And if you look hard enough, everyone is guilty of something.
If you can’t find it, you’re not looking hard enough.
I clearly have. And you have clearly stated that it is acceptable for the FBI to investigate a group based on its political leanings, not based on any crimes it has committed.
It’s really not a matter of belief, your words are right there.
FTR, I also don’t want the FBI placing informant in right wing anti-government groups unless they have reasonable suspicion that they have committed or are planning to commit crimes.
The very fact that it is as decentralized as it is makes it easier to infiltrate. It also makes it easier to instigate violence and blame it on them.
And if you still can’t find anything, there’s always fabrication and entrapment to fall back on.
It’s an interesting question: is the FBI a law enforcement organization like a police department, responsible for solving and punishing crimes - or is it a national security organization like the CIA, responsible for preventing harm to the country and its interests? Or is it somehow both?
If i might hijack this thread about undercover FBI operations with a stupid Republican idea of the day, Loser Donald wants to put on televised mass firing squad executions of drug dealers if reelected.
If we could start with the leader of the most recent insurrection attempt, I’d go for a one and done.
See what he is doing to me. :shakes little fist at god:
You made the “every city they visit something bad happens” analogy. If you want to pretend that you’re staking out some middle ground, you could put a little more effort into masking what you really think.
What - like this?
Racist GOP bastards in Tennessee want to rename a section of John Lewis Way in Nashville after Pussy Ass Bitch.
Deleeted
You can only interpret that as “it is acceptable for the FBI to investigate a group based on its political leanings” if you ignore the entire context of all my other posts, which is that they do have reasonable suspicion of just that. Hell, half your damn country believes that, do you really think law enforcement is going to be likely to just dismiss it out of hand?
Focus on the real problem here, which is that it wasn’t just an informant. This guy went out of his way to try to create crimes. There’s so much more here to legitimately complain about.
God, it’s like talking to conspiracy theorists in here today. Learn to analogy.
Ann Coulter tells Nikki Haley to “go back to your own country”.
It’s both. The CIA is purely a security organization, but the FBI is both law enforcement and security. So the FBI investigates domestic Federal crimes like racketeering, but also are responsible for things like counterintelligence.
The Montana House has passed the bill legalizing bullying trans kids, with one legislator arguing that children have no obligation to be kind to each other.
I am going off the context of what is quoted right there in your post. You said it was not problematic to place informers in a group because it is anti Law Enforcement.
Not because they were suspected of committing or planning crimes, but only because of their political views. That was the entirety of the context in that exchange.
Now, you could have walked that back, and said that they would have to be suspected of committing or planning crimes as well, but you didn’t. Instead you tried changing the subject by feeding into fearmongering about BLM.
And as long as it is acceptable to place informant into groups because of their political views, those informants will have potential to create crimes. They aren’t there to investigate the innocence, they are there to find crimes they can arrest people for, even if they have to instigate them.
The analogy that you made was that it was as reasonable to surveil BLM as it would be to surveil a person because banks get robbed in every city that they visit.
If you didn’t mean to imply that there is a riot in every city that BLM has a demonstration in, then it is indeed you that needs to learn to analogy.
Newsmax: The White House’s call for celebrating Valentine’s Day with open hearts is a code for tolerance, which is not the Valentine’s Day spirit.
There’s no obligtion to be kind to one another? Wow, it’s almost like they’ve never heard of the teachings of Jesus the Christ.
Oh, my mistake.
It’s EXACTLY like that.
Valentine’s Day is about being all smoochy with your sweetheart as a prelude to the serious BDSM action. No tolerance involved there, once you get past the mushy stuff.
Valentine’s day is about selling chocolates, flowers and cards. That guy is performing so hard he probably has an Oscar size turd stuck in his colon.
JFC. What happened to shame? I miss shame.