US Anti-Police Protests and Riots Thread II

[Nobel Hobos 2]

Reason pulls no punches with their headline:

Feds Send Outside Agitators To Escalate Conflict in Portland

Instead, this deliberately intimidating gaggle of outside "law enforcement" officers has been agitating peacefully assembled people who are merely exercising their constitutional rights. This has included shooting one man directly in the head with an impact munition of some sort (sending him to the hospital and necessitating facial reconstruction surgery) and, reportedly, forcing protesters into unmarked vans.

According to an internal Homeland Security memo, "federal agents facing backlash for their militarized approach to Portland were not specifically trained in riot control or mass demonstrations," The New York Times reports.

That doesn't bode well for the idea that they were sent in with mitigation in mind.

Imagine that, the Border Patrol and Homeland Security weren't trained for the roles they have been deployed to carry out.

You mean identifying Mexicans by counting their heads, and getting in snacks while wearing a balaclava, aren't useful skills in riot suppression?

[Gravlen]

Reason pulls no punches with their headline:

Feds Send Outside Agitators To Escalate Conflict in Portland

Instead, this deliberately intimidating gaggle of outside "law enforcement" officers has been agitating peacefully assembled people who are merely exercising their constitutional rights. This has included shooting one man directly in the head with an impact munition of some sort (sending him to the hospital and necessitating facial reconstruction surgery) and, reportedly, forcing protesters into unmarked vans.

According to an internal Homeland Security memo, "federal agents facing backlash for their militarized approach to Portland were not specifically trained in riot control or mass demonstrations," The New York Times reports.

That doesn't bode well for the idea that they were sent in with mitigation in mind.

Imagine that, the Border Patrol and Homeland Security weren't trained for the roles they have been deployed to carry out.

Unless of course the role they're really supposed to carry out simply is to be aggressive and brutal. The cruelty is the point yet again.

[Ifreann]

Imagine that, the Border Patrol and Homeland Security weren't trained for the roles they have been deployed to carry out.

Unless of course the role they're really supposed to carry out simply is to be aggressive and brutal. The cruelty is the point yet again.

Cruelty they do seem to be trained for.

[Greed and Death]

Yeah. Some of us still remember when he had Robin always by his side. Combined with the inescapable ambience of Batman being gay ... well let's just say that nowadays cops would no-knock the Batcave, shoot Ace the Bathound, and take away the Batcomputer.

Batman has always been not only 'pro police' but the mythology of the police, like he's the ideal of everyone who's cracked a skull and then wrote 'fell' on the police report. He's the embodiment of that idea that if it weren't for people's pesky rights and the restrictions on the use of power and surveillance, one determined man can really do something about this crime problem. When the GPD wants to violate the rights of someone they turn on the ol' Batsymbol and then go "well, he doesn't work for us..."

I never liked the Batman gay thing because it tacitly relies on the specious relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia (running around with his boy 'ward') rather than normalizing mentorship or male guardianship as anything other than problematic. But that's a threadjack of a threadjack...

It is likely why his villains keep getting released, the judges keep throwing out the evidence Batman has gathered.

[Gravlen]

Unless of course the role they're really supposed to carry out simply is to be aggressive and brutal. The cruelty is the point yet again.

Cruelty they do seem to be trained for.

Practiced it for quite a while, too, before being deployed.

[Neutraligon]

Reason pulls no punches with their headline:

Feds Send Outside Agitators To Escalate Conflict in Portland

Instead, this deliberately intimidating gaggle of outside "law enforcement" officers has been agitating peacefully assembled people who are merely exercising their constitutional rights. This has included shooting one man directly in the head with an impact munition of some sort (sending him to the hospital and necessitating facial reconstruction surgery) and, reportedly, forcing protesters into unmarked vans.

According to an internal Homeland Security memo, "federal agents facing backlash for their militarized approach to Portland were not specifically trained in riot control or mass demonstrations," The New York Times reports.

That doesn't bode well for the idea that they were sent in with mitigation in mind.

Faarck. What does "agitating" mean though? It implies calling out insults and such.

EDIT:

By Giovanni Russonello
July 20, 2020, 7:05 a.m. ET

Armed federal agents are patrolling the streets of Portland against the wishes of local leaders, and the president refuses to guarantee that he won’t contest the official results of the election. It’s Monday, and this is your politics tip sheet. Sign up here to get On Politics in your inbox every weekday.


