Page 6 of 23 FirstFirst ... 234567891016 ... LastLast
Results 126 to 150 of 558
  1. #126
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    Okay, you want to die on this hill.

    In support of their ideology, Antifa has routinely showed up in swarms whilst wearing masks and violently engaging law abiding citizens and destroying property as a means to terrorize them.
    Like when? You say it's routine.

  2. #127
    [email protected] David Hogg's Avatar
    My Team
    Miami Heat
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Post Count
    468

  3. #128
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    43,734
    The US Antifa movement no longer adheres to the original narrow anti-fascist purpose and have expanded the "enemy" list to police and any conservatives. Now they are just assholes being assholes.

  4. #129
    6X ST MVP
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Post Count
    81,091
    Like when? You say it's routine.
    Like a ton of times over.
    Sperm shield David Dook.
    Spoon feed plz.

  5. #130
    dangerous floater Winehole23's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Post Count
    89,421
    The US Antifa movement no longer adheres to the original narrow anti-fascist purpose and have expanded the "enemy" list to police and any conservatives. Now they are just assholes being assholes.
    The forerunner of US Antifa , Anti-Racist Action (ARA) mostly beat down Nazis and racists at punk rock shows, but I have a feeling the"original, narrow anti-fascist purpose" might have been somewhat broader than you claim.

    Having hung around a few of the places in Texas back in the 1980s, I can tell you cops were already on the ARA's enemies list. Pretty sure they hated Ronald Reagan and conservatives too, don' t quote me on that.

    This guy wrote a book about US Antifa, maybe you should read it, CC. Might learn something before your next failed pose of expertise.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/art...w-about-antifa
    Last edited by Winehole23; 06-01-2020 at 11:18 AM.

  6. #131
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    43,734
    The forerunner of US Antifa , Anti-Racist Action (ARA) mostly beat down Nazis and racists at punk rock shows, but I have a feeling the"original, narrow anti-fascist purpose" might have been somewhat broader than you claim.

    Having hung around a few of the places in Texas back in the 1980s, I can tell you cops were already on the ARA's enemies list. Pretty sure they hated Ronald Reagan and conservatives too, don' t quote me on that.

    This guy wrote a book about US Antifa, maybe you should read it, CC. Might learn something before your next failed pose of expertise.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/art...w-about-antifa
    Speaking of failed pose of expertise, Antifa dates back to the 20s-30s, in Europe as explicitly anti fascist.

  7. #132
    Still Hates Small Ball Spurminator's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Post Count
    37,144



    Antifa?

    I don't know much about Three Percenters but people are saying he has the tattoo on his right arm in one of those pics.

  8. #133
    [email protected] David Hogg's Avatar
    My Team
    Miami Heat
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Post Count
    468
    A Three Percenter, Infowars, and white ass Jake Paul busted now.

    Still waiting on a card carrying member of Antifa Inc to be implicated.

  9. #134
    Mr. John Wayne CosmicCowboy's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    43,734
    FWIW I looked it up and here is a picture of a 3 percenter tattoo...don't see one on him...


  10. #135
    Veteran vy65's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Post Count
    8,002
    there's three hash marks on his upper forearm by his wrist so maybe that?

  11. #136
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737



  12. #137
    coffee's for closers FrostKing's Avatar
    My Team
    Chicago Bulls
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    17,533
    *German nationalist

  13. #138
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,016
    The US Antifa movement no longer adheres to the original narrow anti-fascist purpose and have expanded the "enemy" list to police and any conservatives. Now they are just assholes being assholes.
    they've always bee assholes being assholes. anti-fascist never made sense since a lot of their actions were patently anti-free speech which is inherently pro-fascist

  14. #139
    Savvy Veteran spurraider21's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Post Count
    96,016



    Antifa?

    I don't know much about Three Percenters but people are saying he has the tattoo on his right arm in one of those pics.
    he should have followed AOC's advice tbh

  15. #140
    [email protected] David Hogg's Avatar
    My Team
    Miami Heat
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Post Count
    468
    *German nationalist
    I’m sure any non-white Germans felt really secure with Hitler in power.

