to use small children and babies of slaves as bait of alligators because they could get so much for the skins? There are many things that would never make history books in the US. The way change has always happened in the government is through the people. They elect who best represents them and they have to rights to make themselves heard. There is a dire need for change right now, the country has become so divided in the last 3 years and they need to be heard.

Notalib

There you go again.

LetsBreal

40 USC 1315

Voltaire

LetsBReal--Thank you for the citation. Very informative.

amerigirl

not warrented

BobOhneiserEsq

Amerigirl - REALLY - unless someone wears a uniform they can't be authorized to pick up criminals? Ever see an off duty cop stop a crime - save a life? How long do we have to hear "protesters, bystanders and demonstrator" terms used to describe clearly criminal behavior which needs to be stopped while local officials stand by and allow it to happen? I get the hatred for presidential candidates, what I can't accept is the total lack of concern for local business and local residents in Portland, Seattle and other spots as sponsored thugs move in to cause trouble and commit crime. In my opinion this is nothing more than a political stunt badly contrived and terribly executed which hurts all Americans helping nobody.

amerigirl

Bob, not if they won’t identify themselves. If an off-duty cop wants to make an arrest they must identify themselves. I have no problem with them stepping in as long as they say who they are. Bob, imagine that you are on the street and someone dressed in street clothes throws a bag over your head, doesn’t say who they are and throws you in an unmarked vehicle, isn’t that the basic definition of kidnapping? Wouldn’t you fear for your life? Doesn’t that give you every right to protect yourself from harm? It’s a fire keg because one of these times there will be someone with a gun trying to protect themselves.

Portland was starting to calm down before forces were sent in, they have made it much worse. I have been watching the Congressional hearing today and these types of things are being brought up. I agree, there are big problems in places but it is not trumps place to step in when the mayors, congressmen, and senators don’t want them there. They are the elected officials of that area. He has no idea what is going on, if there are types of negotiations or anything except what he sees on TV.

Chris McHale

AG - When you say that Portland was starting to calm down, does that contradict the point of peaceful protests?

The writer of the opinion also asked about "black shirts" in Leesburg, that protest was actually peaceful and not stored were looted or burned. So no I would not want to see federal agents in Leesburg under those conditions. But that's simply comparing Applebees to Orange Theory.

amerigirl

The protesters I mentioned were in Lafayette Park. There was plenty of video and no reason to force the priest and congregants off the patio of their property, or the press, or the people who had obtained a permit to be there until 7pm with teargas.

As far as Portland, the mayor Ted Wheeler was listening to the protesters and engaging in talks when the U.S. agents deployed tear gas and stun grenades in an attempt to disperse the crowd, teargassing him too. He also said that many of the protesters had left before federal forces arrived and now, they are returning along with the wall of moms, the wall of dads and the wall of vets. Violence is not the answer when you are negotiating a peaceful outcome. Peaceful protester Donavan Labella,26, was seriously hurt and may have brain injuries after a federal officer shot him in the forehead with an impact munition. There was nobody near him so this had to be aimed at him. A mom from the “Wall of Moms” was also peacefully protesting when she was shot in the head. A person was grabbed by people in shorts and thrown into an unmarked vehicle with no reason and held against his will. Listening to the hearing yesterday it appears that they violated his 1, 4, 5 and 10 amendment rights.

Voltaire

AG--OK. No, you cannot make what Federal law enforcement is doing out to be kidnapping. The legal definition of kidnapping is as follows: "the crime of unlawfully seizing and carrying away a person by force or Fraud, or seizing and detaining a person against his or her will with an intent to carry that person away at a later time."

Generally, kidnapping occurs when a person, without lawful authority, physically asports (i.e., moves) another person without that other person's consent, with the intent to use the abduction in connection with some other nefarious objective. The key word phrase is "without lawful authority". If Federal law enforcement has arrested/detained someone then they have the lawful authority to remove that person/(s) from the scene and move them to jail or other detention center. It is not kidnapping. The Federal law enforcement personnel, no matter if they are not wearing military style uniforms, ARE wearing proper identification on them, be it the simple word POLICE on their person. It is a oversimplification to portray them as the equivalent of the KGB. The KGB, and other Eastern European communist countries' secret police agencies did tactics like that.

