Trump flexes his improvisational secret police force. Looking for Big Brother? It's not face masks. It's this.

Should they burn them alive like Bill Clinton did in Waco?

Kylie, with you being a lawyer, I'm pretty surprised at your utter lack of legal awareness with this post.

What constitutional rights, let alone laws (federal, state, or local) are being violated? Granted, the optics are bad, but everything the feds are doing in Portland is 100% legal, and being done to protect the innocent lives of Portland's law abiding citizens, and the livelihoods of small business owners.

Unless you believe in mob rule, which would pretty much destroy your livelihood (assuming you are a lawyer...)

The idea the Portland protests were anything like mob rule is laughable.

Under the Constitution, local authorities are generally responsible for the maintenance of public order -- and in Portland they have told Trump to get lost with this secret police force.

Again: These secretive kidnappings are causing the protests to *escalate.*

Did Trump bank on this? Is he playing 3D-chess? Need to stir up more footage of unrest for from now until November?

Read more here: https://www.vox.com/2020/7/20/21328387/portland-protests-unmarked-arrest-trump-wold

I disagree; the "protests' in Portland are the epitome of mob rule. Granted, I'm not following Portland's situation to the degree to be able to speak with certainty, but from what I've seen, once the people who are legitimately protesting go home, say around midnight, then the goon squad comes out. So to describe my characterization of them as mob rule to be laughable, seems naive at best, but more likely just ill informed.

Also, I will admit to being guilty of an assumption, and over-extending my comments based on it. As I understand it, so far the feds are only protecting federal buildings and federal property. My assumption was that what they're doing is a first step, and that (hopefully) the local authorities would come around to reason, and work with the feds to restore order in general. The mayor of Portlandia seems to have squarely put me in the 'wrong' category when it comes to that assumption, so I stand corrected.

I disagree that what the feds are doing is causing the protests to escalate. They couldn't really escalate, imo. Not the post midnight goon squad activity at least.

If Trump is banking on it, he's got a worthy adversary in Portlandia's mayor when it comes to the PR aspect. That guy had himself video'd intentionally breathing gas, albeit while being protected by armed security. I do consider that a totally punk move, but assuming the footage doesn't show his security, no doubt highly effective. And although it was a punk move, the tactic of breathing gas is what I would describe as above and beyond devotion to the cause.

If he did you are playing right into his hands, you should stop rioting and demanding to burn the federal building and move on.

It's not an optics thing. It's the creation, in effect, of an unaccountable "interior ministry" that circumvents local authorities and detains people without charges.

Constitutional Amendments implicated here: Start with pretty much the entire Bill of Rights 1-10.

Portlanders are pissed and the protests are growing in size.

Nope, Americans aren't the type to be governed like this. Executive Branch authority tends to grow and grow, but I sure hope this is one thing that won't outlast Trump's Presidency.

You can call it what you want, but the facts don't support your interior ministry observation. I'm surprised you haven't tried saying (as Biden apparently has) that what Trump is doing is causing disharmony. Harmony being a word straight from the CCP's playbook.

You may be a lawyer, and may think I appreciate your brevity, but when you say that what's being done violates every amendment in the bill of rights, I think you're just being silly. At least give me three specific examples, so you can prove to me how wrong I am!

American's aren't the type to put up with goons running wild in our streets. It used to be acceptable to put this type of lawlessness down. When did that change? Peaceful protests are a core American value. Mob rule is not.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see how the public votes this fall to see if I'm right or you're right. I'd like to think that people will come down on the side of law and order, over mob rule under the pretense of legitimate protest.

Not just executive branch authority has tended to grow and grow, the entire effing govt has grown out of control. You may think I'm crazy, but if Portlandia wants to secede from the union, or even the state of Oregon, then I say adios and farewell. It was grand while it lasted.

Oh gee, I thought a constitutional scholar like yourself would just need a general citation to the Bill of Rights.

Anywho:

10th Amendment -- Reserves the general police power to the states.
6th Amendment -- No detainment without timely notification of charges.
1st Amendment -- These covert actions chill the right of peaceful protest, which is not explicitly spelled out in the text of the First Amendment (and can be subject to lawful "time, place, and manner" restrictions, for example), but which everyone recognizes is a core component of it.

Just the first 3 that came to mind.

The Portland authorities are responsible for determining whether the situation on the ground meets the standard of "mob rule" or is manageable with local available resources, and they determined the latter and told the feds to get lost.

One good reason for that? Mysterious Feds running around in Portland have re-energized the protests and exacerbated any civil unrest that was there to begin with.

"Oh gee, I thought a constitutional scholar like yourself would just need a general citation to the Bill of Rights."

Hmmm, haven't seen that level of snarky from you in a long time KF. Some might even say you're... triggered. That was not my intention.

I will attempt to avoid being snarky myself, by saying that I didn't ask you to tell me what three of the amendments that are in the bill of rights mean. I asked you to give me three examples of how rights were being violated under three of the amendments. In looking back at how I wrote what I wrote, I didn't explicitly phrase it that way, so in the interest of goodwill, I'll not snark back, other than to say that I thought my intent would be obvious to someone like you.

So, just stating in general what rights the amendments were intended to protect, without providing examples of how those rights are being violated... well, it sure looks like you're trying not to answer my question.

I could be wrong, mr. Lawyer (oops, the snark slipped through... sorry) but I'm pretty sure the federal govt has the right to protect federal property on federal land.

The Porlandia authorities may be responsible for determining whether the situation on the ground meets the standard of mob rule, but the're clearly failing to do so. To anyone with a keen grasp of the obvious, and any sense of what constitutes a civil culture and society, they have failed. Just imagine security for your own family in a situation like that, and try to tell me you wouldn't have vacated the area 53 days or so ago, when the mob started to rule.

Judge Nap from Foxy news.... When help arrives, it does so by surprise, under cover of darkness and shielded by anonymity. Then, the reinforcements beat and arrest and harm protestors because their bosses in Washington do not approve of the protestors’ message.”
“Public dissent against the government is a core personal freedom.
He was just a judge so he has no idea about laws like other :fake" lawyers on this site