Maxine Waters Should Be Arrested

[Aloha Hoosier]

That is the myth. The vast majority of us supported the rights of protestors, not rioters. As an example, if The Proud Boys and others want to march in DC they should have that right never mind what happened in January.

Legit protestors should not lose their rights because of criminals.

Despite adamant denials, there was always a subset of the protesters that were also among the rioters. Sometimes it was a large subset, like recently in Portland:

Portland protesters light fires, smash downtown windows; police declare riot

The downtown damage also came on the heels of a fatal police shooting earlier Friday in Southeast Portland but was carried out as part of a previously scheduled “autonomous demonstration” in the name of people killed in recent police shootings nationwide, including Adam Toledo, a 13-year-old...

www.oregonlive.com

 

[mcmurtry66]

Despite adamant denials, there was always a subset of the protesters that were also among the rioters. Sometimes it was a large subset, like recently in Portland:

Portland protesters light fires, smash downtown windows; police declare riot

The downtown damage also came on the heels of a fatal police shooting earlier Friday in Southeast Portland but was carried out as part of a previously scheduled “autonomous demonstration” in the name of people killed in recent police shootings nationwide, including Adam Toledo, a 13-year-old...

www.oregonlive.com

Of course there were/are. It’s naive to think there’s no overlap when you have slogans silence equals violence and reps like Maxine and the moron from Saint Louis who joined “the squad”

 

[HooDatGuy]

I definitely don't think she belongs in jail, one of these would probably be a more appropriate place for her and Joe.

19 Retirement Homes in Washington DC, DC - Find Reviews, Photos

Read 36 reviews on 19 Retirement Homes in Washington DC, DC. See detailed profiles, photos, amenities, reviews, complaints, and more. Call 1-800-986-5902 to speak to a skilled care provider now.

www.senioradvice.com

 

[Marvin the Martian]

What secret? The national guard should have been brought in before billions of dollars were lost and peoples’ livelihoods ruined. To allow it was an active decision. Not oh shoot we need to catch these guys.

The blm slogan was silence equals violence. Maxine encourages same. The blm congress rep from Stl was doing it here.

the national guard should have been brought in to do what? If it involves in any way stopping a peaceful protest I disagree. Until the January people entered the Capitol they were fine and dandy (using them as an example) and no one should have done a thing to break them up UNTIL they tried to break into the building.

My memory of this board over the summer was a common argument all protesters were rioters, and all protests should be broken up. That I strongly disagree with either this summer or this January.

The problem is one does not know the difference between a rioter and a protester until the rioter does something illegal. Massive force against thousands of peaceful protesters to get to one rioter is a problem.

There were 4 churches vandalized in a December Proud Boys march (https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...2f5826-3e26-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html). Of course the people involved should have been investigated and arrested. But in no way should the actions of those people have meant that other right right protests should have been stopped or disbanded.

It is much like the gun debate, we aren't allowed to take guns from everyone because some violate the rules.

 

[mcmurtry66]

the national guard should have been brought in to do what? If it involves in any way stopping a peaceful protest I disagree. Until the January people entered the Capitol they were fine and dandy (using them as an example) and no one should have done a thing to break them up UNTIL they tried to break into the building.

My memory of this board over the summer was a common argument all protesters were rioters, and all protests should be broken up. That I strongly disagree with either this summer or this January.

The problem is one does not know the difference between a rioter and a protester until the rioter does something illegal. Massive force against thousands of peaceful protesters to get to one rioter is a problem.

There were 4 churches vandalized in a December Proud Boys march (https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...2f5826-3e26-11eb-8bc0-ae155bee4aff_story.html). Of course the people involved should have been investigated and arrested. But in no way should the actions of those people have meant that other right right protests should have been stopped or disbanded.

It is much like the gun debate, we aren't allowed to take guns from everyone because some violate the rules.

