thormas

Well said..............and healthy skepticism and questioning is essential to freedom: always has been, always will. Note: highlight is added for emphasis.

No empathy, no respect..................there is nothing else!

........and he's back. Well done!

In a tweet, the trumpster wrote that the old guy in Buffalo, shoved to the ground and hospitalized could be..........wait for it........ an ANTIFA provocateur. Yeah, this helps: the divider in chief.

A statement that a white man might make but given history, it is not a statement that a large number of black men and women can make. Therein lies the problem. Many , including prominent generals and former cabinet members (white and black) are questioning the reasons of Barr and the trumpster who gave the police the 'go ahead'

The circumstances on the ground makes no difference?

Some of us have prayed for that since inauguration day but alas..................it has not and will not happen with one such as the trumpster.

Rather you have no real answers given the trumpster's actions and immorality. But that you don't even give some acknowledgement to 'white privelege' and recognize that your situation, described above, is not the situation that many/most/all (?) black men and women find themselves in, is stunning, tragic and speaks volumes in this ongoing societal inequality So much for wisdom. I have no problem with you're ignoring me or stating, conveniently, that I misread what is plain in your posts. As you continue to push the orange obese one, I will simply provide an alternative"+}

Nobody is denying the complexity of the problem and the idea of 'defunding or disbanding' needs to be better defined even by those who use the terms. However, you speak from the experience of a white man, correct?. I am one and grew up with cops and detectives as my coaches, the fathers of my best friends, neighbors and later some of those kids grew up to be cops and in two cases, hero cops and we are friends to this day. However neither of us has the experience of being stopped because we are black and the assumptions that go with that. Given the number of stops, harassment, simply because someone is black............how can many give that benefit of the doubt given what has continually happened throughout the country? Good God look at the story of a women calling the police on a black bird watcher in Central Park when she 'illegally' had her dog off the lease. Would that have happened to you or me? Perhaps but I really, really doubt it! The odds of you or me being treated respectfully or with 'kid gloves' is much more probable because we are white; it is not the experience of many black citizens. And the idea of taking it up with your elected official is actually laughable in the experience of many black citizens. It is obvious that that the legitimacy or benefit of the doubt ends tragically for many black citizens - yet not for whites! I too have experience in protest and in a black community, having taught in the Ironbound section of Newark, NJ where we teachers were the only white faces to be seen in entire neighborhoods. it was humbling and the shoe was on the other foot. I remember taking our kids on a bus to a park where other schools were also going and when we got off the bus, the 'looks' we got were amazing and shameful. I say we because for a short while, being in a sea of black faces, with kids whom I grew to love, with kids under my protection, when all you see is black, you forgot for a moment who and what you are. To say that was just a weird little thing is to not honor the depth of the experience, it was revelatory. To you it would be foolish but for many citizens protesting it is literally life and death of their kids, their family members, their friends, themselves. I have a friend, an ex=Marine who had a career with a Fortune 10 company and, as a black man, he is petrified for his sons every damn day of his life. I have never so feared for my kid. Life and death of your family and friends is not a foolish topic. As for the night of 6/1 give us sources that there were warnings. And there is no red herring: if the trumpster didn't want to go for his walk the curfew wouldn't have been violated by the cops and we simply don't know what would have happened at 7PM. You give excuses for a strongman move, the move of a dictator: clear the streets and preen for the cameras, look whose in charge. For a President to make such a move at the expense of a legitimate protest and endanger the people is, as one Republican operative put it, "IMMORAL!' Your wisdom is limited by your whiteness.........in this case! Allow Wisdom to speak more inclusively.

Did I get that right " Russian speaking Americans for Trump 2020?" I do love your humor, is this a play on the 'Russian hoax?"

Here is what Democrats are proposing we replace Trump with. https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1265106469579444224/pu/vid/640x360/Nr0RnWjkA6NmDX6N.mp4?tag=10 Ah Joseph, how desperate: you poor thing, you're reaching for the orange make-up to gloss over the history of the obese orange man (with women) and the now famous quotes that the impeached trumpster has made about groping women. And that's on top of all his lies, bullying, name calling (3rd grade much?), disregard for the constitution, ignorance, narcissism, dismissal of science and failure dealing with the virus. Desperation! And you continue to beat the dead horse of the police attacking citizens. Tell us about the warnings. And you only assume that those who stayed were not peaceful - it was obvious that many, many people were caught completely off guard. What is the source of your news, specifically? Joe, we know that all the protests were not peaceful, that some looted, burned and destroyed - and no one here is saying 'let it burn" - certainly not me and I haven't seen Paul write that. So stick to the subject at hand.........the Park on 6/1.

