[Unthinking Majority]

He tear-gassed nurses sitting by the steps of the church to get his prop-picture. And you see no problem with that?

Did you not read what I wrote in the very text you quoted me from?: "I'm not defending the riot police in how they cleared the streets in DC. They're abusive tyrants."

[noemon]

Did you not read my post about how you say something and then you blame the victim with a "but"? The tear-gas thrown to the nurses was done just so Trump could take the church photo-op for which you blame the pastor for not praising Trump. Because apparently that is your priority, Trump failing to receive due credit for tear-gassing nurses and praising the Lord in vain. The issue for you is the pastor failing to praise Trump which you believe should have been done.

[Donna]

There's lots of racism within police forces, but it's not systemic. It's not built into US laws or institutions regarding police, at least not anymore. What you have are rogue cops and rogue police departments acting outside of the law. They're tyrants, and they need to be stopped. These racist rogues are the enemy of the people, and the enemy of minorities especially.

Another cringe take. It absolutely is systemic because it doesn't matter how rotten an apple is, law enforcement institutions and police unions will do everything they can to protect to their own, with the only high profile incidents being the exception. Besides that, systemic racism isn't just about individual police behavior or psychology, it also includes the pattern of over-policing in black communities. We were just discussing that, too.

Maybe i'm wrong and you can find examples of systemic laws or institutional policies regarding police behaviour.

The premise here is wrong. 'Systemic' relates to entire systems, not just laws and policies. What you're arguing here isn't really that different from saying that systemic racism in America does not exist because racial discrimination is technically illegal. It's totally a bad faith argument, especially coming from someone who claims to acknowledge that racism is real.

[XogGyux]

Another cringe take. It absolutely is systemic because it doesn't matter how rotten an apple is, law enforcement institutions and police unions will do everything they can to protect to their own, with the only high profile incidents being the exception. Besides that, systemic racism isn't just about individual police behavior or psychology, it also includes the pattern of over-policing in black communities. We were just discussing that, too.



The premise here is wrong. 'Systemic' relates to entire systems, not just laws and policies. What you're arguing here isn't really that different from saying that systemic racism in America does not exist because racial discrimination is technically illegal. It's totally a bad faith argument, especially coming from someone who claims to acknowledge that racism is real.

Systemic racism is also about economic inequality. There have been plenty of studies that have shown that perhaps racism is in part a correlated variable and that it is extreme poverty in fact what leads to high criminality in certain areas as well as a corrupt police force that profile, discriminate and abuse their power towards those people. Of course, race, given the historical facts makes it so that African Americans have a shit start line.
Real reform would have to address as many economic disadvantages as they have to reform the police force.
This would be a great time for Congress to spearhead reforms with the aim to reform the justice system and address income inequality. In particular, I believe education and housing should be a priority.

[Unthinking Majority]

Another cringe take. It absolutely is systemic because it doesn't matter how rotten an apple is, law enforcement institutions and police unions will do everything they can to protect to their own, with the only high profile incidents being the exception. Besides that, systemic racism isn't just about individual police behavior or psychology, it also includes the pattern of over-policing in black communities. We were just discussing that, too.

The premise here is wrong. 'Systemic' relates to entire systems, not just laws and policies. What you're arguing here isn't really that different from saying that systemic racism in America does not exist because racial discrimination is technically illegal. It's totally a bad faith argument, especially coming from someone who claims to acknowledge that racism is real.

Ok fine, systemic racism is real. I thought systemic meant laws and institutions. Maybe i'm wrong, I dunno. Definitions don't really matter, the racism does, and we both agree that it exists and is a major problem.

[Unthinking Majority]

Systemic racism is also about economic inequality. There have been plenty of studies that have shown that perhaps racism is in part a correlated variable and that it is extreme poverty in fact what leads to high criminality in certain areas as well as a corrupt police force that profile, discriminate and abuse their power towards those people. Of course, race, given the historical facts makes it so that African Americans have a shit start line.
Real reform would have to address as many economic disadvantages as they have to reform the police force.
This would be a great time for Congress to spearhead reforms with the aim to reform the justice system and address income inequality. In particular, I believe education and housing should be a priority.

