Trump threatens to send national guard to control blacks in Minneapolis

[pknopp]

That stupid Democrat Governor of Minnesota is blaming the riots on White Supremacists. Really he is. He said that last night. What a ******* dumbshit!

In the big picture he is right.

What white supremacists?

Read many of the posts here. They are the same all over.

We're talking about in Minneapolis, the liberal paradise. Nobody in this forum had anything to do with the riots. Neither did any "White supremacists" in Minneapolis.

It's the same in most places.

Please identify a White supremacist that had anything to do with the riots. Otherwise, shut the **** up.

Lol.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

 

[pknopp]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

You are lying

 

[BlueGin]

President Trump is frustrated with the looting and rioting following the Minnesota riots.

Trump also said that it's OK to shoot looters, so I don't give a crap what that human waste of space thinks. He is single-handedly setting this country back decades. It hasn't been this contentious since Nixon (another criminal president) was in office!!!

Wrong. We had riots under a Obama. Infact also a mass shooting of cops at a BLM protest. And several others around the country. Obama’s rhetoric started this shit.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

You are lying

So what are you saying, that the cops in a city like NY had nothing better to do than just hassle this fat clown? They didn't see anything, and decided to accuse him of something he wasn't doing?

 

[pknopp]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

You are lying

So what are you saying, that the cops in a city like NY had nothing better to do than just hassle this fat clown? They didn't see anything, and decided to accuse him of something he wasn't doing?

Just like Philandro Castillo getting pulled over for having a "wide set nose".

 

[Flash]

That stupid Democrat Governor of Minnesota is blaming the riots on White Supremacists. Really he is. He said that last night. What a ******* dumbshit!

In the big picture he is right.

LOL!!!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

You are lying

So what are you saying, that the cops in a city like NY had nothing better to do than just hassle this fat clown? They didn't see anything, and decided to accuse him of something he wasn't doing?

Just like Philandro Castillo getting pulled over for having a "wide set nose".

So change the subject now that you've been proven wrong. Police do pull people over for matching a description of a wanted suspect. It's part of their training.

 

[pknopp]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

You are lying

So what are you saying, that the cops in a city like NY had nothing better to do than just hassle this fat clown? They didn't see anything, and decided to accuse him of something he wasn't doing?

Just like Philandro Castillo getting pulled over for having a "wide set nose".

So change the subject now that you've been proven wrong. Police do pull people over for matching a description of a wanted suspect. It's part of their training.

It was all a lie. He matched nothing. Every single black guy matched that description.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No truer words...from Matt Taibbi.

Following all of this amazing protest news underscores the folly of all those cover-ups in cases like Eric Garner's - the numbing certainty that even obvious brutality cases won't be punished leaves people furious not just with police, but the whole system.

My former coworker was a retired Cleveland police officer. He asked "So WTF do they expect us to do? When a suspect fights you while being arrested, we're supposed to say, okay, if you don't want to be arrested, we'll go away. Perhaps another time."

except in this case the guy was subdued and cuffed, he was no longer able to fight, but the cop kept his knee on his neck when there was no fight left. It was murder. That cop and the ones who watched and did nothing should get the maximum sentence. But that does not excuse the looting and destructive violence in our large cities.

In this case, correct. In the Garner case, he resisted arrest, and it's common for police to subdue a suspect by taking them to the ground in such a case.

They had NO reason to arrest Garner. He had done nothing wrong. It was an attempt at an illegal search. (Now here is where you lie again about the facts)

A store owner called the police because he was selling single cigarettes to people outside his business. That's illegal, and he's been arrested in the past for doing the same thing.

That's a lie and you know it is because we have covered this more than once.

He was recognized as someone that had sold loose cigarettes in the past and the cop decided he wanted to search him again.

That's an illegal search and why the family got millions for civil rights violations.

No doubt you will repeat this lie again in the future.

No, the officer stated that they actually seen him selling cigarettes when watching him.

You are lying

So what are you saying, that the cops in a city like NY had nothing better to do than just hassle this fat clown? They didn't see anything, and decided to accuse him of something he wasn't doing?

Just like Philandro Castillo getting pulled over for having a "wide set nose".

So change the subject now that you've been proven wrong. Police do pull people over for matching a description of a wanted suspect. It's part of their training.

It was all a lie. He matched nothing. Every single black guy matched that description.

Oh, because they all look alike? Gotcha.

 

[Flash]

Looks like the officer may not have killed the shithead but he had PCP in his system that may have been the caused of his death.

George Floyd’s preliminary autopsy raises the question: Was this another rush to judgement?

By Peter Barry Chowka

Almost totally absent from the mainstream news Friday, as the violent insurrection in the wake of George Floyd’s death spread to cities nationwide, were the preliminary results of his autopsy. The report was part of the arrest warrant for Derek Michael Chauvin, the disgraced former Minneapolis police officer who was taken into custody on Friday afternoon and charged with the third-degree murder of Floyd while he was in police custody last Monday evening. The brief mention of the autopsy suggests that the case against Chauvin, and possibly his three colleagues assuming they too will eventually be charged, for being totally responsible for the death of Floyd may not be as cut and dried as previously thought. The Washington Times headlined its story Friday afternoon “Asphyxiation not the cause of George Floyd's death: Autopsy.” An examination of the official complaint (arrest warrant) for Chauvin includes this sentence from a paragraph about Floyd’s cause...(Read Full Post)


Seems to me if his death was not caused by asphyxiation "knee to the neck", he had underlying health conditions the officers were not aware of and was intoxicated or high to the point where it can be shown restraint was necessary for the safety of the officers and civilians in the area the officers could get their charges dropped.

