Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[kiidcarter8]

https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/30/politics/mandela-barnes-trump-kenosha-wisconsin-visit/index.html

They would rather that Trump not go to Kenosha.

Trump, as ever, does not care what anybody else thinks.

"they"

[kiidcarter8]

Why?


https://www.cnn.com/2020/08/29/us/los-angeles-teacher-i-cant-breathe-shirt/index.html

Why flee her house? Because she feared for her life.

Why threaten her for wearing a tee shirt? Because your part of society has made it clear that that is okay behavior.

strike 2

[bankshot1]

And most businesses don't pay late, Kid.


Extra fees are built into contracts - different percentages for differing times of payment.  Gives options.  Just regular business practice.

And yes - often lawsuits occur for non payment - not just with Trump's entities.

Trump entities operate a little differently-   2 10 net DIRTY

[josh]

Doubt very much it is legal to charge people for police presence at a political protest/rally. 
[
Unless the group specifically hired the police.  Absent that, the gov't can't charge you to assemble in public.

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

The mayor said he is the first in decades to combat the housing issue and had no problem with the protest.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

Apparently you believe everything a public official declares without thinking before typing.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Bo and I were discussing the fact that free speech does not automatically  include freedom from expenses  to assemble at private events.

Yes, I understood all of that.

But your emphasis is in one erroneous place, instead of the two it should have been at.
Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

You're believing his when he says those things. It might be true, it might not. You have no knowledge here. He could instead be covering his ass by eliminating the bill that perhaps should never have been sent.

Otherwise, the police can assign somebody to any event they feel like and then bill the event whatever they deem they can get away with.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Doubt very much it is legal to charge people for police presence at a political protest/rally. 
[
Unless the group specifically hired the police.  Absent that, the gov't can't charge you to assemble in public.

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

The mayor said he is the first in decades to combat the housing issue and had no problem with the protest.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

Apparently you believe everything a public official declares without thinking before typing.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Bo and I were discussing the fact that free speech does not automatically  include freedom from expenses  to assemble at private events.

Yes, I understood all of that.

But your emphasis is in one erroneous place, instead of the two it should have been at.
Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

You're believing his when he says those things. It might be true, it might not. You have no knowledge here. He could instead be covering his ass by eliminating the bill that perhaps should never have been sent.

Otherwise, the police can assign somebody to any event they feel like and then bill the event whatever they deem they can get away with.

I suggest you go back and read the cited story.

[josh]

Doubt very much it is legal to charge people for police presence at a political protest/rally. 
[
Unless the group specifically hired the police.  Absent that, the gov't can't charge you to assemble in public.

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

The mayor said he is the first in decades to combat the housing issue and had no problem with the protest.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

Apparently you believe everything a public official declares without thinking before typing.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Bo and I were discussing the fact that free speech does not automatically  include freedom from expenses  to assemble at private events.

Yes, I understood all of that.

But your emphasis is in one erroneous place, instead of the two it should have been at.
Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

You're believing his when he says those things. It might be true, it might not. You have no knowledge here. He could instead be covering his ass by eliminating the bill that perhaps should never have been sent.

Otherwise, the police can assign somebody to any event they feel like and then bill the event whatever they deem they can get away with.

I suggest you go back and read the cited story.

Of course you do. You do that every time that you cannot point out an actual flaw in the other person's argument.

The cited article did not post chapter and verse from the regs. They quoted the man, same as you did. You want to show me a copy of their regs that backs up what he said about them then show me other instances of their assigning cops to an "event" of this size and type that they then billed for, showing that this is a "standard practice," and I will simply agree and say, "yup, this time a public official was telling the truth. Yay!"

Otherwise, you are taking his word for it with zero substantiation.

[josh]

https://pgcabs.org/2020/08/30/whats-best-for-our-kids-during-a-pandemic/

[REDSTATEWARD]

Doubt very much it is legal to charge people for police presence at a political protest/rally. 
[
Unless the group specifically hired the police.  Absent that, the gov't can't charge you to assemble in public.

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

The mayor said he is the first in decades to combat the housing issue and had no problem with the protest.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

Apparently you believe everything a public official declares without thinking before typing.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Bo and I were discussing the fact that free speech does not automatically  include freedom from expenses  to assemble at private events.

Yes, I understood all of that.

But your emphasis is in one erroneous place, instead of the two it should have been at.
Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

You're believing his when he says those things. It might be true, it might not. You have no knowledge here. He could instead be covering his ass by eliminating the bill that perhaps should never have been sent.

Otherwise, the police can assign somebody to any event they feel like and then bill the event whatever they deem they can get away with.

I suggest you go back and read the cited story.

Of course you do. You do that every time that you cannot point out an actual flaw in the other person's argument.

The cited article did not post chapter and verse from the regs.

Well, then  look them up.

[josh]

Doubt very much it is legal to charge people for police presence at a political protest/rally. 
[
Unless the group specifically hired the police.  Absent that, the gov't can't charge you to assemble in public.

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

The mayor said he is the first in decades to combat the housing issue and had no problem with the protest.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

Apparently you believe everything a public official declares without thinking before typing.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Bo and I were discussing the fact that free speech does not automatically  include freedom from expenses  to assemble at private events.

Yes, I understood all of that.

But your emphasis is in one erroneous place, instead of the two it should have been at.
Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

You're believing his when he says those things. It might be true, it might not. You have no knowledge here. He could instead be covering his ass by eliminating the bill that perhaps should never have been sent.

