Politics And Current Events

[Morkle]

Like I said, no sense in getting hopes up there.

[Morkle]

Tomorrow's fun:

Supreme Court ruling on Trump’s tax returns, financial records to come Thursday

The end result of these decisions is that SCOTUS upheld principles that would have been absolutely ridiculous to green light, (that the President is not subject to congressional or criminal subpoena). But in the practical sense, the president can continue to exploit the US legal system and keep these disputes tied up in court indefinitely. Effectively, a shameless and corrupt executive can continue to ignore accountability to anyone but the voters and there is nothing the courts or the legislative branch can do about it. Thus exploiting a weakness in the structure of our government (the ultimate threat of Trumpism @Kraftster )

Trump still seemed upset on Twitter lol.

[MWB]

Interesting piece by Whitlock:

[Freddy Rumsen]

Even Unionists getting guillotined.

[Morkle]

Geoffrey S. Berman, who was abruptly dismissed by President Trump last month from his post as the top federal prosecutor in Manhattan, told lawmakers on Thursday that Attorney General William P. Barr tried unsuccessfully to pressure him to resign voluntarily, warning that a firing could ruin his career.

Scumbag city.

[tifosi77]

Today I arise into a world world where we have learned that Shaf is two degrees of Kevin Bacon removed from Jeffery Epstein. Yikes.

I keed. That would freak me the f**k out.

[NAN]

Interesting piece by Whitlock:

One of the best articles I read on this and matches my feelings overall.

[MWB]

Yeah, I don’t agree with all of it, but he makes good points. I especially liked what he said regarding social media.

[tifosi77]

There is not a shred of evidence that Chauvin acted out of racial animus. None. Chauvin abused the power the city of Minneapolis gave him.

I would argue that while Derek Chauvin may not, personally, be a bigot or racist, I also have no doubt in my mind that if George Floyd were a white dude that situation may not have been escalated by the cops the way it was. And that's largely how I feel about police in most urban centers. The constituent members of the force may not on an individual level be bigoted, but in aggregate the standards and practices of 'policing' leads to disparate outcomes that show a clear racial bias.

[MrKennethTKangaroo]

There is not a shred of evidence that Chauvin acted out of racial animus. None. Chauvin abused the power the city of Minneapolis gave him.

I would argue that while Derek Chauvin may not, personally, be a bigot or racist, I also have no doubt in my mind that if George Floyd were a white dude that situation may not have been escalated by the cops the way it was. And that's largely how I feel about police in most urban centers. The constituent members of the force may not on an individual level be bigoted, but in aggregate the standards and practices of 'policing' leads to disparate outcomes that show a clear racial bias.

You are right and that is one of the points that Whitlock didn't really address in his article. I thought the article was good, but when I was reading it, i had some of the same thoughts that you had re: cops and their perception of black dudes.

[tifosi77]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

[MWB]

There is not a shred of evidence that Chauvin acted out of racial animus. None. Chauvin abused the power the city of Minneapolis gave him.

I would argue that while Derek Chauvin may not, personally, be a bigot or racist, I also have no doubt in my mind that if George Floyd were a white dude that situation may not have been escalated by the cops the way it was. And that's largely how I feel about police in most urban centers. The constituent members of the force may not on an individual level be bigoted, but in aggregate the standards and practices of 'policing' leads to disparate outcomes that show a clear racial bias.

You are right and that is one of the points that Whitlock didn't really address in his article. I thought the article was good, but when I was reading it, i had some of the same thoughts that you had re: cops and their perception of black dudes.

And this is the often overlooked part of the argument that he and others make... there is a definite prejudice. Some will say it’s rightful. That they deal with black criminals and they look at someone and have to make a judgement ahead of time. Or not.

[genoscoif]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

He addressed that directly in the article by stating that the Black community commits violent crime at a waaaaay higher rate than any other racial demographic, which translates to a waaaaay higher rate of interaction with police.

[tifosi77]

Tomorrow's fun:

Supreme Court ruling on Trump’s tax returns, financial records to come Thursday

The end result of these decisions is that SCOTUS upheld principles that would have been absolutely ridiculous to green light, (that the President is not subject to congressional or criminal subpoena). But in the practical sense, the president can continue to exploit the US legal system and keep these disputes tied up in court indefinitely. Effectively, a shameless and corrupt executive can continue to ignore accountability to anyone but the voters and there is nothing the courts or the legislative branch can do about it. Thus exploiting a weakness in the structure of our government (the ultimate threat of Trumpism @Kraftster )

Trump still seemed upset on Twitter lol.

The most important takeaway here, imo, is that the Justices' opinions may have been 7-2 on the facts in each case, they were sort of 9-0 in rejecting the idea of 'absolute immunity'.

[tifosi77]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

He addressed that directly in the article by stating that the Black community commits violent crime at a waaaaay higher rate than any other racial demographic, which translates to a waaaaay higher rate of interaction with police.

Which goes back to the notion of bias in policing, not an inherent defect in one racial demographic.

[King Colby]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

He addressed that directly in the article by stating that the Black community commits violent crime at a waaaaay higher rate than any other racial demographic, which translates to a waaaaay higher rate of interaction with police.

Which goes back to the notion of bias in policing, not an inherent defect in one racial demographic.

There are levers on both sides of that though.

