Idaho officers getting death threats after arresting 31 Patriot Front white nationalists near Pride event
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
Idaho police said they've received death threats since arresting 31 men affiliated with white nationalist group Patriot Front near an annual LGBTQ+ event over the weekend.
Coeur d'Alene Police Chief Lee White spoke to reporters Monday, saying that his department has fielded about 149 calls in the aftermath of the arrests. He said about 50 percent of the calls have been praise from the community, who offer their names and express pride in the department.
Idaho police receiving death threats following Patriot Front arrests near Pride event
"And the other 50 percent — who are completely anonymous, who want nothing more than to scream and yell at us and use some really choice words — offer death threats against myself and other members of the police department merely for doing our jobs," White said. "Those people obviously remain anonymous."
Officers have also received threats of doxxing, a practice in which someone publishes personal information such as phone numbers or addresses online, White said. The majority of the threats being made appear to be from outside the Coeur d'Alene community, according to the chief.
A 911 caller reported seeing a "little army" of people in masks and with shields in a U-Haul truck on Saturday. Responding officers stopped the vehicle about 10 minutes later and 31 people in "similar attire" were arrested, White previously said.
The 911 caller will not be identified.
"Since myself and other members of my agency have been receiving threats, including death threats, I think it appropriate to withhold that person's information," White said.
The 911 call and body camera footage would be made available at some point, White said, but did not say when citing the ongoing investigation process.
Police in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho detain people pulled on June 11, from a U-Haul truck near the city's Pride celebration. Georji Brown
Police had received prior threats from "opposing groups" leading up to the city's annual Pride in the Park event, which highlights the civil rights struggles of LGBTQ+ communities. Additional staff were allocated to the Pride event, but there was no intelligence specific to the Patriot Front group, White said.
White praised the 911 caller for their diligence in reporting what they saw, saying it likely prevented a dangerous conflict.
"This one concerned citizen rather than pulling out their phone and recording this for their 15 minutes on YouTube — or Snapchatting it or something like that — took the time to call 911 to report some suspicious activity," White said.
"And as a result, we likely stopped a riot from happening downtown."
White confirmed he observed documents in which the group allegedly planned to create a confrontation, including the use of smoke grenades, before retreating down Sherman Avenue.
"It didn't delineate which group exactly, whether it was police officers or the Pride people, that they were planning to confront," White said. "It was more vague than that."
One smoke grenade was found among the suspects' belongings and they wore arm patches and logos on their hats that identified them as members of Patriot Front, White said over the weekend.
The Southern Poverty Law Center identifies Patriot Front as a white nationalist "hate" group. The nonprofit says the group was founded with the help of other "neo-Nazis" in Texas immediately following 2017's deadly Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, which left the event's organizing group, Vanguard America, in shambles.
The Kootenai County Sheriff's Office released the identities of all 31 who were arrested, all of them charged with one count each of criminal conspiracy and bonded out of custody. It's unclear if they have all retained attorneys.
Of the entire group, only two were listed as residents of Idaho in the sheriff's booking report.
The rest of the group included seven individuals from Texas, six from Utah, five from Washington, three from Colorado, two from South Dakota, one from Alabama, one from Wyoming, one from Oregon, one from Illinois, one from Arkansas, and one from Missouri.
It's unclear when the suspects will appear in court.
Among those identified was a man with the same name as Patriot Front's Dallas-based founder, Thomas Ryan Rousseau. An email sent to an address listed for Rousseau requesting comment was not immediately returned Monday.
Tags
Who is online
375 visitors
I'd be willing to bet that many of those making threats would also say that they "back the blue".
Also, you beat me to it dev. I was going to post that. Great minds think alike
Very astute observation, Sandy. They are probably camo-wearing, gun-toting nutjobs like Kyle Rittenhouse to whom "riot" cops tossed some water bottles and thanked him for being there.
These particular nutjobs threatening the Law and Order Blue Lives because they couldn't "go kill them 'em some f-gs? You betcha!"
Why do you think he is a nutjob?
Good question.
Have you seen pictures of him from that night? He was just a child who acted like a Braveheart, all drunk on feeling some ridiculous power because he was weilding a Big Powerful War gun. And the cops told him "Thanks for being here" - WOW! He must've really felt that the future of civilization was upon him at that time - I know I would! And you would too!
Then during the mayhem the child got scared and went all mental shooting unarmed people he thought were a mortal danger for him.
And then the child went to court and cried about how scared he was, and therefore he acted in self-defence - even though he ENGINEERED, KNOWINGLY, this combustible, volatile situation because he felt high on this powerful "I got an AR-15" dumb feeling.