From the trumpster: "I am dispatching thousands and thousands of heavily armed soldiers, military personnel and law enforcement officers to stop the rioting, looting, vandalism, assaults and the wanton destruction of property. We are putting everybody on warning, our 7 o’clock curfew will be strictly enforced.” However it wasn't strictly enforced, they 'jumped the gun." And that night prior to 7PM it was a peaceful demonstration. And we all know that the impeached one wanted it cleared not to protect lives and property but so he could take a stroll and use a Bible safely tucked away in his daughter's pocketbook for a .........photo op. I didn't hear or read of any warnings that night but I have been looking.........this sounds like trumpster speak. "When an innocent person isn't breaking the law, usually the police are powerless to take action against them." Well said: if only the trumpster and his lackies understood this and how it is American to protest. You are right about the trumpeter's action being likened to that of dictators (whom he so admires). What is more than shameful is those who have not yet understood or recognized his disregard for law, constitution, justice and those who, recognize it and lack the courage to say, "Enough!" Thankfully some generals, former Chairmen of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a former Republican President and a Republican Senator have so far taken such a stance. Contrast this to Republican senators with heads down, avoiding questions about that night in the Park. Do the trumpeters' lackies and followers accept his vision of America and disregard for constitution, decency and law?

I actually do try to quote others accurately and It is valid to look at different quotes and comment on them if the context is valid (example trumpster as a unique leader and not knowing whether (such a unique leader) has a plan speaks volumes. I did not intentionally transpose the word most on purpose. It was a mistake. Heh, that's something you never hear from the trumpster or his offspring or his cronies and toddies. However, your actually words that what "most republicans rejected" was not that most protestors were acting peacefully but that "protestors" were acting peacefully contains no qualifier so what you communicated was that most republicans didn't reject that a few or some or many or most protestors but protestors acted peacefully - you did not modify the word protestors which is inclusive. If you didn't mean all protestors then the onus is on you or republicans to qualify the (few, some, many, most, etc.) protestors. However, there was no curfew (since it was before 7pm) and the protestors (and on street reporters) didn't know what was going on (given the videos and reporting) and the police did not discriminate between peaceful and resistant protestors. But this is what you get when the trumpster tried to convince us he is the 'law and order' president and unleashed armed troops/police against American citizens. Your words do mirror all things trumpster. Oh, Joseph, don't get testy, no one knows everything another has to say. The impeached trumpster surprises us all, each new day, with ever new lows that he reachers for and embodies:+}

An incident and an issue that are worthy of out attention ....................

And this from another General: Retired Adm. Mike Mullen, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs: “I am deeply worried that as they execute their orders, the members of our military will be co-opted for political purposes.” Retired Marine Force General John Kelly: said Friday he agrees with former Secretary of Defense Gen. Jim Mattis' stark warning this week that President Donald Trump is "the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people: "I agree with him." No slant, no interpretation just the words of 3 Generals who served the nation

Most republicans? You continually miss that this was all at the trumpeter's behest: he 'needed' to walk to the church to show how brave he was after being taken to the bunker (which was not a problem for many people) because he seemingly thought his manhood was being questioned and he needed to 'dominate' the protestors - so prior to the curfew's start and in spite of a legal protest, they 'sent in the troops.' They were acting peacefully and caught totally off guard by the forced march of the police - even reporters were caught off guard. This was totally unnecessary. These were American citizens Joseph in a legal protest, prior to a curfew. Don't try to recreate history or spin the facts. And in answer to your question: "Should the President have gone to the church for a photo-op that led to tear gas and other measures to be used on the protesters?" The answer is no given it was just a photo-op and people, Americans, had to be harmed so he could take a totally unnecessary walk - unnecessary for all except his ego and need to dominate. Good god, I have not seen such pseudo rationalization in ages. Now the Bible is a civil message - is that the case when it is even held upside down? It was a prop!, The church was a prop. And, once again for those who cannot see, hear or understand, American citizens were hurt in a lawful protest! You do see how you contradicted yourself, don't you?: "republicans reject that most were acting peacefully" yet 3 short sentences later you state, "most protesters left" so they were peaceful and did listen - they left! This had to come from the trumpeter's playbook since it is contradictory, illogical. self-serving and un-empathetic.

Straight from the man's mouth - no slanting: “Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try,” Mattis wrote in a statement published by the Atlantic. “Instead he tries to divide us. We are witnessing the consequences of three years of this deliberate effort.”

Again, well reasoned. Even those who live in other countries see more clearly than some in the USA.

....with the exception of Fox News? OMG........more out of the trumpster's playbook except when he gets pissed at them for telling the truth. And there is a difference between the News at Fox and the typical talking heads, like Hannity and the morning crew. Where is it not uncommon? Most peaceful protestors leave peacefully when asked? Ok but it takes time for a crowd of a few hundred, a thousand or more to disperse and professionals know that. The sole reason, the great urgency, for police to move in was the trumpster photo-op: it was about him and there was no care for those citizens of the country. This was a peaceful protest and since the curfew never came, you don't know, the trumpster didn't know, they would not disperse, Barr and the troops jumped the gun. Now you bring up boogeymen - troublemakers - never knowing who in that crowd you're talking about or whether they existed that night. In the DC incident there was no violation of the law: they were peaceful and there was no curfew broken. They weren't in non-compliance - that is a fact!. There is no trumping the agreed curfew time if the people are peaceful, thus there is no legitimate direct order from law enforcement. It happened because Barr wanted it clear for the impeached one. The rationale/excuses provided by the administration and parroted here are simply embarrassing.

Well reasoned and said.