Otherwise, the police can assign somebody to any event they feel like and then bill the event whatever they deem they can get away with.

I suggest you go back and read the cited story.

Of course you do. You do that every time that you cannot point out an actual flaw in the other person's argument.

The cited article did not post chapter and verse from the regs.

Well, then  look them up.

LOL.

You're the one making a claim that something is so, but providing no evidence of it, Ward.

You're not looking it up either because you are too fucking lazy or, more likely, you suspect that you are wrong.

But there is no point in my looking it up and sharing it here, because You NEVER admit anything disproves your prior position!

So, look it up knowing that if the facts back you up I will admit it or don't look it up out of fear or laziness.

[bodiddley]

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

A public political protest is NOT a private event.
Which is why the local gov't changed their position and withdrew the bill.
And the mayor admitted that he got bad advice form the borough legal counsel.

If you are charging the girl for police OT, you are restricting and putting a price on people's 1st A right to assemble.  In this case, an 18 year old girl is unlikely to have an extra $2,500 to fork over to protest.  And the bigger the rally, and the longer it goes on, the more the bill would be.  Ridiculously unconstitutional.

[LarryBnDC]

Trump's Thinker Pose....


May need to substitute a toilet for the chair and put the King on his Throne?

Put him on toilet and place his Twitter machine in his grubby little hands.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

A public political protest is NOT a private event.

This one was a private event.

Which is why the local gov't changed their position and withdrew the bill.

It didnt withdraw the bill

And the mayor admitted that he got bad advice form the borough legal counsel.

The Mayor said no such thing 

If you are charging the girl for police OT, you are restricting and putting a price on people's 1st A right to assemble.  In this case, an 18 year old girl is unlikely to have an extra $2,500 to fork over to protest.  And the bigger the rally, and the longer it goes on, the more the bill would be.

She might have wanted to think that one through. Luckily for her the town had a heart for youthful naivety.

Ridiculously unconstitutional.

Please cite why

[REDSTATEWARD]

Doubt very much it is legal to charge people for police presence at a political protest/rally. 
[
Unless the group specifically hired the police.  Absent that, the gov't can't charge you to assemble in public.

Did you even read the article you linked?

“I was shocked when I read that I had to pay to exercise my First Amendment right,” said Gil, who thinks she was being targeted for her take on affordable housing in the community.

The mayor said he is the first in decades to combat the housing issue and had no problem with the protest.

“And we made sure that we fulfilled and satisfied our obligation to make sure that they can exercise their freedom of speech and to peaceably assemble,” said Mayor Kranjac.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Apparently you did not.

Apparently you believe everything a public official declares without thinking before typing.

Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

Bo and I were discussing the fact that free speech does not automatically  include freedom from expenses  to assemble at private events.

Yes, I understood all of that.

But your emphasis is in one erroneous place, instead of the two it should have been at.
Kranjac said the borough has an ordinance in place that allows it to bill for any expenses incurred for police services at private events. The bill sent to Gil was standard protocol, he said.

You're believing his when he says those things. It might be true, it might not. You have no knowledge here. He could instead be covering his ass by eliminating the bill that perhaps should never have been sent.

Otherwise, the police can assign somebody to any event they feel like and then bill the event whatever they deem they can get away with.

I suggest you go back and read the cited story.

Of course you do. You do that every time that you cannot point out an actual flaw in the other person's argument.

The cited article did not post chapter and verse from the regs.

Well, then  look them up.

LOL.

You're the one making a claim that something is so, but providing no evidence of it, Ward.

The evidence was cited, and not by me.

[josh]

Which is why the local gov't changed their position and withdrew the bill.

It didnt withdraw the bill

And the mayor admitted that he got bad advice form the borough legal counsel.

The Mayor said no such thing 

They withdrew it.

The Mayor admitted he got bad advice.

Will you admit it? Seems unlikely, but here's your chance, Ward! Admit you made a mistake! You can do it!

“The bill was mistakenly issued based on advice I received from our borough administrator who I understand consulted the borough attorney,” Kranjac told NJ Advance Media. “I was told that all private events requiring police overtime should be paid for by the organizers. That advice was incorrect.”

Kranjac said he further researched the issue with his own attorney and said it was “clear that the exercise of Constitutional Rights are treated differently when it comes to borough administration and billing.”

https://www.nj.com/bergen/2020/08/mayor-rescinds-2500-bill-sent-to-nj-teen-who-held-black-lives-matter-protest.html

[REDSTATEWARD]

Which is why the local gov't changed their position and withdrew the bill.

It didnt withdraw the bill

And the mayor admitted that he got bad advice form the borough legal counsel.

The Mayor said no such thing 

They withdrew it.

The Mayor admitted he got bad advice.

Will you admit it? Seems unlikely, but here's your chance, Ward! Admit you made a mistake! You can do it!

“The bill was mistakenly issued based on advice I received from our borough administrator who I understand consulted the borough attorney,” Kranjac told NJ Advance Media. “I was told that all private events requiring police overtime should be paid for by the organizers. That advice was incorrect.”

Kranjac said he further researched the issue with his own attorney and said it was “clear that the exercise of Constitutional Rights are treated differently when it comes to borough administration and billing.”

https://www.nj.com/bergen/2020/08/mayor-rescinds-2500-bill-sent-to-nj-teen-who-held-black-lives-matter-protest.html

And?