I know the Right made him into some sort of a hero. "Standing your ground" type of hero? I don't know. It doesn't take heroics to walk into a school, a workplace, a kindergarden, - or even into a racial justice protest where nearly EVERY racial justice/liberal protester is unarmed - and shoot up the place. How is that "Standing your ground" if you are walking into an "OK-Corral" where everybody is inebriated, loud, abnoxious (but not even armed) - and you start shooting their brains out because a lound noise freightened you???
There is nothing heroic about bringing a War Machine to a charged mingling of many people and then shooting them willie-nillie.
That's why I think he was a nutjob - he set himself up for this situation, this explosive point of no return, and then tried to lie his way out of it at the trial (not such a nutjob, after all, right? He knew to cry and mope in court)
Do I make any sense?
And thank you for asking!
Certainly someone could see that when you get hit in the head with a skateboard, it is no longer just a thought that you are in mortal danger, it has become a fact.
Are you suggesting that he did not receive a fair trial?
A jury heard and saw all the evidence and more than12 people disagree with you.
Did you not pay any attention to the trial or watch the video's? Do you honestly think that the only armed person in Kenosha riot was Rittenhouse?
Ummm. An AR-15 is not a "war machine" by any stretch. Many people think it's used by the military because it's similarities to the M4 that is currently in use. Reality is the only thing the AR-15 and M4 have in common are the looks.
Absolutely deplorable who their heroes are eh? Murderers and scumbags alike. That's what this fat little turd is, a killer.
You are also so right on the other matters - scum like Rittenhouse and other alt-right outside agitators are to blame for the majority of the violence during otherwise peaceful protests.
And another person who lives rent free in the liberal mind. Some people are so damned easily triggered.
And the "outsiders" schtick again? hahaha bullshit.............the gullibility scale needle just pegged....................
Excerpt their interchangeable parts.
Those making the threats come from all sides:
Police had received prior threats from "opposing groups" leading up to the city's annual Pride in the Park event, which highlights the civil rights struggles of LGBTQ+ communities.
NO, NOT FROM ALL SIDES. THE ALT-RIGHT.
So, the LGBTQ community is threatening police for protecting them?
Sure, makes sense.
Protecting them from what?
You are aware that there were people arrested who were planning to "protest" a Pride parade in riot gear, yes? That they were planning to riot?
It's not too tough a leap of logic to surmise that they were being protected from the guys in riot gear who were arrested for planning to riot at an LGBTQ function.
When did protesting become a crime?
When did a "gay parade" become a sacred act that all must bow to?
Do you see groups like this 'protesting' Mardi Gras? Or a St Patrick's Day parade?
They are only doing it to this event for hatred and to cause division.
No, but then again I wouldn't put Mardi Gras or a St Patrick's Day parade in the same category as an in-your-face alternate sex event.
Now that I've answered your question, I have one.
What do you think of the Dallas drag queen event for kids?
It's not, if they do it peacefully. You don't really expect us to believe that people in riot gear carrying smoke grenades, who are members of a group known for vandalism and intimidation tactics, was there to protest peacefully, do you, Vic? That would be a suspiciously rosy view for anyone to hold of those arrested.
Quote me saying so.
I believe those in such a parade should be safe. But some folks defend those who would make them unsafe.
Wow. An in your face sex event? You do not have to go to a pride parade. It is a choice to be there you know. So because it is of people you don't like and/or approve of it is ok for potentially violent protest...
So what? What in the hell does it hurt. I don't mind drag queens. I have been to some shows and most of them are the nicest people you could know.
If you think a child is going to see one drag queen and automatically run home and turn gay or whatever, that is some seriously misguided thinking.
I believe Bugs Bunny dressed in drag on several occasions. I don't recall ever feeling traumatized by this. I do wear pants frequently, though, so maybe I'm more damaged by it than I thought /s
I never approve of violence, but people should be allowed to demonstrate against a lifestyle.
So what?
I just wanted everyone to see it.
Let's see, They wanted freedom from persecution - they got it. They wanted all the rights to a traditional marriage - they got it.
Now it's parades. It would seem to me that they want universal acceptance. That is something they will never have.
Sorry.
Demonstrate against a lifestyle? Should all gay people receive harassment just because you do not approve?
You act like I should be ashamed of what I said. I am not. The true shame is easy for all to see.
Your comment seems to have little to do with the portion of my comment that you quoted.
Those who are threatened by people having a parade to celebrate their hard-won freedoms seem to have very weak personalities. I mean, what kind of person gets all worked up about what somebody else does with their genitals? It's a sad, strange thing to be obsessing over.
One one celebrates a lifestyle with a parade others have the right to do the same.
