Is it time to be very afraid?

[WCH]

If the Trump was honestly wanting to know the truth, he would place an independent investigator in charge and not someone who has already shown to be his biased lacky.

Who would that magical "independent" be? How 'bout Mueller?

The reason we are where we are today is lack of anyone trusting anyone else.

 

[WCH]

So the Russians are doing it again now. Sounds like you’re totally OK with it.

Are they buying more FB ads?

 

[Thoreau72]

We live in a police state because there are so many things to police?

We live in a police state because here in the Land Of The Free and Home of the Brave, there are laws that take away many freedoms, and the police enforce them, right or wrong.

We live in a police state because police officers are present in virtually every school in the country to assure that students learn to obey authority. We live in a police state because in 9 out of 10 cases, the police can break any law they please and not be held responsible for their actions, will not be liable for their actions. We live in a police state because most juries forgive the police from any crimes they might have committed, on the long shot that the police are even prosecuted by the system.

 

[Vadinho]

We live in a police state because here in the Land Of The Free and Home of the Brave, there are laws that take away many freedoms, and the police enforce them, right or wrong.

We live in a police state because police officers are present in virtually every school in the country to assure that students learn to obey authority. We live in a police state because in 9 out of 10 cases, the police can break any law they please and not be held responsible for their actions, will not be liable for their actions. We live in a police state because most juries forgive the police from any crimes they might have committed, on the long shot that the police are even prosecuted by the system.

You are right and on this topic, I agree with libertarians completely. We are indeed a police state. The confiscation laws alone prove it. The way they treat black people proves it. The way they are armed proves it. The way they are protected by law proves it. The way they can legally kill any of us by claiming a threat proves it. The way we all agree to allow ICE to run around the nation arresting people proves it. It's disgusting.

 

[bomberfox]

A lot of people wanted Obama to investigate the Bush administration's use of torture, but he resisted because it sends us down a slippery slope towards political leaders using the government to investigate their political opponents. This is something we expect from what Trump describes as ****hole countries.

In light of Trump already claiming that Comey, whose last minute comments about Clinton and her emails helped put him in the White House, is guilty of treason, I would say he brought a toboggan to this slippery slope.

So, yeah, its time to be afraid.

Maybe we live in a ***** hole country. We can do better but we stubbornly refuse to. Trump is in essence a mirror of what we project outwards.

 

[bomberfox]

What makes you think I'm okay with it?

Because you whatabouted your way out of it. Whataboutery is the hypocrisy.

 

[Mycroft]

Because you whatabouted your way out of it. Whataboutery is the hypocrisy.

Nonsense.

 

[Oborosen]

I was struck today by the confluence of these two events:
Trump orders intel agencies to assist Barr with review of Russia probe (CNN) and Trump Justice Department Crosses New Line, Charges Assange With Publishing U.S. Secrets (Daily Beast).
I am aware that there is at least one thread addressing one of these topics, but, seriously, this is the way a police state behaves.

In the first event, the Attorney General is being tasked to police other agencies for "disloyalty". One can call it something else, but that it what is going on. He's looking for "enemies" of the President within the agencies. In the second, he is trying to extend prosecution of espionage to journalists. Thankfully, there are constitutional proscriptions against that, but maybe they think they've adequately co-opted the judiciary to get away with it. The point is, they're trying, which is chilling enough.

Now, in fairness, I detest Assange and I am not a fan of what he has done, but, significantly, they are not pursuing him for his interference with the election, but for the Manning disclosure. There were adequate, and in my view, appropriate charges already pending against him for assisting in breaching government computers - something that any journalist would be susceptible of prosecution for. And, I think, a legitimate case could be made for electoral fraud in the 2016 election regarding the coordination with a foreign adversary (I think Assange himself has been a Russian operative for some time). But, that is not what he is being charged with.

On the other hand, it may be that they deliberately targeted Assange in this was to prevent his extradition. (That seems too clever by half, but it is a theory.)

