Mothra said:They forgot to mention that just prior to the photo, Karen was throwing Molotov cocktails at the police.Jack and DP said:
Yep, you got it!!! I've been preaching here among all the social misfits and their pseudo intellectual deep theories and arguments/debates that the time for discussion and dialogue is OVER. There are so many posts here actually advocating for Biden and mostly they cannot stand him, but TDS has completely taken over their faculties and caused the brain to accept this new America, and they will not believe you when you tell them that is does not matter who is elected president in regard to the murder, mayhem and chaos that will ensue in a Biden administration. If Biden has gone this far left he has completely like nobody I've ever seen flip-flopped on every single Judeo-Christian tenant there is.Canada2017 said:
If you like what you see in Portland, Seattle , Baltimore and Chicago .....absolutely vote Democrat.
If you want higher taxes , free medical care for illegals , resuming federal litigation agains Christians , and the Green plan.....vote Democrat.
If you want police defunded, military preparedness slashed and ICE abolished ....vote Democrat.
But don't act surprised with the collapse that follows .
Shhhhhhh! The Democrats have a false narrative to propagate! Don't f it up!WacoKelly83 said:
You don't see the five minutes prior to this. A group of about 20 terrorists walked right into the protected area and began throwing stuff on a fire that was burning inside the fence. The feds purposely left two gates wide open at each end of building to allow the protesters easy access. This of course was a trap and for most of the night the terrorists resisted the opportunity. But they got bold. Then when the time was right, the feds rushed out and grabbed whoever they could. This lady was just the slow one in the mob that got caught.
Booray said:
Isn't there a simple answer here:
Trump says to Ted Wheeler-I am putting you in charge of defending the federal courthouse. I am also filming everything that goes on. He tells the nation the same thing.
If the courthouse is destroyed, Trump's law and order argument going into the elections is a million times stronger. The "this is what the Democrats want" is accompanied by actual footage and no BS excuse about how Trump and the Feds provoked them. And there is then self-evident rationale for using federal personnel to forcefully protect every other federal building.
If the protesters leave, Trump can say he successfully defended federal property.
It is essentially the same strategy the forces on the ground used to arrest the crying woman this thread is about.
I agree that the local authorities have let this get out of hand. My point is that Trump is giving them cover. Take the cover away. Remove everyone from the building and film what happens. Losing an empty building-if that is what happens-would be a small price to pay for clarifying the issue for everyone.GrowlTowel said:Booray said:
Isn't there a simple answer here:
Trump says to Ted Wheeler-I am putting you in charge of defending the federal courthouse. I am also filming everything that goes on. He tells the nation the same thing.
If the courthouse is destroyed, Trump's law and order argument going into the elections is a million times stronger. The "this is what the Democrats want" is accompanied by actual footage and no BS excuse about how Trump and the Feds provoked them. And there is then self-evident rationale for using federal personnel to forcefully protect every other federal building.
If the protesters leave, Trump can say he successfully defended federal property.
It is essentially the same strategy the forces on the ground used to arrest the crying woman this thread is about.
The better question is why have the local authorities allowed this to happen in their cities for this amount of time? It cannot be seriously argued anymore that these people are "protestors."
It is time to clear the streets.
I'm pretty sure he wouldn't shoot a bunch of protesters. Because he didn't.Malbec said:
What would Ronald Reagan do?
And if they burn the building down and some "protestors" or fire fighters die in the aftermath? You think the anarchists are going to all say "we're sorry, it was all our fault?"Booray said:I agree that the local authorities have let this get out of hand. My point is that Trump is giving them cover. Take the cover away. Remove everyone from the building and film what happens. Losing an empty building-if that is what happens-would be a small price to pay for clarifying the issue for everyone.GrowlTowel said:Booray said:
Isn't there a simple answer here:
Trump says to Ted Wheeler-I am putting you in charge of defending the federal courthouse. I am also filming everything that goes on. He tells the nation the same thing.
If the courthouse is destroyed, Trump's law and order argument going into the elections is a million times stronger. The "this is what the Democrats want" is accompanied by actual footage and no BS excuse about how Trump and the Feds provoked them. And there is then self-evident rationale for using federal personnel to forcefully protect every other federal building.
If the protesters leave, Trump can say he successfully defended federal property.
It is essentially the same strategy the forces on the ground used to arrest the crying woman this thread is about.
The better question is why have the local authorities allowed this to happen in their cities for this amount of time? It cannot be seriously argued anymore that these people are "protestors."
