On Trump

[Dude#1279435]

And what did he do that preceeded the arrest?

And what did Chauvin do post arrest?

If you followed one of my earlier posts I said Floyd was not a saint. Given that, im acknowledging Floyd resisted arrest.

But now role later in the timeline. What do you see? What were the bystanders saying to the officers? Was Floyd responsive later?

 

[GO-NAD!]

And what did he do that preceeded the arrest?

Whatever he did is not punishable by summary execution.
Speaking does not imply breathing, and this is a dangerous myth

Can we put this one to bed now?

 

[GO-NAD!]

Back on topic, this is Trump's nominee for Health Secretary.
RFK Jr. disparaged vaccines dozens of times in recent years and made baseless claims on race - The Washington Post

God help you all if he's confirmed. Unless, of course, he has a miraculous "come to Jesus" moment and recants his previous nuttery.

 

[Trell]

Whatever he did is not punishable by summary execution.
Speaking does not imply breathing, and this is a dangerous myth

Can we put this one to bed now?

It was not an execution but a murder: Derek Chauvin was convicted of second-degree murder.

Supreme court rejects Chauvin’s appeal of George Floyd murder conviction

Decision affirms Minneapolis ex-police officer’s conviction for second-degree murder and sentence of over 20 years in prison

www.theguardian.com

 

[Trell]

Back on topic, this is Trump's nominee for Health Secretary.
RFK Jr. disparaged vaccines dozens of times in recent years and made baseless claims on race - The Washington Post

God help you all if he's confirmed. Unless, of course, he has a miraculous "come to Jesus" moment and recants his previous nuttery.

He is just the tip of the spear.

 

[dolynick]

It was not an execution but a murder: Derek Chauvin was convicted of second-degree murder.

Supreme court rejects Chauvin’s appeal of George Floyd murder conviction

Decision affirms Minneapolis ex-police officer’s conviction for second-degree murder and sentence of over 20 years in prison

www.theguardian.com

I think the point was that resisting arrest does not carry the punishment of death - negligent or otherwise.

I don't really care if he was resisting (mostly whining like he was doing and violently resisting are two different things too). He was handcuffed and face down on the ground. He was no threat at that point. If he's been restrained and in custody, then his well-being is in the hands of the officers. At best they were completely negligent in monitoring his status despite multiple bystanders expressing concern. Add in the excessive knee on neck long after he had stopped moving or speaking for good measure.

 

[highfigh]

Whatever he did is not punishable by summary execution.
Speaking does not imply breathing, and this is a dangerous myth

Can we put this one to bed now?

I was arguing that he could breathe, but the cause of death for FLoyd, Garner and others came from Oxygen deprivation due to the blood flow to the brain being reduced or stopped. It's the reason choke holds are prohibited.

I have never said or posted that his death was OK- my point is that people use his "I can't breathe" when they clearly can and the destruction that followed his death assumed he was something that wasn't correct. The Police did their own damage, the destruction should have been limited to that location, rather than spread around the country. Was it necessary to cause billions of dollars in damage? I don't think so.

OK, let's stop.

 

[highfigh]

And what did Chauvin do post arrest?

If you followed one of my earlier posts I said Floyd was not a saint. Given that, im acknowledging Floyd resisted arrest.

But now role later in the timeline. What do you see? What were the bystanders saying to the officers? Was Floyd responsive later?

With the number of witnesses, I'm surprised that nobody tried to stop them, as I have posted. But just about everyone had their phone out. What they said is one thing, what they did is another and they should have recorded video of someone stopping the cops.

 

[Trell]

I think the point was that resisting arrest does not carry the punishment of death - negligent or otherwise.

I'm not sure how you got that take on my post, but yeah, I agree and so does @GO-NAD! I was just "correcting" usage of the word of "execution" that carries the whiff of legality, which it does not have.

I don't really care if he was resisting (mostly whining like he was doing and violently resisting are two different things too). He was handcuffed and face down on the ground. He was no threat at that point. If he's been restrained and in custody, then his well-being is in the hands of the officers. At best they were completely negligent in monitoring his status despite multiple bystanders expressing concern. Add in the excessive knee on neck long after he had stopped moving or speaking for good measure.

What do you mean with "at best"? The dude is dead and the perpetrator was convicted of murder that was upheld in higher court.

 

[dolynick]

I'm not sure how you got that take on my post, but yeah, I agree and so does @GO-NAD! I was just "correcting" usage of the word of "execution" that carries the whiff of legality, which it does not have.

Fair enough. It wasn't really meant to be directed specifically at you either.

What do you mean with "at best"? The dude is dead and the perpetrator was convicted of murder that was upheld in higher court.

It was in response to those who seem to think that what resistance he gave to them excuses or negates the responsibility of the officers involved in how events played out in the end. Not necessarily just here but in the comments of the posted youtube video.

I shouldn't have posted in this thread anyways. I generally have avoided these types so far. I was just kind of annoyed by the ideas being expressed that because he was a being a pain he deserved to die or be let die with zero apparent concern in the way that he did.

 

[Trell]

I have never said or posted that his death was OK- my point is that people use his "I can't breathe" when they clearly can and the destruction that followed his death assumed he was something that wasn't correct. The Police did their own damage, the destruction should have been limited to that location, rather than spread around the country. Was it necessary to cause billions of dollars in damage? I don't think so.

Yet again you're carrying water: The dude could say "I can't breathe" but didn't so it's his fault that some fat white murderous police officer put his knee on some black dude neck until he died! What if the black dude is faking it that he can't speak!

This pattern of your is so very familiar.