The guard should have been brought in to Portland. The protestors given an area to protest with clear lines of demarcation. All constitutional. Instead it ran amok and now Portland wants a bailout. You naively think there’s no overlap in protestors and rioters. Silence equals violence was the slogan of “the peaceful protestors” movement.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Despite adamant denials, there was always a subset of the protesters that were also among the rioters. Sometimes it was a large subset, like recently in Portland:

Portland protesters light fires, smash downtown windows; police declare riot

The downtown damage also came on the heels of a fatal police shooting earlier Friday in Southeast Portland but was carried out as part of a previously scheduled “autonomous demonstration” in the name of people killed in recent police shootings nationwide, including Adam Toledo, a 13-year-old...

www.oregonlive.com

Yes, of course, there is some crossover. And the secret is to find and arrest anyone guilty of crimes, including the crossover. And there were incidents of lawful protesters pointing out rioters to police, or physically intervening themselves.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Yes, of course, there is some crossover. And the secret is to find and arrest anyone guilty of crimes, including the crossover. And there were incidents of lawful protesters pointing out rioters to police, or physically intervening themselves.

When the damage is of the magnitude caused that’s no longer the secret. It’s a large scale uprising. The leaders in Portland and other places failed. The protests should have been limited to a set area and the guard brought in. I cannot imagine losing my livelihood and my own gov allowing it to happen

 

[Marvin the Martian]

The guard should have been brought in to Portland. The protestors given an area to protest with clear lines of demarcation. All constitutional. Instead it ran amok and now Portland wants a bailout. You naively think there’s no overlap in protestors and rioters. Silence equals violence was the slogan of “the peaceful protestors” movement.

Of course there is some overlap. I thought that goes without saying but I was wrong. But even Breitbart found a case of protesters catching a rioter https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ers-take-down-rioter-hand-him-over-to-police/.

In the umbrella man saga, pizza guy was trying to stop him. There are others (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ashington-DC-stop-looters-raiding-stores.html).

Clearly, something went wrong in Portland. I don't live there and it is a local issue so I don't know exactly what went wrong.

Using National Guard to clear out protesters to hold a Bible upside-down is wrong too, as long as the protesters were not causing damage.

Going back to January, it would have been easy to put those protesters in a zone and let them do their thing out of the way of everyone. But I don't support that for them, nor for the Floyd protests over the summer. Protesting where no one sees you is not having your voice heard. The January protests going over to the Capitol made all kinds of sense, and I had no issues with that. Unfortunately, we were not ready for the rest of that day. But it is a problem with protest zones. It is like telling people they have a right to contact their congressman, but then providing email addresses that are never read and phone numbers that go to voicemails that are deleted without being heard. Zones are a way of pretending to allow someone to be heard without really hearing them.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Of course there is some overlap. I thought that goes without saying but I was wrong. But even Breitbart found a case of protesters catching a rioter https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...ers-take-down-rioter-hand-him-over-to-police/.

In the umbrella man saga, pizza guy was trying to stop him. There are others (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ashington-DC-stop-looters-raiding-stores.html).

Clearly, something went wrong in Portland. I don't live there and it is a local issue so I don't know exactly what went wrong.

Using National Guard to clear out protesters to hold a Bible upside-down is wrong too, as long as the protesters were not causing damage.

Going back to January, it would have been easy to put those protesters in a zone and let them do their thing out of the way of everyone. But I don't support that for them, nor for the Floyd protests over the summer. Protesting where no one sees you is not having your voice heard. The January protests going over to the Capitol made all kinds of sense, and I had no issues with that. Unfortunately, we were not ready for the rest of that day. But it is a problem with protest zones. It is like telling people they have a right to contact their congressman, but then providing email addresses that are never read and phone numbers that go to voicemails that are deleted without being heard. Zones are a way of pretending to allow someone to be heard without really hearing them.

You're placing the interests of the protestors/rioters over the interests of lawful business owners. when you abuse your rights to lawfully protest greater restrictions are warranted. when it extends for months and months and months it becomes ludicrous.

anyway it's a discussion from last summer. when you listen to maxine waters, cori bush, blm silence equals violence it's clear that the left is every bit as violent and disruptive as the right. it's partisanship to believe otherwise

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

If you want money for people with minds that hate, all I can tell you is brother you’ll have to wait.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

You're placing the interests of the protestors/rioters over the interests of lawful business owners. when you abuse your rights to lawfully protest greater restrictions are warranted. when it extends for months and months and months it becomes ludicrous

So are you placing the rights of business owners over lawful protesters? Some of these marches had 20,000 or more people in them. No where close to that number were rioting.

America was settled by two types. One type came here to get rich, another type came here for freedoms they could not find at home. We have long fought to balance those two views. Sometimes not very well (what was the Boston Tea Party but a riot destroying property?).

