aristocrat Posted August 21, 2022 Posted August 21, 2022 1 hour ago, BillStime said: what’s the about elections? How bout defund the police? No bail? 2
Doc Posted August 21, 2022 Posted August 21, 2022 3 hours ago, aristocrat said: what’s the about elections? How bout defund the police? No bail? The above is why I tell people to shut it when they bring up Repubs challenging the results of 2020. And when they bring up J6, I ask them how that ever could have been planned and/or an insurrection if they didn't bring weapons and left before finishing the job?
BillsFanNC Posted August 23, 2022 Author Posted August 23, 2022 Search of CNN and MSNBC on current trial = bupkis. NYT = last coverage 8/10. WaPo to their somewhat credit has current coverage. Then you read the article and they go to the tired "pounce" language. It would be nice if they could come up with a novel rhetorical device every now and then. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/deliberations-start-for-2-men-charged-in-gov-whitmer-plot/2022/08/23/c8aff026-22e1-11ed-a72f-1e7149072fbc_story.html Prosecutors said some of the best evidence against Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. came from their own words, either written by them or secretly recorded by FBI agents and informants during weeks of surveillance in three states. Defense lawyers, meanwhile, pounced on the FBI in their closing arguments, linking any scheme to rogue operatives, not a band of anti-government rebels. 1
BillStime Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 6 minutes ago, DRsGhost said: Search of CNN and MSNBC on current trial = bupkis. NYT = last coverage 8/10. WaPo to their somewhat credit has current coverage. Then you read the article and they go to the tired "pounce" language. It would be nice if they could come up with a novel rhetorical device every now and then. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/deliberations-start-for-2-men-charged-in-gov-whitmer-plot/2022/08/23/c8aff026-22e1-11ed-a72f-1e7149072fbc_story.html Prosecutors said some of the best evidence against Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. came from their own words, either written by them or secretly recorded by FBI agents and informants during weeks of surveillance in three states. Defense lawyers, meanwhile, pounced on the FBI in their closing arguments, linking any scheme to rogue operatives, not a band of anti-government rebels. YOU CHANGED THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD AGAIN - per Julie? lmao
BillStime Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 12 minutes ago, DRsGhost said: Search of CNN and MSNBC on current trial = bupkis. NYT = last coverage 8/10. WaPo to their somewhat credit has current coverage. