Say hello to the, victim, dear Mr. Baker: Yes!! http://m.startribune.com/st-paul-of...e-force-in-kicking-of-innocent-man/504453382/
Anyone else see some Constitutional issues here? (like how is this a jurisdictional area for the federal government?)
Yes. He violated Mr. Baker's civil rights, yes federally protected rights. So Donald Trump's DOJ, took appropriate action.
If a peculiar, I repeat, a peculiar White cop did that to Black people then, yes, I want the Fed to get involved in those cases. When any evil cops use their badge and their state-employment, to hide behind racial-terrorism they inflict onto citizens especially when via GOVT-owned armaments; the purpose of a US Atty Gen then unfurls.
This is nasty precedent, it seems these days public opinion can influence the federal authorities to try to make any case to placate the baying mob even when local law enforcement justify them.
Okay. Fair enough. Now please go review the facts of this case, then summarize why this cop should not be charged.
Do you agree that White cops are not capable of being racist toward Black people, within their policing decisions?
When you answer a question, with another question, then you avoided responding. Is that intentional??? If not, then...Do you agree that White cops are not capable of being racist toward Black people, within their policing decisions?
You are being very deceitful right now. Go check post#7 & post#9 here, and read where you in fact made statements and did not ask any questions whatsoever. Yes you made statements. I read your statements which were not questions, then it inspired me to ask you the question I asked you in post#10 here. And now, not only do you refuse to answer my question, but you are also being dishonest by claiming you asked me a question where you actually asked no questions. And most unfortunate is how this episode is like all of your posts here/they keep coming back to the nucleus of your stance on the issue; disingenuousness!