Do you also consider it a peculiarity that all failures of the federal government are attributed to the president?

Example: "Trump sent militia to Portland to put protesters into unmarked vans.".

Or is this attribution a worry only when something good happens?

The popular suggestion - with regard to your specific example - is that the president himself is directly supporting those federal actions in Portland (against the wishes of state leadership and law enforcement) because appearing strong on crime is politically beneficial for his re-election. There is no other reason for those officers to be present, refuse to wear uniforms, or use civilian vehicles. The

But then, I’m sure you’re fully aware of this and are just making hay.

>>>There is no other reason for those officers to be present

Looting? Vandalism? Rioting? Violence? Failure of local government to do anything about it?

You're ignoring the forest for the trees. Were you listening when the extrajudicial killings incited these peaceful protests?

Trump is also directly supporting the US beating China in technology. He doesn't care how it is done or what the technology is. This is just like he doesn't care how riots are stopped just that they are stopped. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising if he told somebody on his team to get it done and they handled the arrangements.

>because appearing strong on crime is politically beneficial for his re-election. There is no other reason for those officers to be present,

Maybe he genuinely wants to stop crime? You shouldn't assume somebody's reasons for doing stuff when you don't actually have any proof.

> refuse to wear uniforms

Do you have an example? All videos I have seen have uniforms, just not the normal police uniforms.

> or use civilian vehicles.

This is extremely common throughout the west under certain circumstances. It is especially common for federal agencies more so than state / local. The reason you use civilian vehicles is to prevent the person you are trying to apprehend from realizing you are police. If somebody knows they are going to be arrested they may flee or grab a weapon. Some of the people they are arresting are quite possibly the same people who have thrown bricks at police officers. Some of the police have been hit in the head with bricks. Its completely understandable an officer wouldn't want give the suspect additional time to get a weapon when dealing with people like that.

The explicit purpose of a uniform is to associate an individual with an organization (e.g. the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Prison, etc) that vests them with specific authorities - for example, the authority to detain and charge citizens with crimes.

These actors in Portland do not wear patches, badges, names, or other identifying features that associate them with any authority. Camouflage clothing can be purchased by anyone with the Internet and a credit card. A badge number can’t. This distinction is important to maintain a free society.

I’m not going to explain the history of secret police and political disappearances. Go read about the Dirty War in Argentina for a taste.

>The explicit purpose of a uniform is to associate an individual with an organization (e.g. the Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Prison, etc) that vests them with specific authorities - for example, the authority to detain and charge citizens with crimes.

Nice job changing the goal posts.

>These actors in Portland do not wear patches, badges, names, or other identifying features that associate them with any authority.

Are you sure? I have heard there actually are badges on the uniforms. I have only seen pictures and videos on my phone so I could not tell personally if that is the case.

Will you please provide a video / picture of the uniforms?

> Camouflage clothing can be purchased by anyone with the Internet and a credit card. A badge number can’t. This distinction is important to maintain a free society.

Anybody can buy a fake police uniform and badge as well. Amazon has multiple for cheap.

I doubt I would know a real police uniform from a fake one.

> Nice job changing the goal posts.

Hardly. You contend that these actors are wearing uniforms. I argue that camouflage is generic and doesn’t serve the purpose of a uniform as it doesn’t indicate under what authority they serve.

> Are you sure? I have heard there actually are badges on the uniforms. I have only seen pictures and videos on my phone so I could not tell personally if that is the case.

It is being widely reported as such, yes. Additionally, new federal legislation has been put forward just in the last week to require federal officers to wear identification in the future.

> Anybody can buy a fake police uniform and badge as well. Amazon has multiple for cheap. I doubt I would know a real police uniform from a fake one.

This is precisely my point.

>It is being widely reported as such, yes. Additionally, new federal legislation has been put forward just in the last week to require federal officers to wear identification in the future.

I'll ask again. Do you have a video or picture? I have heard that these uniforms do in fact have a badge and identification on them.

Allegedly these officers did identify themselves when they made the arrests but due to the sounds (like people shouting at the officers) we cannot hear it on tape.

> This is precisely my point.

Every uniform and badge can be copied and sold to other people. If it becomes illegal to have a fake uniform people could still buy them illegally. Cops will also sometimes sell their old vehicles so even if they roll up in a police car you wouldn't know. It would also be possible to paint a car to look like a police car as well.

It sounds like it is impossible to ever arrest somebody without you complaining that there is no way to know if the person is legit. What is your solution to this problem? Never arrest anybody?

So, that's a pretty major issue, and the president was presumably presented with a meaningful choice on it (if he wasn't, then there are other, very serious, problems). Whereas I would seriously doubt that he even rubber-stamped the quantum computing thing; even if he did it's not something he'd have any context on, and would really have to rely on the experts. They're very, very different things.

In a parliamentary system the quantum computer thing would be signed off by a ministerial department, and might be rubber-stamped by the minister, but probably would not be attributed to the minister by the press and certainly would not be attributed to the PM. The "have weird paramilitaries attack our own civilians" thing would definitely go to the PM and would require a decision from them, and would be blamed on them.

The "[whoever] admin did whatever" thing, for every little thing the government does, with named whoever, is a peculiarity of the US system, but everywhere attributes major decisions which the executive leader signed off on to the executive leader.

Well, he has talked on Twitter about sending federal forces to Portland, so...