Should all gay people receive harassment just because you do not approve?
Me? I thought we were discussing the article, the parade and those being rounded up for what they might do?
You act like I should be ashamed of what I said. I am not. The true shame is easy for all to see.
I only wanted your true feelings and you gave them.
Being gay isn't a lifestyle.
Exactly what did they do? Why did the police act?
I mean, what kind of person gets all worked up about what somebody else does with their genitals?
Ask the justices with crowds illegally staking out their homes.
It's a sad, strange thing to be obsessing over.
I didn't post the article.
In Baltimore, the other day, a couple of houses were set on fire for displaying gay pride flags, etc. They're looking into it as a hate crime.
Who asked what LGBTQ+ folks needed to be protected from?
What is it?
How someone is born.
You're not born straight and then grow up to be gay.
What is this 'in your face alternate sex event' that you're speaking of.
Never heard of it.
How about people who go into prison straight and come out gay?
Agree.
I hope they get them and prosecute it as a hate crime.
Do you think they will?
I still hold my position that the ones with the loudest voices against gay people usually have latent tendencies themselves.
Who got them? Merrick Garland?
Having a right to denounce and a violent protest are two different things.
One has a right to be a bigot, one does not have a right to threaten other people.
When did they 'get it'?
We know close minded bigots will never accept anyone who doesn't love who they deem is inappropriate.
That's a very intolerant comment.
There are gays against gays?
Reclaim America? I always get confused as to what was taken away from them...
"How about people who go into prison straight and come out gay?"
How many of them do you know?
I agree.
One has a right to be a bigot, one does not have a right to threaten other people.
Those calling people names are usually the bigots.
They're the ones you always find with their pants down, not that there's anything wrong with that.
Two, both females hooked on drugs.
17 Antigay Leaders Exposed as Gay or Bi
Oh come on Tess, let's not drag NT down. We can have an adult conversation, can't we?
Is that good or bad?
We see the shameful ignorance and bigotry and it's not coming from you.
So when some preacher in Texas calls for gay people to be shot and I call him a bigot, I am a bigot?
[Deleted]
Take a look at where this discussion has gone.
A few are really getting worked up. I think I'll just say have a good day.
No, you cannot.
[Deleted]
If a lesbian is raped by a man, does that make her straight? We've all heard the stories of people getting raped in prison, I've not heard of straight people getting raped then declaring themselves gay. Perhaps if someone had repressed their sexuality because of peer pressure and lived in the closet all their life suddenly embraced being gay after getting raped in prison and liking it, but that's not someone 'born straight'.
Do you believe you'd 'turn' gay if you got raped in prison?
We know who is getting all worked up here and it's not us.
Move along then.
Absolutely absurd the nonsense some people come up with.
The police acted because they planned to riot.
You may not have posted the article, but you are defending those who planned to engage in violence.
Proving that Vic is, at best, mistaken when he says LGBTQ people are no longer persecuted.
They don't come out of prison gay.
If you mean mistaken, you are being kind.
Some folks also claim racism doesn't exist any longer.
What's wrong with where the conversation went? You want to defend people who plan to attack LGBTQ people, assert that LGBTQ people can't expect acceptance, incorrectly claim they're not persecuted, incorrectly call homosexuality a "lifestyle", but have a problem talking about what, exactly, those doing the persecuting have a problem with?
Those bigots have a problem with what other people are doing with their genitals. Do you need euphemisms, Vic?
Yes, "mistaken". Stupid autocorrect.
I don't defend violence and I don't like the accusation. I tried to leave the conversation. You know what I'll be doing next, right?
What?
You are trying to pretend that those who had violent intentions didn't intend to engage in violence.
That's gasligting in defense of violence.
I don't much care what you do next. Your intent and views have been made clear. Nobody is forcing you to participate.
Stop your personal attacks and let's not pretend that there is any virtue in defending your special groups.
As for the group that was arrested before they were able to do anything, the cops knew all about them. Funny how somebody with a gun got to Kavanaugh's house and was only stopped by a last minute call. Where was the suspicious activity on that one? Where is your AG on that stuff? As for this click bait story, it's probably not the way the story claims. Any group that is described as "white supremacist" has most likely been infiltrated by the FBI, unlike your BLM, antifa and lets not forget Jane's Revenge.
As for gaslighting, nobody has done more than you. How's that?
Oh ya, you don't get the last word that you insist on. The 5 votes up you got tells us all we need to know.
Enjoy your Saturday.
You seem to be taking all of this very personally, Vic. Why does it bother you so much that some white supremacists who were planning to commit violent acts got arrested?
And declaring that I'm gaslighting without providing any support for that accusation, just because I pointed out the fact that you are gaslighting (and supported my statement) is a bit childish.