Military-clad agents reporting to the Department of Homeland Security are patrolling the streets of Portland, Ore., and throwing protesters into unmarked vehicles. The governor of Oregon has called it “a blatant abuse of power,” and the city’s mayor said it was “an attack on our democracy.”

Demonstrators have reported that officers dressed in camouflage fatigues have ambushed them and thrown them into vans without telling them why were being arrested or detained.

The state’s attorney general has filed a lawsuit accusing the federal agents of unlawful tactics and is seeking a restraining order against them. Washington officials have cited the post-Sept. 11 legislation that created the Department of Homeland Security in justifying the deployment of troops to quell protests. That law empowered the agency’s secretary to send in federal agents to help the Federal Protective Service when federal property is threatened.

President Trump also signed an executive order last month directing federal agencies to send personnel to protect monuments and statues. Immediately afterward, the Department of Homeland Security assembled “rapid deployment teams,” pulling officers from a range of law-enforcement agencies.

On “Fox News Sunday,” Trump was not shy about defending his decision to send in federal officers to crack down on protesters. “If you look at what’s gone on in Portland, those are anarchists and we’ve taken a very tough stand,” he told Chris Wallace.

In fact, the protests there are being driven by a wide range of racial- and social-justice activists. Crowds over the weekend grew to over 1,000, a mixture of longtime left-wing demonstrators and relative newcomers galvanized by the Black Lives Matter movement.

A minority of the Portland protesters have engaged in confrontations with the police and defaced property; Portland’s mayor, Ted Wheeler, has called repeatedly for an end to destructive protests. But he was just as quick to make it clear last week that he did not want federal officers getting involved in the situation.

Two polls released over the weekend showed how badly Trump’s failed response to the coronavirus has dented his re-election prospects. An ABC News/Washington Post poll out yesterday found that, by a 20-percentage-point margin, Americans said they trusted Joe Biden over Trump to handle the pandemic. Back in March, the country was roughly split on that question, according to an ABC/Post poll at the time.

In a Fox News poll also released yesterday, 56 percent of voters disapproved of Trump’s handling of the virus, his highest disapproval on the pandemic in five consecutive months of Fox polling. When given four choices to characterize the United States’ response to the virus, 51 percent of voters chose the worst option, saying that the government did not have the virus under control “at all.” By more than two to one, voters who told Fox that the virus was the No. 1 issue confronting the nation preferred Biden over Trump.

While approval of Trump’s handling of the crisis has dropped, Americans continue to give positive reviews to Dr. Anthony Fauci. Roughly three-quarters of voters said they approved of Fauci’s response to the virus, according to Fox. The share expressing strong approval — 44 percent — had jumped by seven percentage points since June.

But Biden still trails Trump in the realm of voter enthusiasm: While 69 percent of Trump supporters said in the ABC/Post poll that they were very passionate about voting for him, just 39 percent of Biden’s voters said the same about him.

It may not be a fatal flaw for Biden: Most of his voters said it was their passion for defeating Trump, not for their own candidate, that would drive them to the polls in November. Separate polls conducted last month from Monmouth University and CNN both asked voters how enthusiastic they were about voting — not about their enthusiasm about their candidate specifically — and in both cases Democrats were slightly more likely than Republicans to express a high level of passion about voting.

Arguably an even more pressing question is the simplest one of all: whether voters will have equitable access to the ballot. States have struggled to put in place efficient and effective voting plans amid the pandemic; California, for instance, rejected over 100,000 mail-in ballots in its March 3 primary election because of technicalities. At the same time, Trump has opposed expanding access to mail-in voting, while seeking to restrict funding for the Postal Service and blocking funds meant to improve election administration.

This makes a kind of political sense: Polls show that restrictions on vote-by-mail could end up hurting Democrats more than Republicans. Whereas most Biden voters said in the ABC/Post poll that they would prefer to vote by mail, fewer than one in five Trump voters said the same.

Commentators have begun to openly speculate that the simple appearance of a compromised election could open a window for Trump to dispute the results, in the event that Biden appears to have won. Asked flatly by Wallace whether he would accept the official results of the election if he lost, Trump refused to give a definitive answer.