amerigirl

WOW volt they met your definition of kidnapping. They were detained against their will. It was unlawful because; Police officers in plainclothes must identify themselves when using their police powers; however, they are not required to identify themselves on demand and may lie about their status as a police officer in some situations (see sting operation). That is why U.S. Attorney Billy J. Williams has called for an inspector general investigation into DHS personnel over reports of two protesters being detained without probable cause. According to the ACLU; The actions of the militarized federal officers are flat-out unconstitutional and will not go unanswered. Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum is filing a lawsuit against DHS, the U.S. Marshals Service, the United States Customs and Border Protection, the Federal Protection Service and their agents. Take a look at one of the detainees in Portland: "I am basically tossed into the van," Pettibone said. "And I had my beanie pulled over my face so I couldn't see, and they held my hands over my head."

Pettibone and O'Shea both said they couldn't think of anything they might have done to end up targeted by law enforcement. They attend protests regularly, but they said they aren't "instigators." They don't spray-paint buildings, shine laser pointers at officers or do anything else other than attend protests, which law enforcement have regularly deemed "unlawful assemblies."

Blinded by his hat, in an unmarked minivan full of armed people dressed in camouflage and body armor who hadn't identified themselves, Pettibone said he was driven around downtown before being unloaded inside a building. He wouldn't learn until after his release that he had been inside the federal courthouse.

"It was basically a process of facing many walls and corners as they patted me down and took my picture and rummaged through my belongings," Pettibone said. "One of them said, 'This is a whole lot of nothing.' "

Pettibone said he was put into a cell. Soon after, two officers came in to read him his Miranda rights. They didn't tell him why he was being arrested. He said they asked him whether he wanted to waive his rights and answer some questions, but Pettibone declined and said he wanted a lawyer. The interview was terminated, and about 90 minutes later, he was released. He said he did not receive any paperwork, citation or record of his arrest.

"I just happened to be wearing black on a sidewalk in downtown Portland at the time," Pettibone said. "And that apparently is grounds for detaining me."

It is a blatant violation of their civil liberties and constitutional rights. Then there are the lies, when the say there was a large mob approaching but the video clearly shows only 1 othr person in the area.

OPB (govt funded public broadcasting for Oregon) sent DHS an extensive list of questions about Pettibone's arrest including: What is the legal justification for making arrests away from federal property? What is the legal justification for searching people who are not participating in criminal activity? Why are federal officers using civilian vehicles and taking people away in them? Are the arrests federal officers make legal under the Constitution? If so, how?

These are the questions that need answers

Voltaire

AG—Wow indeed. Enjoy making caustic comments, do we? Your “opening” statement is noted and ignored. The definition that I provided is the LEGAL definition so if you want to argue that, then get in a car and go to the courthouse and argue it there if you so desire. It appears that we are basing everything on only one side of the story now? The last time that I checked, you get the perspective of ALL sides. No, we can’t do that because no matter what the Federal law enforcement is saying it must be a “lie”. Right? That is conspiracy theory and that is wrong. Again, there is no evidence that points to the argument that law enforcement is “kidnapping anyone” except for the statements from two individuals whose motivations question credibility. As to markings, how do YOU know that they were not marked? You don’t. There are photos and videos of these Federal agents that show that they are wearing identifying patches on their uniforms, the word “police” emblazoned on their vest. As to the question of unmarked vehicles, they are using rented vehicles because they are on temporary duty assignments in Portland. Concerning the arrests of these “innocent protesters”, Federal agents are not precluded from making probable cause arrests (arrests based on warrants) away from Federal property. As a retired member of the law enforcement community noted: “Since many of these federal teams have been in place for weeks, it is likely they have arrest packages on individuals accused of previously committing crimes who are now being identified through investigations. In several videos, agents can be seen bypassing individuals to arrest persons of apparent interest; these appear to be targeted operations, not the roundup of innocents.” If the DHS Office of Inspector General wants to conduct an inquiry, then so be it as that would fall under their authority under the Inspector General Act of 1978. Nothing wrong with accountability if (and that is based on credible evidence) things were not followed. That matter will be up to the agency head to determine. As to the OPB’s request, I very much doubt that they will get anything as that would fall under one of the exceptions to the Freedom of Information Act. As to the question of violation of civil rights/liberties, has a COURT OF LAW made that determination? No, you have but you are not a court so your declarative statement is false. If, as you have suggested that this matter is headed to the proper tribunal, and that tribunal states that, then that statement has merit. Until that time, it is an allegation or subjective conjecture or both. That is how the LAW (or you like to refer it as “legal mumbo jumbo”) works in this country.

