Because it’s not your job to look into rumors that support violence on the part of federal soldiers, right? It’s just your job repeat them whenever you can.
Is this LAPD do nothing?
I heard more than one reporter comment that there appeared to be more cops on the street today than protestors. The view from the news copters certainly seemed to confirm that. They had time to arrest people for merely sitting in the street, so it’s not like they were too busy responding to rampaging vandals.
Three businesses along Broadway between 3rd and 7th streets were damaged by looters, two athletic footwear stores and a T-Mobile storefront. The Jordan Studio 23 and the Adidas stores both suffered shattered front door glass when the Broadway shops were burglarized. On Monday morning, police stood guard at the damaged businesses.
The protests against ICE were up by the Federal Courthouse and the Robert Young Federal Building, west of Los Angeles Blvd and north of E. Temple., three blocks east and five blocks north, nearly a mile away. It seems pretty unlikely that demonstrators were taking half an hour to wander over and do some self-serve shoe shopping mid-protest.
Stranger
Good cites, thank you.
Before trump sent in troops, the violence was minimal. Mind you yes, a couple of robot cars were burned by some criminal morons- and a lot of litter and graffiti- which lats two are minor misdemeanors. Some blocking of traffic- good for a citation.
Yeah, but there are criminals who take advantage of civil unrest- even peaceful protests- to do some looting.
I’ll thank you not to use their names; it scares the horses.
Stranger
Good vid by Legal Eagle.
Speak for yourself. I know that law does not allow impediment of traffic.
You shouldn’t feel so safe holding such a false belief. Try standing in the middle of the nearest street and refuse to move and report back what the law had to say about that.
Did part of my comment that standing in the middle of the street throwing molotov cocktails sounded like a dismissal of the lawful right to protest?
Not having a moral compass or a spine is not virtue.
I was very clear what I was talking about, and I made no mention of Trump. If you have a specific question I’ll help you to understand.
You’ve unlocked the bonus understanding I snuck into the comments. If someone thinks an election is stolen, then they are morally obligated to “stop the steal”.
People might believe any anything including the earth is flat, but lawful behavior is expected, else repercussions. I’ll reiterate that the handful of people that might have had sympathy for their perspective went out the window when the violence and lawlessness made people miss their kids recital, and caused them to pay for all the theft and destruction (because government and companies only have your money, and nobody else’s). That behavior is morally, strategically, and individually idiotic. Only the most ideologically possessed individuals would begin to slightly support that behavior, because it fails on absolutely every front.
I like myself, so no.
History tends to suss out the important facts. Whatever is being pushed by so-called news today isn’t likely to be remembered tomorrow, next week, next month, or imprinted into important history.
Better to focus on my sphere of influence and let others to their fear-mongering entertainment.
Ah, so you’re part of the “fake news” crowd.
No, as I stated, I don’t follow so-called “news” because I don’t desire the entertainment or emotional manipulation.
Moderating:
While it may not have been your intent, this response is very easily read as an insult to the poster quoted. As a reminder, attack the post, not the poster. At this time, you are receiving the benefit of the doubt that it was directed at those you characterize as deliberate lawbreakers, but let’s avoid this ambiguity going forward.
Where do you get your information, out of curiosity?
Do you just guess blindly at what’s going on, or do you actually have news sources?
Thank you for asking.
My nature is to question authority. It’s an inescapable proclivity of mine. While I acknowledge the need for authority, my personality seeks to test it to the limits, to either prove or disprove the quality.
At age 16, I interned with state government in IT. The local newspaper wrote an article about it and snapped a photo. The photo showed my boss pointing at a computer screen with me observing what she was pointing at, and the caption read something like “mentoring youth to build career skills”. My boss was asking me what something did, and I was giving her an explanation. I didn’t know it then, but had been introduced to what is now known as Gell-Mann Amnesia-
The Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is a cognitive bias where individuals critically assess media reports in a domain they are knowledgeable about, yet continue to trust reporting in other areas despite recognizing similar potential inaccuracies.
My parents would watch local news, and I’d run a comedy satire exposing the nearly constant absurdity or “cat stuck in tree” non-news. Still I had a level of respect for the national news broadcasts.
Then Dan Rather was dismissed from CBS for not performing due diligence on a story he aired. Somewhere around there is when I stopped watching “news” and TV in general (the internet age displaced TV watching then, and I never had cable or other paid TV service).
I mostly didn’t hear about unimportant day to day junk that’s in the news. My friends who are Democrats would express anxiety that Trump might be POTUS, and I would remark “that reality TV guy, there’s no chance”.
In 2016 I started listening to podcasts, and unfortunately ran into an increasing amount of stupid “news”; the stuff organizations that profit on clicks think will generate the most clicks, mostly by triggering primal outrage, aided by outright deception and lies.
Right away there was the “Overfeeding Koi hoax”, and the “Fine People hoax” and the “Drink Bleach hoax”, and the “Russia Hoax”, and another “Russia Hoax”, and on and on. There’s gobs of detestable things about that person to report on, but apparently reality isn’t enough to talk about.
I’m sure there’s examples of fake news about the other political color, but those aren’t as apparent to me. Incontinence comes to mind, and I don’t appreciate that “news” either, but it is a more benign accusation, even if mean (I wouldn’t point and laugh at my incontinent senile grandpa, because I’m not a jerk).
… but to finally answer your question, I mostly learn of current topics (so-called news) from a couple of left-leaning forums I’m active on. I gravitate toward liberally minded communities because that is where creativity is generally cultivated. I listen to Berry Weiss - Honestly podcast, Sam Harris, Dark Horse, certain NPR programs, Jordan Peterson, Peter Boghossian, Dan Carlin, Triggernometry, Andrew Klavan… mostly liberally-minded folk. I listen to people who challenge my conception of things with well-reasoned thought. I’m uninterested in listening to someone I’ll only agree with, who only present mental frames I’ve already considered.
Do you question the openly illegal actions of ICE and other law enforcement authorities? Or is obstruction of traffic your primary concern?
Very few of those things were actually “hoaxes” (although what Trump talked about was injecting disinfectants rather than literally drinking bleach). In fact the phrase “Russia hoax” is and has always been a much bigger lie than whatever the user of it claimed to be debunking.
Stop the steal was an attempt to violently overthrow a democracy and establish a white nationalist autocracy under the guise of pretending to care about election security. Its not the same thing.
Lawful behavior is expected, except in exigent circumstances. Abolitionists broke the law. Civil rights activists broke the law. First wave feminists broke the law. Labor union activists broke the law. The law is written by the people with power, largely to serve the interests of the people in power, and is not some code handed down by an almighty, unquestionable deity.
Thank you for this important post.
If I think a bank owes me money, I guess I am morally obligated to take the money back by force. All righty then. Let me look at my check registry.