How?

[davidallen]

"I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon, and I mean very soon, come to an end. Beginning on Jan. 20 of 2017, safety will be restored."

Serious question for those who buy into the Trump promises...

 

[MegaPoke]

"I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon, and I mean very soon, come to an end. Beginning on Jan. 20 of 2017, safety will be restored."

Serious question for those who buy into the Trump promises...

Understand that I'm skeptical too, but I'll play.

A good start would be not to have the country's chief executive puke up BLM rhetoric and not treat them like they are legit civil rights activists.

Beyond that, @CowboyJD had some awesome suggestions for changing the way we police, prosecute, rehabilitate and incarcerate.

 

[Clinton Scott]

His divisive rhetoric has already ensured that, in the event America is f'ing dumb enough to elect him as our next POTUS, widespread rioting, looting and anarchy would begin.

I mean, there's a good reason the majority of his rallies incited violence. He wanted it that way.

 

[wyomingosualum]

His divisive rhetoric has already ensured that, in the event America is f'ing dumb enough to elect him as our next POTUS, widespread rioting, looting and anarchy would begin.

I mean, there's a good reason the majority of his rallies incited violence. He wanted it that way.

Amazing analysis.

 

[JonnyVito]

"I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon, and I mean very soon, come to an end. Beginning on Jan. 20 of 2017, safety will be restored."

Serious question for those who buy into the Trump promises...

With small hands...

 

[CowboyJD]

"I have a message for all of you: The crime and violence that today afflicts our nation will soon, and I mean very soon, come to an end. Beginning on Jan. 20 of 2017, safety will be restored."

Serious question for those who buy into the Trump promises...

I don't buy into anything Trump is promising or selling.

Crime and violence is way too complicated and multi-factored to be resolved....maybe ever...certainly not the day whomever is our next President steps into office.

 

[CowboyJD]

Understand that I'm skeptical too, but I'll play.

A good start would be not to have the country's chief executive puke up BLM rhetoric and not treat them like they are legit civil rights activists.

Beyond that, @CowboyJD had some awesome suggestions for changing the way we police, prosecute, rehabilitate and incarcerate.

Thanks, man.

There are reasons my agency has had only three civil rights or wrongful death lawsuits filed against it in the 17 years I've been there and only two from actions when I was there. We've only had one payout/settlement from those three, and that's was the one that involved conduct by employees before I was hired. I'm pretty proud of my track record on that.

 

[NZ Poke]

His divisive rhetoric has already ensured that, in the event America is f'ing dumb enough to elect him as our next POTUS, widespread rioting, looting and anarchy would begin.

I mean, there's a good reason the majority of his rallies incited violence. He wanted it that way.

Actually --- the Democratic National Committee has been shown to be driving the violence -- as per one of the 20,000 DNC emails just released by WikiLeaks.

Email source: https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/13366

 

[davidallen]

Understand that I'm skeptical too, but I'll play.

A good start would be not to have the country's chief executive puke up BLM rhetoric and not treat them like they are legit civil rights activists.

Beyond that, @CowboyJD had some awesome suggestions for changing the way we police, prosecute, rehabilitate and incarcerate.

As POTUS he would have nothing to say about local policing right? That's the Chief of Police, Mayor, County types - sure... POTUS not so much unless he goes extreme ...

 

[CowboyJD]

As POTUS he would have nothing to say about local policing right? That's the Chief of Police, Mayor, County types - sure... POTUS not so much unless he goes extreme ...

Lots of contingent/condition grant funding out there.

Would be one way he could have some skin in the game at a local or regional level.

 

[MegaPoke]

Here is a pretty good breakdown of his speech, for progressives.

I challenge you to listen to the whole thing.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast...domainradio.com/FDR_3356_RNC_Trump_Speech.mp3

 

[davidallen]

Lots of contingent/condition grant funding out there.

Would be one way he could have some skin in the game at a local or regional level.

Yeah but that isn't 'very' anything... Not fast for sure.

 

[poke2001]

Probably the same way that the oceans were going to stop rising 8 years ago.

 

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

Yeah but that isn't 'very' anything... Not fast for sure.

I don't buy into anything Trump is promising or selling.

Crime and violence is way too complicated and multi-factored to be resolved....maybe ever...certainly not the day whomever is out next President steps into office.

 

[CowboyJD]

Yeah but that isn't 'very' anything... Not fast for sure.

No idea what this means.

You stated a proposition

As POTUS he would have nothing to say about local policing right? That's the Chief of Police, Mayor, County types - sure... POTUS not so much unless he goes extreme ...

I provided on example where POTUS might have something to say about local policing without "going extreme" (whatever that means).

 

[imprimis]

My guess is we won't see the AG of the US and a delegation of DOJ employees running off to stand arm in arm with rioters before the facts are in like we saw in Ferguson. Nor will we hear, "the __________ Cops acted stupidly." I doubt we have any beer summits. We may also see more police departments responding quicker and more forcefully with someone in the WH having their back.

Before you liberals claim that Trump will institute a police state, perhaps a Trump administration will give the local PDs the signal that they can actually enforce the law rather than act like crossing guards. Maybe enforcing the law will take precedent over siding with the wrong doers. A change in tone may be all that's needed.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Wow. Obama has never been anti-cop. It's like a POTUS can't be anti- bad cop. What cop did he unfairly criticize? What cop has he criticized, for that matter?