Science Can Save Us

You really are a pompous hair-splitter, Voltaire. Though with that mane I can see how you got into that...

Voltaire

Science can save us--really. Based on your reply to one of Ace10's posts, you are a hypocrite. As to your "opinion" you are entitled to opine and I am entitled to ignore it as the trite conjecture that it is. I don't give a flying toss as to your opinion. As the British would say, get stuffed.

RoundHillGuy

Lies

More Cowbell

Maybe in a perfect world, but since these protests are more like war zones, Federal agents have authority because it's similar to a terrorist act. Curious why all these protesters don't go to mayors house or gov house in Oregon? And we're following the money.

amerigirl

Did the mayor, Governor or any Congressman or Senators from that area want their help? Do you know if any of them have gone to speak with the protesters? I also know someone who is following the money and it will be very interesting to see what you have to say.

Voltaire

AG—According to George Washington Constitutional Law Professor Jonathan Turley, the President of the United States, under Article II of the Constitution, has the necessary authority to “send in federal officials into any city.” Accordingly, Turley stated “Federal enforcement is not by “invitation only.” The use of federal agents to protect federal property or enforce federal law does not depend on local permission. There may be legitimate questions on how that authority is used but not the right to use that authority.”

amerigirl

Volt. To me it seems you are basically saying that if trump thinks sending troops to a state will boost his approval numbers than he can do that. I never said he didn’t have the power to send people. Regardless of it being legal, was it right? You always state laws and different thing that can easily be used as the legality of the actions but that does not mean that those actions were right, fair or warranted. In this case he found out that it is not boosting his numbers and he has decided to agree with Oregon’s governor, Kate Brown most of the federal forces to withdraw from the courthouse, and for it to be guarded by state police instead.

Voltaire

AG—No, that is not my position at all. You have made the argument on a couple of occasions that the state and local officials did not want Federal law enforcement to be in Portland. What I am saying is that, as Professor Turley stated, is that the Federal Government has an obligation to protect Federal assets and enforce Federal law. Accordingly, the Federal Government can and should send in Federal law enforcement personnel in those areas, even without the approval of local/state officials, where there is such a need to protect Federal property and enforce Federal law. I care about the enforcement and the rule of law. To me, it should not be a political issue. This use of Federal law enforcement could occur, if the circumstances warrant, under either a Democratic or Republican President. As to Trump and his approval ratings, I don’t give a toss about them as I am not a Trump follower, but an independent voter.

amerigirl

Volt, No it should not be political and the people have a right to be upset when they think something like that is done for political reasons.

Voltaire

AG—I believe that you and I agree that it should not be political. As to people being upset, I also agree that they have that right. However, the method that they express that anger is where the problem is. If people want to demonstrate peacefully and follow the law/rules, then that is acceptable. If, however, people want to express their anger through direct violence at law enforcement, destruction of property, then that isn’t acceptable and that should be handled by the appropriate authorities in accordance with the established law and procedures.

amerigirl

Volt, then you and I also agree that violence is not the answer. I have not and do nor defend what the rioter are doing. As I said before it takes away from the message that the peaceful protesters are trying to get across.

Voltaire

AG--I agree with you concerning your statement about violence.

RoundHillGuy

Maureen you are ridiculous, these rioters and burning , looting , shooting and destroying. that's all. the feds deployed to deal with these violent rioters have their agency and badge number clearly displayed while they get attacked by the anarchist in Portlanistan. You are trying to spew you own narrative just like Joseph Gobbels, making you the Brown shirted propagandist. Oh by the way, keep your goats out of your neighbors yard.

amerigirl

None of them had badge numbers or the agency displayed, please show me a pic, send a link, because that is simply a lie. https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/06/who-are-they-unmarked-security-forces-dc-spark-fear/165892/ or https://www.wusa9.com/article/news/local/dc/unmarked-police-officers-dc-riots-bureau-of-prisons-riot-squads/65-bc1c42a7-b05b-490c-9dab-eebb1b1bba20 that DC You want other places?

RoundHillGuy

google image Portland Border patrol, 4th pic- id # Y1140 took me about 20 seconds. brilliant research work on your behalf.

amerigirl

wrong, give a site.

ace10

This insane lie has become the Left's version of the "Comet Ping Pong" conspiracy theory. And the US Media is complicit is perpetuating these lies. If only the media could be held accountable.

"Dissent and demonstration" does not include firebombing occupied Federal buildings.

"Dissent and demonstration" does not include assaulting Federal law enforcement officers.

You'd think the Left would be on board with protecting Federal buildings and their occupants. Twenty five years ago the Alfred P. Murrah building in OKC was bombed in a protest against the Federal government.

Wrong is wrong. No matter which side is committing the violence and destruction.

RoundHill_also

Look! Its ace10 here to provide us with the Breitbart version of reality.

Thank goodness we can get your authoritarian point on view on this discussion. Please ace, tell us how to lick the boot....

ace10

Adorable. But what a massive failure on your part.

Do you have anything to refute my comment, or are you simply going to go straight for the ad hominem attack?

amerigirl

No kidding, don't you know that the peaceful demonstrators outnumber the rioters? You would think you would know the difference. Who says the left agrees with those actions? Just you and a bunch of conspiracy theorist in the republican party. So I guess you will perpetuate the conspiracy theory instead of seeing the truth.

RoundHillGuy

Lies,

amerigirl

How many riots were there here in Loudoun. Learn to count.

amerigirl

The real insanity is that you think everyone that isn't a righty tighty is left. So sad that you only have 2 views. There is a whole world of individuals out there the left has nothing to do with like terrorist and rioters. You should widen your horizons.

RoundHillGuy

More lies

amerigirl

More lies about what??? That doesn't even make sense.

Voltaire

M. Maureen Skahan—OK. You are historically INACCURATE. The N@zis NEVER deployed “black shirts” during the time of the Third Reich in Germany. The historical record clearly shows that the “black shirts” were a product of Italian fascism. The Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale (MVSN, "Voluntary Militia for National Security"), commonly called the Blackshirts (Italian: Camicie Nere, CCNN, singular: Camicia Nera) or squadristi (singular: squadrista), was originally the paramilitary wing of the National Fascist Party, known as the Squadrismo, and after 1923 an all-volunteer militia of the Kingdom of Italy under Fascist rule, similar to the SA in N@zi Germany. Its members were distinguished by their black uniforms (modelled on those of the Arditi, Italy's elite troops of World War I) and their loyalty was to Benito Mussolini, the Duce (leader) of Facism, to whom they swore an oath. They were NO way connected to N@zi Germany. It should be noted that many Italian Fascists were opposed to N@zism as fascism in Italy did not espouse Nordicism and did not initially espouse the anti-semitism that was inherent in N@zi ideology, although many fascists held racist ideas and there were racial policies from the beginning of Fascist rule of Italy.

Now, the individuals that you are calling “thugs” are sworn Federal law enforcement officers (tactical response units) from either the U.S. Department of Justice (U.S. Marshal’s Service) or the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (Customs and Border Protection). They ARE totally different than “blackshirts” or “thugs” as these are law enforcement officers. “Blackshirts” consisted of primarily civilians (nationalist intellectuals, former army officers and young landowners opposing peasants' and country labourers' unions). These law enforcement officers have been deployed to Portand, Oregon in order to protect the Federal Courthouse there in compliance with President Trump’s Executive Order that ordered protection of Federal monuments and Federal buildings. The U.S. Marshal’s Service SHOULD be there as it is part of their law enforcement mission to provide security to Federal judiciary (including Federal courthouses). You cannot compare the U.S. law enforcement agencies to the Gestapo. In the United States, law enforcement agencies are subject to judicial review. During its existence, the Gestapo had the authority to investigate cases of treason, espionage, sabotage and criminal attacks on the N@zi Party and Germany. The basic Gestapo law passed by the German government in 1936 gave the Gestapo carte blanche to operate without judicial review—in effect, putting it above the law.