I am saying we can arrest rioters. Almost all of them have been recorded one way or another. Anyone seen leaving a drug store with product during a looting should be hunted down and arrested. Heck, same for people seen throwing bottles, or setting fires. We can do that and send a signal that such behavior isn't allowed AND still allow people to exercise their rights to free speech and assembly.

 

[mcmurtry66]

So are you placing the rights of business owners over lawful protesters? Some of these marches had 20,000 or more people in them. No where close to that number were rioting.

America was settled by two types. One type came here to get rich, another type came here for freedoms they could not find at home. We have long fought to balance those two views. Sometimes not very well (what was the Boston Tea Party but a riot destroying property?).

I am saying we can arrest rioters. Almost all of them have been recorded one way or another. Anyone seen leaving a drug store with product during a looting should be hunted down and arrested. Heck, same for people seen throwing bottles, or setting fires. We can do that and send a signal that such behavior isn't allowed AND still allow people to exercise their rights to free speech and assembly.

The best way to do that was through curfews

 

[JamieDimonsBalls]

I definitely don't think she belongs in jail, one of these would probably be a more appropriate place for her and Joe.

Hopefully Cuomo isn't overseeing those

 

[DANC]

Her rhetoric may very well spark riots, violence, and destruction, even though it would have happened regardless. She did throw more gas on the fire, for sure.
Should we wait and see what the precedent for these types of things ends up being from the Jan. 6 riots, or use her punishment as a justification to go after the gas throwers (including the IPOTUS) from that day?
Either way, I'm on board.

POTUS was impeached, so there's your precedent.

I assume you are on board for her impeachments.

 

[DANC]

That is the myth. Thousands marched peacefully by the day. Many on the right wanted to shut them off.

The secret is to catch and punish people looting, starting fires, etc. The vast majority of people were not doing that. And as we know, unlike January where so far no liberals have been caught, some of the chaos was caused by people on the right (umbrella man for example).

Nobody objects to peaceful protest. Nobody. You are throwing up a straw man.

 

[DANC]

That's almost the same as saying there is no 2nd Amendment right to open fire on people.

I used to think you were somewhat intelligent. If you are, you're being intellectually dishonest.

 

[DANC]

Without being yabuty about it, I agree with whoever said she belongs in the cell next to DT.
Think that will happen?

Yeah, becasue telling people to peacefully assemble is the same as telling people to get in the face of Republicans.....

 

[Cortez88]

Marvin doesn’t need me to make his point, but there are numerous bills this year all across the country that are ostensibly for the prevention of riots but step very close to the free assembly line. I think we need to be very careful in that arena.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Nobody objects to peaceful protest. Nobody. You are throwing up a straw man.

You should go back and read the threads from last summer. People were arguing all protests should be stopped. A protest should be allowed until that specific protest generates violence. I hold that true for the right-wing and left-wing protests.

 

[mcmurtry66]

You should go back and read the threads from last summer. People were arguing all protests should be stopped. A protest should be allowed until that specific protest generates violence. I hold that true for the right-wing and left-wing protests.

All reasonable people should agree with this

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

POTUS was impeached, so there's your precedent.

I assume you are on board for her impeachments.

I have no problem with that.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Yeah, becasue telling people to peacefully assemble is the same as telling people to get in the face of Republicans.....

So, that's what DT did? Talk about intellectual dishonesty.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

I used to think you were somewhat intelligent. If you are, you're being intellectually dishonest.

Since you aren't all that intelligent, you're just being dishonest.


(C'mon...that line made you grin a little at least, right?)

 

[hoot1]

This thread reminds me of Rush Limbaugh continually poking fun at black politicians such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Limbaugh did this in the context of humor, but many hearing Rush (and generally not liking his politics) would call it racist.

In my view, if I were a Republican and wanted to win support from the black community, i would ignore Maxine Waters and instead look for areas of agreement with black politicians..

 

[DANC]

You should go back and read the threads from last summer. People were arguing all protests should be stopped. A protest should be allowed until that specific protest generates violence. I hold that true for the right-wing and left-wing protests.

Bullshit. No one objected against peaceful protesting.

You are misremembering.

 

[DANC]

So, that's what DT did? Talk about intellectual dishonesty.

Yes, it's what he did.

 

[DANC]

Since you aren't all that intelligent, you're just being dishonest.


(C'mon...that line made you grin a little at least, right?)

I never claimed to be intelligent.

But that designation is a low bar around here.

