Janeese Lewis George is keeping our kids safe from TURF

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

JLG is so far left wing, she’s an unashamed Democratic Socialist after all, that she was promoting this radical policy of defunding the police before it got popular. She was the cutting edge, the vanguard of the defund movement.

Even if this is true, why did she never mention it again? After that, the only time "Defund the Police" came up, it was coming from her opponents. That is a really strange way to handle what some claim was the ""signature issue" of her campaign. Don't candidates normally talk about their "signature issue" quite a bit?

You could ask her? She was running for public office and trying to get elected. As a result, I am going to guess that she was saying things that she thought would get her votes and not saying things that she thought wouldn’t get votes. She’s a smart lady, so she stopped saying it.

If she stopped saying it, how could it be her signature issue? I ask again, don't candidates normally talk about their signature issue?

The fact is that it was not her signature issue. Her opponents lied about it. Now, four years later, they still haven't thought of a better lie and are simply using the same one. Even the Washington Post has joined in with an accusation that is rebutted by its own reporting. I wonder if anyone will have to repeat DFER's performance and issue a retraction this time.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

JLG is so far left wing, she’s an unashamed Democratic Socialist after all, that she was promoting this radical policy of defunding the police before it got popular. She was the cutting edge, the vanguard of the defund movement.

Even if this is true, why did she never mention it again? After that, the only time "Defund the Police" came up, it was coming from her opponents. That is a really strange way to handle what some claim was the ""signature issue" of her campaign. Don't candidates normally talk about their "signature issue" quite a bit?

You could ask her? She was running for public office and trying to get elected. As a result, I am going to guess that she was saying things that she thought would get her votes and not saying things that she thought wouldn’t get votes. She’s a smart lady, so she stopped saying it.

If she stopped saying it, how could it be her signature issue? I ask again, don't candidates normally talk about their signature issue?

The fact is that it was not her signature issue. Her opponents lied about it. Now, four years later, they still haven't thought of a better lie and are simply using the same one. Even the Washington Post has joined in with an accusation that is rebutted by its own reporting. I wonder if anyone will have to repeat DFER's performance and issue a retraction this time.

I am not sure who you’re arguing with but it’s not me.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

JLG is so far left wing, she’s an unashamed Democratic Socialist after all, that she was promoting this radical policy of defunding the police before it got popular. She was the cutting edge, the vanguard of the defund movement.

Even if this is true, why did she never mention it again? After that, the only time "Defund the Police" came up, it was coming from her opponents. That is a really strange way to handle what some claim was the ""signature issue" of her campaign. Don't candidates normally talk about their "signature issue" quite a bit?

You could ask her? She was running for public office and trying to get elected. As a result, I am going to guess that she was saying things that she thought would get her votes and not saying things that she thought wouldn’t get votes. She’s a smart lady, so she stopped saying it.

If she stopped saying it, how could it be her signature issue? I ask again, don't candidates normally talk about their signature issue?

The fact is that it was not her signature issue. Her opponents lied about it. Now, four years later, they still haven't thought of a better lie and are simply using the same one. Even the Washington Post has joined in with an accusation that is rebutted by its own reporting. I wonder if anyone will have to repeat DFER's performance and issue a retraction this time.

I am not sure who you’re arguing with but it’s not me.

Strange that you joined the conversation in that case.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

Are you JLG's spokesperson? She doesnt even believe this crap you spew.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

Are you JLG's spokesperson? She doesnt even believe this crap you spew.

I don't speak for anyone but myself. I have no idea if she agrees with me or not, but that's what the record shows. If you believe that "Defund the Police" was her "signature issue", make the case. But, that simply is not supported by the evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

Are you JLG's spokesperson? She doesnt even believe this crap you spew.

When the Post asked JLG about defunding the police, she didn't deny it. She just said it wasn't the best choice of words.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

Are you JLG's spokesperson? She doesnt even believe this crap you spew.