If this were the way that a police state behaves. You would've been arrested within hours, or even minutes of posting such hyperbole.

 

[Oborosen]

Soon you'll be crying again that Obama didn't do enough to stop the Russians and Trump. He's got you guys running in circles.

Why the likes of you, just keep running your heads into brick walls.

See, nonsensical idiocy sounds just as stupid from both sides.

 

[cabse5]

Not lying would be a good first start.

Telling us “no collusion, no obstruction” about the Mueller report? Seriously? What, he thinks we can’t read?

I think it's you (and Mueller) who are confused on what guilt is in America...Psst, it's the absence of guilt...:roll:

 

[cabse5]

We live in a police state because here in the Land Of The Free and Home of the Brave, there are laws that take away many freedoms, and the police enforce them, right or wrong.

We live in a police state because police officers are present in virtually every school in the country to assure that students learn to obey authority. We live in a police state because in 9 out of 10 cases, the police can break any law they please and not be held responsible for their actions, will not be liable for their actions. We live in a police state because most juries forgive the police from any crimes they might have committed, on the long shot that the police are even prosecuted by the system.

Psst...I think police may be in schools, rather, in an attempt to prevent a terrorist attack of any kind.

 

[jimbo]

Soon you'll be crying again that Obama didn't do enough to stop the Russians and Trump. He's got you guys running in circles.

Since Obama apparently knew about Russian meddling months prior to the election and did nothing, I'd say that would be a valid argument.

Every country has interfered, if that's the correct word, in other country's elections when it suits their purpose since the bothersome French took our side against the British. Obama made a trip to England over Brexit. Flat told the Russians he would have more latitude after the elections. While I may at times question the motive, I don't fault any of them for the action.

 

[SDET]

This is the way a police state behaves BECAUSE we live in a police state. Thank you Mr. Occam!

I would still take a right wing police state over a socialist police state any day of the week. At least prosperity is still on the table with a right wing police state.

 

[humbolt]

Not lying would be a good first start.

Telling us “no collusion, no obstruction” about the Mueller report? Seriously? What, he thinks we can’t read?

Nope. He thinks YOU. can't read, and he's right. Mueller: "Interesting wording there, Andy. How many in your party do you think will read that the wrong way?" Weissmann: "Why, virtually all of 'em." Mueller: "HA! (Slaps Andy on his back) Good job. Let's all go home and watch the **** storm."

 

[jet57]

I was struck today by the confluence of these two events:
Trump orders intel agencies to assist Barr with review of Russia probe (CNN) and Trump Justice Department Crosses New Line, Charges Assange With Publishing U.S. Secrets (Daily Beast).
I am aware that there is at least one thread addressing one of these topics, but, seriously, this is the way a police state behaves.

In the first event, the Attorney General is being tasked to police other agencies for "disloyalty". One can call it something else, but that it what is going on. He's looking for "enemies" of the President within the agencies. In the second, he is trying to extend prosecution of espionage to journalists. Thankfully, there are constitutional proscriptions against that, but maybe they think they've adequately co-opted the judiciary to get away with it. The point is, they're trying, which is chilling enough.

Now, in fairness, I detest Assange and I am not a fan of what he has done, but, significantly, they are not pursuing him for his interference with the election, but for the Manning disclosure. There were adequate, and in my view, appropriate charges already pending against him for assisting in breaching government computers - something that any journalist would be susceptible of prosecution for. And, I think, a legitimate case could be made for electoral fraud in the 2016 election regarding the coordination with a foreign adversary (I think Assange himself has been a Russian operative for some time). But, that is not what he is being charged with.

On the other hand, it may be that they deliberately targeted Assange in this was to prevent his extradition. (That seems too clever by half, but it is a theory.)

You should have been around in the '60s and you should read about the 1930s. What's happening is that the mass of Americans are being pushed further into the corner and that's just making US mad.

 

[bomberfox]

Nonsense.

Small brained post of the day.

