DOGE staffer wrecked in DC, Trump threatening to federalize DC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic take.

First, the tweet’s emphasis on unarmed is silly given the fact that we can name multiple notable murders by unarmed DC teens in the past few years — Bryan Smith was beaten to death in Shaw, Mohammad Anwar was run over by his own vehicle in Navy Yard, and Reggie Brown was beaten to death in Brightwood. All three murders were perpetrated by unarmed teens, rendering the unarmed aspect of this case that the tweeter emphasizes completely moot to anyone with an ounce of IQ.

Secondly, the tweet’s emphasis on the quick police response is irrelevant given DC’s leniency in sentencing. What good does police response do if the teens are immediately released to their parents and reoffend shortly thereafter, or in the case of the above literal murders are held until they are 21 and then released back into society?

The crux of the issue is that DC leadership has shown itself to be incapable of proper justice. Teens who commit serious crimes such as murder or assault with serious bodily harm need to be removed from society — not held for a negligible amount of time and released. This provides the best deterrence — if these teens know that they will spend a couple of decades behind bars, they won’t commit crime at the same rate. If the DC government won’t do this due to their progressive stance, we need the duly elected federal administration to step in and get it done.

You feel like democratically elected officials aren’t working (for you), so your response is to take away democracy?

No, Home Rule versus presidentially appointed commissioners are both two valid alternative forms of democracy. The former, which did not exist from our nation’s founding until 1973, puts more emphasis on the local, whereas the latter puts more emphasis on the national. Both are democratic forms of rule for a federal city that the entire nation has a stake in keeping nice and safe as our capital city.

Remember, the former did not exist until 1973.

Ah, the halcyon days of pre-1973 DC when you could roam Swann street with not a care in the world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic take.

First, the tweet’s emphasis on unarmed is silly given the fact that we can name multiple notable murders by unarmed DC teens in the past few years — Bryan Smith was beaten to death in Shaw, Mohammad Anwar was run over by his own vehicle in Navy Yard, and Reggie Brown was beaten to death in Brightwood. All three murders were perpetrated by unarmed teens, rendering the unarmed aspect of this case that the tweeter emphasizes completely moot to anyone with an ounce of IQ.

Secondly, the tweet’s emphasis on the quick police response is irrelevant given DC’s leniency in sentencing. What good does police response do if the teens are immediately released to their parents and reoffend shortly thereafter, or in the case of the above literal murders are held until they are 21 and then released back into society?

The crux of the issue is that DC leadership has shown itself to be incapable of proper justice. Teens who commit serious crimes such as murder or assault with serious bodily harm need to be removed from society — not held for a negligible amount of time and released. This provides the best deterrence — if these teens know that they will spend a couple of decades behind bars, they won’t commit crime at the same rate. If the DC government won’t do this due to their progressive stance, we need the duly elected federal administration to step in and get it done.

You feel like democratically elected officials aren’t working (for you), so your response is to take away democracy?

No, Home Rule versus presidentially appointed commissioners are both two valid alternative forms of democracy. The former, which did not exist from our nation’s founding until 1973, puts more emphasis on the local, whereas the latter puts more emphasis on the national. Both are democratic forms of rule for a federal city that the entire nation has a stake in keeping nice and safe as our capital city.

Remember, the former did not exist until 1973.

DC had 285 murders in 1973 with home rule signed into law by Nixon on December 24, 1973 (so it didn't take effect until 1974). Population was 750,000, so a rate of .038%.

DC had 99 homicides through August 7, 2025 which puts the city on a pace for 170 homicides. Population is 702,000, so a rate of .024%.

Can someone explain why bringing back Home Rule is such a good idea for crime?

[Anonymous]

No, they can’t. It’s all about narrative and some odd fascination with Singapore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic take.

First, the tweet’s emphasis on unarmed is silly given the fact that we can name multiple notable murders by unarmed DC teens in the past few years — Bryan Smith was beaten to death in Shaw, Mohammad Anwar was run over by his own vehicle in Navy Yard, and Reggie Brown was beaten to death in Brightwood. All three murders were perpetrated by unarmed teens, rendering the unarmed aspect of this case that the tweeter emphasizes completely moot to anyone with an ounce of IQ.

