|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On August 16 2017 13:44 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:40 Introvert wrote:
Some people in this thread were giving props to GOP lawmakers, which is a smallish class. But then there are those like that NYT reporter who said it was probably just for a future presidential run. I don't think that's an appropriate thing for that reporter to have said (though I haven't chased the quote) but it seems like small potatoes. Show nested quote +I never said the entire left was condemning the entire right. But it must be agreed upon that the right and conservatives are being tarred with this, not just Trump (See:Danglars). I mean if we can't it wouldn't surprise me, I suppose. The members of the right and conservatives who aren't condemning Trump's position are probably getting tarred with it. Beyond that, you are yet to advance any argument that convinces me that I "must agree" with your position.
Well we could look back in this very thread, but that's fine (or anytime a conservative talks about immigration they called racist and xenophobic). But I didn't expect as much.
If you like we can revisit this in 1.5 years when the entire Republican party will be (probably) smeared with this. I mean they will, but it's a question of will it stick.
|
On August 16 2017 13:45 NewSunshine wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:33 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:26 Logo wrote:On August 16 2017 13:23 m4ini wrote:Link i just posted shows the entire situation where he accelerated. Yeah, the video shows pretty clearly that he wasn't surrounded by people and just trying to make his way through a crowd.
It's absolutely mind-bending to me how you could come to any other conclusion than this being deliberate. This is like fucking brainwashed level of idiocy. You can also see clearly from the car backing up that there was no one before the crowd, no bats, no whatever else is being peddled as a dumb excuse. The street is empty except for the crowd ahead. He also rammed into additional cars that were in the crowd making it doubly obvious he wasn't trying to get through the crowd. There were guys with bats that charged his car after he hit people, but that's besides the point. Because when a violent racist runs 20 people down with his car, you just let him do it. Seriously, why the fuck would you point that out?
Plansix -- you should have enough legal training to know why I pointed out the weapons and then also said it was besides the point. Care to explain it to the kind gentleman?
|
On August 16 2017 13:45 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:40 Plansix wrote:On August 16 2017 13:33 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:26 Logo wrote:On August 16 2017 13:23 m4ini wrote:Link i just posted shows the entire situation where he accelerated. Yeah, the video shows pretty clearly that he wasn't surrounded by people and just trying to make his way through a crowd.
It's absolutely mind-bending to me how you could come to any other conclusion than this being deliberate. This is like fucking brainwashed level of idiocy. You can also see clearly from the car backing up that there was no one before the crowd, no bats, no whatever else is being peddled as a dumb excuse. The street is empty except for the crowd ahead. He also rammed into additional cars that were in the crowd making it doubly obvious he wasn't trying to get through the crowd. There were guys with bats that charged his car after he hit people, but that's besides the point. The video that m4ini posted still doesn't show quite what I am looking for. When that video starts, people are already screaming, suggesting that stuff has already happened. However, what this guy's defense lawyer is not going to like is that the footage seems to show 1) the guy slow down before accelerating into the crowd, and 2) no one is chasing him with weapons or otherwise before he hits people. Just to be clear, this is completely justified and there is no reason they shouldn't do this after he ran down 20 people. And the man was a violent Nazi lover. And we know this because he school teachers and criminal record of domestic abuse back this up. Did you know his disabled mother once locked herself in the bathroom bathroom because she yelled at him to stop playing video games and he became violent? https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/judge-denies-bail-for-man-accused-of-ramming-car-into-charlottesville-protesters/2017/08/14/2177a028-80fd-11e7-ab27-1a21a8e006ab_story.html?utm_term=.acadcaf663bf&xcv I mean, there's no denying that he's a nazi, there's plenty of pictures of him posing with other, uhm.. "men", i guess. It's kinda interesting to see what kinda people become nazis in the US. Like this pudding bodied virgin, next to plenty of other retarded people running around with stupid haircuts, white poloshirts and cargopants. I mean.. Poloshirts? Really? edit: ![[image loading]](https://c.o0bg.com/rf/image_960w/Boston/2011-2020/2017/08/13/BostonGlobe.com/National/Images/1608a8e1-e691-4483-9b75-ff504a3d1838.jpg)
These new Nazi uniforms do suck. But that is the exact sort of fragile masculinity I expect from racists and Nazis. After the racism comes the sexism, because these clowns are soft and fragile in the worst way possible. And those people live to keep everyone else under their thumb.
|
On August 16 2017 13:47 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:44 ZeaL. wrote:On August 16 2017 13:21 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:18 m4ini wrote:On August 16 2017 13:14 xDaunt wrote:
Is there a video showing the car before the guy gunned it and rammed the crowd? Yes. edit: don't go there, there's no ground for you or that argument to stand on. There's videos showing the car completely free accelerating into the crowd. Post a link. The only videos that I've seen show the car already at speed plowing into the car. I want to see what was going on at the point of acceleration. This post reeks so much of desperation to avoid the mental gymnastics required to hold your position. You clearly have no fucking idea what my position is. Just stay out of this one.