Wow, you must like to make conspiracy theories. It would help if you had some FACTS to support your wild hypotheses. For example, the Blackshirts ceased to exist at the conclusion of World War II. They DO NOT exist anymore and therefore will NOT be coming to a town/county near you. As to your “wild” concern about the “imminent arrival” of Federal law enforcement to Leesburg, I hate to break it to you but that is NOT going to happen. Why? The answer is that there is NO Federal courthouse within the Leesburg Town limits. Pretty simple logic, no? As to Black Lives Matter, you cannot make the statement that ALL of those demonstrations are “peaceful”. There is no evidence to sufficiently support that argument. Finally, you ARE advocating rebellion to law enforcement performing lawful purposes. That is a violation of the Federal Law (18 U.S.C. § 2383)—rebellion or insurrection. This section of Federal law states: “Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States. You, through this letter to the editor, meets the basic requirement of “inciting”. Maybe you should think about that before making ridiculous conspiracy theories and historically inaccurate comparisons, no?

ace10

Just stop it. This is pure fake news.

These Federal law enforcement officers are protecting federal property from violent rioters.

They all display patches identifying the agency for which they work and their badge numbers.

LTM, by publishing this letter, is violating its own rules about LYING.

Good grief.

amerigirl

You must not watch the news. This is the real thing. They are not staying where federal property is, they don’t have marking on their uniforms or even their vehicles, and in Portland are kidnapping people off the streets. Does that sound like the America you know? As far as with Lafayette Park, the Congressional inquiry starts today about the peaceful protesters that were teargassed and shot with ‘less than lethal’ weapons and had a helicopter do a low fly over them, just so trump could have a photo op. Like the priest of St. Johns said, they were moved off their own property, tear gassed and they had a permit and it was still an hour before curfew. Not to mention that they were trespassing by being on that property. https://religionnews.com/2020/06/02/ahead-of-trump-bible-photo-op-police-forcibly-expel-priest-from-st-johns-church-near-white-house/ The forces there were not marked. They had no identifying marks saying where they were from or what department they were with. https://www.defenseone.com/threats/2020/06/who-are-they-unmarked-security-forces-dc-spark-fear/165892/. You are the one accusing them of lying when it is you that doesn’t have the facts. This coverage has been on every news network, everyone, how could you have missed it?

Voltaire

AG—No, you are not correct. The Federal law enforcement in Portland are standing on the perimeter around the Federal Courthouse and that is lawful as that is considered to be Federal property. A U.S. District Court Judge in Portland agreed when he denied the issuance of a Restraining Order requested by the State of Oregon. Kidnapping? How do you know that? The answer is that you don’t and that is basic speculation and wrong. These individuals were probably arrested/detained and were removed by law enforcement to another location. It sounds like proper law enforcement to me. As for marking of Federal law enforcement, no, there is no legal requirement that they do not have to identify which agency they are from. For example, the unmarked units were from the U.S. Bureau of Prison’s Strategic Operations Response Team (SORT). The Director of the U.S. Bureau of Prisons, Michael Carvajal, stated ““We normally operate within the confines of our institution, and we don’t need to identify ourselves. Most of our identification is institution-specific and probably wouldn’t mean a whole lot to people in D.C.,” He acknowledged that he should have done a better job identifying these people, but there is no legal requirement do so. As for the Lafayette Park “incident”, all we have here is one side of this story and that does not represent the complete story. The official law enforcement account of the incident is missing. I am going to let Congress do its oversight role on this matter and go down the same road over again. I will say that the use of tear gas, non-lethal munitions are proper riot control tools and should be used to disperse people in times of civil unrest. They are the least harmful. However, law enforcement/national security apparatus does have other tools at its disposal to quell civil unrest. Do we want to go to using water cannons? That is what is used in parts of Europe and are quite effective and can cause more injury. How about live rounds? Some countries are authorized to deploy military assets (tanks) and can use live rounds. There is historical precedent for this. Napoleon Bonaparte used field artillery to clear rioters in Paris and killed 300 of them. The riot quickly stopped. The U.S. military in 1863 riots in New York used live ammunition and it stopped. So, which option do you want?

LetsBreal

I know I watch the news and also video feeds of what’s happening on the ground by people with phones and cameras. I don’t rely solely on the sanitized version and carefully picked footage and contrived commentary by the main stream media. I’ve watched a lot of video footage on youtube, liveleak, discord (and twitter/facebook until inconvenient footage started disappearing), of protests, riots, looting and the ensuing mayhem over the past months.