Secondly, the tweet’s emphasis on the quick police response is irrelevant given DC’s leniency in sentencing. What good does police response do if the teens are immediately released to their parents and reoffend shortly thereafter, or in the case of the above literal murders are held until they are 21 and then released back into society?

The crux of the issue is that DC leadership has shown itself to be incapable of proper justice. Teens who commit serious crimes such as murder or assault with serious bodily harm need to be removed from society — not held for a negligible amount of time and released. This provides the best deterrence — if these teens know that they will spend a couple of decades behind bars, they won’t commit crime at the same rate. If the DC government won’t do this due to their progressive stance, we need the duly elected federal administration to step in and get it done.

You feel like democratically elected officials aren’t working (for you), so your response is to take away democracy?

No, Home Rule versus presidentially appointed commissioners are both two valid alternative forms of democracy. The former, which did not exist from our nation’s founding until 1973, puts more emphasis on the local, whereas the latter puts more emphasis on the national. Both are democratic forms of rule for a federal city that the entire nation has a stake in keeping nice and safe as our capital city.

Remember, the former did not exist until 1973.

Ah, the halcyon days of pre-1973 DC when you could roam Swann street with not a care in the world.

But that area was a rundown hippie enclave then

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, they can’t. It’s all about narrative and some odd fascination with Singapore.

I suspect they haven’t spent much time walking around the district. It’s really beautiful. (I’m sure they’ll come back with some isolated anecdote from their 8th grade school trip they think proves otherwise.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s up with all the MAGA postings? Do we have a sock puppet on our hands?

They want a mealy-mouthed excuse for a Big Government solution that they want to force onto an unwilling populace. DC could have only 100 homicides this year and they would still say and do the same things.

They have no honor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic take.

First, the tweet’s emphasis on unarmed is silly given the fact that we can name multiple notable murders by unarmed DC teens in the past few years — Bryan Smith was beaten to death in Shaw, Mohammad Anwar was run over by his own vehicle in Navy Yard, and Reggie Brown was beaten to death in Brightwood. All three murders were perpetrated by unarmed teens, rendering the unarmed aspect of this case that the tweeter emphasizes completely moot to anyone with an ounce of IQ.

Secondly, the tweet’s emphasis on the quick police response is irrelevant given DC’s leniency in sentencing. What good does police response do if the teens are immediately released to their parents and reoffend shortly thereafter, or in the case of the above literal murders are held until they are 21 and then released back into society?

The crux of the issue is that DC leadership has shown itself to be incapable of proper justice. Teens who commit serious crimes such as murder or assault with serious bodily harm need to be removed from society — not held for a negligible amount of time and released. This provides the best deterrence — if these teens know that they will spend a couple of decades behind bars, they won’t commit crime at the same rate. If the DC government won’t do this due to their progressive stance, we need the duly elected federal administration to step in and get it done.

You feel like democratically elected officials aren’t working (for you), so your response is to take away democracy?

No, Home Rule versus presidentially appointed commissioners are both two valid alternative forms of democracy. The former, which did not exist from our nation’s founding until 1973, puts more emphasis on the local, whereas the latter puts more emphasis on the national. Both are democratic forms of rule for a federal city that the entire nation has a stake in keeping nice and safe as our capital city.

Remember, the former did not exist until 1973.

DC had 285 murders in 1973 with home rule signed into law by Nixon on December 24, 1973 (so it didn't take effect until 1974). Population was 750,000, so a rate of .038%.

DC had 99 homicides through August 7, 2025 which puts the city on a pace for 170 homicides. Population is 702,000, so a rate of .024%.

Can someone explain why bringing back Home Rule is such a good idea for crime?