Clarify then, because that's what your statement comes off like honestly.
|
On August 16 2017 13:51 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:47 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:44 ZeaL. wrote:On August 16 2017 13:21 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:18 m4ini wrote:On August 16 2017 13:14 xDaunt wrote:
Is there a video showing the car before the guy gunned it and rammed the crowd? Yes. edit: don't go there, there's no ground for you or that argument to stand on. There's videos showing the car completely free accelerating into the crowd. Post a link. The only videos that I've seen show the car already at speed plowing into the car. I want to see what was going on at the point of acceleration. This post reeks so much of desperation to avoid the mental gymnastics required to hold your position. You clearly have no fucking idea what my position is. Just stay out of this one. Clarify then, because that's what your statement comes off like honestly.
No, I want to give Plansix (or someone else) an opportunity to do it first, because there are certain posters in this thread who need to be embarrassed.
|
2774 Posts
On August 16 2017 13:45 m4ini wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:40 Plansix wrote:On August 16 2017 13:33 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:26 Logo wrote:On August 16 2017 13:23 m4ini wrote:Link i just posted shows the entire situation where he accelerated. Yeah, the video shows pretty clearly that he wasn't surrounded by people and just trying to make his way through a crowd.
It's absolutely mind-bending to me how you could come to any other conclusion than this being deliberate. This is like fucking brainwashed level of idiocy. You can also see clearly from the car backing up that there was no one before the crowd, no bats, no whatever else is being peddled as a dumb excuse. The street is empty except for the crowd ahead. He also rammed into additional cars that were in the crowd making it doubly obvious he wasn't trying to get through the crowd. There were guys with bats that charged his car after he hit people, but that's besides the point. The video that m4ini posted still doesn't show quite what I am looking for. When that video starts, people are already screaming, suggesting that stuff has already happened. However, what this guy's defense lawyer is not going to like is that the footage seems to show 1) the guy slow down before accelerating into the crowd, and 2) no one is chasing him with weapons or otherwise before he hits people. Just to be clear, this is completely justified and there is no reason they shouldn't do this after he ran down 20 people. And the man was a violent Nazi lover. And we know this because he school teachers and criminal record of domestic abuse back this up. Did you know his disabled mother once locked herself in the bathroom bathroom because she yelled at him to stop playing video games and he became violent? https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/judge-denies-bail-for-man-accused-of-ramming-car-into-charlottesville-protesters/2017/08/14/2177a028-80fd-11e7-ab27-1a21a8e006ab_story.html?utm_term=.acadcaf663bf&xcv I mean, there's no denying that he's a nazi, there's plenty of pictures of him posing with other, uhm.. "men", i guess. It's kinda interesting to see what kinda people become nazis in the US. Like this pudding bodied virgin, next to plenty of other retarded people running around with stupid haircuts, white poloshirts and cargopants. I mean.. Poloshirts? Really?
Man come on, "Hitlerjugend" haircuts are legit! When actually pulled off properly I suppose.
|
On August 16 2017 13:49 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:45 NewSunshine wrote:On August 16 2017 13:33 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:26 Logo wrote:On August 16 2017 13:23 m4ini wrote:Link i just posted shows the entire situation where he accelerated. Yeah, the video shows pretty clearly that he wasn't surrounded by people and just trying to make his way through a crowd.
It's absolutely mind-bending to me how you could come to any other conclusion than this being deliberate. This is like fucking brainwashed level of idiocy. You can also see clearly from the car backing up that there was no one before the crowd, no bats, no whatever else is being peddled as a dumb excuse. The street is empty except for the crowd ahead. He also rammed into additional cars that were in the crowd making it doubly obvious he wasn't trying to get through the crowd. There were guys with bats that charged his car after he hit people, but that's besides the point. Because when a violent racist runs 20 people down with his car, you just let him do it. Seriously, why the fuck would you point that out? Plansix -- you should have enough legal training to know why I pointed out the weapons and then also said it was besides the point. Care to explain it to the kind gentleman?