Some of the pro-law enforcement crowd kind of refuses to acknowledge distinctions between good and bad law enforcement - as if you can't criticize bad law enforcement or you're agains ALL law enforcement. Being for bad law enforcement makes it hard on good law enforcement. Demanding blind fealty to law enforcement is authoritarian and unamerican.

 

[poke2001]

Wow. Obama has never been anti-cop. It's like a POTUS can't be anti- bad cop. What cop did he unfairly criticize? What cop has he criticized, for that matter?

Some of the pro-law enforcement crowd kind of refuses to acknowledge distinctions between good and bad law enforcement - as if you can't criticize bad law enforcement or you're agains ALL law enforcement. Being for bad law enforcement makes it hard on good law enforcement. Demanding blind fealty to law enforcement is authoritarian and unamerican.

Remember the cop that acted stupidly?

He was also on the wrong side of Ferguson, came out blasting police before knowing the facts.

 

[MegaPoke]

Remember the cop that acted stupidly?

He was also on the wrong side of Ferguson, came out blasting police before knowing the facts.

I can't imagine being such s fan of a politician that I couldn't acknowledge this.

 

[anon_xl72qcu5isp39]

Remember the cop that acted stupidly?

He was also on the wrong side of Ferguson, came out blasting police before knowing the facts.

The facts were that Ferguson PD had a helluva problem with race. Even Wilson admitted to that. It predated the shooting and it was institutional. This is what I'm talking about -- cons bitch about political correctness all the time until they disagree with the statement an then they're the most pc in the world. He was right in ferguson and that doesn't mean he hates police because he criticized bad police. What's your agenda? The authority is always right?

 

[wyomingosualum]

The facts were that Ferguson PD had a helluva problem with race. Even Wilson admitted to that. It predated the shooting and it was institutional. This is what I'm talking about -- cons bitch about political correctness all the time until they disagree with the statement an then they're the most pc in the world. He was right in ferguson and that doesn't mean he hates police because he criticized bad police. What's your agenda? The authority is always right?

Did you read the DOJ report? It was somewhat of a joke. They uncovered a few things that needed to be addressed, as I recall. So I don't criticize the need for an investigation. This investigation needed to happen.

But their basic goal was to crucify the department. I base this judgment on the manner in which they reached some of their conclusions. The DOJ would find a couple of questionable incidents and then proclaim this as a "pattern of abuse". Never mind the other 15,000 incidents of acceptable work, by God they found two things and they had found their "pattern". In that regard, it was a bit ridiculous.

 

[davidallen]

No idea what this means.

You stated a proposition

I asked a question counselor, no proposition was offered.

The idea of immediate "fast, very fast" impact would seem to me to preclude "PR" moves as most have cited here.

What if any powers would a President Trump have to make an immediate impact?

As you noted some grant type funds is one avenue - in concert with local government- anything else?

On the extreme side, is there any precedent to declare an emergency and parachute Rudy G into Chicago? Half way sarcastic question....

 

[vetmedpoke]

How libs don't see that Trump will fix this is beyond me. He will use liberal tactics and a little Republican conservative faith.

Trump gets elected -> Hell freezes over -> Climate change stops -> All crime and hate in the world stop -> ISIS folks then get jobs and stop fighting Western Civilization.

If this is all not possible then what has Obama been fighting for?

 

[Clinton Scott]

How libs don't see that Trump will fix this is beyond me.

He can't even run a campaign without f'ing up repeatedly. No he ain't gonna fix it.

 

[davidallen]

"I am your voice. I alone can fix it. I will restore law and order."

Again.... How? All of you who oppose the expansion of the state ----- how do rationalize support for this dillusional at best authoritarian megalomaniac at worst?

 

[Clinton Scott]

They don't. It's an empty talking point to make themselves feel better when they know that, in the end, it will be Hillary.

We haven't even got to the fun part yet - Donald put on the spot in debates for REAL questions and the buffoonery soon to come.

 

[Clinton Scott]

What's hilarious about the comments in this thread is the fact that grants to law enforcement during the Obama administrations, along with border security, all increased.

 

[MegaPoke]

What's hilarious about the comments in this thread is the fact that grants to law enforcement during the Obama administrations, along with border security, all increased.

So? What are the results?

 

[Clinton Scott]

So? What are the results?

 

[N. Pappagiorgio]

Grants to law enforcement and border security reduced violent crime?

 

[MegaPoke]

Interesting graph. Not sure why the third president in an existing decline gets any credit for it though.

Here's my theory on declining violent crime.

 

[CowboyJD]

I asked a question counselor, no proposition was offered.

The idea of immediate "fast, very fast" impact would seem to me to preclude "PR" moves as most have cited here.

What if any powers would a President Trump have to make an immediate impact?

As you noted some grant type funds is one avenue - in concert with local government- anything else?

On the extreme side, is there any precedent to declare an emergency and parachute Rudy G into Chicago? Half way sarcastic question....

You put a question mark on the end, but you were certainly making an assertion that he has nothing to do with local law enforcement. That is inherent in cross-examination techniques like you're using right now.

I've already stated the promise re: Trump's original statement is incapable of being accomplished as he stated.