Telling, very telling.
Have a good day.
There you go again Sandy. You are now calling me a white supremacist.
And declaring that I'm gaslighting without providing any support for that accusation, just because I pointed out the fact that you are gaslighting (and supported my statement) is a bit childish.
Using your impressions of people as facts is worse than gaslighting. I have firm beliefs regarding you too, but I don't go around calling you names.
Have a good day.
You aren't getting the last word today.
Quote me calling you a white supremacist.
You are upset, and directing your anger at me, over this group being arrested, and somehow blame me ("my" BLM, "my" antifa, "my" AG) for somebody getting close to Kavanaugh, but getting arrested. That's taking it personally, Vic. Everyone can see that you are angry that what happened to the white supremacists didn't happen sooner to the guy who wanted to harm Kavanaugh. I'm glad that both this group and the guy planning to kill Kavanaugh were arrested. You want him to be arrested, but protest the arrest of the group planning to riot. What is the motivation for your double standard?
I'm not using impressions of people as fact. I'm using your words and the fact that you have repeatedly questioned what this group had done to deserve arrest as evidence that you are gaslighting. They were planning to riot, Vic. You know it, but you seriously expect everybody to believe otherwise. If I were to ask the same question about the man arrested near Kavanaugh's house, I'd be gaslighting. But only one of us is asking such questions, and everyone can see that.
Neither have I called you any names.
You insinuated it by claiming that "I was bothered by "white supremacists" being arrested. A clear insinuation that my sympathies lie with them. Is this the example you are setting for our colleagues on the left?
You are upset, and directing your anger at me, over this group being arrested, and somehow blame me ("my" BLM, "my" antifa, "my" AG) for somebody getting close to Kavanaugh, but getting arrested. That's taking it personally, Vic. Everyone can see that you are angry that what happened to the white supremacists didn't happen sooner to the guy who wanted to harm Kavanaugh. I'm glad that both this group and the guy planning to kill Kavanaugh were arrested. You want him to be arrested, but protest the arrest of the group planning to riot. What is the motivation for your double standard?
If you had bothered to think about my earlier comments, you might discover that I had little interest in this group you are focused on. I was expressing the idea of counter demonstrations and when they might be appropriate. You know, back where Ender was comparing a gay parade to a St Patrick's Day parade. Do you recall me telling him what the difference was? I know to you this is a simple morality play with out any larger implications. For you gays are oppressed and American society is the oppressor.
I'm not using impressions of people as fact. I'm using your words and the fact that you have repeatedly questioned what this group had done to deserve arrest as evidence that you are gaslighting.
I did ask why people were arrested, who had yet to do anything. The point I was trying to make was that LE knew a lot more than the story indicates. As for whether they deserved it, I think they absolutely did: 1) for the potential of violence and 2) for being stupid.
Neither have I called you any names.
indirectly you have. Our members don't need any more road maps.
You're the one asking what they've done to be arrested. You also claimed the threats to police came from "all sides", and didn't acknowledge that there was any threat to LGBTQ people (in opposition to evidence). If you agreed with the arrests, you wouldn't be asking. Own your words and their implications, Vic.
Counter-demonstrations are appropriate, IMO. Counter-demonstrations with smoke grenades are not.
Because they were planning to do something. Brett Kavanaugh hadn't been shot yet, either, but I'm glad they got the guy planning to do the shooting, before he pulled it off. I'm not questioning why he was arrested, as he had yet to do anything.
Possibly. It is an ongoing investigation. It is possible they're withholding information in the hopes that those who continue to threaten violence against law enforcement officers will out themselves somehow, or that will make convictions of the would-be rioters more likely.
No, our members don't need any more road maps. They have seen you question the arrests of white supremacists planning to riot, assert that LGBTQ people are not persecuted (even though white supremacists were planning to attack their parade), call homosexuality a lifestyle, and blame me for "my" AG not being on top of an assassination attempt against Brett Kavanaugh (in which not a single shot was fired). It is clear to anyone reading who is doing the gaslighting here. What may not be clear to you is just how thoroughly you have managed to gaslight yourself.
A legitimate question. If they knew of a plan, how did they know?
You also claimed the threats to police came from "all sides", and didn't acknowledge that there was any threat to LGBTQ people (in opposition to evidence).
It is in the article:
Police had received prior threats from "opposing groups" leading up to the city's annual Pride in the Park event, which highlights the civil rights struggles of LGBTQ+ communities.
I interpreted that to mean extreme groups opposed to one another. Obviously, it could mean groups opposed to a gay parade. If that was the case, maybe it would have been prudent to deny a permit for a parade.
