Just another example of a woke white leftist trying to coach other races how to feel about other races.
There we go. The first two days confirm long held Conservative suspicions but this is what puts CNN and BLM at odds.
Those who don't show an ounce of belief in God, who then invoke God's wrath, are not to be minded.
There will be rioting in blue counties in red states actually.
That's not my point. My point is if everyone is coming out with a disorganized half-assed attempt at building a new market for cancelled conservative audiences, it is less viable than just one or two well thought out and effective solutions.
Looks unstable. Needs a good dicking and a copy of Ayn Rand.
From the quivery voice to the eye twitch to the slight tremble to the weird smiles, she shows all the signs of a volcano about to explode.
She's cute but she's nucking futz.
It's insane how lefties will bark at the covid heretics who don't believe masks give them magic immunity powers. It's also just weird seeing people who have never willingly picked up a Bible invoke the wrath of god on their political foes.
You could land a 747 in the gap between those eyes. What a soulless obese bug man
Maybe they will learn. I doubt it. But there's always hope
We didn't do anything. The people acting like this are likely all 100 percent Biden supporters. These people were that retarded to begin with.
Just read up on this. I hope Namajunas shows no mercy.
Mods. We need ninja flair
The author's right. The Trump folks should be reimbursed. It was the job of the state to do the election right. Now Trump supporters are having to pay out of pocket to rectify the state's crooked behaviors. That ain't right.
The family can take up a civil case and sue the cop for wrongful death. But all that does is maybe gets him to pay them. That's not justice. He killed someone and he should be treated in the legal system the way people who kill others are treated. They are charged with murder and their case is taken seriously. Maybe the cop doesn't get convicted but that should be up to a jury that looks at evidence, not a federal prosecutor letting his political companions off the hook. If the government won't prosecute, the private citizen should have that right. Our legal theory is based on the idea that a crime is an offense against the state and thus by the state deciding not to prosecute, the state is not offended and thus there is no crime. The legal system needs to be rewritten such that the offense belongs to the offended party (Babbitt) and her family and that their ability to rectify that criminal offense is delegated to the state at their discretion.
These people need to fight this. I had some fool respond in a comment to me that the cops opening doors to people on Jan 6 is a conspiracy theory. To that I say bullshit. It's on video. It's well documented and the Capitol has seen protests in the past. People have a 1st amendment right to go to the capitol and shout at their representative, so long as they are not blocking hallways or storming the floor. You're allowed to be on Capitol Hill the same way you can go to your allowed to at your state house. If you are being prosecuted for simple trespass and you did nothing but walk through a door a cop opened, that is your defense and its a solid one and you need to fight it until the very end and sue the DOJ for violating your 1st amendment rights.
This is so obnoxious. I'm tired of every conservative dude starting his own site/tech co-alternative/etc in a disorganized effort with standards that are all over the board. Build a competent platform that gives users free speech and let's them get the products they need. Gab is the Twitter alternative and it's solid and the more people use it, the less these smears about it being a raycis matter.
Build the same thing but as an alternative to Amazon. Any company that gets pulled from Amazon. Just use that alternative as your way to get your products to market with minimal bullshit and hassle. Once that shipping infrastructure is there, Amazon stops being the market leader and their censorship collapses.
Okay so Gaetz started talking to her when she was 17 and then she turned 18 before she went on a trip with him and they had sex? Unless he paid her FOR sex that's not a crime. If he paid for her plane ticket while they went on a vacation, he wasn't paying for sex (prostitution) he was just paying for a high-priced date with a woman on the young side (a date). If that's what the DOJ is going after Gaetz on this is a nonthingburger/political smear campaign.
This is a clearly political decision. Given the willingness prosecutors have shown to put people like Kyle Rittenhouse on trial, or any other officer-involved shooting, it makes no sense that they would skip Babbitt's case UNLESS they were politically motivated not too. It's a shame the ability to prosecute for a crime is held by the state. In instances where the state passes on prosecution of a crime, private parties should have the right to bring their own criminal prosecution. Otherwise the deep state can always excuse its own criminals (like Hillary Clinton). In our justice system, we have double jeopardy and the prosecution gets one crack at convicting a criminal defendant. If the state passes on the opportunity, that opportunity shouldn't go away, it should just fall to the injured party/their family to give it a try. That's a judicial reform I think needs to be made.
She honestly might. If she had known she was pulling out her pistol when she fired at Wright, she could have conceivably argued Wright was resisting arrest, fighting with her fellow officer, potentially grabbing at his belt or going for his own concealed weapon. There's enough erratic movement from Wright in that video that she could make that defense if she had knowingly pulled the pistol.
IIRC, the cop who shot Jacob Blake is literally back on the force now because his actions were both justified and intentional.
But in the video this cop clearly, audibly and repeatedly says "I'm going to taze him" and then says "taser, taser, taser" and after she shoots she says "oh shit" like she realizes she grabbed the wrong thing out of her belt. Shooting Wright may have been justified, but shooting him was not her intent, meaning her accidental actions caused a death. Generically speaking, when someone has an accident that gets someone killed, that's usually called manslaughter (again, speaking generically and not specifically in this exact case).
Now, maybe this could be dismissed as a no-fault accidental death situation but I doubt it and the cop had already been charged with second degree manslaughter. I think the evidence is strong enough to earn a conviction on manslaughter in this case and I'm not really sure Wright's actions here could negate that. It's clear the cop did not premeditate murder or even attempt to cause the kind of harm that would result in murder, so it does seem murder 2 or 3 are not appropriate here.
If I'm totally off base, feel free to correct me. What do you think are appropriate charges, if any, in this case?
Duante creating an unsafe situation doesn't negate the cop pulling out and using a gun instead of a taser. It's tragic. Wright is not "in the right" here and he's not innocent. But his stupidity doesn't absolve the officer of the mistake she made. The mistake is obvious too as she is essentially narrating what she believes are her actions (to taze a suspect) before realizing she pulled the wrong tool from her belt.
Black science man regularly tweets objectively retarded shit. He is mediocre at dumbing down astronomy to stupid people in a soothing voice but knows dogshit about anything else.
A not unreasonable motion. The prosecution witnesses went for a lot of emotional appeals and had some "damning" sound bites but they didn't present a consistent argument that it was Chauvin that caused Floyd to die. They started off saying the knee on Floyd's neck killed him, then when they realized the knee was on his back for a large part of the video they said well a knee on the back could have compressed his lungs and killed him. Those are not consistent cause of death theories and every expert who attested to that claim did so based solely on their armchair judgement from watching the video as opposed to an actual autopsy. At least one use of force witness for the state also said Chauvin could've used more force. This is an opening day argument from the defense. I assume they are making it with the full expectation they will still have to present the full defense argument. But a good way to at least move the jury in their direction.
They're just hiding from their current position. Don't stop until they take the opposite position and affirm the GA bill.