From the New York Post, 20 July 2020:
Nancy Pelosi and Democrats have it exactly wrong on feds vs. protesters in Portland
From the New York Post, 20 July 2020:
Nancy Pelosi and Democrats have it exactly wrong on feds vs. protesters in Portland
NY Post will say anything to get to the trump teet.
Next.
Originally posted by: Don
From the New York Post, 20 July 2020:
Nancy Pelosi and Democrats have it exactly wrong on feds vs. protesters in Portland
Would DonDiego grant federal agencies unlimited power to snatch people off the streets in the city where HE lives?
Kevin Lewis inquires: "Would DonDiego grant federal agencies unlimited power to snatch people off the streets in the city where HE lives?"
From KGW Portland:
"Oregon may be one of the safer states in the country, accoding to data released by the National Council for Home Safety and Security, but Portland is one of its most dangerous cities. The least-safe city in the state is Coos Bay, but Portland doesn't rank far behind, coming in third from the bottom. Portland's violent crime rate is 5.2 reported crimes per 1,000 people and its property crime rate is 56.8 per 1,000."
Poor old DonDiego chooses to enjoy the quiet life in locales with much too little Sturm und Drang to attract the Federal authorities. The metropolitan area in which poor old DonDiego presently resides ranks in the top-10 safest communities in the State. The Feds'll never find poor old DonDiego or his confederates.
Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis
Would DonDiego grant federal agencies unlimited power to snatch people off the streets in the city where HE lives?
Notice how Don gave you the standard republican non-answer?
A Federal Agent on every street corner is the Republican's new campaign slogan.
Heil trump!!!!
Oh, . . . wait a minute; poor old DonDiego thought Kevin Lewis was asking a personal question.
With regard to Portland Oregon, the White House Press Secretary has already provided justification for the deployment of Feds to Portland, Oregon.
Specifically she cited 40 U.S Code Section 1315 providing for law enforcement authority of [the] Secretary of Homeland Security for protection of public property.
"The Secretary may designate employees of the Department of Homeland Security, including employees transferred to the Department from the Office of the Federal Protective Service of the General Services Administration pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as officers and agents for duty in connection with the protection of property owned or occupied by the Federal Government and persons on the property, including duty in areas outside the property to the extent necessary to protect the property and persons on the property."
So, . . . in the very very unlikely event of similar destructive persons appearing with bad intentions "in the city where poor old DonDiego lives", poor old DonDiego would welcome application of the same laws.
Ref: 40 US Code Section 1315
Really, . . . look at the reference. It's like the Law was written with the events occuring in Portland in mind.
The key phrase in the section you quoted.
...to the extent necessary to protect the property and persons on the property.
I wouldn't want to be the attorney making the argument in court that Federal Agents needed to kidnap random people off the street outside their jurisdiction because a handful of people out of a group of hundreds might come on to Federal property to spray paint graffiti on the building. The types of actions being reported would be considered beyond the extent necessary.
The way most judges would interpret this is that the Federal Agents could go after someone standing over the property line lobbing molotov cocktail's at the Federal buliding but they could not actively police a peaceful protest that was held over the property line because there is no threat to the building.
You also have to scroll down in the code section you quoted where you will find:
(e) Authority Outside Federal Property.—
Originally posted by: Don
Oh, . . . wait a minute; poor old DonDiego thought Kevin Lewis was asking a personal question.
With regard to Portland Oregon, the White House Press Secretary has already provided justification for the deployment of Feds to Portland, Oregon.
Specifically she cited 40 U.S Code Section 1315 providing for law enforcement authority of [the] Secretary of Homeland Security for protection of public property.
"The Secretary may designate employees of the Department of Homeland Security, including employees transferred to the Department from the Office of the Federal Protective Service of the General Services Administration pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, as officers and agents for duty in connection with the protection of property owned or occupied by the Federal Government and persons on the property, including duty in areas outside the property to the extent necessary to protect the property and persons on the property."
So, . . . in the very very unlikely event of similar destructive persons appearing with bad intentions "in the city where poor old DonDiego lives", poor old DonDiego would welcome application of the same laws.
Ref: 40 US Code Section 1315
Really, . . . look at the reference. It's like the Law was written with the events occuring in Portland in mind.
DonDiego may not understand that the US Code section he quoted does NOT grant DHS employees the right to roam the streets and kidnap peaceful protestors---just because some OTHER protestors sprayed graffiti on a federal building---which is now protected by a stout steel fence.
Trump's goon squad greatly exceeded their duty, their authority, and their jurisdiction.
DonDiego would probably NOT appreciate being swept off the streets of his home city and detained simply because he was walking in an area where protestors had previously sprayed graffiti.
