America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 years ago by Speyside. 63 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Agents’ actions in Portland Oregon may set up test of states’ rights..
rfenst Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,304
PORTLAND, Ore. — Federal law enforcement officers’ actions at protests in Oregon’s largest city, done without local authorities’ consent, are raising fears of a constitutional crisis — one that could escalate as weeks of demonstrations find renewed focus in clashes with camouflaged, unidentified agents outside Portland’s U.S. courthouse.

State and local authorities, who did not ask for federal help, are awaiting a ruling in a federal lawsuit filed last week by state Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum. She said in court papers that masked federal officers have arrested people off the street, far from the courthouse, with no probable cause — and whisked them away in unmarked cars.

Constitutional law experts said Monday the federal officers’ actions are a “red flag” in what could become a test case of states’ rights as the Trump administration expands federal policing into other cities.

“The idea that there’s a threat to a federal courthouse and the federal authorities are going to swoop in and do whatever they want to do without any cooperation and coordination with state and local authorities is extraordinary outside the context of a civil war,” said Michael Dorf, a professor of constitutional law at Cornell University.

President Donald Trump says he plans to send federal agents to other cities as well. The Chicago Tribune, citing anonymous sources, reported Monday that Trump planned to deploy 150 federal agents to Chicago. The ACLU of Oregon has sued in federal court over the agents’ presence in Portland, and the organization’s Chicago branch said it would similarly oppose a federal presence.

“We’re going to have more federal law enforcement, that I can tell you,” Trump said Monday. “In Portland, they’ve done a fantastic job.”

The actions run counter to the usual philosophies of American conservatives, who typically treat state and local rights with great sanctity and have long been deeply wary of the federal government — particularly its armed agents — interceding in most situations.

But Trump, a Republican, has shown during his time in office that his actions do not always reflect traditional conservatism — particularly when politics, and in this case an impending election, are in play.

One prominent Republican, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, who is from the libertarian-leaning flank of the party, came out publicly against the federal agents.

“We cannot give up liberty for security. Local law enforcement can and should be handling these situations in our cities but there is no place for federal troops or unidentified federal agents rounding people up at will,” Paul said in a tweet Monday.

The protests now gaining nationwide attention have roiled Portland for 52 nights, ever since George Floyd died May 25 after being pinned by the neck for nearly eight minutes by a white Minneapolis police officer.

Many rallies have attracted thousands and been largely peaceful. But smaller groups of up to several hundred people have focused on federal property and local law enforcement buildings, at times setting fires to police precincts, smashing windows and clashing violently with local police.
HockeyDad Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,130
You forgot to highlight the last paragraph.
rfenst Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,304
HockeyDad wrote:
You forgot to highlight the last paragraph.

Amended as requested.
ZRX1200 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
They’ve actually done more than breaking windows and setting fires..
Raceyraider3 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 12-25-2019
Posts: 13
As on Oregonian & Conservative Republican I welcome the Federal Troops to Portland. The liberal Mayor of Portland and Governor don't want to enforce the law and constantly allow these Criminals to destroy our State & livelihoods. The 4th of July Freedom Celebration was cancelled in the entire state but a BLM march was allowed on the 4th. How's that for a slap in the Patriotic face!
rfenst Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,304
Raceyraider3 wrote:
As on Oregonian & Conservative Republican I welcome the Federal Troops to Portland. The liberal Mayor of Portland and Governor don't want to enforce the law and constantly allow these Criminals to destroy our State & livelihoods. The 4th of July Freedom Celebration was cancelled in the entire state but a BLM march was allowed on the 4th. How's that for a slap in the Patriotic face!

If you were a real American, you would have been out thereon the 4th peacefully protesting too.
Gene363 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
Are the Federal authorities arresting people for jaywalking or breaking Federal laws?

If the protestors are damaging Federal property. do the locals really get a say in enforcement?

If the FBI is investigating interstate crime, do they need the permission of local officials in every town, county and state before taking action?

If local police are corrupt, does the FBI need to ask their permission before investigating them?

This argument makes no sense, sounds like more a reaction to Trump's administration.

FWIW, as a taxpayer and part owner of those Federal facilities, if the locals are not taking an action to protect them I would want the Feds to act.
BuckyB93 Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,188
Do you foster the same outrage of federal troops being sent in when the state's are not able to control things on their own...

