there was an active protest, no one was gonna drive on through. but if they were on the sidewalk they'd have been pushed out all the same even if the street wasn't involved. plus this wasnt clearing them for cars to get through, it was for a photo op. i hate traffic blocking, maybe id agree a bit more if that were the case. using tear gas and rubber bullets isnt the norm for this type of stuff. if u have examples of presidents in the modern era clearing people out with tear gas id be happy to be wrong, even if it was for something more important than a photo op. that's half the issue here, not just thuggery and tear gas, but it was for a fucking photo.

Your analogy fails for several very important reasons.

1. This wasn't a closed off area. It was a place that protests happen often.
2. This wasn't some important official business like a foreign visit, it was a photo-op.
3. They did not "break through". They were present before and were forcibly removed despite not breaking any laws or threatening anybody.

Literally nothing about your analogy works, and your description of the state of affairs is fundamentally at odds with the reality of the situation.

There are cases of controversial figures visiting and protests ensuing with some of those protests turning violent and police having to use rubber bullets and so on. Might not be common in the US but it is in many other countries.

It's one of the closest churches to the white house, which was recently burned down and vandalized. Honestly there is very little controversy about him going there imo. If the white house is surrounded by protests on all sides, does that mean that the president should never leave the WH because it would infringe on someones right to be there?



It doesn't matter if a taxi driver is already there 'first' or that he's routinely parked there waiting for clients. If the public figure comes and the authorities ask him to move out of the area, he's expected to do so. This has been the case for a very long time in almost every country.

This hierarchy has been established long before Trump, never controversial.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jun 3 2020 12:07pm

so a dictator coming to Washington and Trump wanting a photo op deserve the same police treatment?

like i guess i dont even know what to say, strong disagree. it's for sure an example tho ill give u that.

on a semi related note, do you think Trump is a believer in Jesus Chris our Lord and Savior? does he follow the word?

So then wait until after the 7 p.m. curfew to do it.
So then don't start getting violent without warning to do it.

You are trying to nit pick one detail at a time to make it seem like this isn't controversial. I get why, if you actually look at the big picture this is a pretty obscene violation of rights, so you have to try anything to make it look better. You're not honest or strong enough to accept you might be supporting a shitty leader, so you hide.

All true. But you know how it is... "orange man bad" and all that.



I especially liked the lady priest saying Trump wasn't welcome there. As far as I know, you pretty much have to be a satanist to get 86'd from a Catholic church. (and I was raised Catholic)






Police tell thousands at Dutch anti-racism protest to go home because of overcrowding

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-minneapolis-police-protests-netherlan/police-tell-thousands-at-dutch-anti-racism-protest-to-go-home-because-of-overcrowding-idUSKBN23A2ND











No burning or looting... I guess Dutch protesters are just that much smarter than American protesters.

This post was edited by Ghot on Jun 3 2020 12:27pm

Not my place to decide if they deserve it or not. If the host country agreed to greet that person then usually they make preparations for logistics to maintain safety. Like you constantly have controversial figures from a western perspective that travel to other countries and are safe. SA leader, Erdogan, even Xi, etc.

As far as his beliefs i don't know and don't care tbh. He has done a decent amount for religious rights during his presidency though.



A person of authority, a police officer, in preparation for a public official coming through asks you to move. He does so once, he does so twice, like at what point in your opinion do you have to comply? If not at all, then why do you think we should abandon this long established standard? It's a standard that has been established, like i said for decades, internationally, why is it all of the sudden an issue?

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Jun 3 2020 12:25pm

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/all-those-arrested-in-mondays-night-protests-and-unrest-in-st-louis-released-from-jail/article_6c06a78f-b9f3-59f2-842f-0d6c466e84e5.html

Yeah real martial law going on in St Louis

Keep trying to isolate details to make it look better. You're not convincing anybody.

i personally cant stand being pandered to, i see Trump's lip-service and crumbs he's given religious people as disgusting. that bible photo op was more of the same.