Your sentences was so unclear that I couldn't tell if you were referencing the fact that he hit them with the car or the bats. I spent a good 3 minutes look at at it too. Maybe we are all stupid here. And I am not really sure what the legal argument you are trying to make is. I don't know if if you are this unclear in your pleadings or you are a couple beers in, but maybe try the good fashion numbered paragraph format.
Edit: to be clear, I am desperately hoping you are not trying to justify his actions or claim it wasn't intentional. If you are just trying to formulate the legal defense, you may want to clarify.
|
On August 16 2017 13:53 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:51 m4ini wrote:On August 16 2017 13:47 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:44 ZeaL. wrote:On August 16 2017 13:21 xDaunt wrote:On August 16 2017 13:18 m4ini wrote:On August 16 2017 13:14 xDaunt wrote:
Is there a video showing the car before the guy gunned it and rammed the crowd? Yes. edit: don't go there, there's no ground for you or that argument to stand on. There's videos showing the car completely free accelerating into the crowd. Post a link. The only videos that I've seen show the car already at speed plowing into the car. I want to see what was going on at the point of acceleration. This post reeks so much of desperation to avoid the mental gymnastics required to hold your position. You clearly have no fucking idea what my position is. Just stay out of this one. Clarify then, because that's what your statement comes off like honestly. No, I want to give Plansix (or someone else) an opportunity to do it first, because there are certain posters in this thread who need to be embarrassed.
You're trying to form a legal defence for him, or figure out what it'd look like.
Man come on, Hitlerjugend haircuts are legit! When actually pulled off properly I suppose.
You know what's funny? I actually wanted to link a picture of the Hitlerjugend here, showing that this puddingmonster has nothing to do with them, but in all fairness, the Hitlerjugend isn't really comparable. They were kids, these are >30 year old "men".
|
If I can take a stab in the dark. Without the before proof that he was indeed all alone before ramming into the crowd, a good defense lawyer can make it seem that he indeed was, trying to get away. And that the people ran over by his car were unfortunate. He was fearing for his life and made a reckless decision to speed ahead.
They could plead it down to manslaughter instead of premeditated murder.
|
On August 16 2017 13:56 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
If I can take a stab in the dark. Without the before proof that he was indeed all alone before ramming into the crowd, a good defense lawyer can make it seem that he indeed was, trying to get away. And that the people ran over by his car were unfortunate. He was fearing for his life and made a reckless decision to speed ahead.
They could plead it down to manslaughter instead of premeditated murder.
Not gonna happen, not on that base anyway. There's too much evidence to the contrary, including multiple eye witnesses who saw him back up to get a longer "run up".
|
On August 16 2017 13:49 Odawg27 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:25 Introvert wrote:On August 16 2017 11:42 Odawg27 wrote:On August 16 2017 11:17 Introvert wrote:On August 16 2017 10:42 Nebuchad wrote:On August 16 2017 10:17 Introvert wrote:On August 16 2017 10:11 Wulfey_LA wrote:On August 16 2017 10:04 Introvert wrote:Actually, I think most of the conservatives in this thread and elsewhere feel like this: + Show Spoiler +which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this. How about you actually make that argument? Lots of conservatives are tried to make the "b-b-b-b-but Antifa/Alt-Left" argument stick. Why don't you actually pony up some real evidence of violence at Charlotesville that was Antifa induced. And then you need to make the critical second part of the argument: that antifa is linked to the broader Left/Dems. We have the video from VICE. We have lots of news reports. Pony up the evidence that Antifa violence was anything comparable to the armed beatings that the racists were handing out in Virginia. Then pony up evidence linking Antifa back to the broader Left/Dems. This wasn't explicitly about Charlotesville either. If people calmed down for 3 seconds and just took the time to read Tfw you post about the right's response to nazis being perceived as not enough right after a nazi terrorist attack and people don't have the reading comprehension not to assume you're talking about the attack. With the exception of the president the right's response has been fine. A large exception. But even then we have a problem of lumping "alt-right" with everyone else, which is very intentional. On August 16 2017 10:43 Odawg27 wrote:On August 16 2017 10:37 Introvert wrote:On August 16 2017 10:22 Odawg27 wrote:On August 16 2017 10:04 Introvert wrote:Actually, I think most of the conservatives in this thread and elsewhere feel like this: + Show Spoiler +which is how politics today works. And Trump is not the right person to deal with this. Except what's going on is this: Violent, hateful rhetoric from Unite the Right protesters. Documented attacks and vile chants and statements from those protesters. A few scuffles between protesters and counter-protesters. A Unite the Right protester drives his car into a group of peaceful counter-protesters at high speed killing 1 and injuring 19. Most people: "Nazis are bad!" Trump and many on the far right: "Whoa, many sides are at