I agree with this.

I think education should be top priority. As long as housing is regulated to avoid overspeculation and whatnot i think it will take care of itself. People who are better educated get better jobs and make more money, and then are able to afford better housing. Economic mobility should be a priority.

Education shouldn't be left to the free market, they should all be non-profit institutions, and tuition should be regulated and/or subsidized by taxing the wealthy. Athletic scholarships should be eliminated, and the revenues from popular college sports should help subsidize everyone's tuition.

[jimjam]

MAKE WAY! HERE COME DA BIBLE! HERE COME DA BIBLE!



Does anything scream weakness and impotence more than needing an armed squadron to clear and line a pathway for the President? (PS. He is holding the bible backwards and upside down: the same way he leads the nation.)

[Unthinking Majority]

(PS. He is holding the bible backwards and upside down: the same way he leads the nation.)

That was a pretty good burn. Kudos! Trump-worthy LOL. I kid, i kid.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

I'm not defending the riot police in how they cleared the streets in DC. They're abusive tyrants.

I see the historic church catch fire, and Trump gets rid of the people who lit the fire and prevented any more damage to the church, then makes his way over there and shows support for the church and then the faith itself by displaying a bible. But the priests are angry at him?? Wha???

No, you've made that up. On Sunday evening, around 10 pm, someone set fire to the basement. No one "got rid of the people who lit the fire".

D.C. police said a small fire was deliberately set in the basement. Under police escort, D.C. firefighters quickly extinguished it. Fire department spokesman Vito Maggiolo said the blaze did not appear to cause any significant damage.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/religion ... story.html

On Monday, the bishop noted that the damage was mainly to the basement, and made her remark about systemic racism and police brutality being the bigger concern.

On Monday afternoon, there was a peaceful protest in the area; they set up a first aid station on the steps of the church. Then Trump sent in the riot police to get rid of the peaceful demonstration and first aid station, with tear gas, pepper spray and flashbang grenades, so that he could have a photo-op in front of the church. He had not asked anyone from the church if that was OK. He did not "prevent any more damage". The priests from the church feel that him waving a bible about is not "showing support for it"; it's him abusing it by literally waving it around, without paying any attention to what is written in it:

When at last it was over and the President’s expedition had returned to the White House, the church rebelled. In a seething call with CNN, the Right Reverend Mariann Budde, the Episcopal bishop of Washington, said that she was “outraged” by Trump’s use of St. John’s as a prop. “I can’t believe what my eyes are seeing tonight,” she said. “What on earth did we just witness?” Driving away a peaceful crowd with tear gas and weapons in order to stage a photo op was an “abuse of sacred symbols,” she said. A visiting pastor was tear-gassed in the charade. “The President just used a Bible . . . and one of the churches of my diocese without permission as a backdrop for a message antithetical to the teachings of Jesus and everything our churches stand for.”

https://www.newyorker.com/news/daily-co ... -sanctuary

Raged Robert Hendrickson, rector at a Tucson Episcopal Church, "This is an awful man, waving a book he hasn’t read, in front of a church he doesn’t attend, invoking laws he doesn’t understand, against fellow Americans he sees as enemies." Perhaps the best religious shade of the day was thrown by pastors of color who gathered at St. Johns to call for solidarity with #DCProtests and an end to police brutality. “God is always on the side of the oppressed," declared one. "Mr. President, I promise your hands are too small to box with God.”

https://www.commondreams.org/further/20 ... ll-box-god

Those abusive tyrants who "cleared the streets of DC" did so at the orders of Trump, for photos of him holding a bible he doesn't read in front of a church he normally ignores.

[Steve_American]

I assume he is offended by the fire. But only his being offended by Trump's Bible-holding is major headline news.

[My inserted comment here is, that the fire was later that night, just in the basement, and easily put out. The church was not destroyed. Also, who says it was set by a lefty, might it have been set by a right wing nut job trying to stir up the situation?]