... like when Eisenhower sent in federal troops to enforce the integration Alabama schools?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Rock_Nine

Or when JFK sent in federal agents to enforce the enrollment of a black student at Ole Miss?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ole_Miss_riot_of_1962

Or when he federalized the Alabama National Guard to enforce the integration at the University of Alabama?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand_in_the_Schoolhouse_Door

Or when LBJ sent in the federalized Alabama National Guard to protect the Selma to Montgomery marches?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selma_to_Montgomery_marches

Seems to me the federal government has and will send in troops or deputize/federalize state resources to enforce the law of the land when the state requests it or are are unable to or simply refuse to do it themselves.

They've also done it to quell riots after things like the assassination of MLK, the riots following the Rodney King verdict and natural disasters.
frankj1 Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
let's not pretend that all situations are the same.

Kent State.
HockeyDad Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,130
Dirty hippies and commies. Portland is looking like Kent State just a bit.
frankj1 Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
not really
BuckyB93 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,188
I didn't say all situations are all the same. In this situation we have rioters destroying public and private property and the local enforcement is unable to or unwilling to protect that so someone has to step in and do it.

Robert and the article treated the "small groups of up to several hundred" that were destroying property and acting out violently as merely a footnote. HD had to bring it to his attention. Several hundred! Not a couple bad seeds, several hundred! That's not insignificant information there. What is that 5%, 10% of the entire group of protesters? But that is only worthy of the final two "oh, by the way" sentences of the article.

Invite 20 people to your house and tell one or two guys that they are free to smash and burn any of your stuff that they want. No biggie... the other 18 or 19 are being peaceful.
frankj1 Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
BuckyB93 wrote:
I didn't say all situations are all the same. In this situation we have rioters destroying public and private property and the local enforcement is unable to or unwilling to protect that so someone has to step in and do it.

Robert and the article treated the "small groups of up to several hundred" that were destroying property and acting out violently as merely a footnote. HD had to bring it to his attention. Several hundred! Not a couple bad seeds, several hundred! That's not insignificant information there. What is that 5%, 10% of the entire group of protesters? But that is only worthy of the final two "oh, by the way" sentences of the article.

Invite 20 people to your house and tell one or two guys that they are free to smash and burn any of your stuff that they want. No biggie... the other 18 or 19 are being peaceful.

evidently you left the herf at my house before tailgater, rman, and fiddler.
Gene363 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
frankj1 wrote:
let's not pretend that all situations are the same.

Kent State.



Psst, The 13 unarmed Kent State University students in Kent, Ohio, were shot by members of the Ohio National Guard, a state organization.
CelticBomber Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Gene363 wrote:
Psst, The 13 unarmed Kent State University students in Kent, Ohio, were shot by members of the Ohio National Guard, a state organization.



Just thought I'd point that out. Carry on!
tonygraz Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,247
Raceyraider3 wrote:
As on Oregonian & Conservative Republican I welcome the Federal Troops to Portland. The liberal Mayor of Portland and Governor don't want to enforce the law and constantly allow these Criminals to destroy our State & livelihoods. The 4th of July Freedom Celebration was cancelled in the entire state but a BLM march was allowed on the 4th. How's that for a slap in the Patriotic face!


Russian bot, I think.
Gene363 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,814
CelticBomber wrote:
Just thought I'd point that out. Carry on!


It is in the name and they may be called up by the President, but they are generally called up by a state governor and in the kent Stat Shootings:

Quote:
The mayor of Kent, Leroy Satrom, declared a state of emergency on May 2. He requested that Governor James A. Rhodes send the Ohio National Guard to Kent to help maintain order.


http://ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Kent_State_Shootings
itsawaldo Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 09-10-2006
Posts: 4,221
Gene363 wrote:
Are the Federal authorities arresting people for jaywalking or breaking Federal laws?

If the protestors are damaging Federal property. do the locals really get a say in enforcement?

If the FBI is investigating interstate crime, do they need the permission of local officials in every town, county and state before taking action?

If local police are corrupt, does the FBI need to ask their permission before investigating them?

This argument makes no sense, sounds like more a reaction to Trump's administration.

FWIW, as a taxpayer and part owner of those Federal facilities, if the locals are not taking an action to protect them I would want the Feds to act.


We have discussed these same questions and if we presume (hope/pray) that this is not some federal takeover then why wouldn't the feds step in to protect Federal Property?

Isn't it possible that "picking" people off the streets could in fact be people identified as perpetrators in the destruction of Federal Property?

