this post was submitted on 25 Feb 2025
564 points (98.5% liked)

politics

20434 readers
3938 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

A GOP town hall in Idaho turned violent when private security, LEAR Asset Management, forcibly removed Teresa Borrenpohl for speaking out.

The incident escalated after Borrenpohl questioned a panelist’s anti-abortion stance, leading to her being dragged out by unmarked security. Sheriff Norris, present but in plainclothes, did not intervene initially.

LEAR, known for aggressive tactics, was revealed to have been hired by the town hall organizers. Police later revoked LEAR’s city license and clarified that removing someone for speaking out is unlawful.

The incident shows rising tensions and the blurring lines between political events and private security enforcement in conservative areas.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Boddhisatva 144 points 20 hours ago (6 children)

The unmarked security force were from a private security firm called LEAR Asset Management, the Press reported, but Sheriff Norris “claimed no knowledge of the security personnel or who hired them.”

Wait, so the sheriff, admits that he just watched three unidentified men assault a woman in front of him, and that he has no knowledge of who they are or who hired them, and he took no action at all. If he knows nothing about them or who hired them, how would he know that they were providing security? This is brown shirts in action and the sheriff is clearly one of them. Terrifying.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago)

He didn't just watch; he was the first to make contact with her, then commanded the private security himself 'boys get her'.

https://youtu.be/-lxu3Ff_s14

[–] RampantParanoia2365 15 points 12 hours ago

I mean, it seems pretty clear he knew exactly who they were, and he decided to look the other way, which is just as bad.

[–] MajinBlayze 12 points 13 hours ago (1 children)

Remember, the police in the US have no duty to protect

[–] kreskin 12 points 12 hours ago

or to be truthful in their interactions.

And except for when you're driving, you have no responsibility to talk with them unless you're in a stop and identify state: Alabama, Delaware, Florida, Illinois, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Utah, and Wisconsin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stop_and_identify_statutes

You're not required to identify yourself or talk with them unless you are formally being detained, which is about the only thing they have to tell the truth about. They are not worth talking to in any situatuion, and they are never "off duty" So they are never worth talking to after work either. They should always be ignored and interacted with as little as possible.

[–] P1k1e 16 points 16 hours ago

Sheriffs are known for being gangsters, probably just another day in the park for him

[–] sartalon 54 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago) (2 children)

Not just watched, he's the one in the video telling her she needs to leave and then had the "private security" remove her.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 13 hours ago

So he gave the illegal order to remove her to vigilantes he didn't know as law enforcement, and he's not in trouble?

[–] Boddhisatva 27 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

But he doesn't know who hired them? Who was in charge of security for the event. How would the local sheriff no know that?

[–] [email protected] 8 points 16 hours ago

Does their lawsuit shield come off them when their badge comes off?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Wasn't he the guy who mocked and belittled her as she was assaulted? The only who called her a little girl?

[–] Boddhisatva 3 points 12 hours ago

According to the article that was the moderator of the town hall who said that. Some website developer named, Ed Bejarana. No clue if he was involved with security, but he certainly seemed to be getting off on watching a woman get abused.