 

[DANC]

This thread reminds me of Rush Limbaugh continually poking fun at black politicians such as Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Limbaugh did this in the context of humor, but many hearing Rush (and generally not liking his politics) would call it racist.

In my view, if I were a Republican and wanted to win support from the black community, i would ignore Maxine Waters and instead look for areas of agreement with black politicians..

Did you ever listen to Rush? Do you know who "Mr. Snerdley" is?

He's the African-American who was the producer of Rush's show.

 

[hoot1]

Did you ever listen to Rush? Do you know who "Mr. Snerdley" is?

Oh yes, James Golden (a.k.a. Bo Snerdley).

He's the producer of Rush's show who once introduced himself as an “African-American-in-good-standing-and-certified-black-enough-to-criticize-Obama guy,”

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Yes, it's what he did.

We will have to agree to disagree on that.

 

[Im4iu89]

Another great example of the need for maximum age limits for public office.

Screw age limits, need to be term limits. Should not be a lifetime job!

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

The trial judge seems to think her comments could be grounds for an appeal.

"I'll give you that Congresswoman Waters may have given you something on appeal that may result in this whole trial being overturned," Cahill said as arguments in the case concluded Monday and the jury began deliberations.

If I was the judge, I would haul Waters into my court TODAY and take evidence from her under oath for the purpose of determining whether she tried to or even inadvertently threatened jurors, or sought to encourage others to do so, or otherwise tried to impact the impartial operation of a criminal court. She would be held in contempt if she made any effort to ignore the court or its processes, other than invoking her 5th Amendment right to remain silent, or acted in any manner showing a lack of respect for same, and she would be very unhappy with the press coverage of her appearance before me, because it would be live and she would most definitely not be in charge. She would admit certain very embarrassing facts. The limits of her authority would be demonstrated, and the world would see that running your uninformed racist mouth has serious risks.

 

[Cortez88]

If I was the judge, I would haul Waters into my court TODAY and take evidence from her under oath for the purpose of determining whether she tried to or even inadvertently threatened jurors, or sought to encourage others to do so, or otherwise tried to impact the impartial operation of a criminal court. She would be held in contempt if she made any effort to ignore the court or its processes, other than invoking her 5th Amendment right to remain silent, or acted in any manner showing a lack of respect for same, and she would be very unhappy with the press coverage of her appearance before me, because it would be live and she would most definitely not be in charge. She would admit certain very embarrassing facts. The limits of her authority would be demonstrated, and the world would see that running your uninformed racist mouth has serious risks.

What would you do if you were judge to those elected officials who incited an insurrection of the Capital on 1/6?

 

[T.M.P.]

Anyone who disagrees is a violent racist

another stupid thread...

 

[mcmurtry66]

another stupid thread...

Disagree TMP. the thread might be antagonizing but this is an impt case. It’s been televised. The pleadings made public. The jury instructions made public. There’s plenty imo to convict. It’s important that all these people who feel like the system is rigged/unfair feel like it worked and justice was done. The last thing we as a society need is an octogenarian providing fodder to F things up on an extrajudicial matter

 

[MyTeamIsOnTheFloor]

What would you do if you were judge to those elected officials who incited an insurrection of the Capital on 1/6?

I’m not sure there was any judge with a relevant criminal trial in progress in the jurisdiction on 1/6, so your comparison doesn’t fit. There was no “judge to those elected officials.” Civics much?

Likewise, the location of a statement matters. Senators and Reps have immunity for what they say in Congress. Not on the street. Not in a military jurisdiction.

And there will be judges with jurisdiction over criminal trials in the relevant jurisdiction over 1/6 issues soon, and they can exercise thier jurisdiction accordingly.

But Waters was not elected in Minnesota and has no traveling immunity to try and subvert the law by inciting violence if a jury does not do as she says.

Trump was impeached over his statements. I assume other Senators and Reps would have been if the Dims and their Sycophants had felt it appropriate. No such proceedings went forward. Had they, I suppose the Senate could conduct a “contempt” hearing, but have not researched it.

None of which has anything to do with Waters threatening violence against a community and a jury in a very specific trial overseen by a very specific judge.

Your attempt to attack my attack has failed.

What should be your penalty?

 

[Courtsensetwo]

That's almost the same as saying there is no 2nd Amendment right to open fire on people.

It is exactly the same.

 

[Courtsensetwo]

another stupid thread...

No, it really isn't. We understand why you would say that though.