  16. #141
    Pronouns: Your/Dad TheGreatYacht's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Post Count
    36,436

    Spurtacular

  17. #142
    coffee's for closers FrostKing's Avatar
    My Team
    Chicago Bulls
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    17,533
    I’m sure any non-white Germans felt really secure with Hitler in power.
    Nazis killed Whites

  18. #143
    [email protected] David Hogg's Avatar
    My Team
    Miami Heat
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Post Count
    468
    Nazis killed Whites
    They definitely wiped out a ton of pussy ass Polacks

  19. #144
    coffee's for closers FrostKing's Avatar
    My Team
    Chicago Bulls
    Join Date
    Aug 2018
    Post Count
    17,533
    They definitely wiped out a ton of pussy ass Polacks
    We fought them. You played baseball. Today your a "MF whiteboy" to blacks. Know your role.

  20. #145
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,590
    We fought them. You played baseball.
    America first.

  21. #146
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    he should have followed AOC's advice tbh

  22. #147
    wrong about pizzagate TSA's Avatar
    My Team
    Sacramento Kings
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    20,548
    President Trump announced on Sunday that the US Government is designating Antifa a “terrorist organization.” Many left-wing legal commentators immediately took to Twitter to announce such a designation is meaningless as there is no federal statute that criminalizes the activities of a “domestic terrorist organization.”

    That is true. There is a statute which defines and criminalizes “foreign terrorist organizations,” but Congress has not seen fit to create a similar statute for “domestic” groups. One of the primary reasons for this is because no such statute is needed.

    Existing federal statutes provide plenty of “coverage” for prosecuting domestic groups which involve themselves in terrorist activity within the borders of the United States. The impediment to such prosecutions is generally the overlap between state police powers and federal law enforcement interests. As a general proposition, state laws outlaw the kind of violent activities that typify “domestic terrorist organizations” whether it be Antifa or the KKK. Compelling federal interests often come into play when the activities of such groups target the civil rights and liberties of groups of people because of a particular characteristic such as race or religion. There isn’t a similar compelling federal interest in simply curtailing localized violent activities whether labeled “terrorism” or just “violence crime”.

    So, what was the purpose of Pres. Trump’s announcement if labeling Antifa as a “terrorist organization” had no practical impact?

    I thought it was meaningful that the declaration came after more than 12 hours of silence from the White House about events around the country from early Saturday evening into Sunday morning. I also found it significant that Pres. Trump’s announcement was followed-up almost immediately by a written statement from Attorney General Barr.

    I think that 12+ hour delay involved another evening and night of watching the feckless and impotent response of big city mayors and mostly blue state governors to the breakdown of order in their cities, including the rising level of violence after dark that seemed to target police and show that left-wing agitators had moved in on the protest marches.

    After watching the lawlessness go largely unaddressed by local law enforcement – with several big city police department leaders content to have their officers stand by and watch rather than intervene as looting and property destruction took place in plain view – President Trump and AG Barr made a determination that the Department of Justice and its component law enforcement agencies would be a “player” in dealing with the violence. While the announcement and designation may not have added to DOJ’s arsenal of resources, what it did do was signal that DOJ would be entering the fight.

    So, what does that mean? In my opinion there are three potential prosecutorial options that play to the strengths of the federal agencies and can be brought to bear on the problem relatively quickly.

    The simplest is a charge under 18 U.S.C § 2101, which provides:

    (a) Whoever travels in interstate or foreign commerce or uses any facility of interstate or foreign commerce, including, but not limited to, the mail, telegraph, telephone, radio, or television, with intent—

    (1) to incite a riot; or

    (2) to organize, promote, encourage, participate in, or carry on a riot; or

    (3) to commit any act of violence in furtherance of a riot; or

    (4) to aid or abet any person in inciting or participating in or carrying on a riot or committing any act of violence in furtherance of a riot;

    and who either during the course of any such travel or use or thereafter performs or attempts to perform any other overt act for any purpose specified in subparagraph (A), (B), (C), or (D) of this paragraph—

    Shall be fined under this le, or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

    Since the federal government hasn’t been involved in a lot of “riot” prosecutions in recent memory, this isn’t a charge that has been used often. But the language is nearly identical to a crime set forth in le 21 USC § 843(b) – a federal drug statute – which reads:

    “It shall be unlawful for any person knowingly or intentionally to use any communication facility in committing or in causing or facilitating the commission of any act or acts cons uting a felony under any provision of this subchapter…”

    These are colloquially referred to as “phone counts” – pick up a phone to order up a delivery of drugs and you’ve committed a crime whether the drugs arrive or not. They are easy for a jury to understand and easy to prove. If the federal government is able to capture a significant amount of telephone, email, or text trafficking over cell phones, the cases are ready made. These are easy – but what makes them most attractive is they provide a basis for quick guilty pleas which allows one prosecutor to churn through dozens of cases in very little time.

