Here Are 12 Quick Take-Aways From Portland ‘Man Versus Antifa’ Case in Oregon Appeals Court

What are the stakes in the Mike Strickland versus Antifa case out of Portland, Oregon?

The City of Portland, prosecutors, police and judiciary have, so far, sided with Antifa protesters over Strickland, a videographer whose job it was to chronicle the radical mob which has preyed upon Portlanders for years.

As I explained here:

“Before they chased old men in cars and canceled parades; before Ann Coulter, Ben Shapiro, Milo Yianoppolous and Charles Murray were silenced by mob violence; before Professional Paid Protesters, Incorporated™ screamed at Senators, overturned cars or set a ‘deplorable’s’ limo on fire; there was Michael Strickland.
Strickland is believed to be Antifa’s ‘victim zero.‘”

The videographer and concealed carry permit holder was covering a Don’t Shoot Portland/Black Lives Matter protest on July 7, 2016.  Strickland was surrounded and beaten by the Antifa mob (read about their conspiracy to do so here) and when they couldn’t bully him out of the protest on public property, the mob came back to finish him off.  I reported  on the clash: 

“Strickland drew his licensed concealed handgun that Antifa knew he had (I know, I asked), a Glock semi automatic pistol. Strickland, showing amazing trigger discipline – never allowing his finger to come close to the trigger – held off his attackers as he backed away from the mob. To be clear,  Strickland was the only person hurt that day. No shots were ever fired.”

One question remains: Is the judiciary  even aware of the violence and vandalism perpetrated by a group that the Department of Homeland Security has designated a domestic terrorist group?

Strickland’s attorney, Robert Barnes, worries that they have no clue, telling VictoriaTaft.com and others on Friday:

“The judges haven’t ‘got’ what’s happening – the Judiciary as a branch. The judicial branch hasn’t figured out – other than Justice Brett Kavanaugh experiencing it personally – the rest of the judicial branch hasn’t deduced what’s happening in the public arena, what’s happening in these protests, what’s happening at these social gatherings, what’s happening in these tactics – these mob tactics –  that are being utilized.
The reason why the press is nervous about the use of the word ‘mob’ is because of how accurate it depicts their tactics and techniques over the past two years. Tactics they experimented a little bit with at Occupy Wall Street but that went sideways because everybody was busy assaulting everybody inside, so they’re going, returning, back to those roots and those are dangerous roots for political expression. It’s going back to the street violence of the 1920’s and 1930’s as a technique and a tactic and the court system doesn’t realize it’s happening.”

After arguments in the case of Oregon V Strickland held Friday in a Oregon Appeals Court tribunal,  Barnes summed up the high stakes involved in the outcome of the case.

Here are 12 quick takes from Barnes:

The appeals court tribunal has taken the case under consideration.The court’s decision could take months to hand down.