hey it worked.
*** will bold and italicize.
‘Thousands of hippies’!?
Come out from under the porch and look around. Replace that 1974 calendar.
And your point being with regards to my more substantive points are???
I must have missed them…
Probably is a better forum to ask this, but y’all have been very helpful, how do I link a news article? even when I tried to quote someone else I get a an error message about not being able to post images or something
You got the one about the hippies though, am I correct on that?
(Missed the edit window. )
I must have missed them…
The judge’s notion that there is no problem because thr state could not show the kidnappings to be widespread enough is laughable. Can I murder just a few people and not offend this judge? And the compsrison to Argentina as a defense of the federal troops is offensive for the same reason. Essentially the judge is saying’ it’s not bad enough yet’. What does he want? Four more years of tRump?
Okay. Good luck with that.
Has anyone brought up the Federal Protective Service? They wear uniforms and patches (that say POLICE on them). And they are many times charged with protecting buildings and other facilities owned or leased by the federal government.
Good lord, I have conceded that there are federal agencies that have marked cars and uniforms. But most don’t.
generality
Pronunciation /ˌjenəˈralədē/ /ˌdʒɛnəˈrælədi/
Translate generality into Spanish
NOUNgeneralities
- 1A statement or principle having general rather than specific validity or force.
‘he confined his remarks to generalities’
More example sentences
Synonyms
- 1.1The quality or state of being general.
‘policy should be formulated at an appropriate level of generality’
More example sentences
Synonyms
- 2 the generality The majority.
‘appropriate to the generality of laymen’
I think the answer is right there in what you are asking. Why HAVEN’T the police arrested federal agents purportedly doing what you claim, despite the ‘governor, mayor, et al’ having asked said federal police to leave? The answer is that those people don’t have the authority to do so, given the actual circumstances. IF the federal agents were doing something that was illegal, then they could and would be being arrested. You either have to believe that, or go into some CT about collusion or extortion or the federal government really having lots of super-legal powers that are hidden.
From what I’ve gathered, the federal agents are acting on instructions to protect federal property that has been under threat, and their actions have been in keeping with that. If they haven’t, if they have made arrests…arrests they have the legal authority to do, as far as I know…illegally, then when those cases go to court those people illegally arrested can and will happily sue the federal government. And the state as well, if they think they can get money from them too, and if the people mentioned have been looking the other way while crimes were committed.
I think what Trump is doing is both dangerous and stupid…as most things he does seem to be…but I don’t think they are illegal or extra-judicial, or outside of either his or the agencies acting powers. But that’s for the court to decide. Above, a posters cited the ACLU as moving forward with a law suit over this. If they win, then that’s great. If they don’t, then that sucks. But it will be one of many, and in the aggregate along with personal lawsuits from people being arrested it should definitively answer your question. At this point, anything else is speculation, IMHO.
The idea that ‘if they were doing something illegal, police would arrest them, therefore what they’re doing is legal’ doesn’t hold up to basic scrutiny, and is clearly disproven by cases Botham Jean, and George Floyd, where a cop murdered someone and was eventually charged (or convicted), but police declined to execute an arrest even though the crime was flagrant and honest. It’s simply not reasonable to point at an activity, then say ‘well, the police didn’t arrest them for it, therefore it must be legal’, especially when the people engaging in illegal actions are themselves some sort of police.
An ‘illegal arrest’ is also known as a kidnapping, and police are definitely empowered to arrest someone committing that offense. They just live by the ‘blue-line’ culture of overlooking abuses by other police and have not been forced to do anything about federal agents by their own governments for whatever reason. Philadelphia’s DA is ready to order the arrest of Federal agents if they engage in similar behavior in his jurisdiction, contradicting your idea that it’s perfectly legal for federal agents to seize people off the street at any time with no justification:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-07-22/philly-d-a-threatens-to-arrest-federal-agents
Sure it does, in the long run. As I said, if something illegal is happening, it will come out in the courts. Also, I’d say if federal officers were in fact overstepping their authority or the local officials even though they were doing something clearly illegal then they would be taking steps, since it’s clear that those local officials are quite unhappy with how things are going right now and would use any excuse, if they thought they could, to redress this.
Those crimes are all just that…crimes. And while it’s true about the long ‘blue-line’ culture, this doesn’t extend between local police (let alone officials) and federal officers, who often work and act at cross purposes and with some level of rancor.
"Why don’t the Portland police arrest the camouflaged feds?
Because the feds are not doing anything illegal. Despite your amateur legal training, you are clinging to some false theory.
As are you, with all due respect.
If you are a member of a Bar, to which one? Which state(s), the Supreme Court?
Yes I am a member of the Supreme Court.
All due congratulations. How many civil rights cases have you argued in front of the Supreme Court?
Couldn’t resist.
While various lawsuits are underway, some decisions have been given, mostly supportive of the Federal Government. Unless they start going against them, I’m sticking with “they are not doing anything illegal”