I am making my comment based upon what I am seeing on the clip itself. I never stated it as a known fact. If you read it that way, it was not my intent. I happen to believe that Amy is a pretty smart cookie, who has been around the block a few times in covering protests or being a participant (as is her right). She is likely very knowledgeable about how interactions with police are handled. Especially a setting which is a very chaotic situation occurring of peaceful protesters with significant numbers of outright anarchists mixed within, who are destroying property and taking selective advantage of numbers to also assault officers (surely you’ve seen the news videos yesterday). The police are in a heighten state of action and are going to be especially limited in tolerating disobedience, whether verbal or physical. Since you may have a personal empathy for Amy through her work, you may never be able to view this incident involving her through the eyes of those trying to control a dangerous situation going on around them.

I explained above how, during this particular emergency situation that the police were dealing with, Amy seemed insistent that her requests for information be honored immediately, as the officer was repeatedly asking her to move back away from a particular police line. While he was then physically trying to move her away from the police line she was continuing to lean into him and resist being moved back. As I said, she is no doubt a smart person and is familiar with how these interactions work. I have no idea why she would do this since you would have to think that she would fully understand what the final result was likely to be. I can appreciate her concern for her co-workers. Maybe she felt if she couldn’t get an answer she’d just as soon be arrested along with them. But to believe that she was oblivious to the idea that she might be arrested as a result of her actions is actually giving her LESS credit for street smarts than I am giving her.

And I don’t know who was filming this at such close range. A colleague? But I would suppose that both Amy and the police officers knew that the exchange was being videoed, which may have played into both of their reactions.

I can’t speak to all the arrests that happened throughout the day. I can only suggest what I am seeing from the limited clip and the knowledge of the types of conflict and violence that was going on yesterday.

I would think that soon (if not already) the charges initially leveled on her and her co-workers will be dropped, if events happened as Amy says. Let’s at least try to understand all the moving parts here when a riot is breaking out (by what seems to be some very fringe factions) within and around an otherwise lawful protest. It’s a very confusing and chaotic scene that the police are tasked to try to control. Its not the ideal time to try to demand for a police supervisor to appear so that a discussion of professional rights can be debated.

I said it before and I’ll say it again. If the police acted with excessive force, even within the guidelines for behavior in a difficult situation such as that one yesterday, the culprits should be punished.

This is likely just another topic in which we will just have to disagree.

Of course, I am just repeating what you have already read here, so I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know. You just choose not to believe it. And that’s what puzzles me. I don’t understand why you automatically give greater credence to police telling people they cannot assemble on the streets outside the convention and peacefully protest (which is their constitutional right) and then roughing them up when they question the infringement on their rights, than you do to the protesters. There seems to be a default setting in your mind that leads you to equate dissenters with troublemakers, in the absence of any real evidence that that is the case.

I am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the dissenters, partly because I know that it’s in the nature of established authority to clamp down on dissent, yes, even in the United States, and partly because I have been present at many peaceful demonstrations and protests about which I later heard or read that the police were violently confronted, or physically endangered, and it just wasn’t true. At least, I never saw it.

I also feel confident in saying that the police charges against Amy Goodman of “conspiracy to riot” are pure hogwash on their face, because I have seen and heard Amy Goodman speak in person on several occasions; I have participated in pollitical events that she covered or spoke at; plus, I have listened to her Democracy Now! radio show for many years. Charges of violent behavior or “conspiracy to riot” are just laughable, Craig. They’re nonsense. Amy is the least violent person I’ve ever met.

What is the actual evidence that these media-types were horribly abused of their rights? Their own press release? The “free speech TV”? Please. That is simply their narrative, with no real filter on how much, or how little, truth is in it. Is there something I am not reading or seeing here? The video clearly showed Amy insisting on making her point and physically resisting the repeated order and effort to move her away from the specific area she was at, and onto the sidewalk. As for her collegues, doesn’t it make at least some sense that they could have been in a “wrong place wrong time” scenario during a riot situation? Could it also not be that they too were resisting police direction to back away from an immediate area? Rather than assuming it was “Nazis Gone Wild” out there, why not at least try to seek some full context? Unless I missed it, Amy didn’t seem to make reference to the anarchists that were spreading mayham all around. Given that fact that the three people were released (to my understanding) I’d say that their ID’s checked out, and if they truly did nothing other than protest their innocence, any remaining charges will likely be dropped as well.

Let’s not kid ourselves, there are many people wanting to have their voices heard peacefully and respectfully during this convention. But there are a subset of people, many who are fringe elements, who could give a rip about this election or in democracy in general, who only want to specifically cause physical damage to property and physical harm to certain people during this week. I fully expect ( my opinion) a disturbance within the convention itself during one of the major televised speeches. And not necessarily just some people standing up and chanting slogans. I hope I am wrong.

As I said before, if any law enforcement personnel have gone beyond their authority in this type of crowd/riot control situation, then they should be punished.

I still hope we can discuss this as real people and not just yelling at assumed stereotypes (though labeling people as some kind of “thing” makes it easier to deal with).

Ah, hyperbole–I heart.

Relax, cupcake , no heretical punishment is in your future–at least, not from me. You have every right to be the lone righteous apologist for authoritarian overreach on this thread without fear of the Spanish Inquisition. Allow me a resigned sigh, however, as once again I’m presented with more evidence that too many US citizens (assuming you are American, of course) are quite willing–nay, eager–to sacrifice constitutionally-mandated rights and liberties out of reflexive, fawning deference for authority (especially when it’s a dirty fucking hippie being ordered up against the wall, motherfucker). The only “context” one needs to keep in mind is the Bill of Rights and the 1st Amendment; anything else is deliberate, disingenuous obfuscation, or “spin” as the kewl kidz in the PR industry like to call it.

You Tivo COPS religiously, dontcha, Craig?

“Weep not for Amy, because I’m sure she was quite fine with the idea of being arrested while on video.”

She was, ahem, asking for it, huh, Craig? And you know this, how? Tarot cards? Crystal ball? Making a (slanderous) statement like that is well within your rights as an American citizen. Were you in Canada, Amy would have solid grounds to commence legal action against you for libel.

I fear the irony will blow over your all-American crew cut with the supersonic velocity of an F-16.

Weep not for Amy, because I’m sure she was quite fine with the idea of being arrested while on video.

Let me try to jump ahead of the blowback by saying that this is not a blanket approval for actual police brutality and illegal acts. Just try to put a little context around the full episode before anyone claims that St. Paul is a police state.

If the police acted inappropriately, then they should be punished for it.