Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Armed Trump supporters protest outside FBI office in Phoenix following Mar-a-Lago raid: reports


Grim Reaper 6

Recommended Posts

Some Republicans, including Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan, have called for the FBI's abolition and "defunding" after the search warrant was executed this week.  An FBI spokesperson told CNN that the Phoenix protest, which around 25 people attended, was lawful and was disbanded by around noon. They did not cross into FBI property. A joint intelligence bulletin issued by the FBI and Department of Homeland security warned of "violent threats" in the coming days and weeks, CNN reported. Mar-a-Lago Raid: Armed Trump Supporters Protest at Phoenix FBI Office (businessinsider.com) 

 
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Some Republicans, including Georgia Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and South Carolina Rep. Jeff Duncan, have called for the FBI's abolition and "defunding" after the search warrant was executed this week.  An FBI spokesperson told CNN that the Phoenix protest, which around 25 people attended, was lawful and was disbanded by around noon. They did not cross into FBI property. A joint intelligence bulletin issued by the FBI and Department of Homeland security warned of "violent threats" in the coming days and weeks, CNN reported. Mar-a-Lago Raid: Armed Trump Supporters Protest at Phoenix FBI Office (businessinsider.com) 

I love when leftists are using terminology such as "assault-style weapons"...:D

  • Like 5
  • Haha 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

I love when leftists are using terminology such as "assault-style weapons"...:D

What do you call them?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

What do you call them?

Just 'weapons'.

i can assault someone with the fork. Does it make forks 'assault-style weapons'?

  • Like 4
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

 An FBI spokesperson told CNN that the Phoenix protest, which around 25 people attended,


I just wish it was more like 2,500 protesters

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Just 'weapons'.

i can assault someone with the fork. Does it make forks 'assault-style weapons'?

Hi Bmk

Have never seen a report of mass forking ever but do wonder what the point is in bringing assault style weapons to a peaceful protest.

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Bmk

Have never seen a report of mass forking ever but do wonder what the point is in bringing assault style weapons to a peaceful protest.

They have the rights for carry, the same way as NFAC during their marches.

BTW, find any article from CNN that would mention NFAC and 'assault style'/'assault' weapon within the same article. When Trump's supporters carry guns - 'assault style weapons', when black militants - same weapons suddenly become just 'weapons'. Why is that?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bmk1245 said:

They have the rights for carry, the same way as NFAC during their marches.

BTW, find any article from CNN that would mention NFAC and 'assault style'/'assault' weapon within the same article. When Trump's supporters carry guns - 'assault style weapons', when black militants - same weapons suddenly become just 'weapons'. Why is that?

Hi Bmk

Yes I understand that people in the States can open carry. No sure that means strut around carrying an assault rife for the most part. What need does a person have to bring an assault rifle to a peaceful demonstration? Who do they think they have to protect themselves from? The FBI, they are not going to come out guns blazing when they can just slap some cuffs on and charge them.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, bmk1245 said:

They have the rights for carry, the same way as NFAC during their marches.

BTW, find any article from CNN that would mention NFAC and 'assault style'/'assault' weapon within the same article. When Trump's supporters carry guns - 'assault style weapons', when black militants - same weapons suddenly become just 'weapons'. Why is that?

Your imagination? 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The headline does its job.  Lots of clicks because people assume violent intent and then the report is quite tame.  No one did anything illegal with their weapons, no one threatened anybody, no one even trespassed enough to step on the grass of the facility.  25 Americans who view the recent events at MAL as one more instance of this agency being used as a tool of intimidation against political opponents, showed up to peacefully protest.  It sounds like they probably needed a permit and failed to secure one before they marched.

Americans SHOULD be angry when a powerful government agency, long respected as rock-solid and honest begins a pattern of sending dozens of agents on pre-dawn raids, CNN cameras magically warned ahead of time, to arrest citizens who have NEVER even hinted at a violent instinct let alone had a record of violence.  Those who are interested in facts and a perspective of why 25 protesters might have been mad enough to stand in the heat with placards showing their discontent, can sift through reports on Manafort, Stone, and Navarro.  They have one thing in common, they supported Trump and were connected to his administration.  All of them could have been detained by knocking on the door and reading them their rights.  In the past when dozens of agents swarmed a location before dawn, with guns drawn, it happened because of a reasonable possibility the people inside might be armed and dangerous.

In the case of the last guy, Peter Navarro, he had been in their offices being interviewed and he and his attorney were in close contact with the agency, fully cooperating.  He was scheduled to be in Tennessee for the taping of an interview on a popular conservative pundit's show and he called the local FBI and explained his travel plans and asked if he was going to be need during that time and offered to come to their office.  His agency point of contact told him no, he would not be needed.  When he arrived at the airport, several FBI agents approached him while he was in line, arrested him and put him in handcuffs and took him back to their offices where they then put him in LEG SHACKLES and left him for hours in the same cell they'd used decades before for John Hinckley (Reagan's attempted assassin).

Now, I ask anyone to justify such treatment as anything other than intimidation tactics, and not just for the individual they are trying to sweat for information.  The whole thing was done, all three times, with Manafort, Stone, and Navarro, with a full media presence.  I've heard this referred to as fifth generation information warfare but I just think of it as using the media to intimidate political opponents.  If it was done to Democrat members of a previous or even current administration I'd say the same.  The FBI should never take sides in politics and should certainly never behave in a way that causes huge numbers of Americans to lose faith that the FBI is trustworthy.  

On the final point and the one meant for the most clicks - showing up to a peaceful protest with a semi-auto long gun hanging on your shoulder is ridiculous.  That also is meant to be some kind of intimidation and it serves no good purpose, just creates opportunities for suspect government agencies and an eager media to paint them all as dangerous, violent, "domestic terror" types.  And never mind that they threatened no one, destroyed no property, and did not even so much as disobey a "stay off the grass" sign.  

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, and-then said:

Now, I ask anyone to justify such treatment as anything other than intimidation tactics, and not just for the individual they are trying to sweat for information.

I think it is called the Green Bay Sweep.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For anyone who hasn't made up their mind about this event:

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to change things, you can vote you know.  Odds are high that the incumbent president will lose the House or Senate or both, Republicans will take control, unless they blow it.  

Problem is that Republicans don't to represent the  people, they want to rule them by force and intimidation. 

Most Democrats would love for Trump to run in 2024.  There is nobody else with the advanced age and low popularity to match up with Joe Biden.  Ron DeSantis is half the age and twice the popularity of either of them.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just curious about something that I recently saw in media that got me pondering.  The FBI raid/document search with guns ;) was perfectly legal and no one should dispute that.  I'm wondering, since they took 20 boxes of documents and sundry items, what process is in place to protect Trump's legal interests from being compromised by FBI officials who decide to use or share documentation of Trump's attorney-client privileged info?  It's a serious question because A-C privilege is a fundamental element in our legal system.  Any documents that were purely personal business are protected by both 4A and 5A for all citizens, including Trump.  So, if we begin seeing leaked material regardless of it's potential legal value, and Trump's people can prove that the info came from documents protected by 4A, what should happen to the FBI agents who planned and ordered this raid?

Keep in mind that such documents cannot legally be taken before a ruling by a judge with LOTS of evidence produced to give probable cause that they conceal criminal activity.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

If you want to change things, you can vote you know.  Odds are high that the incumbent president will lose the House or Senate or both, Republicans will take control, unless they blow it.  

Problem is that Republicans don't to represent the  people, they want to rule them by force and intimidation. 

Most Democrats would love for Trump to run in 2024.  There is nobody else with the advanced age and low popularity to match up with Joe Biden.  Ron DeSantis is half the age and twice the popularity of either of them.

Tat, 

It's a long way to 2024 and Trump is no Spring chicken. I think that DeSantis is a better pick, myself. 

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:

Tat, 

It's a long way to 2024 and Trump is no Spring chicken. I think that DeSantis is a better pick, myself. 

Well it is, but 2022 is right around the corner. A Republican majority in Congress would change everything.  Over the years, I have shared offices with several combat vets and am very glad the PACT act passed.  Joe could take a well deserved 2 year nap now.

Not a Republican myself, or a big Biden fan either, but it is clear to see that DeSantis does not have the baggage Trump does.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, and-then said:

Just curious about something that I recently saw in media that got me pondering.  The FBI raid/document search with guns ;) was perfectly legal and no one should dispute that.  I'm wondering, since they took 20 boxes of documents and sundry items, what process is in place to protect Trump's legal interests from being compromised by FBI officials who decide to use or share documentation of Trump's attorney-client privileged info?  It's a serious question because A-C privilege is a fundamental element in our legal system.  Any documents that were purely personal business are protected by both 4A and 5A for all citizens, including Trump.  So, if we begin seeing leaked material regardless of it's potential legal value, and Trump's people can prove that the info came from documents protected by 4A, what should happen to the FBI agents who planned and ordered this raid?