[genoscoif]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

He addressed that directly in the article by stating that the Black community commits violent crime at a waaaaay higher rate than any other racial demographic, which translates to a waaaaay higher rate of interaction with police.

Which goes back to the notion of bias in policing, not an inherent defect in one racial demographic.

So you're arguing that they don't actually commit more violent crimes than other racial demographics?

[MrKennethTKangaroo]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

He addressed that directly in the article by stating that the Black community commits violent crime at a waaaaay higher rate than any other racial demographic, which translates to a waaaaay higher rate of interaction with police.

Which goes back to the notion of bias in policing, not an inherent defect in one racial demographic.

So you're arguing that they don't actually commit more violent crimes than other racial demographics?

I don't think anyone would argue that point.

The argument is that there is an inherent bias in the treatment of blacks by cops

[King Colby]

When he was still on FS1 Speak For Yourself (which the new guy, Emmanuel Acho, is awesome) he made the point that non-black people make up 3/4 of the victims of police violence. (Parroted in that essay) Which ignores the fact that black people make up only 12% of the population, so that means they are waaaay disproportionately victims of police violence.

He addressed that directly in the article by stating that the Black community commits violent crime at a waaaaay higher rate than any other racial demographic, which translates to a waaaaay higher rate of interaction with police.

Which goes back to the notion of bias in policing, not an inherent defect in one racial demographic.

So you're arguing that they don't actually commit more violent crimes than other racial demographics?

I don't think anyone would argue that point.

The argument is that there is an inherent bias in the treatment of blacks by cops

To which the response is that there may be a statistical motivation for that

[NAN]

Agree with King Kolby. Chicken or the egg type of situation, and also has factors on both sides.

[MWB]

Which is where the whole prejudice thing comes in. It’s a horrific cycle. If you’re black, doing what you’re supposed to, and get targeted as a criminal, you’re going to have issues with cops. If you’re a cop, see blacks commit crimes, you may be more likely to think an innocent black person is not innocent. That’s where increased training could be helpful.

[MrKennethTKangaroo]

Which is where the whole prejudice thing comes in. It’s a horrific cycle. If you’re black, doing what you’re supposed to, and get targeted as a criminal, you’re going to have issues with cops. If you’re a cop, see blacks commit crimes, you may be more likely to think an innocent black person is not innocent. That’s where increased training could be helpful.

WSJ ran an article totaling two full pages along with another quarter of a page regarding this problem. It was a bunch of anecdotes from very successful black people (partners in large accounting firms, the chief of HR for weight watchers, some executive of constellation brands). Obviously these are all people that don't fit the mold of "black people that should be profiled" but they each shared a story of unfair treatment because of their color. Some rich executive at Target had guns pulled on him in his own house because he went for a job through his neighborhood and someone called the cops. Or a manager following the constellation brands guy around the liquor store (very ironic) because he suspected the constellation guy was going to steal sht. And so on and so forth.

[shafnutz05]

Yes, it is a tough balance. The stats on violent crime are out there for public consumption... Just about half (probably going over that this year) of murders in the United States and 60% of robberies are committed by black people... Needless to say, that is hugely disproportionate to their demographic representation (13%), and even worse when you consider the vast majority of these crimes are committed by younger black men under 35. It's an extremely narrow sliver of the overall population responsible for most violent crime in America today. I'm not arguing why that's the case, but it's there.

If I was a cop (and thank God I'm not), I admit it would be extremely difficult not to approach situations differently, especially in urban environments, based on the race of the suspect. There is a very good statistical reason why cops are much more wary of young black men, especially in cities, because they are statistically far more likely to pull out a gun and start shooting or do something similarly deadly or reckless.

The problem is, when you have completely unjustifiable uses of force (Chauvin being the obvious example), that flies out the window. And it also doesn't justify profiling for traffic stops, etc. But I can definitely understand why a cop's adrenaline and caution would be higher in scenarios like that.

[shafnutz05]

Which is where the whole prejudice thing comes in. It’s a horrific cycle. If you’re black, doing what you’re supposed to, and get targeted as a criminal, you’re going to have issues with cops. If you’re a cop, see blacks commit crimes, you may be more likely to think an innocent black person is not innocent. That’s where increased training could be helpful.

WSJ ran an article totaling two full pages along with another quarter of a page regarding this problem. It was a bunch of anecdotes from very successful black people (partners in large accounting firms, the chief of HR for weight watchers, some executive of constellation brands). Obviously these are all people that don't fit the mold of "black people that should be profiled" but they each shared a story of unfair treatment because of their color. Some rich executive at Target had guns pulled on him in his own house because he went for a job through his neighborhood and someone called the cops. Or a manager following the constellation brands guy around the liquor store (very ironic) because he suspected the constellation guy was going to steal sht. And so on and so forth.

Bingo. No excuse for profiling in that respect because it exacerbates resentment.

[MWB]

The last two posts kind of oppose each other, shaf. In one instance, you’re saying profiling is on. In another, it’s not. And really, I do understand what you’re saying in the first post. And “professional” black man may not get profiled as much.

I’ve got a friend who is black and in his 20s. He wears jeans that sag below his ass, usually do-rag or hat with straight brim, and various high tops. Would often be stereotyped. He’s the nicest guy in the world. Does he deserve to be pre-judged? Of course not. But he is. If you dropped him in a certain situation, he would be “suspect” because of his appearance. How is that right?