This is police brutality

[SojournerSteel]

They are absolutely pathetic and believe Anything that fake news vomits up at them.

Viral Photo of White House ‘Going Dark’ That Was Shared by Dems Is from Before Trump Presidency
National Review
Zachary Evans
,National Review•June 2, 2020

A viral photo showing the White House with its lights off, shared by numerous Democrats during demonstrations in Washington, D.C., is at least five years old and was edited to make it seem darker, the Associated Press reported on Monday.

The image can be found in Getty Image’s stock photo collection. The original photo shows the lantern on the White House portico and several lights around the fountain in the lawn as lit, while in the doctored image these lights are blacked out.

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton was among those who shared the image, along with Representative Bill Pascrelli (D., N.J.) and former Obama strategist David Axelrod.


Hillary Clinton
✔
@HillaryClinton
Elections matter. http://Vote.org

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter
177K
10:53 AM - Jun 1, 2020
Twitter Ads info and privacy
52.7K people are talking about this


The New York Times reported that the White House shut its external lights off during demonstrations early Monday morning, while Daily Beast editor Molly Jung-Fast also wrote that the lights were down. In fact, the lights at the White House are turned off at 11 p.m. every night.


Kaitlan Collins
✔
@kaitlancollins
As someone who has done many late night live shots, the lights at the White House go off every night around 11 p.m.

15.3K
9:27 AM - Jun 1, 2020



The AP noted that other Twitter users claimed that the president had been moved to a bunker on Sunday night, and that the lights going off had signaled the move. This was not the case, although Trump was reportedly moved to the bunker on Friday night.

Protesters and Rioters gathered outside the White House throughout the weekend, leading Washington, D.C., mayor Muriel Bowser on Monday to declare a two-day curfew beginning at 7 p.m. The president addressed the nation on Monday night with police dispersing demonstrators just outside the White House fence.

““I am mobilizing all available federal resources, civilian and military, to stop the rioting and looting, to end the destruction and arson, and to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans, including your Second Amendment rights,” Trump said in his address. “These are not acts of peaceful protest. These are acts of domestic terror.”

Small wonder, Hillary has always been confused about light and darkness.

 

[Steeler Pride]

People can't be upset about both?

Apparently not, I have been told by numerous people on social media that it is wrong that I am equally upset about George Floyd's death as well as the violent rioting. Apparently it's one or the other.

 

[jitter77]

That's a Secret Service decision and not a Trump decision. You do realize that national security and nuke codes are in question when people start trying to breach WH grounds -- or a foreign actor decides to take advantage. Contingencies have to be accounted for.

Clear protocols are in place independent of who the POTUS is at the time.

I'm sure Trump could have overruled them if he really wanted to, plus there was basically 0 % chance the protestors would have made it in there. If the protestors were being unruly the day of the church visit then why was Trump allowed out of his hiding spot. It can't be both ways.....

 

[jitter77]

I also don't have TDS just don't worship every word or action the guy says or does. The hard-core base is going to end up costing him the election to a guy who can't even speak coherently. I know polls don't mean much, but he is down 10 points to Biden. If i was hardcore Trump id be saying "hey we need you to win and can't afford to have Biden take over just tone it down a bit. " If he can't appeal to more moderates he is going to lose in a landslide. Biden maybe senial, but he is nowhere near disliked as much as Clinton was.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Apparently not, I have been told by numerous people on social media that it is wrong that I am equally upset about George Floyd's death as well as the violent rioting. Apparently it's one or the other.

Could you be any more racist????

 

[NCSteelerfan]

Apparently not, I have been told by numerous people on social media that it is wrong that I am equally upset about George Floyd's death as well as the violent rioting. Apparently it's one or the other.

I get that there are people on the other side of the equation that also do this, but there also seems to be quite a few here that feel someone can't have multiple opinions on something. Especially when it comes to Trump.

Sides same.

 

[thesteelcity]

Apparently not, I have been told by numerous people on social media that it is wrong that I am equally upset about George Floyd's death as well as the violent rioting. Apparently it's one or the other.

I've been told, as well. Actually, my white privilege is why i shouldn't care about the rioting and vandalism. . . from another white guy.

 

[Stewey]

Preach.

That was awesome.

Don't see many black immigrants playin the oppressed card do yinz?

