“We are always watching you.”

“Think about what your [sic] doing and the possible consequences.”

Sure, it could be nothing but bluster and fluff, but Antifa has never shown anyone it’s soft and fuzzy side. Now we’re being patted on the head and told it’s going to be alright because these (and other) threats against me and other people on the right by people representing themselves as Antifa are too “vague” and are “common.”

After having been intimidated and threatened in person and in writing by people in Antifa, I asked the Portland Police Bureau to add my name to the undoubtedly growing list of people threatened, assaulted and violated by the group the feds refer to as domestic terrorists.

But in Portland, domestic terrorists get a pass.

We’ve seen this in the way Mayor Ted Wheeler has framed his ordinance to crack down on protesters, blaming Antifa violence on the right.

On Thursday, I got an email back from a Portland Police Bureau investigator who shall remain nameless because of the doxxing, threats, vandalism and violence done to other cops, ICE officers and city officials (looking at you, Ted Wheeler) by the Leftist Portland Professional Protesters and their shock troops, Antifa.

I’m being told in essence that I must rely upon the good will and good behavior of Antifa not to kill, assault or doxx me.

How comforting.

Here’s part of the message:

 “Through our investigation we discovered that politically motivated indirect online threats are a common tactic used by Antifa to intimidate, and that steps are taken to assure the person sending the messages remains anonymous.

Our primary concern was to determine if state or federal law was broken and if there was any legitimacy to the threat. Our conclusion was that there wasn’t enough evidence to support criminal charges and we didn’t find corroborating information to substantiate an imminent targeted attack against you.”

There’s more, which I’ll lay out in another post this weekend, but the official response doesn’t inspire confidence, let’s just put it at that.

I did have some responses for the official which I put in an email back to him:

The only conclusion we can come to at this point is that Portlanders are on their own. The City won’t enforce the law against law breakers only people who defend themselves against Antifa.

Portland has a mayor, but look who’s really in charge.


12 Responses

  1. One wonders just how many threats and how many actual examples of unlawful force are necessary to justify an other than surrendering response in the face of threats. Especially targeted threats – threats aimed right square at someone’s face in person or otherwise.
    I still can’t believe the Strickland prosecution was even considered after the first 5 seconds of review. Or that the PPB gave the driver who ran the illegal riot blocade with his car a while back one BIT of guff.

    Nevertheless, these revolutionaries seem to hold the reins…in town. I suggest they keep to the business and industrial areas in the large towns, because in my experience, city residents and the cops in smaller towns are less welcoming to worrisome mobs and strangers lurking about than Mayor Wheeler and his compadres elsewhere are, and residents and other cities are disinclined to call mayor Wheeler for guidance when deciding how to react.

    As to running down the online threats, last I heard the PPB was a participant in the FBI Regional Computer Forensic Lab, and also has personnel trained in the skill who are in normal assignments. There are plenty of businesses who can do it just as well.

  2. Here’s what Curt commented over at my Facebook pages: “So threatening violence is OK. Good to know.

    Here’s a definition: “…assault is often defined as an attempt to injure to someone else, and in some circumstances can include threats or threatening behavior against others.”

    Here’s in The Peoples State of Oregon, intimidation is only in place if “…race, color, religion, sexual orientation, disability or national origin…” is a factor. And assault according to ORS involves a physical act; threatening is not included.

    Any lawyers out there want to chime in with what Oregon law is broken when a person writes a threatening email to another?”

    1. Can be construed as Menacing under Oregon law. But as everyone knows, freedom of speech is strong here. In order for a threat to be criminal in nature there has to be means, motive, and opportunity. A vague “watch your back” threat nearly never rises to the level needed for prosecution, especially with a District Attorney’s Office that routinely dumps charges because they’re scared to try a case that they might lose. Getting promoted and having their own practice relies on a high-percentage success rate.

  3. Steve wrote this over at the FB pages and I think he’s right, “Civil rights violations? I think the fbi is needed because Portland city government will not protect its citizens”

  4. Hope you reported it to FBI directly. I wouldn’t put any faith in PPB. I’m surprised the good cops they still have actually stay here when they aren’t allowed to do their jobs. Scary scary state.

  5. Isn’t it ironic that the violence and threats of violence that the Anti-fascist (Antifa) movement conduct here is precisely what the Nazis did in the 30’s and early 40’s to the Jews. I am surprised that they don’t wear lightening bolts or swastikas on their uniforms. Of course, they are portrayed by those on the left as innocents defending the streets against the tyranny of the right. Give me a break.
    The gullibility, naivety, bias and stupidity of the City Council is astonishing to me…and the rest of America who simply shake their heads.