    A prosecutor will be able to do that because in most instances he will marry the offer to plead to a phone count with a threat to charge the defendant with one of two other crimes that carry far greater exposure in terms of potential imprisonment.

    The more controversial will be efforts to charge violations of 18 U.S.C. § 2339C – “Prohibitions Against Financing of Terrorism”. This is where the designation becomes important in terms of “optics” if not so much in terms of making use of the statute. Making use of the statute in these cir stances will be somewhat unique – but hey, everything about the past few days has been “unique.”

    This statute is a bit involved, and it takes a careful “wander” through the text to knit together the provisions that make it useful. I’m excising parts of the text that don’t apply – noted by an “…” – and highlighting the provisions that are potentially operative given events:

    (1) In general.—Whoever, in a cir stance described in subsection (b), by any means, directly or indirectly, unlawfully and willfully provides or collects funds with the intention that such funds be used, or with the knowledge that such funds are to be used, in full or in part, in order to carry out—

    (A) an act which cons utes an offense within the scope of a treaty specified in subsection (e)(7), as implemented by the United States, or

    (B) any other act intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to a civilian, or to any other person not taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of armed conflict, when the purpose of such act, by its nature or context, is to intimidate a population, or to compel a government or an international organization to do or to abstain from doing any act, shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (d)(1).

    (2) Attempts and conspiracies. — Whoever attempts or conspires to commit an offense under paragraph (1) shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (d)(1).

    —There is jurisdiction over the offenses in subsection (a) in the following cir stances-
    (1) the offense takes place in the United States and—

    (A) a perpetrator was a national of another state or a stateless person;

    (G) was directed toward or resulted in the carrying out of a predicate act—

    (ii) within the United States, and either the offense or the predicate act was conducted in, or the results thereof affected, interstate or foreign commerce;

    (c) Concealment. —Whoever—

    (1) (A) is in the United States; or

    (B) is outside the United States and is a national of the United States or a legal en y organized under the laws of the United States (including any of its States, districts, commonwealths, territories, or possessions); and

    (2) knowingly conceals or disguises the nature, location, source, ownership, or control of any material support or resources, or any funds or proceeds of such funds—

    (A) knowing or intending that the support or resources are to be provided, or knowing that the support or resources were provided, in violation of section 2339B of this le; or

    (B) knowing or intending that any such funds are to be provided or collected, or knowing that the funds were provided or collected, in violation of subsection (a), shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (d)(2).

    (d) Penalties. —

    (1) Subsection (a)— Whoever violates subsection (a) shall be fined under this le, imprisoned for not more than 20 years, or both.

    (2) Subsection (c)— Whoever violates subsection (c) shall be fined under this le, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both.

    Let’s unpack this language a bit to see how it might be used.

    The “offense conduct” is the providing or collecting of funds with the intention that they be used to carry out acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to civilians OR “any other person not taking an active part in the hostilities in a situation of armed conflict…”

    In its definitional section, the statute states: “the term “armed conflict” does not include internal disturbances and tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of violence, and other acts of a similar nature.” “Policing” activities in response to “riots” do not cons ute “armed conflict”, and injuries to police or civilians are both “terrorism” within the terms of this statute.

    The offense conduct covered by the statute includes providing funding for the carrying out of acts intended to cause death or serious bodily injury to police officers.

    But there is also a requirement – for jurisdictional purposes – that the violence be connected to some interest of the federal government that justifies federal intervention into what would otherwise be a situation covered by state police powers.

    For this, two well-established jurisdictional bases are provided. The first might sound the most interesting because of the foreign actors it might draw in – i.e., that the offense takes place in the United States and the perpetrator is a foreign national. o George Soros – they are talking about you.