Counter-demonstrations are appropriate, IMO. Counter-demonstrations with smoke grenades are not.
I agree with that. Did they know about the smoke grenades or did they find them during the arrest?
Because they were planning to do something. Brett Kavanaugh hadn't been shot yet, either, but I'm glad they got the guy planning to do the shooting, before he pulled it off. I'm not questioning why he was arrested, as he had yet to do anything.
He wasn't arrested on suspicion. He kind of turned himself in.
Possibly. It is an ongoing investigation. It is possible they're withholding information in the hopes that those who continue to threaten violence against law enforcement officers will out themselves somehow, or that will make convictions of the would-be rioters more likely.
Very possible.
No, our members don't need any more road maps. They have seen you question the arrests of white supremacists planning to riot, assert that LGBTQ people are not persecuted (even though white supremacists were planning to attack their parade), call homosexuality a lifestyle, and blame me for "my" AG not being on top of an assassination attempt against Brett Kavanaugh (in which not a single shot was fired). It is clear to anyone reading who is doing the gaslighting here. What may not be clear to you is just how thoroughly you have managed to gaslight yourself.
There is no virtue in defending the oppressor/oppressed ideology that many here learned in school. The LGBTQ people are a protected group and are in our face with their sexual preference. Future generations will grade you harshly.
It was the latter. There is no reason to deny one group who is harming nobody a permit for a parade that has become a tradition, because of the planned violence of another group. Lock up the group that's the problem.
As far as I can tell, they found the grenades during the arrest, but the call to the police advised that the were wearing riot gear.
Is he being held? If so, why? He didn't actually do anything, right?
There are laws allowing for discrimination against LGBTQ people in the workplace and in attaining housing. They are NOT protected people when discrimination against them is illegal.
It's not a preference. It's an orientation. And "in our face", how? Is every heterosexual wedding I attend hetero people being "in my face" with their "sexual preference"? Every PDA between a hetero couple, the same?
Future generations will judge double standards harshly.
When did intolerance become a standard of exceptionalism?
seems as though the people most upset with LGBTQ demonstrations are closeted republicans.
That was my suggestion for the trolling.
As far as I can tell, they found the grenades during the arrest, but the call to the police advised that the were wearing riot gear.
That must have been quite a call.
Is he being held? If so, why? He didn't actually do anything, right?
Don't know if they'll hold him. Most of the violent rioters of 2020 were released. That was back when local police were ordered to stand down.
There are laws allowing for discrimination against LGBTQ people in the workplace and in attaining housing.
What do they say?
And "in our face", how?
Let's start here:
Future generations will judge double standards harshly.
That too!
We know who is getting all worked up here and it's not us.
They allow discrimination against LGBTQ people.
As to your link - I didn't see any sex. I saw some strutting. I could see heterosexual models walking with a similar strut on quite a few catwalks, if I were interested in fashion (I'm not).
Well, glad to see you agree about double standards, in theory, anyway. In practice - well, we'll let our readers decide if your practice matches your theory, shall we?
I suppose a better question would have been: How do people in the workplace or in the Housing business know people are gay?
Why should that matter?
Or is this an admission that gay people actually are persecuted, despite your earlier claim to the contrary? If they have to hide their orientation to avoid persecution, then you agree that they're persecuted.
Progress.
... at a Canadian hate site? Cool!
One with a medium credibility rating, no less.
I doubt that there is such a thing, perhaps a distaste site or a dislike site, but no hate site.
There are many of them.
One other thing, that I can't let go:
Is he being held? If so, why? He didn't actually do anything, right?
Technically, just by being there, along with the protestors, he and they were and are in violation of 18 U.S.C section 1507
You mean they are in peoples faces about their "orientation?"
Why would anyone do that?
Vic, going about their day-to-day lives the same way hetero people do is not being "in their faces."
Try putting the shoe on the other foot (a good way to illustrate double standards). If society were, say, primarily homosexual, bisexual, or asexual, with heterosexuality stigmatized, would heterosexual couples living together, raising a family, having wedding ceremonies, including their spouses on their health insurance policies and naming them as beneficiaries to their estates just like any other couple be "in your face" about their sexuality?
Of course they wouldn't.
That's one way people know gay couples are indeed gay couples - they live together, marry, have children together (one way or another), list their spouses as emergency contacts and beneficiaries. None of that is being "in your face" about their sexuality, except to those determined to persecute them for doing what everyone else does.
If they have to avoid doing what other people do to avoid being fired or kicked out of their apartments, they're being persecuted.
And the would-be rioters were similarly in violation of Idaho law.
No.
That's one way people know gay couples are indeed gay couples - they live together, marry, have children together (one way or another), list their spouses as emergency contacts and beneficiaries. None of that is being "in your face" about their sexuality, except to those determined to persecute them for doing what everyone else does.
You mean they come as a couple and don't get chosen?
If they have to avoid doing what other people do to avoid being fired or kicked out of their apartments, they're being persecuted.
That would be true.
Ok Sandy.
Good work!
Don't get chosen for what?
Back in post 1.3.65 you said:
There are laws allowing for discrimination against LGBTQ people in the workplace and in attaining housing.
So it would be chosen to get an apartment or a house. I asked to see the laws that allow discrimination. I take it you seek such a law, which in effect would mean if 5 people apply for an apartment and one is gay that he should get a preference?
Are you aware of:
Amendment 14
Citizenship Rights, Equal Protection, Apportionment, Civil War Debt
Either we believe in equality or we don't.
So why did one group get arrested and the other group hasn't?
Vic, they can be fired from a job or lose an apartment they already have.
Both have been arrested. Roske has since been indicted.
The white supremacists were arrested. They were the only ones planning to riot.
If it is because of their sexual orientation it would be blatant discrimination. With or without a law, that would have to be proved by the one making the complaint.
The protestors outside the homes of the Justices have never been arrested.
In the case of Justice Barrett, they have revealed where & when she goes to church as well.
"Pro-choice activists protested outside Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s house over the weekend, donning fake-blood-stained clothes and holding baby dolls."
It remains legal to discriminate against LGTB persons regarding housing and employment in 26 states. They are not a protected class.
Peaceful protest is still a constitutional right.
Ok, and? Persecution does not need to be provable beyond the ability of the persecutor to lie in order to be persecution.
Are they violent? Threatening to riot?
No.
As far as why they haven't been arrested - well, the optics are pretty bad, aren't they? Judges hold themselves to be exempt from protest over abortion rights, but allow anti-abortion activists to form gauntlets at Planned Parenthoods. It seems a bit of a double standard to many folks, me included. "Peace and quiet for me, but not for thee."
The decisions upholding that statute have been pretty narrow (5-4), so even among justices, support has at times been mixed.
The reason I said it that way, is that typically when we start writing up provisions for "protected" groups, we tend to turn the law on it's head. The law always should place the burden of proof on the accuser, not the accused.
I do understand the need to prevent discrimination that can be so easily disguised, but enacting special rights or treating the American people as if they can't be trusted is both immoral and illegal.
Enough has already happened for the very partisan AG to take action.
As far as a double standard goes, it's playing out right now:
Not when it comes to Supreme Court Justices:
18 U.S. Code § 1507
Whoever, with the intent of interfering with, obstructing, or impeding the administration of justice, or with the intent of influencing any judge, juror, witness, or court officer, in the discharge of his duty, pickets or parades in or near a building housing a court of the United States, or in or near a building or residence occupied or used by such judge, juror, witness, or court officer, or with such intent uses any sound-truck or similar device or resorts to any other demonstration in or near any such building or residence, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
Nothing in this section shall interfere with or prevent the exercise by any court of the United States of its power to punish for contempt.
What special rights have been enacted, Vic?
Do LGBTQ people get better apartments? Are they allowed to cause unlimited damage to those apartments without having to repair them? Are they allowed to skip work for days on end without risking being fired?
No.
Equal rights are not special rights.
Selective enforcement is nothing new. Law enforcement sat on their hands while the Bundy clan occupied Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Center. They did the same when the Bundys wouldn't leave federal land on which they were grazing their cattle illegally. Remember that? Rifles aimed at federal agents? One advanced on federal agents and kicked a K9 officer because he wanted to continue squatting (read: stealing from taxpayers) on public land.
Yeah, the Bundys are still free. One keeps running for public office.
And as far as double standards go - are you saying that police know who is vandalizing churches and pregnancy centers, and letting them go? Because I'm not reading that anywhere. It's pretty common for cases of vandalism or arson to never be solved for lack of evidence. It wasn't too long ago that a local DNC office was attacked by an arsonist, and as far as I know, nobody caught the perpetrator.
It is unique for the US. We are living in a revolutionary time not unlike 17th Century France. Our laws are very fluid depending upon who is in power. Those in power right now govern by the laws of social justice, not the Constitution. Thus an FBI Director can lie and get away with it and Carter Page can have his civil rights violated.
Yes, double standards and they are everywhere.
Wasn't there a tea party in your neck of the woods?
As opposed to pardoning Roger Stone and Paul Manafort and attempting to blackmail another country for not lying about an opposing political candidate?