The America I know doesn’t allow private and public property damage and harm to bystanders to go on for months on end, because the mayors and governors want to make a political statement via inaction.

Congress is the body I have the most contempt for. They’re supposed to legislate (AKA write law), but they spend all their time in “hearings”, which I thought was the function of the judicial branch. Their hearings are mostly a farce where they call someone in and grandstand with speeches rather than asking any questions. In other words, congress is an ongoing press conference for a political party.

Most of all, I realize that BLM, Direct Action Alliance, ANTIFA and all their little offshoots are a play for the redistribution of income from one group to another by any means necessary. They’re mission is not about stopping deaths, but rather capitalizing on them; they prove it via their violence. They are not new. They’re just updated versions of the Black Panthers, Acorn, Tides Foundation, Weather Underground, La Raza, and plenty of smaller organizations that push equal outcomes over equal opportunity. This is about creating and furthering a narrative of victimhood to further income transfer, period.

“Some people did something.” - Ilhan Omar (D – MN 5th district) summing up her view on 9/11, quote from September 11, 2019

“People will do what they do.” - Nancy Pelosi (D – CA 12th district and House Speaker) refusing to condemn statue topplings, quote from July 9, 2020

amerigirl

Lets, you must watch some pretty biased video feeds. Is it the ones put out by fox and breitbart? You hate congress, well they are duly elected, so I would have to say that the majority don’t feel the same as you. The America I know doesn’t have a secret police force that shoots people in the face or kidnaps them off the streets. If the leaders of any area ask for help then I’m all for it but it is not up to a president that had to take a competency test to decide what is best. Your redistribution of income idea is nothing more than a conspiracy theory, a very disturbing conspiracy theory. That’s probably because you only hear what you want and don’t bother to get the entire story. Omars complete statement; Here’s the truth. For far too long we have lived with the discomfort of being a second-class citizen and, frankly, I’m tired of it, and every single Muslim in this country should be tired of it. CAIR was founded after 9/11 because they recognized that some people did something and that all of us were starting to lose access to our civil liberties. So, you can’t just say that today someone is looking at me strange and that I am trying to make myself look pleasant. You have to say that this person is looking at me strange, I am not comfortable with it, and I am going to talk to them and ask them why. Because that is the right you have. As you see it had nothing to do with terrorist but with the organization CAIR. As far as Pelosi, you also omitted the lines that were said with that. “I’m more interested in what people have accomplished,” she said. “I think that it’s up to the communities to decide what statues they want to see.” “if the community doesn’t want the statue there, the statue shouldn’t be there.” Do you disagree that it should be up to the community?

amerigirl

Volt, there may be there but that is not the only place they are. They did not abduct the that guy from in front of the Courthouse, they took him to a courthouse. So, your opening statement is noted and ignored. Yes kidnapping, did you read the statement from Mark Pettibone? Try WAPO https://www.google.com/search?q=pettibone+kidnapped+in+portland&rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS729US732&oq=pettibone+kidnapped+in+portland&aqs=chrome..69i57j33.10191j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 That sounds like sounds like proper law enforcement to you? What is this country a banana republic? There is a legal requirement that they must identify themselves, hinging on certain wording but the fourth Amendment precludes the government from conducting unreasonable searches and seizures. What if that guy had been armed? He had no clue if they were police or right-wing terrorists, so doesn’t he have the right to defend himself? Like I said about Lafayette Park, time will tell and the truth will come out. I am not going into foreign law enforcement with you, we live here and this has got to stop.

