About Those J6 “People”

[jacksonlamb]

The riots happened not when "Civil rights" were violated, but when blacks criminals were killed by police, rightfully OR wrongfully.

Because of race mongering by the vile legacy media.

And the dems.

I am not threatening you, you drooling moron. I am pointing out the obvious consequences of your actions and hoping you wake the **** up, before it is too late.

Did I mention that you are an asshole?

God closed that door on you, shrub. Quit jiggling the door handle.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Michael Byrd made a bad decision to shoot randomly into the mob from his limited sight position behind other officers and he ended up killing the woman who was doing the most to try to shut down the mob violence.

I see now you're just posting BS. Byrd did not shoot randomly into the mob. His gun was trained on the windows being broken out, prepared to shoot at anyone attempting to breach the barricade in order to keep that mob out. Because of his actions, no one got inside the House chamber while there were still members of Congress inside.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Witnesses lied on the stand and the judge allowed them to get away with it.

Sure.

 

[Correll]

No. The protests (that in some cases turned into riots) happened because the killing of that black man was egregiously wrong and nearly everyone could see that

"some cases" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

 

[Correll]

And they were treated just the same as all the other rioters at the time.
....

Not true. For one thing, there was not a massive nationwide manhunt for everyone there.

That right there is a huge difference.

 

[Correll]

What you refuse to admit. Is they were all treated equally, based on the evidence they had against them.
The rioters were a prosecutors nightmare, because the police had little if any actual evidence of who committed what crime. Ten people standing around a burning police car means nothing, without having evidence of who set the car on fire.

Where are the massive efforts to track down the organizers?

 

[Correll]

You're being delusional and paranoid again. This is not political, and they're not planned.

I don't think that it's a far left political goal to stop the police from mistreating black people.

It's not like the Jan 6th riot where they used violence to achieve and actual political goal of stealing an election for a politician.

You brought it up, so I responded.

Different jurisdictions handle different crimes differently.

What is swept under the rug is that there were a lot of prosecutions for acts of violence in 2020 summer riots. You guys pretend that no one was prosecuted.

It's not. These complaints were brought up in court and failed for pretty obvious reasons that you refuse to accept.

"Someone" implies that there is a single individual or organization making these decisions, and that's not the case. It's pretty absurd to claim that the DoJ is constrained in what they can prosecute because the local prosecutor in Portland didn't do something.

They really aren't. The civil rights issue is definitely not clearly explained. You said "equal protection" and got really pissy when I asked you to explain it further because a single incomplete sentence does not constitute an argument.

Moreover, when you force me to make assumptions about your arguments, then you complain that I'm lying about them.

No matter what I do, you've created a situation where you complain either way.

You are just stonewalling, not giving an inch, even when you are clearl spouting complete shit.

 

[Correll]

It was political only in the sense of people were protesting against police abuse. Like Marener pointed out, they weren't protesting for democrats or against republicans.

I see that you asserted it. I can also see that your claim is clearly false.

....huh, are you pretending to forget... I mean "forget" about the antifa riots, hundreds of them, that are clearly a far left, if not explicitly marxist orginization?

 

[Marener]

You are just stonewalling, not giving an inch, even when you are clearl spouting complete shit.

You are just demanding I accept your assertions without making a coherent argument.

You’re lazy and entitled.

 

[Political-Junkie]

Not true. For one thing, there was not a massive nationwide manhunt for everyone there.

That right there is a huge difference.

Were BLM rioters stupid enough to post videos of themselves committing crimes?

Also, BLM didn't attack Congress.

 

[Correll]

You are just demanding I accept your assertions without making a coherent argument.

You’re lazy and entitled.

My argument is clear and coherent. You are just saying shit, to justify your stonewalling.

You are being an asshole, in support of the use of political violence and police oppression.

 

[Political-Junkie]

I see that you asserted it. I can also see that your claim is clearly false.

....huh, are you pretending to forget... I mean "forget" about the antifa riots, hundreds of them, that are clearly a far left, if not explicitly marxist orginization?

Thanks for abandoning your complaints about BLM and switching to Antifa. By doing so, you just agreed with me that the BLM riots were not about politics.

 

[Marener]

My argument is clear and coherent. You are just saying shit, to justify your stonewalling.

You are being an asshole, in support of the use of political violence and police oppression.

It’s not and you constantly make excuses to avoid having to make it clear and coherent.

You ignore any counter argument.

There’s nothing here because you believe what you’re told and expect everyone else to believe what they’re told.

 

[postman]

Not even a unanimous rejection of an appeal of a wrongful conviction will somehow miraculously transform a wrongful conviction into a just conviction.

Every convict claims he was wrongfully convicted.

Your view completely undermines our justice system, our constitution and our democratic republic.

And Chauvin had the best defense that money could buy.
Derek Chauvin's criminal defense was primarily funded by the Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association, which provided $1 million in legal coverage.

 

[postman]

Michael Byrd made a bad decision to shoot randomly into the mob from his limited sight position behind other officers and he ended up killing the woman who was doing the most to try to shut down the mob violence.

She was breaking and entering.

 

[postman]

Witnesses lied on the stand and the judge allowed them to get away with it.

The judge doesn't make determinations of fact, he makes determinations of law.
It's up to the jury to decide if a witness is telling the truth or not.
Besides, if a witness was lying, why didn't Chauvin's $1 million defense prove it?

 

[jacksonlamb]

Not true. For one thing, there was not a massive nationwide manhunt for everyone there.

That right there is a huge difference.

They were local riots, goofball. 14 to 16 thousand were arrested at the local level. Many went to jail as they should have.

 

[Marener]

Where are the massive efforts to track down the organizers?

Because there barely were any organizers and those that had a role in organizing anything didn’t break any laws.

 

[postman]

I see now you're just posting BS. Byrd did not shoot randomly into the mob. His gun was trained on the windows being broken out, prepared to shoot at anyone attempting to breach the barricade in order to keep that mob out. Because of his actions, no one got inside the House chamber while there were still members of Congress inside.

They always ignore the fact that the woman was breaking and entering into a secret service protectorate zone.

 

[postman]

Were BLM rioters stupid enough to post videos of themselves committing crimes?

Also, BLM didn't attack Congress.

They also weren't a member of the "stupid criminals" club.

Man charged after social media post shows him driving Lamborghini 213 mph on I-465

A 33-year-old man is charged with reckless driving more than two months after posted a video on social media showed him driving more than 200 mph on Interstate 465 on the southwest side.

www.wrtv.com

Man charged after social media post shows him driving Lamborghini 213 mph on I-465

INDIANAPOLIS — A 33-year-old man is charged with reckless driving
A video uploaded on social media on Nov. 18 allegedly showed the driver stop in the left lane of I-465 near mile marker 9.
The man then accelerated rapidly and the Lamborghini's speedometer reached 213 mph before he decelerated. I

In an interview with police, the man said the Lamborghini cannot go 213 mph and that the video was "fake and deceptively edited." However, court documents state the Lamborghini model can reach approximately 211 mph.

Another person to post video of himself breaking the law