Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Donald Trump defends size of his penis - CNNPolitics.comI didn't watch. What did he say?Test. Do you find it appropriate that president Trump talked about his penis size during the republican debates while children were watching? That is what the new republican party is about.Test. How often do you expose your genitalia to minors? That is what the new liberal party has advocated for.The republican party is full of authoritarians like this. They scream states rights when the far right protests. When the left protests it is profiling them all as criminals and arresting them.
A chump that thinks he is a big liberal man (hint, they don't exist). Sassy is a long time poster. Getting personal is considered a no. Kidnaping does not seem like an appropriate response. Additional violence? Sigh... bring it on.So don't protest violently. Duh
I'm going to find one of your kin
Drag him to a protest and knock out some pig
Then we'll see how easy that was
Vapid bitch
A chump that thinks he is a big liberal man (hint, they don't exist). Sassy is a long time poster. Getting personal is considered a no. Kidnaping does not seem like an appropriate response. Additional violence? Sigh... bring it on.So don't protest violently. Duh
I'm going to find one of your kin
Drag him to a protest and knock out some pig
Then we'll see how easy that was
Vapid bitch
Nothing surprising here. It is obvious to all sane people that LIbErals are aligned with criminals, if not criminals themselves. Also, that they are seldom very intelligent. Thus, it's not at all remarkable for one, on an open public forum, to threaten to commit kidnapping and assault.
1. Threatens to use force or violence-Threatening is not a crime until it happens. How do they determine what is a threat and what isn't a threat?
- Making a credible threat to commit a crime is indeed itself a crime, as Juicin might potentially soon learn the hard way.[/list
Just when you think the 4th Reich of the Republican party can't get any worse. Arizona comes up with this law. It's to oppress free speech in this country. Protesters can now be arrested and their property seized if a protest turns violent, even though they may not be involved in the violence.
"Arizona’s police officers will be able to arrest and seize the assets of any protest attendee, even before any crime or riot has taken place, under a new law voted through by state senators on Wednesday.
The legislation was originally established for racketeering but was expanded in definition to include rioting, allowing for the prosecution of everyone planned or participated in a protest that turns violent.
Democrats have criticized the bill, which allows demonstrators to be arrested and have their property seized. The legislation does not require discrimination as to who may have, for example, thrown a punch in a crowd or broken a window. As soon as a riotous action has occurred, all protesters are deemed broadly associated and therefore guilty.
Further to that, due to processes afforded authorities who investigate racketeering and the renewed definition of rioting, police are permitted to preemptively arrest those planning a protest."
New Arizona 'riot' law lets police arrest peaceful protesters—and seize their property
The 4th Reich of the Republican party is in full swing with Trump in office. Make certain they pay hell for it in 2018 and 2020.
Trump supporters want their own version of sharia law against anyone who dares to question their god emperor.
Setting cars on fire and smashing windows of businesses is free speech? Free speech is not a mandate to be heard nor should it infringe on the rights of others.
The republican president has appeared in porno films, is on his third marriage to a woman who poses nude, and talks about grabbing women by the pussy.
Republican values
I really don't like the idea of seizing property at all. Bad law that could end up taking away due process.
All for prosecuting rioters to the fullest extent of the law. You have a right to protest, there is no right to threaten, harm, or destroy property.
A chump that thinks he is a big liberal man (hint, they don't exist). Sassy is a long time poster. Getting personal is considered a no. Kidnaping does not seem like an appropriate response. Additional violence? Sigh... bring it on.So don't protest violently. Duh
I'm going to find one of your kin
Drag him to a protest and knock out some pig
Then we'll see how easy that was
Vapid bitch
Nothing surprising here. It is obvious to all sane people that LIbErals are aligned with criminals, if not criminals themselves. Also, that they are seldom very intelligent. Thus, it's not at all remarkable for one, on an open public forum, to threaten to commit kidnapping and assault.
Really--there is no one in this country that could possibly be as stupid as to fly over several qualified, competent candidates and land on Comrade Trump. Ignorance, anger, hate, division, bigotry, ...?
1. Threatens to use force or violence-Threatening is not a crime until it happens. How do they determine what is a threat and what isn't a threat?