    But the second jurisdictional basis is “tried and true,” i.e., the offense takes place in the United States and the “predicate act” (the violence) was “conducted in, or the results thereof affected, interstate or foreign commerce.”

    All that looting you see taking place – that “affects interstate commerce.”

    The case law on what cons utes violent action affecting interstate commerce is well established in a closely related statute – 18 U.S.C. § 1951, referred to as “The Hobbes Act,” which makes it a federal crime to commit robbery, extortion, or other acts of violence that “affect interstate commerce.” The “interstate commerce” requirement is referred to as the “jurisdictional nexus”, and the Supreme Court has ruled that only a “de minimis” impact on such commerce is necessary to satisfy the jurisdictional requirement.

    Jurisdiction in Hobbes Act cases is established by merely showing that businesses impacted by the “predicate act” acquired items for sale from suppliers outside the state where they are located, or from outside the country. The theft from the business thereby “affects” interstate commerce by impacting the ability of the business to buy more items.

    The concealment provisions of § 2339C could also come into play in tracing the movement of funds through front companies or s en ies in order to disguise its original source.

    Raising or distributing funds for violent activity covered by the statute carries a maximum penalty of 20 years in prison. “Concealment” of the source of such funds is punishable by up to 10 years in prison.

    The third possible federal charge falls under 18 U.S.C. § 1959, “Violent Crimes In Aid of Racketeering Activity” – VCAR.

    The statute reads:

    Whoever, as consideration for the receipt of, or as consideration for a promise or agreement to pay, anything of pecuniary value from an enterprise engaged in racketeering activity, or for the purpose of gaining entrance to or maintaining or increasing position in an enterprise engaged in racketeering activity, murders, kidnaps, maims, assaults with a dangerous weapon, commits assault resulting in serious bodily injury upon, or threatens to commit a crime of violence against any individual in violation of the laws of any State or the United States, or attempts or conspires so to do, shall be punished—
    for murder, by death or life imprisonment, or a fine under this le, or both; and for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or a fine under this le, or both;
    for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than thirty years or a fine under this le, or both;
    for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than twenty years or a fine under this le, or both;
    for threatening to commit a crime of violence, by imprisonment for not more than five years or a fine under this le, or both;
    for attempting or conspiring to commit murder or kidnapping, by imprisonment for not more than ten years or a fine under this le, or both; and
    for attempting or conspiring to commit a crime involving maiming, assault with a dangerous weapon, or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than three years or a fine of [1] under this le, or both.
    As used in this section—
    “racketeering activity” has the meaning set forth in section 1961 of this le; and
    (2) “enterprise” includes any partnership, corporation, association, or other legal en y, and any union or group of individuals associated in fact although not a legal en y, which is engaged in, or the activities of which affect, interstate or foreign commerce.

    This is not “RICO” – and that is a significant distinction. RICO is a statute aimed at criminal “organizations” and the leadership thereof. RICO allows for the prosecution of organizational leaders for the crimes committed by underlings. Proving “RICO” is not a lot of fun.

    The benefit of charging VCAR rather than RICO is for a VCAR count the prosecution needs to only prove “racketeering activity” – not the existence of a “Racketeering Organization” as defined in the RICO statute.

    The violation of the VCAR statute is established by proof that a group of individuals are “associated in fact” – meaning they are acting in concert even if they lack a formal organization structure – are engaged in “racketeering activity”, and someone commits a violent act in exchange for payment or a promise to pay anything of pecuniary value.

    “Racketeering Activity” has an easily understood definition because 18 U.S.C. § 1961 sets forth a specific list of the crimes that fall under the label. But using VCAR might be a bit tricky here because the prosecution would need to show the existence of one the crimes listed by the persons “associated in fact”, and there are only a couple that would likely work. Proving the existence of those “racketeering activity” crimes will require some significant investigative work – but it is the kind of work that feds excel at.

    The first potential racketeering crime could be money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1956 or 1957. I’m not going to get deep in the weeds on how to prove money laundering, but generally speaking it involves the movement of funds through financial ins utions or business transactions for the purpose of promoting or concealing unlawful activity. Section 1957 is the simpler provision to prove, but it requires that the transactions be in amounts greater than $10,000.