The potentially violent offenders in both cases (Kavanaugh threat, Idaho plan to riot) were both arrested. Some protesters who are protesting SCOTUS haven't been arrested, and some rioters from January 6th haven't been arrested. Seems pretty evenhanded to me, except that the January 6th rioters were indeed rioting, not just protesting.
You never did answer, Vic. Are you saying that police know who is committing vandalism, and letting them go? If that is your assertion, please post a link to support it.
The King of England called it an "insurrection!"
Some protesters who are protesting SCOTUS haven't been arrested, and some rioters from January 6th haven't been arrested. Seems pretty evenhanded to me
Houston, we have a problem!
You never did answer, Vic. Are you saying that police know who is committing vandalism, and letting them go?
They were ordered to stand down in 2020.
If that is your assertion, please post a link to support it.
Ok, you're not supporting the same assertion. You posted an link about churches being vandalized over abortion rights. You're trying to support it with links about the BLM protests. Those are separate incidents.
So I guess we are done?
Why are you so desperate to ignore the 'riot' part Vic?
Cut the crap with the strawmen Vic. Nobody said a fucking thing about 'bowing' to anything or about anything being sacred.
That is the exact opposite of what the Sheriff stated Vic.
"Opposing groups" could easily mean that they oppose the parade.
That statement proves that you have never been to Mardi Gras or a Pride parade.
So, you support the protests outside of Churches. Good to know.
That's false Vic. Gay people can still be fired from their job or be refused accommodations just for being gay.
Not for long based on the conservative attack on the concept of the right to privacy.
You've got your chronology all wrong Vic.
Not sure what you mean but I've been to several Mardi Gras and several n\New Orleans Jazz Fests and Jazz Fests are far superior,
Celebrate away.
Are there curmudgeon parades?
Thanks, that would be good to know.
If you're going to deflect and evade questions like you did in @1.3.101, I guess we are.
No they can't.
ot for long based on the conservative attack on the concept of the right to privacy
Gay marriage is not based on the right to privacy.
I don't deflect. What I do is point out the flaws in liberal dreams & perceptions.
I guess we are.
Then have a good day.
Let me tell you a story Dulay. At one time, believe it or not, I was an assistant to the Dairy Buyer of a fairly large supermarket chain out here. There happened to be an employee who was rude and crude when dealing with representatives from other companies as well as customers. This went on for many months and eventually there was a major incident. I asked the individual who was in charge of the Dairy Department why the offender hadn't been fired? He told me that while it normally would have been easy to terminate him, this particular employee happened to be black and therefore a file of misconduct would have to be carefully compiled complete with signed complaints etc before attempting to terminate this person. You may view whatever has been written into our laws as protections, but what I have just described is wrong and un-American.
So, I ask you the same thing I asked Sandy: Where should the burden of proof be in a workplace discrimination case? Need we turn the law upside down and place it on the accused? Or do we follow our legal principles and place it on the accuser?
Bullshit.
You posted this:
And then, when I asked, in regards to that link
You posted links to entirely separate incidents. That's evasion and deflection. You didn't answer my question, and all our readers can see that you didn't, yet claimed you did, while engaging in ad hom at the same time. That's a pathetically dishonest and childish tactic.
The burden of proof doesn't matter one iota in states where an employer can fire someone for being gay without legal repercussions, Vic.
1. Employee claims he was fired because he was gay.
2. Employer agrees.
3. No legal repercussions for employer.
That's how it works in states without protections for the equal rights of LGBTQ people. Legal proof is irrelevant, because it's legal for bigots to bring their bigotry to work.
But you know that, and are evading again.
Then I'm not sure why you're replying with an event review.
All SOME have is projection, deflection, and denial, and also links that usually never support their assertions and usually contradict them.
Yes they can and ARE.
You comment is refuted by the documented content of the Obergefell ruling.
In short, you have no fucking clue what you are talking about.
Why are you assuming that laws have anything to do with your story Vic? I have been a manager and/or Supervisor at multiple corporations and every one of them had a COMPANY disciplinary process that I was required to follow that included documentation of infractions, verbal and written warnings. I was also required to review how like infractions by other employees were handled.
ALL of those requirements were self-imposed by the COMPANY. NO law required it.
YOU made the claim that "they' got freedom from persecution. 'They' have NOT.
Questions about who has the burden of proof in a discrimination case is just a sad attempt to defect from your false statement.
This thread illustrates that is a tactic he uses here ad nauseam.
I'm not sure why ender even brought up Mardi Gras but it was on the table. You then thought that Vic's contrasting it with a Gay Pride event proved that he hadn't attended either. Perhaps, but so what. I felt that my point might be useful to someone contemplating a visit to the crescent city.
It's good to giggle.
And some here cut and paste this same claim over and over and over...
Gays are not entitled to any more rights that any other citizen
But you know that, and are evading again.
Evading anything you have to say? No way.
Whenever I hear such advocacy, the first thing I recall is this lingering memory:
What vile animals. We need not hear anymore about the vicious names you want to call people.
You know damn right well that companies are liable for discrimination via all of your protected groups and the burden is on them. You may recall that I once played the game myself.
Questions about who has the burden of proof in a discrimination case is just a sad attempt to defect from your false statement.
Questions that neither you nor Sandy want to answer.
BTW, I'm sure you don't watch Tucker Carlson, but last night he had a very interesting show. The featured guest was the recently elected Myra Flores, who just flipped what was once a very solid democrat district in south Texas. The topic was the political realignment taking place and how the democrats are losing some of those groups that the party has pandered to for so long. Carlson concluded the program by saying that all Biden may be left with is a bunch of bitter middle-age women with deeply personal problems. That really cracked me up!
Well gee Drinker, if you have attended Mardi Gras, you have to admit that it qualifies as an 'in-your-face alternate sex event' based on conservative standard of 'a kiss' in a cartoon is equivalent to a 'sex scene'.
It's well known that it's a 'tradition' at Mardi Gras to 'reward' women who expose their breasts to whoever asks, with beads. Quite an unusual 'tradition' to come out of the Christian celebration of the Epiphany.
Your travelog is a deflection from the discussion Drinker.
No, they can't be.
ou comment is refuted by the documented content of the Obergefell ruling.
Okay, then the cite the Court saying that.
I'll wait.
Another strawman Vic. Pitiful.
What advocacy are do you have an issue with Vic? Be specific.
Hyperbolic much?
Sandy hasn't called anyone any names Vic. Just STOP.
Some folks need the truth pointed out to them over and over and over and over and over and over and over
Bitch got what she deserved!
Show us your tits is always classy.
It a raucous in-you-face event full of satire, mockery, and sex.
Bourbon, breasts and bad behavior, although I prefer rye of course, in my Sazerac.
Maybe born out of the pagan spring and fertility celebrations of Lupercalia and Saturnalia.
Sorry, I don't want to deflect an important discussion.
NT elected the right official for that, keep up the good work Tessylo.
That's false Vic. Documenting that you treat your employees equitably isn't a fucking 'burden' for a responsible employer Vic. It's something that every one of my employers has mandated in their mission documents. Of course, that doesn't ensure that they follow the spirit of that mandate or that they ensure that their employees do so. It's all about the specific corporation's culture. That's where managers and supervisors come in to standardize the equitable treatment of all employees. Owners and Execs are responsible for ensuring that the standards that they set are being met. If they don't, they are allowing discrimination and need to mitigate the damage.
Yes Vic, you play games.
WHY would either of us play YOUR game and address a sad deflection from your false statement Vic?
BTFW, the rest of your comment is just MORE pathetic deflection.
Oh and FUCK Tucker Carlson.
I'm sure it did!
Nothing like a nice cool banana cream pie after time under the hot lights.
You can always tell when people watch that show. Sometimes they deny it.
A cinder block would have been nice too.
Straw man. Nobody said they were. LGBTQ people not being subject to firing just for being LGBTQ is equality, not "any more rights". What problem do you have with equality, Vic?
More deflection regarding your evasion, and yet another false claim that I've called anybody names. You persist in making accusations you can't back up.
YES they can.
19-267 Our Lady of Guadalupe School v. Morrissey-Berru (07/08/2020) (courthousenews.com)
Here you go.
OBERGEFELL v. HODGES | Supreme Court | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute (cornell.edu)
I'm with the Constitution and equality. You seem to be with protected groups and equity.
Have a good one.
You're redefining "equal rights" as "special rights", with regards to minority groups.
The largest 'protected group' is religious, the only one which chooses its status and the only one that the right insists deserves special rights.
I don't want to belabor the point and it would be childish to try and get the last word.
So once again, I'll take the high road. It was a pleasure.
You've haven't successfully argued a point.
You just did.
That would be the first time and it failed.
Masochistic?
Says the guy who also said
That, Vic, was YOU claiming to have had the last word.
The patrioteers are coming ... the patrioteers are coming ...
Is this a subset of the already proliferate poseur?
Thanks, I’ve already learned a new word today.
"The majority of the threats being made appear to be from outside the Coeur d'Alene community, according to the chief."
That doesn't make sense - how do they know who to call? I can't even spell Cordlane but I know the cops' private numbers?
The charges they face are misdemeanors. They are known domestic terrorists and should be hit with felonies.
TC Perrie. It's been fun.