Good god, all these issues are of utmost importance. Cover-19, high unemployment (both having the greatest impact on people of color), the murder of a black man by police in the light of day (such murders that have happened much too often) and the protests for generations (little kids through grandparents) of black men and women, and those of other races who not only support them but who are also incensed by such wanton, unethical, violence that spits in the face of what we believe about this country. Sure we don't want the destruction that has gone on in cities but everyone who knows anything, knows this is not the work of most of these protestors across the country. Yet the protests were necessary and they are working. Two young black men had a long discussion with a police chief and they said 'it would not have happened without the protests.' True. How many black citizens have been murdered and there are protests, talks, funerals, promises made and great speeches.........and it all goes back to 'same old, same old' until the next time. Seemingly not this time! There are protests across the country and shared across races that 'this is enough, no more: no promises, no return to normal, it must end now.' As said there are those in the protest that want to create havoc. But that is not most of the protestors, so let them protest and let change be made - black citizens cannot let it continue, no American can let it continue. Has most of America ever gotten the 'message of the peaceful protestors?' Perhaps for a very short time but It seems not or we would not be here yet again. Imagine if you are black, if your son is black, if you know a friend or family member who has been stopped, harassed, arrested, assaulted, murdered and it simply goes on and on. No one got the message, that's why we are here again. Where is real, sustainable change? It hasn't happened or we wouldn't be here again. And our president simply cannot think outside the box that is his ego, our president is unable to empathize with another human being, unable to see that the promise of America is not fulfilled (unless you're rich), is incapable of hearing the anguish of the people in the wake of George Floyd's murder (whose heart is so hardened that Floyd's calling for his Mama doesn't bring tear to their eyes), who talked over Floyd's brother rather than let him cry, let him vent, let him tell the President of the US how broken he was, how angry he was? The trumpster announces he spoke to the family (an announcement that served his purposes and did nothing for the Floyds), he shows no understanding of the triple threat faced by black men and women in Covid, unemployment and being singled out and aways fearing that they too could be killed. What does this president do? He focuses on the violence, he focuses on the destruction and he chooses to dominate - rather than speak to the nation, rather than try to heal even as he encourages (not name calls) Governors to address both the protestors and those who desire violence - he chooses the words of force, he chooses to dominate and unleash the American military on its own people in a moment of brokenness. Action was quickly taken? When was the upgrade to 2nd degree, when were the others charged. Some of us long and pray for the day in America when such action will not have to be taken rather than judging how quick (or not) it was. The trumpster is incapable of uniting us and he has shown this time and again. What citizen could be comfortable with how easily he name called Governors and threaten to use the military rather than even try to understand the people he serves? What truly religion person could cheer his walk to the Church for a photo-op where he then holds the Christian Holy Book for another photo-op? And now he thanks himself for the growing success of Governors whose states are becoming more peaceful? If they used the Guard, they made that decision because it was theirs to make (the Governor calls the Guard up to serve) for the good of their people. Our current president is simply incapable, he acts like a dictator in the face of people suffering and he makes America look like a banana republic.

Talk about dismissing the view of another: I was impressed with Paul's statement and analysis - and again you dip into conspiracy theories about the 4th estate. You prevaricate - it was 15 minutes before the curfew and it was a peaceful protest - so legal. The sole reason to unleash the force was Barr's so his boss could do the photo op -at the expense of citizens. Regardless of 'requests' the curfew hadn't been reached and they were within their rights to protest. 'Agitators' - another favorite trumpster talking point. Still it was legal and still prior to the curfew. You ignore a man like Mattis who is not with any paper or the Bishop of the St. John's or priest/bishops who were aghast at the trumpster's photo-op at the Pope Paul shrine. If those stories are in the papers or on media shows............they are reporting the facts as presented.

Paul, Agreement with your premise from Jim Mattis: "“Donald Trump is the first president in my lifetime who does not try to unite the American people — does not even pretend to try. Instead, he tries to divide us.”

Thank you :+} Yet it was the trumpster that you said was not simply unique (as we all are) but a unique leader and you follow it up with the conspiracies theories of the impeached one as a perpetual victim. Right out of his own playbook, sounds like it's from his campaign talking points. How telling is this beauty, "I don't see Trump doing anything except to try to protect peoples livelihood. He is not in charge of city or state police but if they can't protect law abiding citizens then he will use the military and i do not object." And in his little mind, he was totally justified the other night in DC........so that was protecting peoples' livelihood and protecting law abiding citizens and you didn't see that as something else? As it was peaceful then they were within their rights and they were the law abiding citizens. See how that works? The trumpster doesn't.......he needed to strut like a strongman! So, you agree with the clearing of the streets of actual peaceful protestors so he could walk to a Church (photo op) and then hold a Bible for a photo op? Joseph, I think we should leave this conversation since I see no response to numerous questions which I understand given who you are trying to defend.

You said he was a unique leader and you may not know (unless you're on his 'administration' team) but you did say you don't think he has one (incredibly telling for a fan who thinks he is unique). COVID, unemployment, police killing, peaceful protests and riots ..........and he has no plan. And, indeed, a goodly majority of the people agree! That sums it up very nicely.