Unmarked cars? Well Hertz and Avis are not marked - where would they get transportation if agents from different divisions came to town, is there a pool of police like cars for them to use?


victor809 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
itsawaldo wrote:
We have discussed these same questions and if we presume (hope/pray) that this is not some federal takeover then why wouldn't the feds step in to protect Federal Property?

Isn't it possible that "picking" people off the streets could in fact be people identified as perpetrators in the destruction of Federal Property?

Unmarked cars? Well Hertz and Avis are not marked - where would they get transportation if agents from different divisions came to town, is there a pool of police like cars for them to use?




I mean, you're right about the rental cars. One can logically say there's no reason to expect there to be marked transportation for federal police force waiting in all major cities.

But when the president states clearly that if the cities don't get their protesters under control, he'll send in a force to do it.... I think you're stretching when you then try to claim they might just be protecting federal property.

That may be the excuse to be there. But the intention has already been telegraphed be the president.
CelticBomber Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Gene363 wrote:
It is in the name and they may be called up by the President, but they are generally called up by a state governor and in the kent Stat Shootings:



http://ohiohistorycentral.org/w/Kent_State_Shootings


They are a military force. Paid for and maintained by the Federal government. State Governors are considered to be their Commander in Chief and can be activated according to State law when not in use Federally, But, ultimately, The National Guard is administered by the National Guard Bureau, which is a joint activity of the Army and Air Force under the Department of Defense. They are Federal forces that States are allowed to use.
HockeyDad Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,130
I agree with CelticBomber. We should federalize the National Guard in Oregon and mobilize them and secure Portland.
victor809 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
HockeyDad wrote:
I agree with CelticBomber. We should federalize the National Guard in Oregon and mobilize them and secure Portland.


I'm pretty sure that's not what he said.
Celtic said we should privatize the National Guard in Penn, and mobilize them to assist with cbid customer service.

I really wish you'd improve your reading comprehension.
ZRX1200 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
I-5 corridor from Eugene to the Columbia River needs to make their own 💩 state.
HockeyDad Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,130
victor809 wrote:
I'm pretty sure that's not what he said.
Celtic said we should privatize the National Guard in Penn, and mobilize them to assist with cbid customer service.

I really wish you'd improve your reading comprehension.


It’s prolly what he meant and just was typing too fast because of all the customer service PMs he’s getting.
delta1 Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
so now it's OK for any POTUS to send in federal troops to quell any demonstration that he opposes???

I'm sure the right would have approved of Obama sending in armed militarized federal troops to clear Tea Party protesters blocking and disrupting legislative offices
DrafterX Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
was da Tea Party burning chit and shooting little kids for their Nike's..?? Huh
HockeyDad Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,130
It looks like Delta1 has confused protesting with burning buildings down.
rfenst Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,304
delta1 wrote:
so now it's OK for any POTUS to send in federal troops to quell any demonstration that he opposes???

I'm sure the right would have approved of Obama sending in armed militarized federal troops to clear Tea Party protesters blocking and disrupting legislative offices

No, it is not OK.
The national guard should have been called in a long time ago by the state. Portland wouldn't be where it is- had this happened.
Under the circumstances on the ground, namely the taking over of an unprotected federal building, I have no problem with them storming in to protect the federal building. But, that's it. And, they should have notified local and state authorities they were coming.
They shouldn't be clearing the streets beyond the federal building perimeter unless there are specific federal rights federal or U.S. constitutional rights being violated. Protesters violating only state laws are none of the business of the federal government, absent this unless the state deputizes them and controls them. Federalism demands this.
Like I wrote before, Portland/Oregon should have precluded the need for this.
RobertHively Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 01-14-2015
Posts: 1,837
delta1 wrote:
so now it's OK for any POTUS to send in federal troops to quell any demonstration that he opposes???

I'm sure the right would have approved of Obama sending in armed militarized federal troops to clear Tea Party protesters blocking and disrupting legislative offices


I say no, it's not. I would call it the road to tyranny in fact. It's up to the city, county and state to decide, and many of the leaders of those places have said they do not require Federal intervention.

If the liberals that run Portland want to let it burn to the ground then so be it. The citizens should hold them accountable.

The Federal government can cut off their funds and let them wallow in their own "utopia".
CelticBomber Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
HockeyDad wrote:
I agree with CelticBomber. We should federalize the National Guard in Oregon and mobilize them and secure Portland.



Exactly!
CelticBomber Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
victor809 wrote:
I'm pretty sure that's not what he said.
Celtic said we should privatize the National Guard in Penn, and mobilize them to assist with cbid customer service.