“I have to see,” Trump said. “No, I’m not going to just say yes. I’m not going to say no, and I didn’t last time either.”

{continues, away from Portland subject}

To put it simply, the use of tear gas and the like on protesters. The protests had quieted down once the police where no longer allowed to use tear gas and methods of breaking up unruly (though not violent) crowds other then tear gas where working. Then federal agents come in and use tear gas and shoot a peaceful protester in the head after he kicked away a canister that was thrown/shot towards him while he was holding a sign. Basically they are attempting to use the tactics that Portland police originally tried to use, to a greater degree, and failed. Only in this case, the federal agents have even less of a reason to use such tactics. The police where at least outside the damn building when some people threw water bottles at them. The federal agents are inside a bordered up building with small cutouts that can be removed so that they can aim at protesters.

[No State Here]

Yeah. Some of us still remember when he had Robin always by his side. Combined with the inescapable ambience of Batman being gay ... well let's just say that nowadays cops would no-knock the Batcave, shoot Ace the Bathound, and take away the Batcomputer.

Batman has always been not only 'pro police' but the mythology of the police, like he's the ideal of everyone who's cracked a skull and then wrote 'fell' on the police report. He's the embodiment of that idea that if it weren't for people's pesky rights and the restrictions on the use of power and surveillance, one determined man can really do something about this crime problem. When the GPD wants to violate the rights of someone they turn on the ol' Batsymbol and then go "well, he doesn't work for us..."

I never liked the Batman gay thing because it tacitly relies on the specious relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia (running around with his boy 'ward') rather than normalizing mentorship or male guardianship as anything other than problematic. But that's a threadjack of a threadjack...

It’s… Batman

[Gormwood]

Faarck. What does "agitating" mean though? It implies calling out insults and such.

EDIT:

By Giovanni Russonello
July 20, 2020, 7:05 a.m. ET

Armed federal agents are patrolling the streets of Portland against the wishes of local leaders, and the president refuses to guarantee that he won’t contest the official results of the election. It’s Monday, and this is your politics tip sheet. Sign up here to get On Politics in your inbox every weekday.


Military-clad agents reporting to the Department of Homeland Security are patrolling the streets of Portland, Ore., and throwing protesters into unmarked vehicles. The governor of Oregon has called it “a blatant abuse of power,” and the city’s mayor said it was “an attack on our democracy.”

Demonstrators have reported that officers dressed in camouflage fatigues have ambushed them and thrown them into vans without telling them why were being arrested or detained.

The state’s attorney general has filed a lawsuit accusing the federal agents of unlawful tactics and is seeking a restraining order against them. Washington officials have cited the post-Sept. 11 legislation that created the Department of Homeland Security in justifying the deployment of troops to quell protests. That law empowered the agency’s secretary to send in federal agents to help the Federal Protective Service when federal property is threatened.

President Trump also signed an executive order last month directing federal agencies to send personnel to protect monuments and statues. Immediately afterward, the Department of Homeland Security assembled “rapid deployment teams,” pulling officers from a range of law-enforcement agencies.

On “Fox News Sunday,” Trump was not shy about defending his decision to send in federal officers to crack down on protesters. “If you look at what’s gone on in Portland, those are anarchists and we’ve taken a very tough stand,” he told Chris Wallace.

In fact, the protests there are being driven by a wide range of racial- and social-justice activists. Crowds over the weekend grew to over 1,000, a mixture of longtime left-wing demonstrators and relative newcomers galvanized by the Black Lives Matter movement.

A minority of the Portland protesters have engaged in confrontations with the police and defaced property; Portland’s mayor, Ted Wheeler, has called repeatedly for an end to destructive protests. But he was just as quick to make it clear last week that he did not want federal officers getting involved in the situation.

Two polls released over the weekend showed how badly Trump’s failed response to the coronavirus has dented his re-election prospects. An ABC News/Washington Post poll out yesterday found that, by a 20-percentage-point margin, Americans said they trusted Joe Biden over Trump to handle the pandemic. Back in March, the country was roughly split on that question, according to an ABC/Post poll at the time.