When the Post asked JLG about defunding the police, she didn't deny it. She just said it wasn't the best choice of words.

She obviously said it once. Nobody is denying that. But there is no world in which mentioning something once makes it the "signature issue" of her campaign. Back in 2019 her opponents misleadingly tried to use this allegation against her. DFER had to backtrack and admit that it had been wrong. Now the Washington Post and multiple posters here are doing the same thing. At least think of a new lie.

[Anonymous]

It's funny how there were lots of stories in 2020 about JLG showed you can make defunding the police your primary issue, and her victory proved that wasn't necessarily an electoral death sentence.

Fast forward to 2024, after crime hit the fan, and now Jeff pretends that JLG was never for defunding the police. Ok. Now you're going to tell us how no one attacked the capitol on jan. 6, either, right?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:It's funny how there were lots of stories in 2020 about JLG showed you can make defunding the police your primary issue, and her victory proved that wasn't necessarily an electoral death sentence.

Fast forward to 2024, after crime hit the fan, and now Jeff pretends that JLG was never for defunding the police. Ok. Now you're going to tell us how no one attacked the capitol on jan. 6, either, right?

That's not what the stories said. Link to one to prove me wrong. What was actually happening, as I have said several times, is that JLG's opponents tried to make it her primary issue. But, she emphasized other agenda items and the attacks didn't damage her.

Why do you think DFER, which sent out mailers with her tweet, had to backtrack and admit that it had been wrong?

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

Are you JLG's spokesperson? She doesnt even believe this crap you spew.

When the Post asked JLG about defunding the police, she didn't deny it. She just said it wasn't the best choice of words.

She obviously said it once. Nobody is denying that. But there is no world in which mentioning something once makes it the "signature issue" of her campaign. Back in 2019 her opponents misleadingly tried to use this allegation against her. DFER had to backtrack and admit that it had been wrong. Now the Washington Post and multiple posters here are doing the same thing. At least think of a new lie.

Pro tip: When you're accusing the Washington Post of lying, you're either 1. a crazy person or 2. the one who is actually lying

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

Before George Floyd, it had a different name. Google "divest/invest." The idea was take money being spent on police ("divest") and spend it on other programs ("invest"). That's what JLG is referring to in that tweet.

Mostly I agree. More specifically, she was talking about police militarization that she wanted to defund. I think we can all agree that a single tweet does not amount to a "signature issue". The Washington Post was simply wrong in its editorial.

Are you JLG's spokesperson? She doesnt even believe this crap you spew.

When the Post asked JLG about defunding the police, she didn't deny it. She just said it wasn't the best choice of words.

She obviously said it once. Nobody is denying that. But there is no world in which mentioning something once makes it the "signature issue" of her campaign. Back in 2019 her opponents misleadingly tried to use this allegation against her. DFER had to backtrack and admit that it had been wrong. Now the Washington Post and multiple posters here are doing the same thing. At least think of a new lie.

Pro tip: When you're accusing the Washington Post of lying, you're either 1. a crazy person or 2. the one who is actually lying

That is an opinion, not fact. My opinion is that if you still continue to support an allegation that completely lacks evidence, something is wrong with you.

The Post made an allegation that is not supported by the paper's own reporting. They were either lying or incompetent. It doesn't make much difference which.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

JLG is so far left wing, she’s an unashamed Democratic Socialist after all, that she was promoting this radical policy of defunding the police before it got popular. She was the cutting edge, the vanguard of the defund movement.

Even if this is true, why did she never mention it again? After that, the only time "Defund the Police" came up, it was coming from her opponents. That is a really strange way to handle what some claim was the ""signature issue" of her campaign. Don't candidates normally talk about their "signature issue" quite a bit?

You could ask her? She was running for public office and trying to get elected. As a result, I am going to guess that she was saying things that she thought would get her votes and not saying things that she thought wouldn’t get votes. She’s a smart lady, so she stopped saying it.

If she stopped saying it, how could it be her signature issue? I ask again, don't candidates normally talk about their signature issue?