[Resuming the quote] Most of the media is out to destroy Trump politically. If he shows weakness and "hides" in his bunker, they call him a coward. If he shows strength by clearing out the protestors and walking to the church that was set on fire he's called a thug. If he let's the states take care of the protestors and he does nothing while the country is ransacked he's criticized for doing nothing and being a weak leader, but if he calls on the governors to control the protests and threatens to bring in the military he's called a strong-arming bully. There's no scenario where he can win.

With all due respect, an I don't know your mind all that well, so I not attacking you.
What you did there is a well known fallacy. I don't know its name. It is to deny the existence of a 3rd or 4th option. Maybe there is some 3rd choice that we want Trump to implement. Like seem to care about America or anyone not named D. J. Trump.

[Beren]

Is Donald Trump the Antichrist? The Internet thinks so after he holds Bible upside down in front of a church

Donald Trump holding the Bible upside down (NBC News)

Maybe he was making a joke with the Bible like he was just joking when calling for Russia to hack Clinton emails.

[Godstud]

@Beren Bunkerbitch had to hold it in front of the Church, since if he stepped on holy ground he would have caught fire.

[jimjam]

Trump and his cronies know he will lose the next election, so what better way to say it was "fake" or "fixed" results than to declare martial law and take control.

[Unthinking Majority]

[My inserted comment here is, that the fire was later that night, just in the basement, and easily put out. The church was not destroyed. Also, who says it was set by a lefty, might it have been set by a right wing nut job trying to stir up the situation?]

Let's go over what happened here: There were peaceful protestors and rioters, right or leftwing whatever, outside the White House gates and in the immediate area. For his safety, Trump went into the bunker, because some of these protestors are clearly violent goons.

People started criticizing Trump, because he was seen as hiding and showing weakness. Trump then made a speech telling the governors/mayors across the nation that many of them are weak and are letting the rioters control your cities and destroy property & loot etc. Trump said if you don't take control of your streets, then I'll do it for you & send in the military (most assume invoking the Insurrection Act).

Those are the facts, this is my subjective analysis of what happened next: Trump no longer wanted to be seen as weak for hiding in the bunker, and he also just called out governors/mayors for being weak, so to put his money where his mouth was and to show them how it's done, he decided to clear out DC streets so he wouldn't have to hide anymore. As a show of strength, he then walked over to the Church that was set fire. He didn't know what to do when he got there, so he got a Bible and held it up, rather clumsily and looking clueless.

I don't agree with how those police cleared the streets, they were overly violent to people who seemed peaceful, allegedly some nuns & whatnot too. But Trump did remove the rioters from that area who were damaging historic buildings.

[Donna]

Unthinking Majority is defending the bunker bitch.

[Unthinking Majority]

Is Donald Trump the Antichrist? The Internet thinks so after he holds Bible upside down in front of a church.

Wouldn't the anti-Christ be burning down churches? Not ordering the removal of people setting fire to a church?

He held the Bible upside down not because he's Satan, but because he's clumsy and dumb.

[Unthinking Majority]

Unthinking Majority is defending the bunker bitch.

Yes I am. Because people are setting the nation on fire and it shouldn't be tolerated.

Rioters in Minneapolis overran a police station, and the cops were fleeing in cars and on foot. Great police force! That's what you call weakness. They're scared to even do their jobs now, because they only know how to be abusive assholes when doing their jobs. If they did their jobs they way they lawlessly and violently do them all the time, they'd cause more riots.

[Donna]

Yes I am. Because people are setting the nation on fire and it shouldn't be tolerated.

Not really.

U.S. streets calmest in days as protests largely peaceful

Rioters in Minneapolis overran a police station, and the cops were fleeing in cars and on foot.

That happened last week.

Great police force! That's what you call weakness. They're scared to even do their jobs now, because they only know how to be abusive assholes when doing their jobs. If they did their jobs they way they lawlessly and violently do them all the time, they'd cause more riots.

It sounds like you're trying to push a narrative, my dude.. The looting and property damage has mostly subsided. The Antifa conspiracy turned out to be right-wing chuddery and the demonstrations are mostly peaceful now.