In a Fox News poll also released yesterday, 56 percent of voters disapproved of Trump’s handling of the virus, his highest disapproval on the pandemic in five consecutive months of Fox polling. When given four choices to characterize the United States’ response to the virus, 51 percent of voters chose the worst option, saying that the government did not have the virus under control “at all.” By more than two to one, voters who told Fox that the virus was the No. 1 issue confronting the nation preferred Biden over Trump.

While approval of Trump’s handling of the crisis has dropped, Americans continue to give positive reviews to Dr. Anthony Fauci. Roughly three-quarters of voters said they approved of Fauci’s response to the virus, according to Fox. The share expressing strong approval — 44 percent — had jumped by seven percentage points since June.

But Biden still trails Trump in the realm of voter enthusiasm: While 69 percent of Trump supporters said in the ABC/Post poll that they were very passionate about voting for him, just 39 percent of Biden’s voters said the same about him.

It may not be a fatal flaw for Biden: Most of his voters said it was their passion for defeating Trump, not for their own candidate, that would drive them to the polls in November. Separate polls conducted last month from Monmouth University and CNN both asked voters how enthusiastic they were about voting — not about their enthusiasm about their candidate specifically — and in both cases Democrats were slightly more likely than Republicans to express a high level of passion about voting.

Arguably an even more pressing question is the simplest one of all: whether voters will have equitable access to the ballot. States have struggled to put in place efficient and effective voting plans amid the pandemic; California, for instance, rejected over 100,000 mail-in ballots in its March 3 primary election because of technicalities. At the same time, Trump has opposed expanding access to mail-in voting, while seeking to restrict funding for the Postal Service and blocking funds meant to improve election administration.

This makes a kind of political sense: Polls show that restrictions on vote-by-mail could end up hurting Democrats more than Republicans. Whereas most Biden voters said in the ABC/Post poll that they would prefer to vote by mail, fewer than one in five Trump voters said the same.

Commentators have begun to openly speculate that the simple appearance of a compromised election could open a window for Trump to dispute the results, in the event that Biden appears to have won. Asked flatly by Wallace whether he would accept the official results of the election if he lost, Trump refused to give a definitive answer.

“I have to see,” Trump said. “No, I’m not going to just say yes. I’m not going to say no, and I didn’t last time either.”

{continues, away from Portland subject}

To put it simply, the use of tear gas and the like on protesters. The protests had quieted down once the police where no longer allowed to use tear gas and methods of breaking up unruly (though not violent) crowds other then tear gas where working. Then federal agents come in and use tear gas and shoot a peaceful protester in the head after he kicked away a canister that was thrown/shot towards him while he was holding a sign. Basically they are attempting to use the tactics that Portland police originally tried to use, to a greater degree, and failed. Only in this case, the federal agents have even less of a reason to use such tactics. The police where at least outside the damn building when some people threw water bottles at them. The federal agents are inside a bordered up building with small cutouts that can be removed so that they can aim at protesters.

Almost like Homeland Security was given instructions to stir shit up so the protests turn violent and Trump gets his excuse to send in a military crackdown on a domestic situation.

CoIntelPro 2 Electoral Boogaloo

[No State Here]

To put it simply, the use of tear gas and the like on protesters. The protests had quieted down once the police where no longer allowed to use tear gas and methods of breaking up unruly (though not violent) crowds other then tear gas where working. Then federal agents come in and use tear gas and shoot a peaceful protester in the head after he kicked away a canister that was thrown/shot towards him while he was holding a sign. Basically they are attempting to use the tactics that Portland police originally tried to use, to a greater degree, and failed. Only in this case, the federal agents have even less of a reason to use such tactics. The police where at least outside the damn building when some people threw water bottles at them. The federal agents are inside a bordered up building with small cutouts that can be removed so that they can aim at protesters.

Almost like Homeland Security was given instructions to stir shit up so the protests turn violent and Trump gets his excuse to send in a military crackdown on a domestic situation.

CoIntelPro 2 Electoral Boogaloo

DHS was basically created just to overreach democracy

[Kowani]

And the feds are going to Chicago.

[Greater Miami Shores]

See how different medias spin the same issues to their political views:

Report: Trump Readies Federal Response to Homicide-Ridden Chicago
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... n-chicago/

Trump expected to send new federal force to Chicago this week to battle violence, but plan’s full scope is a question mark
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/cri ... utType=amp

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

They all do it.