The fact is that it was not her signature issue. Her opponents lied about it. Now, four years later, they still haven't thought of a better lie and are simply using the same one. Even the Washington Post has joined in with an accusation that is rebutted by its own reporting. I wonder if anyone will have to repeat DFER's performance and issue a retraction this time.

I am not sure who you’re arguing with but it’s not me.

Strange that you joined the conversation in that case.

Sorry, I’m not your bogeyman. I personally think that anyone who chooses to affiliate with left wing extremist Democratic Socialists who have a history of antisemitism are unserious and have disqualified themselves from public service and the Washington Post was correct to not endorse her. She also admitted to shifting her position on defund the police to the Washington Post. Everything else after that, including the accusations and counter accusations about election law and DFER and everything else is between you and whoever else you’re arguing with.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:That tweet has an interesting history. Note the date, October, 21, 2019. The "Defund the Police" movement did not really get started until after the death of George Floyd in May 2020. To believe the DC Police Union, DFER — who used the tweet in multiple mailers for which it later apologized because they were deceptive — and Brandon Todd, JLG was six months ahead of the movement. What actually happened is that JLG launched her campaign based on issues such as affordable housing, affordable childcare, and access to healthcare. Among her concerns was the militarization of police who were increasingly receiving military weapons. If you look back at what she was saying at that time, it dealt with preventing this militarization which she wanted to stop and used the funds in more appropriate ways.

The fact that JLG opponents have nothing beyond a 2019 tweet to support their claims that "defund the police" was the "signature issue" of her campaign tells you everything you need to know. That tweet was actually the signature issue of JLG's opponents. As DFER later said with regard to mailers that printed the tweet, "These mailers oversimplified a more nuanced conversation about public safety... We made a mistake".

DFER, to its credit, says it learned from the mistake. The DC Police Union and the anonymous poster here, clearly has not.

Defund the Police began after the Ferguson Riots, which were in 2014.

I can't find any evidence that the slogan was at all popular before George Floyd's death. If you do any Internet searches, the oldest hits are in 2020.

JLG is so far left wing, she’s an unashamed Democratic Socialist after all, that she was promoting this radical policy of defunding the police before it got popular. She was the cutting edge, the vanguard of the defund movement.

Even if this is true, why did she never mention it again? After that, the only time "Defund the Police" came up, it was coming from her opponents. That is a really strange way to handle what some claim was the ""signature issue" of her campaign. Don't candidates normally talk about their "signature issue" quite a bit?

You could ask her? She was running for public office and trying to get elected. As a result, I am going to guess that she was saying things that she thought would get her votes and not saying things that she thought wouldn’t get votes. She’s a smart lady, so she stopped saying it.

If she stopped saying it, how could it be her signature issue? I ask again, don't candidates normally talk about their signature issue?

The fact is that it was not her signature issue. Her opponents lied about it. Now, four years later, they still haven't thought of a better lie and are simply using the same one. Even the Washington Post has joined in with an accusation that is rebutted by its own reporting. I wonder if anyone will have to repeat DFER's performance and issue a retraction this time.

I am not sure who you’re arguing with but it’s not me.

Strange that you joined the conversation in that case.

Sorry, I’m not your bogeyman. I personally think that anyone who chooses to affiliate with left wing extremist Democratic Socialists who have a history of antisemitism are unserious and have disqualified themselves from public service and the Washington Post was correct to not endorse her. She also admitted to shifting her position on defund the police to the Washington Post. Everything else after that, including the accusations and counter accusations about election law and DFER and everything else is between you and whoever else you’re arguing with.

She did not admit to "shifting her position on defund the police". She said that "It wasn’t the best verbiage used" which has basically always been her position. In 2020 she said, “I don’t think it’s an issue that we can put into one sentence, like defund the police".

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/07/protests-defund-police/

As for your allegation that she associates with anti-Semites, that will probably surprise her Jewish supporters.