You have to look at more than just the crime rate.
You also need to look at prosecution and convictions. How many of the criminals who have been caught with an illegal firearm serve ZERO jail time?
What is the average jail term for people found guilty of rape? How many criminals who commit violent crime get a very light sentence or simply get probation?
How about the 15, 16, and 17 YOs who commit murder? How long are they locked up? And, how many kids under 18 committed these violent crimes back in 1973?

It is way more than just crime rate. It also is enforcement, prosecution, and consequences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic take.

First, the tweet’s emphasis on unarmed is silly given the fact that we can name multiple notable murders by unarmed DC teens in the past few years — Bryan Smith was beaten to death in Shaw, Mohammad Anwar was run over by his own vehicle in Navy Yard, and Reggie Brown was beaten to death in Brightwood. All three murders were perpetrated by unarmed teens, rendering the unarmed aspect of this case that the tweeter emphasizes completely moot to anyone with an ounce of IQ.

Secondly, the tweet’s emphasis on the quick police response is irrelevant given DC’s leniency in sentencing. What good does police response do if the teens are immediately released to their parents and reoffend shortly thereafter, or in the case of the above literal murders are held until they are 21 and then released back into society?

The crux of the issue is that DC leadership has shown itself to be incapable of proper justice. Teens who commit serious crimes such as murder or assault with serious bodily harm need to be removed from society — not held for a negligible amount of time and released. This provides the best deterrence — if these teens know that they will spend a couple of decades behind bars, they won’t commit crime at the same rate. If the DC government won’t do this due to their progressive stance, we need the duly elected federal administration to step in and get it done.

You feel like democratically elected officials aren’t working (for you), so your response is to take away democracy?

No, Home Rule versus presidentially appointed commissioners are both two valid alternative forms of democracy. The former, which did not exist from our nation’s founding until 1973, puts more emphasis on the local, whereas the latter puts more emphasis on the national. Both are democratic forms of rule for a federal city that the entire nation has a stake in keeping nice and safe as our capital city.

Remember, the former did not exist until 1973.

DC had 285 murders in 1973 with home rule signed into law by Nixon on December 24, 1973 (so it didn't take effect until 1974). Population was 750,000, so a rate of .038%.

DC had 99 homicides through August 7, 2025 which puts the city on a pace for 170 homicides. Population is 702,000, so a rate of .024%.

Can someone explain why bringing back Home Rule is such a good idea for crime?

You have to look at more than just the crime rate.
You also need to look at prosecution and convictions. How many of the criminals who have been caught with an illegal firearm serve ZERO jail time?
What is the average jail term for people found guilty of rape? How many criminals who commit violent crime get a very light sentence or simply get probation?
How about the 15, 16, and 17 YOs who commit murder? How long are they locked up? And, how many kids under 18 committed these violent crimes back in 1973?

It is way more than just crime rate. It also is enforcement, prosecution, and consequences.

Who prosecutes crime (let’s say felonies) in DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Idiotic take.

First, the tweet’s emphasis on unarmed is silly given the fact that we can name multiple notable murders by unarmed DC teens in the past few years — Bryan Smith was beaten to death in Shaw, Mohammad Anwar was run over by his own vehicle in Navy Yard, and Reggie Brown was beaten to death in Brightwood. All three murders were perpetrated by unarmed teens, rendering the unarmed aspect of this case that the tweeter emphasizes completely moot to anyone with an ounce of IQ.

Secondly, the tweet’s emphasis on the quick police response is irrelevant given DC’s leniency in sentencing. What good does police response do if the teens are immediately released to their parents and reoffend shortly thereafter, or in the case of the above literal murders are held until they are 21 and then released back into society?

The crux of the issue is that DC leadership has shown itself to be incapable of proper justice. Teens who commit serious crimes such as murder or assault with serious bodily harm need to be removed from society — not held for a negligible amount of time and released. This provides the best deterrence — if these teens know that they will spend a couple of decades behind bars, they won’t commit crime at the same rate. If the DC government won’t do this due to their progressive stance, we need the duly elected federal administration to step in and get it done.

You feel like democratically elected officials aren’t working (for you), so your response is to take away democracy?