[Gravlen]

See how different medias spin the same issues to their political views:

Report: Trump Readies Federal Response to Homicide-Ridden Chicago
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... n-chicago/

Trump expected to send new federal force to Chicago this week to battle violence, but plan’s full scope is a question mark
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/cri ... utType=amp

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

They all do it.

And those three media outlets are

- questionable credibility based on extreme right wing bias,
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on moderately right leaning editorial positions, and
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on story selection that favors Libertarian positions

according to https://mediabiasfactcheck.com

Imagine what media sites with a centrist or left of center bias are saying!

[Greater Miami Shores]

See how different medias spin the same issues to their political views:

Report: Trump Readies Federal Response to Homicide-Ridden Chicago
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... n-chicago/

Trump expected to send new federal force to Chicago this week to battle violence, but plan’s full scope is a question mark
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/cri ... utType=amp

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

They all do it.

And those three media outlets are

- questionable credibility based on extreme right wing bias,
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on moderately right leaning editorial positions, and
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on story selection that favors Libertarian positions

according to https://mediabiasfactcheck.com

Imagine what media sites with a centrist or left of center bias are saying!

I guess you are not looking at the different headlines: I Provided 3 different headlines, I Proved my Point in a fair and balanced way. Which of the 3 do you go by? or should I guess? The choice is yours, I am not going to chose for you.

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

Report: Trump Readies Federal Response to Homicide-Ridden Chicago
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... n-chicago/

Trump expected to send new federal force to Chicago this week to battle violence, but plan’s full scope is a question mark
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/cri ... utType=amp

[Major-Tom]

See how different medias spin the same issues to their political views:

Report: Trump Readies Federal Response to Homicide-Ridden Chicago
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... n-chicago/

Trump expected to send new federal force to Chicago this week to battle violence, but plan’s full scope is a question mark
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/cri ... utType=amp

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

They all do it.

And those three media outlets are

- questionable credibility based on extreme right wing bias,
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on moderately right leaning editorial positions, and
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on story selection that favors Libertarian positions

according to https://mediabiasfactcheck.com

Imagine what media sites with a centrist or left of center bias are saying!

Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?

[Greater Miami Shores]

And those three media outlets are

- questionable credibility based on extreme right wing bias,
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on moderately right leaning editorial positions, and
- highly factual reporting with a Right-Center bias based on story selection that favors Libertarian positions

according to https://mediabiasfactcheck.com

Imagine what media sites with a centrist or left of center bias are saying!

Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?

I was fair and balanced on this post, Do you all want me to concede? To agree with all of you? Because you say so? Because you are right and I am wrong and their is no arguments about it? Decided by you? I at least don this to you guys? You have a choice here? I well probably strongly disagree, but I will accept your choice? Will you accept mine? While strongly disagreeing with me?

See how the different medias spin it to their views:

Report: Trump Readies Federal Response to Homicide-Ridden Chicago
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020 ... n-chicago/

Trump expected to send new federal force to Chicago this week to battle violence, but plan’s full scope is a question mark
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/cri ... utType=amp

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

They all do it.

[The Black Forrest]

Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?

I was fair and balanced on this post, Do you all want me to concede? To agree with all of you? Because you say so? Because you are right and I am wrong and their is no arguments about it? Decided by you? I at least don this to you guys? You have a choice here? I well probably strongly disagree, but I will accept your choice? Will you accept mine?

You just confirmed what Major-Tom wrote.

[Neutraligon]

I was fair and balanced on this post, Do you all want me to concede? To agree with all of you? Because you say so? Because you are right and I am wrong and their is no arguments about it? Decided by you? I at least don this to you guys? You have a choice here? I well probably strongly disagree, but I will accept your choice? Will you accept mine?

You just confirmed what Major-Tom wrote.

...the reply post wasn't even disagreeing with GMS...

[Greater Miami Shores]

You just confirmed what Major-Tom wrote.

...the reply post wasn't even disagreeing with GMS...

Major - Tom was not disagreeing with me, It looks that way? If not I owe him an apology. I did not confirm anything Major Tom wrote. If he strongly disagree's with me, he just proved my point. Gravlen criticized my fair and balanced post, instead of choosing his source.

Posted by Major-Tom:
Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?
viewtopic.php?p=37428917#p37428917

Is this not directed at me?

[Neutraligon]

...the reply post wasn't even disagreeing with GMS...