    The difficulty in using either money laundering statute as the “racketeering activity” is that the funds being “laundered” must be derived from certain “specified unlawful activity” (SUA) as defined in the money laundering statutes. If the funds come from a “non-SUA” crimes, the statutes don’t apply.

    The second possible federal crime that might be used to establish “racketeering activity” for VCAR is 18 U.S.C § 2339b – Acts of Terrorism Transcending National Boundaries.

    The complication of using this statute is clear from its le – the terrorism involved must include acts both inside and outside the United States. There would be issues of proof involving connecting the events in the cities across the United States to activities outside the United States that promoted or supported the terrorism acts happening in US cities. The statute reads:

    (a) Prohibited Acts. —

    (1) Offenses. —Whoever, involving conduct transcending national boundaries and in a cir stance described in subsection (b)—

    (A) kills, kidnaps, maims, commits an assault resulting in serious bodily injury, or assaults with a dangerous weapon any person within the United States; or

    (B) creates a substantial risk of serious bodily injury to any other person by destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States or by attempting or conspiring to destroy or damage any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property within the United States;

    In violation of the laws of any State, or the United States, shall be punished as prescribed in subsection (c).

    Treatment of threats, attempts and conspiracies. —
    Whoever threatens to commit an offense under paragraph (1), or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be punished under subsection (c).

    (b) Jurisdictional Bases. —

    (1) Cir stances. —The cir stances referred to in subsection (a) are—

    (A) the mail or any facility of interstate or foreign commerce is used in furtherance of the offense;

    (B) the offense obstructs, delays, or affects interstate or foreign commerce, or would have so obstructed, delayed, or affected interstate or foreign commerce if the offense had been consummated;

    (c) Penalties. —

    (1) Penalties. —Whoever violates this section shall be punished—

    (A) for a killing, or if death results to any person from any other conduct prohibited by this section, by death, or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;

    (B) for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;

    (C) for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than 35 years;

    (D) for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than 30 years;

    (E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;

    Antifa is an international group. I’m confident the federal government has mapped out a network of Antifa associations and activities both in the US and abroad long before he tragic death of George Floyd. Antifa doesn’t care about George Floyd. Antifa is opportunistic – it looks for situations it can exploit for its own purposes. It exists to turn communities in on themselves in an effort to promote civil unrest, and undermine local, state, and federal governments.

    They are joined in these political efforts now by the Democrat party and left-wing media who both “welcome” civil unrest if it complicates the re-election prospects of Donald Trump. But what they need is the “civil unrest” – and what they need to avoid is groups aligned with Democrat party interests to have the finger of blame pointed at them. So, you see baseless and fact-free allegations that “white nationalists” are a large player among the instigators of violence.

    Pres. Trump and AG Barr simply let the country know that the US Government won’t allow that fiction to play out. The perpetrators of unrest and advocates of anarchy can and will be identified and prosecuted by the federal government if blue state and big city elected officials are content to let the violence play out for their own political purposes.

    Shipwreckedcrew has 22 years as federal prosecutor; six years in private practice. Follow on Twitter @shipwreckedcrew

  23. #148
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,514
    has antifa committed ANY of crimes that Trash/Barr will go after them for?

    this is Trash/Barr abusing govt legal system to bully, punish political opposition,

    green mail to kill them with legal defense fees

    whatabout boogooloo bois? foment race war, revolution? not a terrorist organization? o i c, they're rightwing extremists, Repug approved

    Last edited by boutons_deux; 06-01-2020 at 08:46 PM.

  24. #149
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    he should have followed AOC's advice tbh

  25. #150
    🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 ElNono's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Post Count
    152,607
    President Trump announced on Sunday that the US Government is designating Antifa a “terrorist organization.” Many left-wing legal commentators immediately took to Twitter to announce such a designation is meaningless as there is no federal statute that criminalizes the activities of a “domestic terrorist organization.”

    That is true. There is a statute which defines and criminalizes “foreign terrorist organizations,” but Congress has not seen fit to create a similar statute for “domestic” groups. One of the primary reasons for this is because no such statute is needed.
    This is correct. Nobody actually argued there's no tools or a new statute is needed. Domestic white nationalist groups are charged with this stuff all the time.

    The problem is that calling them "terrorists" is a misnomer under current laws, and that's what was pointed out.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •