Lorewarn Posted November 19, 2021 Share Posted November 19, 2021 Seems right that he was found not guilty of at least 3-4 of the charges present, but for the life of me I can't figure out why the charge of illegal possession of a firearm by a minor was dropped. Link to comment
teachercd Posted November 19, 2021 Share Posted November 19, 2021 11 minutes ago, Lorewarn said: Seems right that he was found not guilty of at least 3-4 of the charges present, but for the life of me I can't figure out why the charge of illegal possession of a firearm by a minor was dropped. How does that work for kids that hunt? Is that why they have to take the Hunter safety class or something? Link to comment
nic Posted November 19, 2021 Share Posted November 19, 2021 1 hour ago, knapplc said: Please. This takes zero mental effort, and half a second of googling. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/18/us/politics/senate-intelligence-russian-interference-report.html https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/03/connections-trump-putin-russia-ties-chart-flynn-page-manafort-sessions-214868/ https://swalwell.house.gov/issues/russia-trump-his-administration-s-ties It beggars belief that anyone who wants to be taken seriously in political discussions would so blithely dismiss known facts. If you don't know, it's because you don't want to know. After years of investigation what did Mueller prosecute Trump for again? We are finding that the media is starting to retract stories on this. This is just beginning of that process. Give Durham more time. Mueller caught a few crooked people lying and hammered them. I do remember Mueller reporting on Russian interference in the 2016 elections. Stuff like trying to hack voting machines and setting up competing protests for opposing sides using social media. Russia promoting discord in our nation sounds about right. Also looks like they succeeded. As for Swalwell, he slept with a Chinese spy while on the intelligence committee. I trust him as much MGT and her ridiculous conspiracy theories. 5 Link to comment
Guy Chamberlin Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 4 hours ago, nic said: I don’t remember all the details. We’re police present when all this went down? Did any see this kid running around with an AR? It seems like they would have stopped and disarmed him at the least. It baffles me that he was even there, and I agree there should be some consequences. I think the prosecution screwed up. Yeah you missed a big part of that story. The police were everywhere that night, and even shared water with the armed white vigilantes. After Kyle Rittenhouse had killed two people, he was holding up his AR-15 and trying to surrender to the police. They ran right past him as they pursued protesters. There’s footage. It was all over the news. 1 Link to comment
Fru Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 3 hours ago, Apathy said: Couldn’t the same thing be said for the rioters….umm I mean “peaceful” protestors? If they weren’t there rioting burning the community up nothing would’ve happened. Couldn’t the same thing be said for the POS’s that assaulted Kyle and tried grabbing his gun while pointed their weapon at Kyle? Had they not chased after him, assaulted him with their legs and skateboard while trying to disarm Kyle while pointing a gun at him as we was fleeing toward safety, this wouldn’t have happened. It goes both ways The only reason this went to trial was because of the wide spread coverage CNN, MSNBC, ABC, etc of misinformation of said incident. The misinformation of supposedly facts the lame stream media fed the nation which most of the left gobbled up turned out to be lies when presented in court. Cause that’s what the left does Yup, it goes both ways. When people hear gunshots and see a guy running around with an AR15, one could argue they “feared for their lives” and acted to stop it. 1 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 3 hours ago, nic said: After years of investigation what did Mueller prosecute Trump for again Mueller entered the proceeding believing he couldn't charge a sitting president. Good try. Keep defending TFG and pretending to be unbiased. 1 Link to comment
knapplc Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said: Yeah you missed a big part of that story. "missed" 2 Link to comment
nic Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 1 hour ago, Guy Chamberlin said: Yeah you missed a big part of that story. The police were everywhere that night, and even shared water with the armed white vigilantes. After Kyle Rittenhouse had killed two people, he was holding up his AR-15 and trying to surrender to the police. They ran right past him as they pursued protesters. There’s footage. It was all over the news. Ok. It’s been too long, but now that mention it, I do remember hearing he tried to surrender to police during this trail. Crazy running past a dude with an AR. Link to comment
nic Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 8 minutes ago, knapplc said: Mueller entered the proceeding believing he couldn't charge a sitting president. Good try. Keep defending TFG and pretending to be unbiased. He said he could not exonerate Trump. Thought he also said he couldn’t prove it. Not sure why he believes he could not prosecute him. Why not do it now if the evidence is there? What is TFG? I am pretending to be unbiased? Everyone is biased. 3 Link to comment
Apathy Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 4 hours ago, Fru said: Yup, it goes both ways. When people hear gunshots and see a guy running around with an AR15, one could argue they “feared for their lives” and acted to stop it. That would be believable had Kyle not run toward the cops and I’m pretty sure those gunshots were behind Kyle. One could even argue that they were directed at Kyle 3 2 1 Link to comment
Lorewarn Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 10 hours ago, nic said: After years of investigation what did Mueller prosecute Trump for again? Mueller didn't prosecute Trump. 6 hours ago, nic said: He said he could not exonerate Trump. Thought he also said he couldn’t prove it. Not sure why he believes he could not prosecute him. Why not do it now if the evidence is there? What is TFG? I am pretending to be unbiased? Everyone is biased. re: "He said he could not exonerate Trump. Thought he also said he couldn’t prove it." He never specifically said either of those things. He did say that, "“[a] statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.”, as well as, “investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.” He also spent 200 pages describing, “numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. ... a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. ... a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations [against the Clinton Campaign].” re: "not sure why he believes he could not prosecute him". Mueller was bound by the DoJ's policy at the time that that the sitting president can't be charged with a crime, so Mueller's report didn't make an effort to reach a legal conclusion, nor did he think it was appropriate to even accuse Trump of committing said crime, in order not to (as is quoted in the report), "“preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct". re: "Why not do it now if the evidence is there?" If you're asking about Mueller, he's retired. If you're asking about anyone else, great question that is it's completely separate topic. Also, just so we're crystal clear, the FBI's investigation started before and unrelated to the Steele dossier. It began in July 2016 after they got intel related to Papadopolous telling a foreign gov. that the Trump campaign had received dirt on Hillary, and the Wikileaks release of stolen DNC emails. 3 1 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 20, 2021 Author Share Posted November 20, 2021 Biased fact checkers in action 1 1 Link to comment
Scarlet Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 The irony of Trumpists pretending to take the moral high ground by accusing anybody of spreading lies and disinformation. It's almost as ironic as the same suburban white guys dismissing claims of racism. How would they know? 2 1 Link to comment
Archy1221 Posted November 20, 2021 Author Share Posted November 20, 2021 It’s almost as ironic as the Bidenist suburban guys claiming racism in regards to everything going on in the world. 1 1 Link to comment
Enhance Posted November 20, 2021 Share Posted November 20, 2021 22 hours ago, Lorewarn said: Seems right that he was found not guilty of at least 3-4 of the charges present, but for the life of me I can't figure out why the charge of illegal possession of a firearm by a minor was dropped. IIRC that all came down to state statutes. That law only applies to a minor in possession of a gun with a certain barrel length and they have to be in non compliance with some other statute. Nobody disputed the barrel length of Rittenhouse's gun so the judge dropped the charge. Link to comment
Recommended Posts