Keep in mind that such documents cannot legally be taken before a ruling by a judge with LOTS of evidence produced to give probable cause that they conceal criminal activity.


and-then, this whole raid has left many questions and suspicions. Yes, Trump is under the microscope, but let's for a minute put the DoJ/FBI under the same microscope:

#1 The snitch.
Are we to believe that security in America is so inept that the National Archives never would have known that Trump had 15 boxes of classified documents without a snitch telling them?

What is wrong with this picture? And there's more I'll get off my chest in here, before long.
 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Well it is, but 2022 is right around the corner. A Republican majority in Congress would change everything.  Over the years, I have shared offices with several combat vets and am very glad the PACT act passed.  Joe could take a well deserved 2 year nap now.

Not a Republican myself, or a big Biden fan either, but it is clear to see that DeSantis does not have the baggage Trump does.


Exactly.

All Trump supporters would clearly vote for DeSantis. But that is not true the other way around, not all DeSantis fans would vote for Trump. Trump alienates people. No tact.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:


Exactly.

All Trump supporters would clearly vote for DeSantis. But that is not true the other way around, not all DeSantis fans would vote for Trump. Trump alienates people. No tact.

 

You are perfectly correct about Trump's constant abrasiveness.  OTOH, I think it's clearly true that the media and the Left began attacking the man personally before he was even inaugurated.  They gave ZERO respect and he isn't the type to get smacked and walk away.  As for DeSantis, IMO every move he has made in FL is something Trump might have tried at the Federal level had he had support.

If Trump decides to run, I'd say no one deserves that chance more than he does.  If he doesn't run I hope he campaigns hard for DeSantis because anyone who believes the current level of political vitriol against Trump WON'T be continued at full volume against DeSantis, is just kidding themselves.  We've reached the stage where the crash is coming and those in power are squabbling over enriching themselves on the carcass.  I HATE saying that but it's true and those who think their hatred of Trump is based in reality are also kidding themselves.  The man is annoying and narcissistic but it's a lie to say he doesn't love the country or its people.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, and-then said:

You are perfectly correct about Trump's constant abrasiveness.  OTOH, I think it's clearly true that the media and the Left began attacking the man personally before he was even inaugurated.  They gave ZERO respect and he isn't the type to get smacked and walk away.  As for DeSantis, IMO every move he has made in FL is something Trump might have tried at the Federal level had he had support.

If Trump decides to run, I'd say no one deserves that chance more than he does.  If he doesn't run I hope he campaigns hard for DeSantis because anyone who believes the current level of political vitriol against Trump WON'T be continued at full volume against DeSantis, is just kidding themselves.  We've reached the stage where the crash is coming and those in power are squabbling over enriching themselves on the carcass.  I HATE saying that but it's true and those who think their hatred of Trump is based in reality are also kidding themselves.  The man is annoying and narcissistic but it's a lie to say he doesn't love the country or its people.

 


What has me concerned here is... What then if DeSantis wins the nomination and Trump decides to run as an independent. That will just hand it over to the dems.
and Trump is radical enough to do it anyway. He's too much of a narcissist - my opinion. 

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How long before a bunch of these unstable crackpots go full Ricky Shiffer? 

These armed protesters are a disgrace to America. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

How long before a bunch of these unstable crackpots go full Ricky Shiffer? 

These armed protesters are a disgrace to America. 

Totally agree. A long time ago American politicians had balls and called out people like this even if it meant losing votes. 
Republicans sold their souls. They made a pact with the orange devil, and there is no turning back I am afraid.
They have blood on their hands.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, jmccr8 said:

Hi Bmk

Have never seen a report of mass forking ever but do wonder what the point is in bringing assault style weapons to a peaceful protest.

 

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

How long before a bunch of these unstable crackpots go full Ricky Shiffer? 

These armed protesters are a disgrace to America. 