- Making a credible threat to commit a crime is indeed itself a crime, as Juicin might potentially soon learn the hard way.[/list
No it's not. It's just words. It's not a crime to pick up a rock, it's only a crime when you hurl it at something or someone with intent to do harm. (They don't define what they consider "threat" is in this bill--making it extremely vague. Is carrying a pop bottle or can a threat? Is pulling out lipstick or powder from a purse considered a threat, etc. etc. etc.)
The bill was very poorly written.
Really all they needed to say is any person that is doing physical damage to property or persons is considered rioting. They tried to legalesssskt it to death, and have now wound up with a can of worms. Typical state legislator.
Trump is the religious right, they voted for him overwhelmingly. No morals yet yeah we actually care about god and stuff. What a bunch of hypocrites lol, the religious right is a joke, basically a scam nowThe republican president has appeared in porno films, is on his third marriage to a woman who poses nude, and talks about grabbing women by the pussy.
Republican values
Wow. YOu mean you suddenly realized that the Religious Right did not get their way this time?
This just hit you NOW?!
Trump is the religious right, they voted for him overwhelmingly. No morals yet yeah we actually care about god and stuff. What a bunch of hypocrites lol, the religious right is a joke, basically a scam nowThe republican president has appeared in porno films, is on his third marriage to a woman who poses nude, and talks about grabbing women by the pussy.
Republican values
Wow. YOu mean you suddenly realized that the Religious Right did not get their way this time?
This just hit you NOW?!
Arresting and seizing assets of protesters that aren't rioting, which most don't, is in violation of the 1st amendment. You'll note the article also states that police can arrest people for planning a protest.
There is no doubt that this is going to be challenged in court and immediately struck down, but again it shows the mindset of the 4th Reich of the Republican party. We are going to oppress free speech in order to protect the ASS CLOWN that Republicans have installed in the oval office is what this is about.
It won't be struck down. Despite your hysteria, laws against intent to riot and rioting are as old as America. Same kind of statute was used in Chicago to charge the rioters in '68. The asset forfeiture can't be applied to the actual rioters because they're broke losers. But the PLANNERS of the event, like the DNC and the Soros empire have deep pockets. The message is clear....come to Arizona planning a riot and we'll kick your ass and bankrupt your masters.
It will be struck down immediately.
1. What this bill is saying is that a bystander on the street who may not be involved in any protest, someone close throws a rock into the window, the bystander gets arrested and his property seized.
2. People out on a peaceful protest, one of them goes wild and and throws a brick through a window, they ALL get arrested and their property is seized.
This bill is not discriminating between those who are peacefully protesting and those who are committing the rioting.
Any JUDGE would see through this and pound it into the GROUND.
The stupidity from the 4th Reich of the Republican party, never ceases to amaze.
1 - the bill is stating that? Really?
Care to point out WHERE it states such a thing:
https://apps.azleg.gov/BillStatus/GetDocumentPdf/449438
2. Again, the bill is right there. Where is such a thing stated?
The relevent part of the bill as far as I can tell is the following:
4 13-1003. Conspiracy; classification
5 A. A person commits conspiracy if, with the intent to promote or
6 aid the commission of an offense, such person agrees with one or more
7 persons that at least one of them or another person will engage in conduct
8 constituting the offense and one of the parties commits an overt act in
9 furtherance of the offense, except that an overt act shall not be required
10 if the object of the conspiracy was to commit any felony [removed] ON the
11 person of another, or to commit an offense under section 13-1508, [removed]
12 13-1704 OR 13-2903.
4. "Racketeering" means any act, including any preparatory or
10 completed offense, that is chargeable or indictable under the laws of the
11 state or country in which the act occurred and, if the act occurred in a
12 state or country other than this state, that would be chargeable or
13 indictable under the laws of this state if the act had occurred in this
14 state, and that would be punishable by imprisonment for more than one year
15 under the laws of this state and, if the act occurred in a state or
16 country other than this state, under the laws of the state or country in
17 which the act occurred, regardless of whether the act is charged or
18 indicted, and the act involves [removed] ANY OF THE FOLLOWING:
19 (a) Terrorism, animal terrorism or ecological terrorism that
20 results or is intended to result in a risk of serious physical injury or
21 death.
22 (b) RIOT.
23 [removed] (c) Any of the following acts if committed for financial gain:
24 (i) Homicide.
25 (ii) Robbery.
26 (iii) Kidnapping.
27 (iv) Forgery.
28 (v) Theft.
29 (vi) Bribery.
30 (vii) Gambling.
31 (viii) Usury.
32 (ix) Extortion.
33 (x) Extortionate extensions of credit.
34 (xi) Prohibited drugs, marijuana or other prohibited chemicals or
35 substances.
36 (xii) Trafficking in explosives, weapons or stolen property.
37 (xiii) Participating in a criminal syndicate.
38 (xiv) Obstructing or hindering criminal investigations or
39 prosecutions.
40 (xv) Asserting false claims, including [removed] false
41 claims asserted through fraud or arson.
42 (xvi) Intentional or reckless false statements or publications
43 concerning land for sale or lease or sale of subdivided lands or sale and
44 mortgaging of unsubdivided lands.
45 (xvii) Resale of realty with intent to defraud.
S.B. 1142 - 6 -
1 (xviii) Intentional or reckless fraud in the purchase or sale of
2 securities.
3 (xix) Intentional or reckless sale of unregistered securities or
4 real property securities.
5 (xx) A scheme or artifice to defraud.
6 (xxi) Obscenity.
7 (xxii) Sexual exploitation of a minor.
8 (xxiii) Prostitution.
9 (xxiv) Restraint of trade or commerce in violation of section
10 34-252.
11 (xxv) Terrorism.
12 (xxvi) Money laundering.
13 (xxvii) Obscene or indecent telephone communications to minors for
14 commercial purposes.
15 (xxviii) Counterfeiting marks as proscribed in section 44-1453.
16 (xxix) Animal terrorism or ecological terrorism.
17 (xxx) Smuggling of human beings.
18 (xxxi) Child prostitution.
19 (xxxii) Sex trafficking.
20 (xxxiii) Trafficking of persons for forced labor or services.
21 (xxxiv) Manufacturing, selling or distributing misbranded drugs in
22 violation of section 13-3406, subsection A, paragraph 9.
And:
11 13-2903. Riot; classification
12 A. A person commits riot if, with two or more other persons acting
13 together, such person recklessly uses force or violence or threatens to
14 use force or violence, if such threat is accompanied by immediate power of
15 execution, which EITHER disturbs the public peace OR RESULTS IN DAMAGE TO
16 THE PROPERTY OF ANOTHER PERSON.
17 B. Riot is a class 5 felony.
*note - struck text has been replaced with [removed] by me as strike through is not an option here.
I think it is pretty clear that it refers to those that have intent and actually use violence to cause destruction. The conspiracy (the power that allows the arrest before the action) requires INTENT and that is clearly stated. The Riot requires that "such person recklessly uses force or violence or threatens to use force or violence." Again, pretty clear as far as I can tell.
"The stupidity from the 4th Reich of the Republican party, never ceases to amaze."
What amazes me is the propensity of people to make claims like the above based on what garbage they are fed rather than going to the actual source that is right there for everyone to see. Hell, we are almost 70 posts in and no one that I seen even bothered to look up what was actually passed. This is why the media, in its entirety, has been attacked and ignored as 'false' news. Almost everything they put out there is sensationalized garbage that is teetering on outright lies, even the 'reputable' sources, because sensationalism is what sells. Here is a small hint, whenever an article talks about a bill, the full text is readily available online.
The final paragraph of this bill is written very poorly & that's what all the huffpuff is about.
Riot; classification: A person commits riot if, with two or more other persons acting together, such person recklessly uses force or violence or threatens to use force or violence, if such threat is accompanied by immediate power of execution, which EITHER disturbs the public peace OR RESULTS IN DAMAGE TO THE PROPERTY OF ANOTHER PERSON.
1. Threatens to use force or violence-Threatening is not a crime until it happens. How do they determine what is a threat and what isn't a threat?
2. Disturbs the public peace--A peaceful protest could be considered disturbing the peace.
3. A person commits riot if, with two or more other persons acting together. They see one person throw a brick through a window how do they determine who the other two rioters are?
It's going to get hammered into the ground by the first District Court Judge.