fault for violence here!" Most people: "wait, what? What about the Neo-nazis and white supremacists?" Trump and many on the far right: "Stop trying to shut down free speech and the first amendment. The left is oppressive and wrong. A lot of those protesters were good people." We already knew this, but it's unfortunate to see that fully reading and comprehending what was written is still a challenge here. Ok, I'm not sure what you're talking about. Do you believe the tweet from Walsh is correct? Not only that conservatives feel this, but they *should* feel this way because it's true that's what's happening? They should, because this is exactly what is happening. Are you serious? That's *not* what's happening at all. No one is claiming 100% innocence without provocation. Not only that, but the right (including Trump and this tweet) aren't leading with "Nazis are bad". They're leading with "All sides have blame" and "Yeah, but what about the violent, hateful left" (btw very little proof of that, and nothing anywhere near the hateful, vile rhetoric and actions by the Unite the Right protesters). Oh and the few that may be saying that first line; it's usually "Nazis are bad, but look at how bad the protesters on the left is, they have such a huge problem." In fact I was discussing that with another poster on here earlier who used that argument. But it is. The most this thread can come up with about left-wing violence is "at least they are only vandals." That's not even true, as we've seen in places like Sacramento or DC. I mean in the past few months we are 1 for 1, DC shooter and car terrorist. But I don't know what world you are living in where this isn't being used to tar the whole right. And it's the final part that's the most important. Anything you say in response gets you labeled as an apologist. Even though everyone on the right is and always does come out in the strongest possible terms against these racists. Just pointing out that these two racially charged movements feed off of each other is enough for damnation. The "left-wing violence" was covered ad nauseam on all news networks. The politicians on both sides, especially the left, condemned the action and did what President Trump didn't. They didn't talk about how terrible the other side was with their violent tendencies or problems. They condemned and shut down violence from their side. There also wasn't a rally where the left chanted about killing other ethnicities or the superiority of the white race before he went to do it. There is no tarring of the whole right. People are taking issue with Trump's inability to strongly condemn the neo-nazis and white supremacists at that rally. They're also taking issue with Nazis and white supremacists and the people on the far right who are attempting to say "but the violent left/antifa", which is seen as an argument to make what happened in Charlottesville okay. Otherwise they'd just say "Nazis are bad" and the left goes "they are" and that would be that.
In this very thread people were playing down the left side because they are "only vandals" that are "protesting police brutality."
A few things are being conflated here, but I will say that if the bolded part were it I'd be right there with you. But the theme of that tweet is correct. Righty does something bad, other righties condemn, lefties do something bad, righties condemn, righties called racist sympathizers.
|
United States42008 Posts
|
I took a strong stance about left wing extremism here, wasn't called racist sympathizer.
edit: @above, yeah.. The fact that "running over protesters" was already a big meme in certain circles doesn't help the defence either.
|
On August 16 2017 13:49 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:44 Aquanim wrote:On August 16 2017 13:40 Introvert wrote:
Some people in this thread were giving props to GOP lawmakers, which is a smallish class. But then there are those like that NYT reporter who said it was probably just for a future presidential run. I don't think that's an appropriate thing for that reporter to have said (though I haven't chased the quote) but it seems like small potatoes. I never said the entire left was condemning the entire right. But it must be agreed upon that the right and conservatives are being tarred with this, not just Trump (See:Danglars). I mean if we can't it wouldn't surprise me, I suppose. The members of the right and conservatives who aren't condemning Trump's position are probably getting tarred with it. Beyond that, you are yet to advance any argument that convinces me that I "must agree" with your position. Well we could look back in this very thread...
That's exactly my point - I have been reading this thread and I have not seen any indication that anybody on the rightwing side of politics is being meaningfully tarred unless they (a) defended the Nazis et cetera. or (b) defended Trump not condeming the Nazis et cetera.
As such, I expect you to either advance evidence that your statement is true, or retract your statement. We cannot proceed with reasonable conversation while leaving a point like this unsettled.
|
I wonder what the chances are Trump tweets something about how the Russians fought the Nazis in WW2, so it's absurd how he can be accused of sympathizing with both Nazis and Russians.
|
On August 16 2017 13:33 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:26 Logo wrote:On August 16 2017 13:23 m4ini wrote:Link i just posted shows the entire situation where he accelerated. Yeah, the video shows pretty clearly that he wasn't surrounded by people and just trying to make his way through a crowd.