'It’s my constitutional freaking right': Black Americans arm themselves in response to pandemic, protests…

…..While the vast majority of demonstrators across the U.S. this summer have been unarmed, some have sought to make a statement with their guns. In Stone Mountain, Ga., an open carry state, at least 150 African Americans asserted their Second Amendment Right as a tool of protest. Dressed in black and armed with semi-automatic rifles, the groupmarched through Stone Mountain Park to protest its depiction of Confederate generals. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/26/black-americans-gun-owners-380162

The leader of the Black militia that marched in Louisville on Saturday said the accidental discharge that hit three people before the group's march happened because a group member dropped his weapon after passing out from the heat.

It went off, according to Johnson, when its holder passed out from the heat and dropped it — thus spreading the buckshot that injured three people. According to the National Weather Service, Saturday had a high of 94 degrees. 

"One person got hit in the leg, one dude got hit right here in the shoulder, the other girl got hit in the arm," Johnson said. "That's it. Nobody got shot."

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/07/27/louisville-protests-nfac-leader-explains-accidental-discharge/5520115002/

  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

 

'It’s my constitutional freaking right': Black Americans arm themselves in response to pandemic, protests…

…..While the vast majority of demonstrators across the U.S. this summer have been unarmed, some have sought to make a statement with their guns. In Stone Mountain, Ga., an open carry state, at least 150 African Americans asserted their Second Amendment Right as a tool of protest. Dressed in black and armed with semi-automatic rifles, the groupmarched through Stone Mountain Park to protest its depiction of Confederate generals. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/26/black-americans-gun-owners-380162

The leader of the Black militia that marched in Louisville on Saturday said the accidental discharge that hit three people before the group's march happened because a group member dropped his weapon after passing out from the heat.

It went off, according to Johnson, when its holder passed out from the heat and dropped it — thus spreading the buckshot that injured three people. According to the National Weather Service, Saturday had a high of 94 degrees. 

"One person got hit in the leg, one dude got hit right here in the shoulder, the other girl got hit in the arm," Johnson said. "That's it. Nobody got shot."

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/07/27/louisville-protests-nfac-leader-explains-accidental-discharge/5520115002/

 

And your whataboutism is referring to what exactly?

Changes nothing in the post you quoted.  

Yes it's in you're outdated barbaric constitution written by adults who know less than a third grader today. Be embarrassed, you've earned it. 

So how long before one of these idiots does a Shiffer? That's the question now. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, el midgetron said:

 

'It’s my constitutional freaking right': Black Americans arm themselves in response to pandemic, protests…

…..While the vast majority of demonstrators across the U.S. this summer have been unarmed, some have sought to make a statement with their guns. In Stone Mountain, Ga., an open carry state, at least 150 African Americans asserted their Second Amendment Right as a tool of protest. Dressed in black and armed with semi-automatic rifles, the groupmarched through Stone Mountain Park to protest its depiction of Confederate generals. 

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/07/26/black-americans-gun-owners-380162

The leader of the Black militia that marched in Louisville on Saturday said the accidental discharge that hit three people before the group's march happened because a group member dropped his weapon after passing out from the heat.

It went off, according to Johnson, when its holder passed out from the heat and dropped it — thus spreading the buckshot that injured three people. According to the National Weather Service, Saturday had a high of 94 degrees. 

"One person got hit in the leg, one dude got hit right here in the shoulder, the other girl got hit in the arm," Johnson said. "That's it. Nobody got shot."

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/07/27/louisville-protests-nfac-leader-explains-accidental-discharge/5520115002/

Hi El

Huh,.. et..ah…well hmm what is your point exactly?:huh:

Okay we are different people you want to carry a gun fine that is your right. Carrying an assault type rifle hung over your shoulder isn’t the norm and likey would be allowed into many business because assault rifles are generally used at mass shootings. A side arm okay not as noticalble if under a shirt or jacket. That said because of some events in my life If you pulled a piece on me I automatically think that you do not think that you can deal with me and need a mental edge. Problem is your weak mind or fear of facing someone one on one still exists and can be played against you armed by or not.

I was raised with guns in my childhood on the farm and trained later in the military and have never felt I needed one to protect myself.

My dad taught me to use my wits and how to take a beating because his pov was if you can’t take it don’t dish it out and he taught me how to take a lot so people don’t scare me much as I do know how to dish it out in more ways than one.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • This topic was locked and unlocked
  • The topic was locked
  • The topic was unlocked

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.