Look at how Dem shills are attacking Brother Cornel West

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
68,198
Reputation
3,636
Daps
106,679
Reppin
Tha Land

1/1
Trump: Cornel West, he's one of my favorite candidates. Cornel West and I like her also, Jill Stein, I like her very much. You know why? She takes 100% from them. He takes 100%


To post tweets in this format, more info here: https://www.thecoli.com/threads/tips-and-tricks-for-posting-the-coli-megathread.984734/post-52211196




it’s surreal observing black people attack a black candidate whose platform is unambiguously tailored towards the needs of black america and defend a president who spent decades authoring and sponsoring legislation that devastated the black community.

plantation politics.

:mjgrin:
:usure:
 

Seoul Gleou

Veteran
Joined
Feb 11, 2017
Messages
10,458
Reputation
4,900
Daps
72,639
Ah yes, good point man.🙂

Mr. Intellectual, please explain what the President of the United States can do to stop innocent people from getting killed by police.
Well, the last democrat president, a black man, forced them to wear body cams and at least hold them responsible. Cases of excessive force have reduced since

So, Mr. Worthless Loser, you need to make us understand.

Is the president useless and therefore voting for him won't matter in stopping black deaths?

Or is he useful and voting for him ensures less black people die?

What is your stance?
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
33,033
Reputation
2,003
Daps
161,561
Yeah. There's literally no difference between that...

And the guy who called literal Nazis very fine people.

There's no difference between that...and the guy who said the Central Park Five deserved the death penalty even though they were exonerated.

Totally no big deal.
You're right.

:unimpressed:
why must you bootlickers always deflect to trump, whose hate is well documented, when discussing the harm that befalls black people under democratic leadership?

it’s an irrelevant tangent.

:francis:
 

Remote

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Aug 29, 2013
Messages
78,035
Reputation
23,671
Daps
355,286
why must you bootlickers always deflect to trump, whose hate is well documented, when discussing the harm that befalls black people under democratic leadership?

it’s an irrelevant tangent.

:francis:
It's not a deflection.
It's important because these are the choices right now.

You don't get points for idealism.
 

BigMoneyGrip

I'm Lamont's pops
Supporter
Joined
Nov 20, 2016
Messages
79,575
Reputation
10,915
Daps
314,579
Reppin
Straight from Flatbush
I’ve always interpreted his message as anarchic and based on his personal gain. I don’t think he would ever endorse something where he’s not integral in decision making and that’s why he’s never endorsed a president. His lane is being counter, even though he works at the whitest of universities with the whitest of colleagues
Exactly
 

BigMoneyGrip

I'm Lamont's pops
Supporter
Joined
Nov 20, 2016
Messages
79,575
Reputation
10,915
Daps
314,579
Reppin
Straight from Flatbush
it’s surreal observing black people attack a black candidate whose platform is unambiguously tailored towards the needs of black america and defend a president who spent decades authoring and sponsoring legislation that devastated the black community.

plantation politics.

:mjgrin:
Is it really tho? Same candidate with a white wife, work at the Ivy League whitest university… but we suppose to believe his platform is tailored toward black America… You gotta see the hustle when it’s in front of you
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
33,033
Reputation
2,003
Daps
161,561
Is it really tho? Same candidate with a white wife, work at the Ivy League whitest university… but we suppose to believe his platform is tailored toward black America… You gotta see the hustle when it’s in front of you
his first wife was black, and his current wife is egyptian. egyptians aren’t white.

:gucci:
 

Worthless Loser

Blackpilled
Joined
Oct 3, 2015
Messages
16,744
Reputation
5,134
Daps
112,525
the power of the justice department can be used to investigate police departments for patterns of abuse and bring charges whose outcome could see those departments come under federal oversight that would establish benchmarks for accountability that must be met in order to avoid penalties.

this has occurred in small and insufficient measure under merrick garland. obama was well within his right to go much further, but neither he nor eric holder and loretta lynch took that step.

and, in an attempt to shore up hillary’s credentials as an ally of the badge, he signed the ‘blue alert’ bill into law before leaving office. that legislation was a meaningless “all lives matter” gesture to police and a rebuke of the burgeoning black lives matter movement that began under his presidency.