I really wish you'd improve your reading comprehension.



Exactly!
HockeyDad Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,130
Don’t you have some customer service PMs to answer?
DrafterX Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,548
Celtic should just ban them all.... Mellow
ZRX1200 Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Al, post number 25 might be the most ironic thing you’ve ever said....
delta1 Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,784
I've been taking my iron pills...
CelticBomber Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
delta1 wrote:
I've been taking my iron pills...



Hah! I just scared the crap out of my cat because that made me snort and laugh at the same time.
frankj1 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
RobertHively wrote:
I say no, it's not. I would call it the road to tyranny in fact. It's up to the city, county and state to decide, and many of the leaders of those places have said they do not require Federal intervention.

If the liberals that run Portland want to let it burn to the ground then so be it. The citizens should hold them accountable.

The Federal government can cut off their funds and let them wallow in their own "utopia".

I probably agree.
at least the first paragraph.
tonygraz Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,247
CelticBomber wrote:
Hah! I just scared the crap out of my cat because that made me snort and laugh at the same time.


I'm reporting you to PETA - expect PMs.
ZRX1200 Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
CB scared some pu$$y......I’m shocked!
zitotczito Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 08-21-2006
Posts: 6,441
The residents voted for the pi_s poor Democratic leadership they got and I say let them burn that city to the ground. We then go through the voting roles to see who voted for the Governor and Mayor and the Federal government should approach this like in the movie "Escape From New York." Fence the place in and make the Democratic voters live in their self created hell hole and we can watch them eat their own. This would make a great reality show. The residents that did not vote for the Governor or mayor will be allowed to leave and go to better run cities or suburbs since the chance that they will spread the Democratic cancer would hopefully be less.
ZRX1200 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Except this is specifically at the federal building, which is exactly why the communist POS are there and the typical posters here are avoiding that. Because science and facts n stuff Mellow
DrMaddVibe Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,424
Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
CelticBomber Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
ZRX1200 wrote:
CB scared some pu$$y......I’m shocked!



That's what happens when you hook your nipple clamps to a car battery.

Freak.
RobertHively Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 01-14-2015
Posts: 1,837
RobertHively wrote:
I say no, it's not. I would call it the road to tyranny in fact. It's up to the city, county and state to decide, and many of the leaders of those places have said they do not require Federal intervention.

If the liberals that run Portland want to let it burn to the ground then so be it. The citizens should hold them accountable.

The Federal government can cut off their funds and let them wallow in their own "utopia".



Department Of Justice Identifies New York City, Portland And Seattle As Jurisdictions Permitting Violence And Destruction Of Property
Identification is Response to Presidential Memorandum Reviewing Federal Funding to State and Local Governments that are Permitting Anarchy, Violence, and Destruction in American Cities

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/department-justice-identifies-new-york-city-portland-and-seattle-jurisdictions-permitting
ZRX1200 Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Pretty disingenuous to have a strong opinion on this if you don’t understand what the state and local government has done in Portland to separate and cease cooperation with federal power. Also making this sound like Trump threw the 82nd Airborne on a plane to parachute into the People Republic of Portland when they mobilized federal agents there to protect federal property that the STATE & CITY were BLATANTLY allowing distraction.

Man I remember folks here being ok with State police and FBI agents assassinating Lavoy. People didn’t care about a roadblock being set up to run a car off the road in ice and have snipers in trees all while in an area with no cell service (on purpose).
ZRX1200 Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,599
Also I would add the use of lasers and illegal fireworks....
RobertHively Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 01-14-2015
Posts: 1,837
My point was, and is, that rather than advocating for martial law... the Federal Govt should cut the funding to these places and let the city/state leaders face the consequences of their liberal policies.

Smooth light Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 06-26-2020
Posts: 3,598
CB that was funny and made me laugh till my nipples hurt!
Tax dollars paid for it,tax dollars protected. Anarchy private funded, who's got most money and balls
Maybe jumper cable on their balls and see which one jumps first
Now that would be fascinating to see.
RayR Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,888
It's ironic that the people who would support one size fits all collectivist dictates on the states and their people from Washington D.C. are all of a sudden discovering states rights.
Speyside Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
It is imperative that the federal government never overstep or overreach regarding state's rights. Sorry Z, I know it is your neck of the woods and it is a mess. Just do not expect federal aid to rebuild. Michigan learned their lesson the hard way, it appears Oregon will also. Portland will become a hell hole, just like Detroit. But the concept of state's rights is to important to ignore, no matter how good the reason.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>