Major - Tom was not disagreeing with me, It looks that way? If not I owe him an apology. I did not confirm anything Major Tom wrote. If he strongly disagree's with me, he just proved my point. Gravlen criticized my fair and balanced post, instead of choosing his source.

Posted by Major-Tom:
Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?
viewtopic.php?p=37428917#p37428917

Is this not directed at me?

Gravlen was not disagreeing with you, only pointing out that considering the fact that right wing sources where so varied, consider what would happen if actual left wing sources where included.They where not actually disagreeing with you that reporting has varied a lot.

[Greater Miami Shores]

Major - Tom was not disagreeing with me, It looks that way? If not I owe him an apology. I did not confirm anything Major Tom wrote. If he strongly disagree's with me, he just proved my point. Gravlen criticized my fair and balanced post, instead of choosing his source.

Posted by Major-Tom:
Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?
viewtopic.php?p=37428917#p37428917

Is this not directed at me?

Gravlen was not disagreeing with you, only pointing out that considering the fact that right wing sources where so varied, consider what would happen if actual left wing sources where included.They where not actually disagreeing with you that reporting has varied a lot.

ok - I included this headline:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

Major Tom Posted:
Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?
viewtopic.php?p=37428917#p37428917

So I posted back and strongly defended my post.

Thank you for responding.

[Neutraligon]

Gravlen was not disagreeing with you, only pointing out that considering the fact that right wing sources where so varied, consider what would happen if actual left wing sources where included.They where not actually disagreeing with you that reporting has varied a lot.

ok - I included this headline:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

Major Tom Posted:
Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?
viewtopic.php?p=37428917#p37428917

So I posted back and defended my post.

Thank you for responding.

Did you read what I said, I was specifically speaking about Gravlen's post not disagreeing with you, only mentioning that all the stuff you posted are from white wing newspapers. If their reporting varied so much, image what left wing articles are saying.

[Greater Miami Shores]

ok - I included this headline:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

Major Tom Posted:
Why do you guys try? Do you think you'll finally get him to concede?
viewtopic.php?p=37428917#p37428917

So I posted back and defended my post.

Thank you for responding.

Did you read what I said, I was specifically speaking about Gravlen's post not disagreeing with you, only mentioning that all the stuff you posted are from white wing newspapers. If their reporting varied so much, image what left wing articles are saying.

I did read what you said. tbh I don't know what this site is right wing or left wing:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

I read the link, there is nothing pro right wing in this link. I could not find 3 on Chicago so I added Portland.

[Neutraligon]

Did you read what I said, I was specifically speaking about Gravlen's post not disagreeing with you, only mentioning that all the stuff you posted are from white wing newspapers. If their reporting varied so much, image what left wing articles are saying.

I did read what you said. tbh I don't know what this site is right wing or left wing:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

I read the link, there is nothing pro right wing in this link. I could not find 3 on Chicago so I added Portland.

Gravlen already told you, reason is a highly factual right wing leaning news source.

[Greater Miami Shores]

I did read what you said. tbh I don't know what this site is right wing or left wing:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

I read the link, there is nothing pro right wing in this link. I could not find 3 on Chicago so I added Portland.

Gravlen already told you, reason is a highly factual right wing leaning news source.

So I am not going to get any credit from anyone on this site for including this leftist site:

Feds send outside agitators to escalate confilict in Portland:
https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send ... -portland/

I read the link, there is nothing right wing on this link. I am going to the RP forums for awhile.

[Cannot think of a name]

Batman has always been not only 'pro police' but the mythology of the police, like he's the ideal of everyone who's cracked a skull and then wrote 'fell' on the police report. He's the embodiment of that idea that if it weren't for people's pesky rights and the restrictions on the use of power and surveillance, one determined man can really do something about this crime problem. When the GPD wants to violate the rights of someone they turn on the ol' Batsymbol and then go "well, he doesn't work for us..."

I never liked the Batman gay thing because it tacitly relies on the specious relationship between homosexuality and pedophilia (running around with his boy 'ward') rather than normalizing mentorship or male guardianship as anything other than problematic. But that's a threadjack of a threadjack...

It is likely why his villains keep getting released, the judges keep throwing out the evidence Batman has gathered.

If he spent half of his bat-budget updating Arkham Asylum...