Voltaire

AG—Again, we are operating on the principle that there is only one side and that is all. No, that is not how this system of justice works. Law enforcement has its side of the story and it also needs to be told. I read the individual’s statement. I am not going to get into conjecture about the tactics as there is not enough information to warrant an objective conclusion. However, it would make sense for Federal law enforcement to take a detained suspect to the Federal Courthouse as the Federal Courthouse does have holding cells for prisoners. Concerning identification, no you are wrong. Federal law enforcement does not have to identify themselves. As noted on the The Hill newspaper’s website, Thaaddeus Hoffmeister, a law professor at the University of Dayton told the newspaper: ““As a general rule, members of the Army (Active Duty, National Guard, and Reserves) must wear an identifiable uniform,…The folks you see without an identifiable uniform are primarily federal law enforcement who don't have the same requirements.” As I have stated elsewhere, the claim that Federal law enforcement is not wearing identification is false. Federal agents making arrests in Portland can be seen wearing identifying patches on their uniforms, with “police” emblazoned on their vests. The agents have appeared in rented, unmarked vans because they are on temporary duty assignments in Portland; it’s not an effort to keep their identities secret. As to the issue of conducting unreasonable searches and seizures, how do you know? You are operating off of one side of the story, the side of the individual whose motivations are questionable. You weren’t there and there is no official account of the incident so how can you make a DEFINITIVE conclusion? The answer is that it is not possible without understanding all perspectives. Since many of these federal teams have been in place for weeks, it is likely they have arrest packages on individuals accused of previously committing crimes who are now being identified through investigations. In several videos, agents can be seen bypassing individuals to arrest persons of apparent interest; these appear to be targeted operations, not the roundup of innocents. There is nothing wrong with that practice. The reason that I bring up foreign law enforcement practices is that you continue to bring up the argument that law enforcement is acting like this is a “banana republic”. That statement, on its face value, is clearly wrong. The practices that Federal (as well as local/state) law enforcement are using are proper and professional. Again, if this was a banana republic, you would be dealing with live ammunition and armor units and there would be mass killings and that would be considered acceptable from a government perspective.

RoundHill_also

Got a pic of those badge numbers...no you dont.

They are smashing the skulls for Trump - thats what you support: Unaccountable violence by agents of the state. The people of Portland have every right to defend themselves and their right to protest.

ace10

Your feelings and emotions are getting the better of you. I truly feel sorry for you.

Use the Google machine. There are plenty of stories, pictures and video concerning the Federal officers' display of badge numbers.

Due to the doxxing of these officers, their names have been rightfully removed from their uniforms. Or are you A-Okay with the death threats being made against them?

It's amazing how you can so easily dismiss firebombing, property damage and violence as "defend themselves" and "protest."

amerigirl

Who is doxxing? How about driving cars through protesters or shooting them in the face?

Voltaire

RoundHill_also--No. They are allowed the right to PEACEFULLY demonstrate. That is NOT what these people are doing. Any comparison to that is blatantly wrong. As Amerigirl likes to point out, there is a difference. In Portland Oregon, you have protesters pointing lasers into the eyes of law enforcement is NOT legal and acceptable. Protesters not following lawful commands and shooting fireworks at law enforcement, destroying property, and committing other unlawful acts is not acceptable either and they should get what they deserve. Want to see what "unaccountable violence by agents of the state"? Take a look at how France responds to riots. They send out the CRG, a law enforcement/military unit that is trained in riot control and can use WHATEVER methods it wants to subdue things. They use water cannons, military assets, and can pulverize protesters for failure to comply with lawful commands. Don't compare the U.S. law enforcement response as this is pale to what other countries AUTHORIZE their law enforcement and military to do to stop civil unrest.

Voltaire

Notalib--Got it. Apologies then. On this site, it is becoming increasingly difficult to discern sarcasm from real people's "perspectives".

Notalib

Fo they have the right to riot, loot and destroy? Or is that a myth?

Voltaire

Notalib--No, people do not have the right to riot, loot, or destroy property. Those are criminal offenses and violators would be arrested/prosecuted by the responsible authorities. However, you cannot compare true peaceful demonstrators with rioters as the two groups are different.

Notalib

Volt, More sarcasm, Jerry Nadler (D) New York, the head of the Congressional Judicial Committee, thinks all of the rioting and looting is a myth.

amerigirl

Notalib, once again you lie, Nadler said ANTIFA violence/rioting rioting and in PORTLAND is a myth. Not that the rioting was a myth or that it was “all”, if you watched the video you would know that. I don’t know if you read something to make believe that or you are overstating the circumstance. It was in regards to Antfia being a loosely organized group, as even Barr testified to on Wednesday. But you have definitely portrayed the entire comment in deception. Just like the internet posts saying that all the Anifa who have been arrested in Portland when in actually none have been, they have used mug shots 2016.

Science Can Save Us

3rd sentence is fake news Ace10. Many just say "POLICE" and it's not municipal police.

Voltaire

Science Can Save Us--actually, that statement is incorrect. There are many Federal officers/agents out in the field with patches that identify them as "DHS/POLICE". That is more than simply "POLICE".

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.