Sujet : Re: NBC Historian Takes Media's "Bloodbath" Insanity To A Whole New Level
De : fredp1571 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (FPP)
Groupes : rec.arts.tvDate : 26. Mar 2024, 13:16:28
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Ph'nglui Mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh Wgah'nagl Fhtagn.
Message-ID : <utuaqc$1p9hm$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.10.0
On 3/23/24 11:40 AM, moviePig wrote:
On 3/23/2024 10:22 AM, NoBody wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 06:57:24 -0400, FPP <fredp1571@gmail.com> wrote:
>
On 3/21/24 12:51 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 3/21/2024 11:04 AM, FPP wrote:
On 3/20/24 10:42 PM, moviePig wrote:
On 3/20/2024 7:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
On Mar 20, 2024 at 3:15:33 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman""
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
BTR1701 <atropos@mac.com> wrote:
Mar 19, 2024 at 8:26:17 PM PDT, super70s
<super70s@super70s.invalid> wrote:
On 2024-03-20 02:46:53 +0000, BTR1701 said:
What if the cops held the door open for them. Is that still
unauthorized?
>
Lie: The rioters were invited into the Capitol by police
>
There is clear video of the police holding the door open for
people who were
later found guilty of unauthorized entry.
>
How does that logically hold up?
>
With that evidence, why wasn't the charge of unauthorized entry
withdrawn or dismissed? Seems to me that both the prosecution and
judge
were obligated to do so.
>
One would think. Obviously this only applies to a very small number
of people
who were there that day but for those to whom it did apply, it seems
that as a
matter of law one cannot be guilty of unauthorized entry if the
people in
charge of authorizing you let you in.
>
Indeed. Not if one remains in the area he was let into.
>
>
Jesus, pig... you don't believe that shit do you? Judges and juries
sure didn't.
>
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/04/politics/fact-check-capitol-insurrection-january-6-lies/index.html >
>
>
I believe pretty much that whole article, including the admission that a
couple of police might've allowed a couple of rioters in. But what I
was addressing is the fact that allowing them into the building doesn't
equate to allowing them into Pelosi's office to shit on her desk.
>
Breaking in the windows with a battering ram, and smashing the doors
down in kind of negates any "they allowed them in" argument.
Throwing aside cops and throwing barricades down is the same.
>
If you walked in a broken door or window, just a few feet away from
where rioters were beating and brutalizing uniformed police officers, I
don't see ANY argument to be made that you weren't aware that what you
were doing was illegal.
>
So you agree that the BLM "protests" were an insurrection. Good to
know. Now if I could only find your posts decrying those events and
demanding arrests.
>
I *know* they must be out there somewhere. Perhaps you could find and
repost a few of them for us?
Did you look under "Attempts To Undo A Presidential Election"?...
Protests against systematic murder of blacks by the State are different from trying to overthrow a government by force and violence.
-- "Thou shalt not make a machine in the likeness of a man’s mind." - OC Bible 25B.G.https://www.dropbox.com/s/ek8kap93bmk0q5w/D%20U%20N%20E%20Part%20II.jpg?dl=0Gracie, age 6.https://www.dropbox.com/s/0es3xolxka455iw/BetterThingsToDo.jpg?dl=0
Re: NBC Historian Takes Media's "Bloodbath" Insanity To A Whole New Level
Re: NBC Historian Takes Media's "Bloodbath" Insanity To A Whole New Level