 
     |
| Derick Chauvin (Page 3/6) |
|
maryjane
|
JUN 28, 08:33 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by sourmash:
Yeah, I'm calling bullcrap on that, maryjane. You're presenting collective guilt by conjured association. Do you post that as bait or, just a social justice warrior at heart, you are. I guess I shouldn't label you and instead give the option to ID yourself instead.
The trial would definitely have had a different outcome with a different, sequestered jury and alternate locale. It would be a hung jury.
The White jurors would still fear for their lives from the Black jurors who would dox them after trial for a targetted assault by BLM. America is mob ruled now.
Got a link to this 'quote'?
|
|
I do, and if you are a military veteran, vetted as such, and registered on that website (and confirmed by the mods as not a poser)
you can view it for yourself.
Do you meet those qualifications?
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
JUN 28, 08:53 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Pretty sure I said "one side or another". Did you fail to read what you underlined or just decide to ignore it?
The irony? Maybe if politicians were held accountable for such things they'd keep their traps shut (reference guilt or innocent) and not try to influence justice regardless of their perspective of the crime...
Rams
|
|
So your answer to my question is 'yes'. (I did read and understand your statement. I just wanted you to confirm that you believe elected/appointed officials should have no 1st amendment rights or right to their own opinions and the right to state them publicly, including but not limited to chiefs of police, county sheriffs, judges around the country and any other personnel elected or appointed.)
I do agree, that Maxine Waters went over the line with her comments, but it is within her 1st amendment right to do so.
We have seen countless public officials state that certain indicted police officers have done no wrong (in their opinion) and I've yet to see a single person here make a big deal about it. Certainly never seen a thread started about that demographic and their statements.
Now, don't be shy..tell us why that is.
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JUN 28, 08:56 AM
|
|
I called your bluff. Post a link and the rest will take care of itself.
Did you mean poseur?1
|
|
|
blackrams
|
JUN 28, 09:01 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
I do agree, that Maxine Waters went over the line with her comments, but it is within her 1st amendment right to do so.
|
|
Glad to see we agree. As you have stated many times, there are consequences to our decisions or something very close to that. I didn't suggest or say they didn't have the right but, I do believe they should be held accountable and face the consequences. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Just as you are trying to hold several folks responsible for their postings here, politicians should be held accountable for their statements, positions and voting records. Thanks for your input. 
Rams[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-28-2021).]
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JUN 28, 09:31 AM
|
|
I haven't had success getting him to substantiate his claims. Like AOC saying something anti-semitic. Or verifying his claim above.
This is what you see people on the left do. It's a key trait. You normally don't see right wingers do it.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
JUN 29, 11:16 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by sourmash:
I called your bluff. Post a link and the rest will take care of itself.
Did you mean poseur?1 |
|
You asked a question.
I answered it.
You did not answer the one I asked.
|
|
|
2.5
|
JUN 29, 11:35 AM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by Rickady88GT:
If politicians were held to the same standards that Police are held to, we would be in a different World. Politicians can't even stay in the professional standards that fast food employees have to follow |
|
Sadly... they also guide what police do. 
|
|
|
|
sourmash
|
JUN 29, 12:00 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:You asked a question.
I answered it.
You did not answer the one I asked.
|
|
When you provide the link I asked for you will repair some of the lost credibility and we'll go forward. You won't because that isn't important to you.
|
|
|
|
maryjane
|
JUN 29, 12:32 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by blackrams:
Glad to see we agree. As you have stated many times, there are consequences to our decisions or something very close to that. I didn't suggest or say they didn't have the right but, I do believe they should be held accountable and face the consequences. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Just as you are trying to hold several folks responsible for their postings here, politicians should be held accountable for their statements, positions and voting records. Thanks for your input.
Rams
|
|
As long as it is accomplished thru the legal elective process that put them in that position to begin with.
Many politicians over the decades have made statements similar, including several US presidents.
It's often a partisan 'conundrum.
The same folks that say Donald Trump's words on Jan 6 were protected under the 1st amendment, also loudly claim Water's words should not be and that her's border on sedition of the judicial process. and vice versa.
The Speech and Debate Clause (Art 1 Sec 6) protection does extend beyond what is said on the floors of congress, but speech that is not an integral part of the legislative process is viewed by the courts as not being protected by Speech and Debate Clause.
It would be up to the DoJ to determine if either Trump's words on Jan6 or Water's words on April 19 violate US statutes, and/or up to the constituents of congressional members to decide if the should lose their jobs. Waters is not my representative, I don't live or vote in California so I really don't give much of a crap what she says.
|
|
|
|
ls3mach
|
JUN 29, 01:07 PM
|
|
| quote | Originally posted by maryjane:
As long as it is accomplished thru the legal elective process that put them in that position to begin with.
Many politicians over the decades have made statements similar, including several US presidents.
It's often a partisan 'conundrum.
The same folks that say Donald Trump's words on Jan 6 were protected under the 1st amendment, also loudly claim Water's words should not be and that her's border on sedition of the judicial process. and vice versa.
The Speech and Debate Clause (Art 1 Sec 6) protection does extend beyond what is said on the floors of congress, but speech that is not an integral part of the legislative process is viewed by the courts as not being protected by Speech and Debate Clause.
It would be up to the DoJ to determine if either Trump's words on Jan6 or Water's words on April 19 violate US statutes, and/or up to the constituents of congressional members to decide if the should lose their jobs. Waters is not my representative, I don't live or vote in California so I really don't give much of a crap what she says. |
|
Hurts my feelings you and Ron didn't help with my chicken hawk death thread. Figured that be both your wheelhouse. I'll sleep tonight, but it'll be after I cry myself that way.
|
|
|
|