It's absolutely mind-bending to me how you could come to any other conclusion than this being deliberate. This is like fucking brainwashed level of idiocy. You can also see clearly from the car backing up that there was no one before the crowd, no bats, no whatever else is being peddled as a dumb excuse. The street is empty except for the crowd ahead. He also rammed into additional cars that were in the crowd making it doubly obvious he wasn't trying to get through the crowd. There were guys with bats that charged his car after he hit people, but that's besides the point. The video that m4ini posted still doesn't show quite what I am looking for. When that video starts, people are already screaming, suggesting that stuff has already happened. However, what this guy's defense lawyer is not going to like is that the footage seems to show 1) the guy slow down before accelerating into the crowd, and 2) no one is chasing him with weapons or otherwise before he hits people.
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/tes7v73.png)
I don't really see how it would be possible to argue that he did anything other than intentionally gun it into a crowd of people. Behind, and around the car there's pretty clearly a fairly wide margin of space when the car first comes into view, and when the video starts, the car's not moving particularly quickly. Pretty hard to call this other than some degree of murder.
|
On August 16 2017 14:01 TheTenthDoc wrote:
I wonder what the chances are Trump tweets something about how the Russians fought the Nazis in WW2, so it's absurd how he can be accused of sympathizing with both Nazis and Russians.
Would be funny considering the soviets/nazis were actually allied for a while, cough.
|
On August 16 2017 13:56 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
If I can take a stab in the dark. Without the before proof that he was indeed all alone before ramming into the crowd, a good defense lawyer can make it seem that he indeed was, trying to get away. And that the people ran over by his car were unfortunate. He was fearing for his life and made a reckless decision to speed ahead.
They could plead it down to manslaughter instead of premeditated murder.
Not bad.
|
United States42008 Posts
On August 16 2017 13:59 Aquanim wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:49 Introvert wrote:On August 16 2017 13:44 Aquanim wrote:On August 16 2017 13:40 Introvert wrote:
Some people in this thread were giving props to GOP lawmakers, which is a smallish class. But then there are those like that NYT reporter who said it was probably just for a future presidential run. I don't think that's an appropriate thing for that reporter to have said (though I haven't chased the quote) but it seems like small potatoes. I never said the entire left was condemning the entire right. But it must be agreed upon that the right and conservatives are being tarred with this, not just Trump (See:Danglars). I mean if we can't it wouldn't surprise me, I suppose. The members of the right and conservatives who aren't condemning Trump's position are probably getting tarred with it. Beyond that, you are yet to advance any argument that convinces me that I "must agree" with your position. Well we could look back in this very thread... That's exactly my point - I have been reading this thread and I have not seen any indication that anybody on the rightwing side of politics is being meaningfully tarred unless they (a) defended the Nazis et cetera. or (b) defended Trump not condeming the Nazis et cetera. As such, I expect you to either advance evidence that your statement is true, or retract your statement. We cannot proceed with reasonable conversation while leaving a point like this unsettled.
This. Nobody is mad at Rubio or Cruz who both immediately and clearly condemned this terrorist attack. Although you'd think that would be a minimum standard we should be able to hold everyone to.
|
On August 16 2017 14:03 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 16 2017 13:56 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:
If I can take a stab in the dark. Without the before proof that he was indeed all alone before ramming into the crowd, a good defense lawyer can make it seem that he indeed was, trying to get away. And that the people ran over by his car were unfortunate. He was fearing for his life and made a reckless decision to speed ahead.
They could plead it down to manslaughter instead of premeditated murder. Not bad.
He is already charged with manslaughter, so they will need to plea lower. But his criminal history and associations make that case almost impossible to make. Motive and intent are easy to prove, especially if he was prolific on any message board.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/j3Z3fY1.jpg)
https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4b6gwl/just_drove_through_arizona_yesterday_and_i_didnt/![[image loading]](http://usa.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2017/08/anti-protest-meme.jpg)
![[image loading]](https://pics.me.me/dontbelateforhwork-get-the-protestor-plow-blm-protesters-no-worries-3095778.png)
![[image loading]](https://pics.onsizzle.com/Facebook-becf0c.png)
![[image loading]](https://pics.me.me/protesters-rose-22311-you-mean-speed-bumps-ghost-americans-defending-6672213.png)