 

[Thoreau72]

Psst...I think police may be in schools, rather, in an attempt to prevent a terrorist attack of any kind.

However it's rationalized, it doesn't square with the fact that many generations of Americans went to school WITHOUT a police presence. How did we possibly survive?

 

[cabse5]

However it's rationalized, it doesn't square with the fact that many generations of Americans went to school WITHOUT a police presence. How did we possibly survive?

You can't tell the 'violent' differences between the level of discourse then and now?

For example, when the Japanese and Germans, for examples, wanted to destroy the US and then the USSR, later on, wanted the same, who within the US wanted that same destruction to occur then, as now? Who wanted the makeup of society or gov't to change, radically, then as now? Which institutions wanted to change American gov't and society, then as now? America has changed radically. There's your answer.

 

[Logician Man]

Small brained post of the day.

It's his 'go-to' response when he knows your point is valid.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Barr is Trump’s personal lawyer. He does what he is told.

Kinda like a wing man?

 

[Thoreau72]

You can't tell the 'violent' differences between the level of discourse then and now?

For example, when the Japanese and Germans, for examples, wanted to destroy the US and then the USSR, later on, wanted the same, who within the US wanted that same destruction to occur then, as now? Who wanted the makeup of society or gov't to change, radically, then as now? Which institutions wanted to change American gov't and society, then as now? America has changed radically. There's your answer.

My question is "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

Which came first, cops in schools or violent discourse?

 

[cabse5]

My question is "which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

Which came first, cops in schools or violent discourse?

Violent discourse.

 

[Terryj]

You are right and on this topic, I agree with libertarians completely. We are indeed a police state. The confiscation laws alone prove it. The way they treat black people proves it. The way they are armed proves it. The way they are protected by law proves it. The way they can legally kill any of us by claiming a threat proves it. The way we all agree to allow ICE to run around the nation arresting people proves it. It's disgusting.

I some instances I would agree that the police are out of hand, in others I would say that they have the right to protect themselves, does this constitute a police state, NO. Some police are bias and racist, but that is a small minority, but the squeaky wheel always gets the attention. As far as ICE goes, they have one job only, and that is to enforce immigration laws, under 8 U.S.C congress was tasked with creating an immigration enforcement agency because local and State police are not tasked with this issue. Local and State can arrest an illegal immigrant for a crime but not for being in the country illegally, this is the mandate for ICE. ICE is the only agency under federal law that can make arrest for being in the country illegally. It might help if you understand the laws that you are complaining about.

Why do you think the reason for the "far left" to the abolish ICE is all about, it is the ONLY agency that can legally arrest illegal immigrants, abolish this agency and the would be no arrests. For the far left to make such a statement means that they encourage the illegal entry of people into the United States, no law enforcement, no arrests, now just how much of this illegal entry is enough. Again, under 8 U.S.C. to encourage a person to enter into the U.S. illegally is a federal crime punishable by 5 years in prison or a 10,000.00 fine or both. Maybe we should start enforcing these laws.

 

[Vadinho]

I some instances I would agree that the police are out of hand, in others I would say that they have the right to protect themselves, does this constitute a police state, NO. Some police are bias and racist, but that is a small minority, but the squeaky wheel always gets the attention. As far as ICE goes, they have one job only, and that is to enforce immigration laws, under 8 U.S.C congress was tasked with creating an immigration enforcement agency because local and State police are not tasked with this issue. Local and State can arrest an illegal immigrant for a crime but not for being in the country illegally, this is the mandate for ICE. ICE is the only agency under federal law that can make arrest for being in the country illegally. It might help if you understand the laws that you are complaining about.

Why do you think the reason for the "far left" to the abolish ICE is all about, it is the ONLY agency that can legally arrest illegal immigrants, abolish this agency and the would be no arrests. For the far left to make such a statement means that they encourage the illegal entry of people into the United States, no law enforcement, no arrests, now just how much of this illegal entry is enough. Again, under 8 U.S.C. to encourage a person to enter into the U.S. illegally is a federal crime punishable by 5 years in prison or a 10,000.00 fine or both. Maybe we should start enforcing these laws.