 

[Stewey]

Don't mean to bring this tweet up again, but which way would yinz like to see it go? Tough choice huh? LOL

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

There really is only one starting point to making the needed changes in these cities. It begins with the most trusted and respectful form of protest there is, voting. The problem is that these communities relinquish the power of that form of protest by either rubber stamping the very people who run these cities into the ground or by neglecting to vote entirely. Many of these local leaders are handpicked to be the face of these communities not for the ideas or talents they bring but for their ability to be controlled. To continue to allow one Party to hold power without ever giving them a reason to fear the voters, is contrary to what freedom is supposed to be about. These "leaders" are at best rubber stamps or worse actively complicit in working for the corrupt unions that protect the very cops that are the problem, they support teachers unions that actually fight against the very changes needed to start giving these communities a fighting chance. Unions must be eliminated or at the very least totally overhauled to rid them of the rampant corruption and criminals that lead them. At their best unions protect the working conditions of their members and advocate on their behalf, at their worst they look after and protect the worst elements of their membership rather than expunging them and lifting up the good people that remain. They are a legal form of graft for their leaders coming at the mercy of their members pocketbooks and reputations. They have caused a lot of this brutality.

As much as I would love to see what some conservative leadership could do to actually lift these communities up, the voters need to come together for at least on cycle and say we will not be shackled any longer to a Party that talks about helping us but actively works against us because they don't fear us a voting block. That and only that will start to force the Democrats to start working on behalf of those they represent instead of the special interests that just line their pockets with corporate and union graft.

 

[thesteelcity]

That was awesome.

Don't see many black immigrants playin the oppressed card do yinz?

I watched it and don't think she's wrong, but I'm sure someone will come along and set me straight.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I get that there are people on the other side of the equation that also do this, but there also seems to be quite a few here that feel someone can't have multiple opinions on something. Especially when it comes to Trump.

Sides same.

Floyd's death and the violent rioting are two different things, so that's not having multiple opinions on something. What is an example of people having multiple opinions on Trump? Do you just mean that some people like some stuff and don't like some stuff?

 

[Vader]

There is never going to be racial unity in the U.S. because dems need to keep ~93% of the AA vote to win a national election. Unless they call people racists, have riots and keep fanning racial tensions there is no way to keep blacks voting for them. You also have entire businesses counting on racial strife. Just think of all those professional organizers, protesters, and money launderers out of work.

 

[IndySteel]

the AA vote .

Alcoholics Anonymous is a strong bloc.

 

[Yinzerlyn]

Thanks to some asshats here who looted a gas station/convenience store chain, all of those stores are closed here in Wichita. They are the equivalent of WaWa, CoGo, 711...so yeah. The morons also tried to loot the Cabela’s here. And that is in a nicer part of Wichita.

 

[IndySteel]

 

[Stewey]

Only one place in America should of had protests...Minneapolis, against the Minneapolis police department. Throughout Americas cities we have what...1000? 10,000? police encounters with blacks per day that go without incident. I hope to God no cop ever goes to the level this guy did, but the chances are great that someday, somewhere a cop is gonna **** up again. Even if it was an accident or justified. What next, round 2 of pillaging and burning across this country?

 

[Superman]

I'm sure Trump could have overruled them if he really wanted to, plus there was basically 0 % chance the protestors would have made it in there. If the protestors were being unruly the day of the church visit then why was Trump allowed out of his hiding spot. It can't be both ways.....

as was pointed out previously - if Trump was in a bunker/basement/elsewhere then it was under the directive of the Secret Service. You do realize that the crowd there outnumbered the Secret Service, correct? yes, it would have been a blood bath if the protestors had breached the wall. A whole lot of people would have died. But, it would be possible for them to get inside the White House. That place where you intellectually state there "was basically 0 % chance" they would have gotten.

I'm sure you believe Trump himself turned out the lights at the White House and scurried down to the bunker/basement knocking children and women over, too.

 

[Iron95]

I'm sure Trump could have overruled them if he really wanted to, plus there was basically 0 % chance the protestors would have made it in there. If the protestors were being unruly the day of the church visit then why was Trump allowed out of his hiding spot. It can't be both ways.....

Wy do you ******* cae? This is the bigest nonissue ever. I spent 20 min in the bathroom. Are you going to freak out about that too?

 

[SojournerSteel]

I'm sure Trump could have overruled them if he really wanted to, plus there was basically 0 % chance the protestors would have made it in there. If the protestors were being unruly the day of the church visit then why was Trump allowed out of his hiding spot. It can't be both ways.....

You know, fog of war at night when it first broke loose and church attacked. Smart to first ascertain what you are dealing with. Situational awareness and eternal vigilance when dealing with POTUS.

You're taking issue with him visiting a Church the arsonists attacked?

 

[SojournerSteel]

as was pointed out previously - if Trump was in a bunker/basement/elsewhere then it was under the directive of the Secret Service. You do realize that the crowd there outnumbered the Secret Service, correct? yes, it would have been a blood bath if the protestors had breached the wall. A whole lot of people would have died. But, it would be possible for them to get inside the White House. That place where you intellectually state there "was basically 0 % chance" they would have gotten.