It has been speculated that one of the intoxicants was Phencyclidine (PCP), (did not know that was still a thing) but if that was in his system then the officers would have had ample justification for the knee to the neck restraint.

 

[pknopp]

Many officers are speaking out and saying that what was done to Floyd is never justified.

We have to make sure all officers understand that.

 

[bripat9643]

Many officers are speaking out and saying that what was done to Floyd is never justified.

We have to make sure all officers understand that.

Who is defending what was done to Floyd?

 

[hunarcy]

George, a convicted felon, would be alive today if the asshole hadn't tried to steal money from a Black owned business.

Just shows you how stupid it is to be involved in criminal activity.

Sometimes it doesn't go the way you think it will go.

Perhaps you're right about his crime, but that particular crime should not have had a death sentence and the policeman's inept and callous application of force was criminal.

A lot of criminal activity may not be worthy of a "death sentence" but shit happens when you break the law and try to steal things.

My point is that had the convicted felon not chose to commit a crime he would be alive today.

He wouldn't have been confronted by the police had he just went to the store to buy some Dr Pepper.

It is not the job of the police to "make shit happen" when people break the law. Their job is to protect lives and property. The man was NOT resisting in the video and he was cuffed. It was TOTALLY unnecessary for him to have been killed.

 

[pknopp]

Many officers are speaking out and saying that what was done to Floyd is never justified.

We have to make sure all officers understand that.

Who is defending what was done to Floyd?

"The restraint was necessary........"

Did you miss that?

 

[hunarcy]

George, a convicted felon, would be alive today if the asshole hadn't tried to steal money from a Black owned business.

Just shows you how stupid it is to be involved in criminal activity.

Sometimes it doesn't go the way you think it will go.

Perhaps you're right about his crime, but that particular crime should not have had a death sentence and the policeman's inept and callous application of force was criminal.

A lot of criminal activity may not be worthy of a "death sentence" but shit happens when you break the law and try to steal things.

My point is that had the convicted felon not chose to commit a crime he would be alive today.

He wouldn't have been confronted by the police had he just went to the store to buy some Dr Pepper.

We have no clue if he had committed a crime. He was accused by the store owner but that doesn't mean he did it.

They had the right to stop him and get his information but really, until they investigated and determined an actual crime happened they had no right to arrest him.

The prosecutor initially said they had to perform an investigation before any arrests of the police officers could be made and that might take nine months to a year.

Seems it took 4 days. It wouldn't have if not for the violence.

Same with the officer who allegedly killed floyd? He was charged but that doesn't mean he did it?

He will get a trial and yes, everyone is innocent until proven guilty but he wasn't arrested until after evidence was collected. Unlike Floyd.

Was Floyd arrested or taken into custody? Do you know the difference?

 

[TheParser]

RE: Thread title

When I watch on TV the chaos, I have noticed that NOT all of the protesters are members of ethnicity X. There are some people of other ethnicities, too, who needed to be "controlled."

Personally, I think that some of the latter will eventually grow to realize that they made a grave mistake in participating in these disturbances.

 

[hunarcy]

Many officers are speaking out and saying that what was done to Floyd is never justified.

We have to make sure all officers understand that.

Who is defending what was done to Floyd?

"The restraint was necessary........"

Did you miss that?

The handcuffing may have been necessary. Taking him to the ground may have been necessary. Placing the officer's knee on the neck was absolutely not necessary.

 

[Flash]

George, a convicted felon, would be alive today if the asshole hadn't tried to steal money from a Black owned business.

Just shows you how stupid it is to be involved in criminal activity.

Sometimes it doesn't go the way you think it will go.

Perhaps you're right about his crime, but that particular crime should not have had a death sentence and the policeman's inept and callous application of force was criminal.

A lot of criminal activity may not be worthy of a "death sentence" but shit happens when you break the law and try to steal things.

My point is that had the convicted felon not chose to commit a crime he would be alive today.

He wouldn't have been confronted by the police had he just went to the store to buy some Dr Pepper.

It is not the job of the police to "make shit happen" when people break the law. Their job is to protect lives and property. The man was NOT resisting in the video and he was cuffed. It was TOTALLY unnecessary for him to have been killed.

No but it does. Don't do the crime and your chances of shit not happening is greatly improved.

You try to do criminal things it may not go like you plan.

 

[pknopp]

George, a convicted felon, would be alive today if the asshole hadn't tried to steal money from a Black owned business.

Just shows you how stupid it is to be involved in criminal activity.

Sometimes it doesn't go the way you think it will go.

Perhaps you're right about his crime, but that particular crime should not have had a death sentence and the policeman's inept and callous application of force was criminal.

A lot of criminal activity may not be worthy of a "death sentence" but shit happens when you break the law and try to steal things.

My point is that had the convicted felon not chose to commit a crime he would be alive today.

He wouldn't have been confronted by the police had he just went to the store to buy some Dr Pepper.

We have no clue if he had committed a crime. He was accused by the store owner but that doesn't mean he did it.

They had the right to stop him and get his information but really, until they investigated and determined an actual crime happened they had no right to arrest him.

The prosecutor initially said they had to perform an investigation before any arrests of the police officers could be made and that might take nine months to a year.

Seems it took 4 days. It wouldn't have if not for the violence.

Same with the officer who allegedly killed floyd? He was charged but that doesn't mean he did it?

He will get a trial and yes, everyone is innocent until proven guilty but he wasn't arrested until after evidence was collected. Unlike Floyd.

Was Floyd arrested or taken into custody? Do you know the difference?

The FOP says it's irrelevant even though all sources is calling it an arrest.

FOP Issues Statement on George Floyd Arrest Death