:francis:
Interesting. Let's address this post and you previous post.

Can the President determine who gets indicted? The answer is no.
Can the President determine who gets investigated? The answer is no.

However, the President does select an Attorney General who share similar policy beliefs as the President and works to implement those policies in the DOJ.

So it's funny that you mentioned "investigate patterns of abuse" when the DOJ under Obama did just that. The DOJ failed to actually indict officers. Which is a valid criticism.

Consent decrees are a relatively recent tool for reforming troubled police departments.

The process begins with civil rights attorneys from the Justice Department opening what’s known as a “pattern or practice” investigation into a police department or other law enforcement agency. They examine whether the rights of residents are being violated — either through excessive force, racially biased stops, unjustified arrests or other misconduct. On occasion, the Justice Department will sue those local jurisdictions or, in the most serious cases, enter into consent decrees.

Those agreements require the local jurisdictions to work with the Justice Department for years to complete a list of reforms and to prove to a judge those reforms are working. The court-appointed monitors, typically a police practices expert or former law enforcement official, examine how well the police force is implementing the changes in a series of public reports. If the local agency refuses to take required steps, or is too slow, it can be sanctioned by the judge on the case. The sanctions can include fines or even jail time for an obstructive police chief or other city official.

The process can be invasive and burdensome for local jurisdictions, particularly cash-strapped ones. After the shooting of Michael Brown, the unarmed Black teen whose death launched nationwide protests, Ferguson, Missouri, entered into a consent decree with the Obama administration Justice Department in 2016. The community has struggled to hire experts in data analysis and other fields that the agreement demands.

But experts believe the process is one of the most effective for righting wayward police forces.

The Obama Department of Justice entered into 15 consent decrees with law enforcement agencies, up from three under the Bush Justice Department. The settlement agreements, which come after a lawsuit by the federal government alleging unconstitutional policing, compel police agencies to fix themselves while under the close watch of Justice Department attorneys and an outside independent court monitor.

In Seattle and jurisdictions across the country, the Trump administration’s Department of Justice has pulled back on policing the police. It has not entered into a single new consent decree with any law enforcement agency suspected of systemic abuses of constitutional rights. It has only announced the completion of one investigation into such abuses.


Being upset that the President signed a blue alert law that orders the Justice Department to create a nationwide notification system to track physical assaults on police officers, credible threats to law enforcement and track officers missing in the line of duty to help detain suspects who engage in violence against the police is peak fake militant outrage. Every President would sign this into law and if for some reason they vetoed it, Congress would override the veto and make it law.

This bill is harmless and it allows more resources for catching criminals. If you're offended that the government is making it harder for criminals to escape accountability simply because the victim is a police officer, then something is clearly wrong with you.
 

Detroit Wave

Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2014
Messages
23,283
Reputation
7,371
Daps
96,890
Reppin
The D
He ain’t do shyt for you… that’s your fukking problem.. when are clowns you like gonna do for self and create your own path? Get ya mind right
:manny: he aint do shyt for you either unless u aint black :mjpls: but the way u meatriding you prolly happy he let you and ya roommate finally get married
 
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
33,033
Reputation
2,003
Daps
161,561
Being upset that the President signed a blue alert law that orders the Justice Department to create a nationwide notification system to track physical assaults on police officers, credible threats to law enforcement and track officers missing in the line of duty to help detain suspects who engage in violence against the police is peak fake militant outrage. Every President would sign this into law and if for some reason they vetoed it, Congress would override the veto and make it law.

This bill is harmless and it allows more resources for catching criminals. If you're offended that the government is making it harder for criminals to escape accountability simply because the victim is a police officer, then something is clearly wrong with you.

the timing of that legislation made the optics of obama’s signature horrible. it occured in the midst of a growing movement among the black community that was voicing stern opposition to the institution of policing and its weaponization against us.

the legislation was signed at the twilight of his presidency, one during which multiple high profile murders of black people by law enforcement and their civilian proxies occurred, as he was stepping aside to pave the way for a woman who once referred to black children as super predators.

it was unnecessary and disrespectful to black america.

:yeshrug:
 
Top