[conspire] Federales in Portland?

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Ruben Safir (ruben at mrbrklyn.com):

> Storming federal court houses and setting the police union hall afire
> isn't non-violent protesting and just being loud.

Objection:  No Federal courthouse has been 'stormed'.

One guy (19-year-old Rowan Olsen, yay Scandinavians!  Not.) threw a
mortar-type firework into Mark O. Hatfield U.S. Courthouse and pressed
his body against a glass door to the point that the glass shattered.
He's being prosecuted for disorderly conduct, creating a hazard on
Federal property, and failing to obey a lawful order.

Another guy destroyed a closed-circuit video camera outside the
courthouse.  He's being prosecuted for destruction of Federal property.

Police arrested many of the gang of rioters who broke into the Portland
Police Association offices and started a fire inside (which was quickly
extinguished).  They will doubtless be prosecuted for arson and breaking
& entering.



> We'll see who this works out.

The city of Portland took the required law enforcement action.  This
other bullshit is not about law enforcement at all,  In fact, 
_it isn't law_.

This is yet more lawlessness from the incompetent, senile crimelord.


The dishonest _National Review_ (but I repeat myself) article you cite
said 'If mayors do nothing to stop anarchists from tearing down Federal
monuments or from defacing, vandalizing, and attempting to burn down
Federal buildings, the Feds have every right to dispatch teams of agents
to restore order.'  Well, first of all, Portland didn't 'do nothing'.

Second, there wouldn't be as big a problem if the unmarked squads of
Federal goons _were_ limiting their action to protecting Federal
property and Federal interests -- although here in America it's very
much not OK to have armed goons without insignia or badges driving
around in unmarked cars and grabbing citizens off the street and holding
them without probable cause and against the law.

The _real_ problem is that this deployment is a massive Constitutional
violation.

It's completely legitimate for the President to deploy Federal forces to
protect Federal property and enforce Federal law.  Anyone who knows US
history can count off many legitimate examples, e.g.:

o  Obama sent US Marshals and FBI agents to confront Cliven Bundy
   in 2014 when he attempted to steal by force a large amount of 
   land from the US government.
   https://www.vox.com/2014/8/14/18080508/nevada-rancher-cliven-bundy-explained

o  Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, AR to enforce
   Federal law after that state defied the authority of the US Supreme 
   Court.

o  Lincoln sent Federal troops to suppress the secession of the
   Confederate states based on the argument that he must enforce Federal
   law and protect Federal property, starting with Fort Sumter.

The limits of such Federal property and interests are nakedly clear:  It's
18 specific powers, listed in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_One_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Section_8:_Powers_of_Congress

And that's _it_.  If there's a USA problem not covered by those 18,
then the Feds have no authority concerning it.  That's the law, bucko.

Of course, the Toddler didn't read the Constitution, because he doesn't
read _anything_, and has (as I mentioned) asserted that article II means
that 'I can do anything I want'.

And, frankly, Ruben, you've proven repeatedly that you don't believe in
the rule of law either.


In Portland, no Federal property has been jeopardized by any failure of
state or local police.  As for the enforcement of Federal law, that is
restricted to crimes affecting state commerce and specifically
enumerated in Federal law or in the Constitution. That does not include
ordinary criminal investigation or the policing of the streets.  It
certainly does not include the exercise of protected constitutional
rights.  Like walking on the streets of one's city, and not expecting to
be scooped up by armed Federal goons without legal justification and
with deliberaely no records kept.

It follows that it is unconstitutional and unlawful for DHS officers to
enforce non-Federal law unless they are deputized by state or local
officials -- not the President -- to do so.  And Portland officials, far
from making the DHS officers into deputies, have instead publicly
expressed their outrage at the officers’ presence and demanded their
removal.

Oregon is filing lawsuit and requesting a TRO, as is appropriate.

Personally, I am of the opinion that they should also surround the goon
squads, arrest and disarm them, and prosecute them for conducting false
arrests.  Bag and tag those suckers.