ICE is simply our version of the Brownshirts, they are disgusting and I do wish they were abolished. Fixing the illegal labor issue can be done without turning us into a papers please nation. There is simply no way any nation can rid itself of illegal immigrants by running around arresting people without turning into a police state. ICE is a fix similar to using a carving knife to pop a pimple on your teenagers chin. It is brute force meant to assuage the many racists and hate filled people who voted for Trump in an orgy of jingoistic rage. Like it or not, every modern economy needs a lower class to do the work needed by the unskilled and desperate. In every economy that has ever existed, that lower class served the interests of the wealthy. The state protected those interests by force and law. But the lower class was always needed, that is why slavery was created. Why feudalism worked for centuries. Why mercantilism morphed into capitalism. Why communism emerged as a counter. By ignoring the reality of an economy that is dependent upon the lower classes, we ignore the possible solution to all that is driving white Americans to hate Mexicans. You want to fix it? Make a national ID mean something. Want to clean it all up? Arrest people who hire others illegally. Want to have an unskilled labor force? Create a bracero type program that is managed, regulated and humane. But no, we want to lash out at good people trying to survive, we want to be cruel. We also want cheap produce, our lawns cut, our dishes washed, our meat packed, our hotel rooms cleaned, our handyman bills cheap.

 

[Terryj]

ICE is simply our version of the Brownshirts, they are disgusting and I do wish they were abolished. Fixing the illegal labor issue can be done without turning us into a papers please nation. There is simply no way any nation can rid itself of illegal immigrants by running around arresting people without turning into a police state. ICE is a fix similar to using a carving knife to pop a pimple on your teenagers chin. It is brute force meant to assuage the many racists and hate filled people who voted for Trump in an orgy of jingoistic rage. Like it or not, every modern economy needs a lower class to do the work needed by the unskilled and desperate. In every economy that has ever existed, that lower class served the interests of the wealthy. The state protected those interests by force and law. But the lower class was always needed, that is why slavery was created. Why feudalism worked for centuries. Why mercantilism morphed into capitalism. Why communism emerged as a counter. By ignoring the reality of an economy that is dependent upon the lower classes, we ignore the possible solution to all that is driving white Americans to hate Mexicans. You want to fix it? Make a national ID mean something. Want to clean it all up? Arrest people who hire others illegally. Want to have an unskilled labor force? Create a bracero type program that is managed, regulated and humane. But no, we want to lash out at good people trying to survive, we want to be cruel. We also want cheap produce, our lawns cut, our dishes washed, our meat packed, our hotel rooms cleaned, our handyman bills cheap.

What part of the law do you not understand? Your advocating for open borders? I don't think you understand the whole dynamics of illegal immigration and the cost that the taxpayers in this country have to pay. There are ways to enter the U.S. without being afraid of being picked up by ICE. Enter the U.S. illegally and you my be subject to arrest if caught. This has nothing to do with Americans hating Mexicans, most illegal immigrants are not Mexicans, they are people who have overstayed their VISA's. I have no problem with people wanting to come to the U.S. via immigration, I do have a huge problem with people coming to the U.S. because of the social welfare programs we offer, these programs are reserved for the citizens of this country, becoming an American citizen offers a person to ALL the benefits that American citizens have. You need to understand that the United States can not take in every person on this planet who wishes to come here, we just don't have the financial means to do this.

You can have your very liberal bleeding heart for humanity, but one has to face the reality of their actions even if they are of good intentions, the ole saying goes "the road to hell is paved with good intentions". As a country we can not afford to keep paying 100 billion dollars a year for illegal immigrants, when we don't don't even take care of our own citizens, a 100 billion a years would go a long way in caring for the homeless in this country, but hey, who the hell cares about American citizens anyway, right!