OK, let's stop.

You should.

 

[Mr._Clark]

If Trump has the power to violate the law with impunity, future presidents will also have the power to violate the law with impunity.

If (big if) the executive branch can effectively rewrite laws at will, it strips congress of it's exclusive power to pass laws under Article 1 of the Constitution. We're not there yet, but it's not clear how this will play out.

>>>Legal experts noted the president is explicitly forbidden from cutting off spending for programs that Congress has approved. The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to appropriate money and requires the executive to pay it out. A 50-year-old law known as the Impoundment Control Act makes that explicit by prohibiting the president from halting payments on grants or other programs approved by Congress.<<<

Trump makes moves to expand his power, sparking chaos and a possible constitutional crisis

Donald Trump's effort to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants is the most provocative of his many attempts to expand his power in the first days of his presidency.

apnews.com

 

[Trell]

It was in response to those who seem to think that what resistance he gave to them excuses or negates the responsibility of the officers involved in how events played out in the end. Not necessarily just hear but in the comments of the posted youtube video.

Agree again.

There is this cliche "That with great power comes great responsibility" but in practice the "great responsibility" does not always work out all that well, sadly.

Now, in the case of police officers they should be experienced and trained enough to handle everyday disturbances with aplomb, even though they've spit upon, insulted or dealing with mentally ill people. And the Floyd murder was just one of those everyday disturbances.

I shouldn't have posted in this thread anyways. I generally have avoided these types so far. I was just kind of annoyed by the ideas being expressed that because he was a being a pain he deserved to die or be let die with zero apparent concern in the way that he did.

Please continue to post!

 

[mtrycrafts]

Is this the beginning of the end?

 

[Trell]

Is this the beginning of the end?

Which end?

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

God help you all if he's confirmed. Unless, of course, he has a miraculous "come to Jesus" moment and recants his previous nuttery.

He won't have that moment. He stated he will follow the president's orders.

 

[highfigh]

Yet again you're carrying water: The dude could say "I can't breathe" but didn't so it's his fault that some fat white murderous police officer put his knee on some black dude neck until he died! What if the black dude is faking it that he can't speak!

This pattern of your is so very familiar.

You should.

How many times have I posted that it shouldn't have happened and they were absolutely wrong for killing him? Beating Chauvin and the cop whose knee was in his back would have been justified, just to get him to stop.

From my other comments about someone saying they can't breathe, you could have inferred that they definitely could and if you would go through the trouble of watching cop videos on YouTube, you would see it may times (they're not posted by the police). Lots of White suspects do it too- maybe they shouldn't, because it's cultural appropriation, right? As you have shown and I have posted, you don't know what happens in this country on a regular basis- look into it and you'll learn that when someone is arrested, the assumption of innocence exists for crime, but the behavior surrounding detainment and arrests shows a lot. However, that isn't always the cause of their detainment or arrest but it does add to the charges.

Maybe you think the people who are arrested are always innocent- you would be wrong.

 

[GO-NAD!]

I'm not sure how you got I was just "correcting" usage of the word of "execution" that carries the whiff of legality, which it does not have.

I thought it was pretty clear that the word "summary" would remove the whiff of legality. I guess not.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Which end?

You really don't want to know....but it starts with a D.

The playbook is in motion.

 

[Mr._Clark]

If Trump has the power to violate the law with impunity, future presidents will also have the power to violate the law with impunity.

If (big if) the executive branch can effectively rewrite laws at will, it strips congress of it's exclusive power to pass laws under Article 1 of the Constitution. We're not there yet, but it's not clear how this will play out.

>>>Legal experts noted the president is explicitly forbidden from cutting off spending for programs that Congress has approved. The U.S. Constitution grants Congress the power to appropriate money and requires the executive to pay it out. A 50-year-old law known as the Impoundment Control Act makes that explicit by prohibiting the president from halting payments on grants or other programs approved by Congress.<<<

Trump makes moves to expand his power, sparking chaos and a possible constitutional crisis

Donald Trump's effort to freeze trillions of dollars in federal grants is the most provocative of his many attempts to expand his power in the first days of his presidency.

apnews.com

Well, that de-escalated quickly.

>>>The White House on Wednesday rescinded a directive that froze trillions of dollars in federal grants and loans after the order led to mass confusion and legal challenges that accused the Trump administration of violating the law.

The order, issued Monday night, was an attempt to purge the government of what President Trump has called a “woke” ideology. A federal judge in the District of Columbia temporarily blocked it Tuesday afternoon, but the lack of clarity sent schools, hospitals, nonprofits and other organizations scrambling to understand if they had lost their financial support from the government. . . .

The decision to pull the directive was a significant reversal and the first major capitulation by Mr. Trump since returning to the White House.<<<(emphasis added)

New Administration Highlights: Freeze on Federal Funds Rescinded, and Trump Signs Law to Ease Path to Deportations

www.nytimes.com

It certainly whipsawed operation of state and federal governments. From the NYT link above:

>>>On Wednesday morning, the Housing and Urban Development Department sent an email ordering researchers to stop work on their federally funded projects immediately while officials undertook a “comprehensive review.” Then on Wednesday afternoon, the department sent another email, this time saying that researchers could continue their work because the budget office memo had been rescinded. . . .

The precise scope and effect of the freeze was revealed in part by the declarations of state officials in a lawsuit they filed Tuesday to block the Trump administration’s order. In Arizona, $200 million was inaccessible as of midday Tuesday.<<<

I suppose someone could concoct an argument that this is all part of a brilliant plan of some sort, but Occam's razor says the original order was not well-reasoned.