It is time to clear the streets.
Edit: And if "you clear the streets" you only add fuel to the fire. There will be innocent (or less guilty) people swept up in it. The student protests of the 1960s were one thing before Kent State and another thing after. Don't let it become the after.
To begin with, the plan does not have to result in damage to the building. If the City of Portland protects it, your issues are not a problem. If Portland refuses the deal it has a really hard time convincing people that the there is no need for a federal force.Malbec said:And if they burn the building down and some "protestors" or fire fighters die in the aftermath? You think the anarchists are going to all say "we're sorry, it was all our fault?"Booray said:I agree that the local authorities have let this get out of hand. My point is that Trump is giving them cover. Take the cover away. Remove everyone from the building and film what happens. Losing an empty building-if that is what happens-would be a small price to pay for clarifying the issue for everyone.GrowlTowel said:Booray said:
Isn't there a simple answer here:
Trump says to Ted Wheeler-I am putting you in charge of defending the federal courthouse. I am also filming everything that goes on. He tells the nation the same thing.
If the courthouse is destroyed, Trump's law and order argument going into the elections is a million times stronger. The "this is what the Democrats want" is accompanied by actual footage and no BS excuse about how Trump and the Feds provoked them. And there is then self-evident rationale for using federal personnel to forcefully protect every other federal building.
If the protesters leave, Trump can say he successfully defended federal property.
It is essentially the same strategy the forces on the ground used to arrest the crying woman this thread is about.
The better question is why have the local authorities allowed this to happen in their cities for this amount of time? It cannot be seriously argued anymore that these people are "protestors."
It is time to clear the streets.
Edit: And if "you clear the streets" you only add fuel to the fire. There will be innocent (or less guilty) people swept up in it. The student protests of the 1960s were one thing before Kent State and another thing after. Don't let it become the after.
No one on this thread. But I had an extended discussion on another thread where Canada and one other poster suggested specifically that, When I called them out and asked for other conservatives to do the same only Mothra and Sam would do it.Malbec said:
Who in this discussion suggested shooting people? Good grief you are as disingenuous as can be. And btw, when does someone cease to be a protestor? When they light a fire? Blind a police officer? Break a skull with a chunk of ice? Kill someone with an explosive device?
This isn't a sit-in at the Chancellor's office.
Do you see Canada in my nameplate? If not, don't ascribe his opinions to me or anyone else who has not advocated for such. Thank you.Booray said:No one on this thread. But I had an extended discussion on another thread where Canada and one other poster suggested specifically that, When I called them out and asked for other conservatives to do the same only Mothra and Sam would do it.Malbec said:
Who in this discussion suggested shooting people? Good grief you are as disingenuous as can be. And btw, when does someone cease to be a protestor? When they light a fire? Blind a police officer? Break a skull with a chunk of ice? Kill someone with an explosive device?
This isn't a sit-in at the Chancellor's office.
I wasn't and I am sorry that it wasn't clear.Malbec said:Do you see Canada in my nameplate? If not, don't ascribe his opinions to me or anyone else who has not advocated for such. Thank you.Booray said:No one on this thread. But I had an extended discussion on another thread where Canada and one other poster suggested specifically that, When I called them out and asked for other conservatives to do the same only Mothra and Sam would do it.Malbec said:
Who in this discussion suggested shooting people? Good grief you are as disingenuous as can be. And btw, when does someone cease to be a protestor? When they light a fire? Blind a police officer? Break a skull with a chunk of ice? Kill someone with an explosive device?
This isn't a sit-in at the Chancellor's office.
These are the lowest of the low. The epitome of evil and Godlessness. So they are never going to stop and it wouldn't matter if Ronald Reagan were back in office. THEY UNDERSTAND ONE WORD: FORCE!Booray said:
Isn't there a simple answer here:
Trump says to Ted Wheeler-I am putting you in charge of defending the federal courthouse. I am also filming everything that goes on. He tells the nation the same thing.
If the courthouse is destroyed, Trump's law and order argument going into the elections is a million times stronger. The "this is what the Democrats want" is accompanied by actual footage and no BS excuse about how Trump and the Feds provoked them. And there is then self-evident rationale for using federal personnel to forcefully protect every other federal building.
If the protesters leave, Trump can say he successfully defended federal property.
It is essentially the same strategy the forces on the ground used to arrest the crying woman this thread is about.
Jack Bauer said:
The Mayor wants the feds to leave. The moment they were to leave, this courthouse would burn to the ground and Antifa would move on the next riot.