I'm sure you believe Trump himself turned out the lights at the White House and scurried down to the bunker/basement knocking children and women over, too.

He probably thinks that somewhere in the bowels of the basement, Dick Cheney was calling the shots for the entire operation.

 

[deljzc]

I roughed it out that there are over 25 million interactions between police (all levels) and the public in a given year. Ranging from as simple as citations, responding to all 9-1-1 calls and delivering warrants to as serious as finding and arresting wanted felons.

25 million.

And we have about 200-300 unarmed deaths at the hands of police.

All of the disproportions of police actions against minority communities matches CRIME RATES disparities and not populations.

To say "polices violence" happens against blacks at a higher rates vs. the general population just doesn't take into account that blacks commits (proportionally) a VAST MAJORITY of violent crimes. That blacks live in communities that have violent crime rates sometimes 10-20 times higher than white communities.

This is not a chicken-egg theory. Police come AFTER the crime rates increase. If you live where lots of crimes are happening you WILL encounter police more often and those police will be on higher alert. That is logical and appropriate.

I just don't think this is as much of a "crisis" as we are being told. I want police to act appropriately and professionally. I really do. But this is a profession that is very hard and draws from a very small subset of the population that even has any DESIRE to be a cop.

I've said how change happens. You increase the number of applicants that WANT to be cops. That lets you be more selective of applicants. You eliminate/weaken the unions that protect the bad cops. And you slowly improve the profession from the inside out.

This type of violent protest. This type of vitriol towards the profession. This type of "change now, or else!" type thinking just doesn't help. We are going to have less applicants. Less people wanting to be police. And the barrel is going to have MORE BAD APPLES in 10 years.

 

[SojournerSteel]

I roughed it out that there are over 25 million interactions between police (all levels) and the public in a given year. Ranging from as simple as citations, responding to all 9-1-1 calls and delivering warrants to as serious as finding and arresting wanted felons.

25 million.

And we have about 200-300 unarmed deaths at the hands of police.

All of the disproportions of police actions against minority communities matches CRIME RATES disparities and not populations.

To say "polices violence" happens against blacks at a higher rates vs. the general population just doesn't take into account that blacks commits (proportionally) a VAST MAJORITY of violent crimes. That blacks live in communities that have violent crime rates sometimes 10-20 times higher than white communities.

This is not a chicken-egg theory. Police come AFTER the crime rates increase. If you live where lots of crimes are happening you WILL encounter police more often and those police will be on higher alert. That is logical and appropriate.

I just don't think this is as much of a "crisis" as we are being told. I want police to act appropriately and professionally. I really do. But this is a profession that is very hard and draws from a very small subset of the population that even has any DESIRE to be a cop.

I've said how change happens. You increase the number of applicants that WANT to be cops. That lets you be more selective of applicants. You eliminate/weaken the unions that protect the bad cops. And you slowly improve the profession from the inside out.

This type of violent protest. This type of vitriol towards the profession. This type of "change now, or else!" type thinking just doesn't help. We are going to have less applicants. Less people wanting to be police. And the barrel is going to have MORE BAD APPLES in 10 years.

Which will eventually result in balkanized NO POLICE zones and entire areas where the police will not go as with the Muslim areas in France. Eventually they will no longer stick their hand in a hornet's nest at the risk of incurring a National Mark of Cain, but woe unto the people who live in those areas who will beg for the police to come back and of course cry racism that no business wants to come near. That's why these areas shot themselves in the foot with a POTUS who pushed Opportunity Zones and CJ Reform when he did not have to knowing the urban areas are squarely locked down for Do Nothing Democrats.

But it goes back to the quote I offered from Carroll Quigley -- the lumpenproletariat first lack "future-preference." The urge to stick it to the man and loot and rob Target and the liquor store proved too much in the present.

 

[Sarge]

I'm sure you believe Trump himself turned out the lights at the White House and scurried down to the bunker/basement knocking children and women over, too.

I read today that the outside lights and main lights at the WH are turned off nightly at 11PM, per Trump lover CNN. I didn’t know that. I’m guessing millions of others didn’t know it either. It’s how the media is able to make an issue of it.

On a side note, the picture that is circulating of the darkened WH was taken in 2014.

 

[Badcat]

Oooooor ... how about the state charge the crime, the defendants are put on trial, and if guilty, face appropriate punishment?

I read somewhere that is what is supposed to be done. Oh yeah, read it here:

I didn't say they shouldn't have a trial. I said they should be arrested for murder 1 and accessory, released into the general population of the county Jail until their hearings. I'll add, set bail to maximum so they cant post it and get the repeated beatings they deserve.