But people are still getting rubber bullets fired into their faces, reporters and non-violent demonstrators are still getting tear gassed and flash banged. And the Trump administration is still trying to brutalize the protest movement and manufacture a completely unnecessary military crackdown.

[Atlantis]

US military adviser resigns after Trump's controversial photo-op at church

- The former principal deputy under secretary of defense for policy resigned, effectively immediately, from the Defense Department's science board.

- James Miller's reasoning centered around President Donald Trump's controversial visit to St. John's Episcopal Church, where he posed with a Bible for photographs as protesters in the surrounding area were tear-gassed for the event.

- Defense Secretary Mark Esper was also present during the visit.

- "You may not have been able to stop President Trump from directing this appalling use of force, but you could have chosen to oppose it," Miller wrote in his resignation letter to Esper, which was obtained by The Washington Post. "Instead, you visibly supported it."
Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.

A Department of Defense adviser resigned, effectively immediately, from the military's science board citing what he believed to be a violation of conduct from Defense Secretary Mark Esper.

In his resignation letter, James Miller Jr., the former under secretary of defense for policy from 2012 to 2014, recalled that he swore an oath of office to "support and defend the Constitution of the United States ... and to bear true faith and allegiance to the same," similar to what the defense secretary had done before he took office.

"On Monday, June 1, 2020, I believe that you violated that oath," Miller wrote in his letter to Esper, which was obtained by The Washington Post.

Miller's reasoning centered around President Donald Trump's controversial visit to St. John's Episcopal Church in Washington, DC, on Monday, where he posed with a Bible for photographs as protesters in the surrounding area were tear-gassed for the event.

Esper, along with US Army Gen. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was also present during the visit.

"Law-abiding protesters just outside the White House were dispersed using tear gas and rubber bullets — not for the sake of safety, but to clear a path for a presidential photo op," Miller wrote. "You then accompanied President Trump in walking from the White House to St. John's Episcopal Church for that photo."

"You may not have been able to stop President Trump from directing this appalling use of force, but you could have chosen to oppose it," Miller added. "Instead, you visibly supported it."

In his letter, Miller also queried Esper on where he believed the Constitution's limits were in relation to his duties.

"You must have thought long and hard about where that line should be drawn," Miller wrote. "I must now ask: If last night's blatant violations do not cross the line for you, what will?"

"Unfortunately, it appears there may be few if any lines that President Trump is not willing to cross, so you will probably be faced with this terrible question again in the coming days," he added. "You may be asked to take, or to direct the men and women serving in the US military to take, actions that further undermine the Constitution and harm Americans."

Esper claimed he was unaware of where he was going with the entourage on Monday.

"I thought I was going to do two things: to see some damage and to talk to the troops," he said in an NBC News interview.

"I didn't know where I was going," he added. "I wanted to see how much damage actually happened."

Miller served on the military's Defense Science Board, a group of retired senior officials who are "best equipped to tackle the Department's challenges in acquisition, cyber, communication technology, and weapons of mass destruction."

He was awarded the Medal for Distinguished Public Service, the Defense Department's highest honorary award for civilians, four times in his career, according to his biography from the Center for a New American Security think-tank.

"I wish you the best, in very difficult times," Miller said at the end of his letter. "The sanctity of the US Constitution, and the lives of Americans, may depend on your choices."

What a sorry excuse of Secretary of Defense. He didn't know where he was going, but he will blindly lead his men against law-abiding citizens in violation of his oath.

[Prosthetic Conscience]

Let's go over what happened here: There were peaceful protestors and rioters, right or leftwing whatever, outside the White House gates and in the immediate area. ... He didn't know what to do when he got there, so he got a Bible and held it up, rather clumsily and looking clueless.

I don't agree with how those police cleared the streets, they were overly violent to people who seemed peaceful, allegedly some nuns & whatnot too. But Trump did remove the rioters from that area who were damaging historic buildings.

You're doing fine until that last sentence. On the day and in the area that Trump had the streets cleared, it was a peaceful protest - no riots. They weren't damaging buildings, historic or otherwise. That had happened the day before. There's no reason to think the people who turned up in daylight on Monday were the people who set the basement on fire on Sunday evening.