336 pgs of personal devaluation/ depreciation aimed at the OP.
0 pages of honest presentation of opposing facts, just more of the same ole bloated opinions.
Objective;
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Well I've not heard a breath of media on this.
The judge is a little bit unqualified yammering and stammering over statutes and precedent cases and losing his temper and shouting. Saying he does not believe the prosecutor should call for his ousting. Rittenhouse is a fake; doesn't know the differences between ammunition types, yet is packing a racked and loaded 223. Obviously he practiced his testimony over and over. None of this would have happened had he not been armed - 17 years old - immature at that.
336 pgs of personal devaluation/ depreciation aimed at the OP.
0 pages of honest presentation of opposing facts, just more of the same ole bloated opinions.
Still... under this onslaught of continuous belittling; the OP has remained a gentleman.
I may not agree with what you post Hempy McNoodle But... I certainly appreciate tenacity and that while the assailment of character,
childish name calling etc., goes on and on (ad nauseam), you Hempy... have not buckled nor stooped to their level.
I appreciate that this thread presents what is not found in MSM. Keeps me returning.
In the quest for information/ truth's etc., it is essential (IME) to look at several sources to KEEP an OPEN MIND/ evaluate/ access/ conclude.
I refuse to close my mind to only what is pushed by the status quo. Rarely has this type of forcing/ funneling/ bombarding info crowd been
shown to be "correct" when the dust finally settles.
Thx Hempy... stay the course
Objective;
(of a person or their judgment) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts.
Well I've not heard a breath of media on this.
The judge is a little bit unqualified yammering and stammering over statutes and precedent cases and losing his temper and shouting. Saying he does not believe the prosecutor should call for his ousting. Rittenhouse is a fake; doesn't know the differences between ammunition types, yet is packing a racked and loaded 223. Obviously he practiced his testimony over and over. None of this would have happened had he not been armed - 17 years old - immature at that.
the judge actually has a reputation for being a fair no nonsense judge. him standing up for the accused against a prosecutor who's infringing on the accused's rights, is how it actually should be. a prosecutor shouldn't even go after someone if he's not convinced of the persons guilt. when you have to break an accused constitutional rights to prosecute you are already on the wrong path. when in doubt you always give it to the accused.
but i do agree, him being there at 17 on the street with a weapon was fucking insane. but it seems rosenbaum being there with an illegal concealed pistol and pointing it at Kyle, also didnt help him not get shot.
The judge saying the word Victim is a loaded word and not saying the same for rioters is a huge prob. People will only see what side of the fence there on. All should only care 2 people were killed, and he maimed another for life.. He was not in any life or death situation. His tiny brain was not even close to mature enough to know the difference. Stop pretending he's an Adult. He prob hasn't even got his 1st BJ yet. He will learn how to do them quickly in prison .
As far as I know you cant kill people to protect property.
referring to them as victims undermines Rittenhouse's constitutional rights (innocent until proven guilty). Calling the rioters 'rioters' is a documented fact and since they aren't being charged (and in front of this particular judge) it is not a matter of innocent until proven guilty.
why are they not being charged? is it because just being at a disturbance does not make you a "rioter"? being shot by someone that had no business being there does make you a victim in many peoples eyes. rioting does not carry a death penalty to my knowledge. let's split the difference - you can call the victims "rioters" and i'll call the shooter a "killer". he DID kill them, right?
Only you see it that way Mcnoodle. Anyone harmed by Another is a Victim. As I said property damage doesnt give any the green light to kill them. Look up the law as to what you can do... They all tell you to let it happen and call the police. His idea of help was to murder 2 people.
Joe Biden overturned so many of Trump's EOs. Why not Executive Order 13848? 'Continuation' of a National Emergency (due to foreign interferrence in an election)? Are we in a national emergency?
When is Continuity of Governance engaged?
National Emergency?
No. They were attacking him w/ deadly weapons. Clear case of self defense. The lesser crimes are where things get complicated (i.e. should he have been there and should he have been armed). Ultimately, the 2nd Amendment is the issue and seems to be absolute and will "trump" any local firearm restrictions. This whole case is a major case in favor of upholding the 2nd Amendment. This case could set precedent for all sorts of firearm 'carry' laws. This case may single handedly overturn any and all local firearm restrictions and affirm the totality of the 2nd Amendment.
They are not going to legalize 17 year old vigilante justice.
And keeping people like Kyle on the street does not make the world a safer place. It sends a message to a lot of very screwed up and poorly informed individuals that they should also shoot people and essentially be judges themselves.