No, Home Rule versus presidentially appointed commissioners are both two valid alternative forms of democracy. The former, which did not exist from our nation’s founding until 1973, puts more emphasis on the local, whereas the latter puts more emphasis on the national. Both are democratic forms of rule for a federal city that the entire nation has a stake in keeping nice and safe as our capital city.

Remember, the former did not exist until 1973.

DC had 285 murders in 1973 with home rule signed into law by Nixon on December 24, 1973 (so it didn't take effect until 1974). Population was 750,000, so a rate of .038%.

DC had 99 homicides through August 7, 2025 which puts the city on a pace for 170 homicides. Population is 702,000, so a rate of .024%.

Can someone explain why bringing back Home Rule is such a good idea for crime?

You have to look at more than just the crime rate.
You also need to look at prosecution and convictions. How many of the criminals who have been caught with an illegal firearm serve ZERO jail time?
What is the average jail term for people found guilty of rape? How many criminals who commit violent crime get a very light sentence or simply get probation?
How about the 15, 16, and 17 YOs who commit murder? How long are they locked up? And, how many kids under 18 committed these violent crimes back in 1973?

It is way more than just crime rate. It also is enforcement, prosecution, and consequences.

Well, it seems a pretty direct correlation between prosecutions and convictions and the overall crime rate...no?

So, I ask once more...why is Home Rule such a good idea if the crime rate was higher under Home Rule which implies the prosecution and conviction rate was lower/worse?

At some point you are going to have to admit that your twisted and incoherent logic just doesn't work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s up with all the MAGA postings? Do we have a sock puppet on our hands?

They want a mealy-mouthed excuse for a Big Government solution that they want to force onto an unwilling populace. DC could have only 100 homicides this year and they would still say and do the same things.

They have no honor.

THIS

They pardon certain crimes like attacking and trying to kill Members of Congress and pedophiles but god forbid anyone would acknowledge history (like a black historical figure) , they will crucify them.

[Anonymous]

If you have ever lived in a college town, you know that when a 19 year old tells the press he was jumped by a gang, while saving a helpless woman, after leaving the bar totally sober... It always turns out he was lying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
If you have ever lived in a college town, you know that when a 19 year old tells the press he was jumped by a gang, while saving a helpless woman, after leaving the bar totally sober... It always turns out he was lying.

Yes, I'm sure the DOGE guy put fake blood all over himself and convinced police to go along with it by saying they're searching for teenage suspects.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/release/updated-photos-mpd-seeks-person-interest-swann-street-attempted-carjacking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you have ever lived in a college town, you know that when a 19 year old tells the press he was jumped by a gang, while saving a helpless woman, after leaving the bar totally sober... It always turns out he was lying.

Yes, I'm sure the DOGE guy put fake blood all over himself and convinced police to go along with it by saying they're searching for teenage suspects.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/release/updated-photos-mpd-seeks-person-interest-swann-street-attempted-carjacking

Well, at least he was following proper masking protocols.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you have ever lived in a college town, you know that when a 19 year old tells the press he was jumped by a gang, while saving a helpless woman, after leaving the bar totally sober... It always turns out he was lying.

Yes, I'm sure the DOGE guy put fake blood all over himself and convinced police to go along with it by saying they're searching for teenage suspects.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/release/updated-photos-mpd-seeks-person-interest-swann-street-attempted-carjacking

Well, at least he was following proper masking protocols.

Wow sure is light at 3 am.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If you have ever lived in a college town, you know that when a 19 year old tells the press he was jumped by a gang, while saving a helpless woman, after leaving the bar totally sober... It always turns out he was lying.

Yes, I'm sure the DOGE guy put fake blood all over himself and convinced police to go along with it by saying they're searching for teenage suspects.

https://mpdc.dc.gov/release/updated-photos-mpd-seeks-person-interest-swann-street-attempted-carjacking

Well, at least he was following proper masking protocols.

Wow sure is light at 3 am.

Yeah, how is this related at all?