RNC asks Secret Service to keep protesters farther from convention location
Source: CNN Politics
Published 2:59 PM EDT, Sat April 27, 2024
CNN The Republican National Committee is asking the Secret Service to keep protesters farther back from the July convention in Milwaukee than is currently planned.
RNC counsel Todd Steggerda wrote in a letter dated Friday that the city of Milwaukees current proposal creates an elevated and untenable safety risk to the attending public and places demonstrators in a one-block park that will force thousands of peaceful attendees and demonstrators
to be in extremely close, consistent and unavoidable proximity.
Steggerdas letter also requests a meeting between Secret Service Director Kimberly Cheatle and RNC leadership to discuss the urgent safety issue. The letter comes amid heightened awareness around political protests as pro-Palestinian demonstrators rally at major universities across the US. Some campuses have called police to remove demonstrators, resulting in detainments and arrests.
As recent college and university campus clashes make plain, forced proximity heightens tensions among peaceful attendees and demonstrators of differing ideologies and increases the risk of escalation to verbal, or even physical, clashes and corresponding law enforcement intervention, the letter states. Alexi Worley, spokesperson for the Secret Service, said in a statement that the agency is not formally in receipt of the letter and will respond through appropriate channels if it receives one.
Read more: https://www.cnn.com/2024/04/27/politics/rnc-secret-service-republicans-convention-milwaukee/index.html
bluestarone
(17,101 posts)HELL NO! They think they are special.
former9thward
(32,121 posts)FBaggins
(26,783 posts)SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)And that article indicates the ordinances were sought by the city to help it more easily keep people from engaging in activities like blocking traffic or engaging in violence, which for the most part are us already illegal.
FBaggins
(26,783 posts)There are no Republican aldermen on the city council (47D/3I). There has been a constant dialog between the candidates/city/party to coordinate the best possible story being told at the convention. Part of getting to host the convention in the first place was a commitment to accommodate the security needs
which for the most part are us already illegal.
Walking dogs and carrying laptop cases or large purses is already illegal in Chicago?
Who knew?
SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)And what part of "most" did you not understand? The point is to prevent violence; violence is already illegal. But folks coming in with dogs in a crush of people could likely result in someone being bit. And large bags are routinely banned from major events, since they can carry weapons like ARs that can mow down large amounts of people in minutes.
SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)Unlike the RNC request for a buffer zone free of protesters, the DNC is seeking a buffer zone free of guns, fireworks, bikes, scooters, tents, balloons and dogs--but not free of protesters.
https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/chicago-dnc-security-plan/
former9thward
(32,121 posts)FBaggins
(26,783 posts)As pushing them much further back than the OP scenario is discussing.
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/chicago/news/democratic-national-convention-protesters-permits-union-park-grant-park/
Four miles???
SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)Individuals can still go into the buffer zone around the convention center.
And again, this is the city's actions, not the DNC.
former9thward
(32,121 posts)So someone in some group 12 years ago was "violent". Whatever that means. I am sure a judge will think that is a good argument by the city...
SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)And the city refusing to grant permits for big events next to the convention is not the same as denying protesters entry into the buffer zone.
former9thward
(32,121 posts)Anyone in Chicago would find your post very humorous.
SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)forgotmylogin
(7,539 posts)What, is the RNC now afraid of tourists just passing by?
RainCaster
(10,942 posts)Not sure I spelled that right, but you get the idea.
hadEnuf
(2,222 posts)could they be worried about some tourists that might show up?
How about a big FUCK NO to the RNC?
erronis
(15,428 posts)did not stand back at all. They (the obviously white RW boys) were pounding on the doors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooks_Brothers_riot
The name referenced the protesters' corporate attire; described by Paul Gigot in an editorial for The Wall Street Journal as "50-year-old white lawyers with cell phones and Hermès ties", differentiating them from local citizens concerned about vote counting.[1] Many of the demonstrators were Republican staffers.[2] Both Roger Stone and Brad Blakeman take credit for managing the riot from a command post, although their accounts contradict each other.[2] Republican New York Representative John E. Sweeney gave the signal that started the riot,[3] telling an aide to "shut it down".[4][5]
slightlv
(2,866 posts)and may seek to implement the same type of action. They always think the worst case scenario, because that's what THEY would do, given the chance!
FBaggins
(26,783 posts)Right now it looks like we will have far more trouble with protesters at our convention.
Sucha NastyWoman
(2,759 posts)And how do you keep them in those confines? Fences maybe? So that they can be surrounded by (oh, Im sure) unarmed Maggots and such with bear spray and seething with white-hot hatred for those within the fencing? Sounds like a recipe for disaster to me.
DENVERPOPS
(8,888 posts)is exactly what Cheney/Rummie did during the W Bush occupation of the White House.
Any demonstrators at any Republican event were "corralled" and taken to a fenced in, police guarded park several blocks from the event.
ZZenith
(4,133 posts)As Orwellian a phrase as there ever was.
SunSeeker
(51,783 posts)I don't know why the GOP is so worried.
BumRushDaShow
(129,875 posts)Especially since they are in the GOP's pockets? The GOP makes sure to keep protestors far away.
Biglinda 52
(25 posts).....paying to keep them safe. Let them pay. I thought the SS was just for the President and family. They already have SS coverage. Calling out the national guard costs money. Let them pay if they want it. Home many times did TFG not pay security bills for his rallies. Ask for money up front.
FBaggins
(26,783 posts)They arent doing the RNC a favor/courtesy
Legally - the SS protects major party candidates as well. And, of course, former presidents retain SS protection.
sindri
(38 posts)with working with schools and youth-focused media to provide comprehensive breakdown and context of Hamas, RW Israeli government - (and how they both treat their populations as acceptable sacrifices for political gain.) A lesson to them that a democracy only works if enough good people are willing to serve and enough people elect them to balance out those acting in bad faith and for personal gain only. Protesting is only one part - in addition, all of us need to put effort into being informed, involved and willing to work together in good faith.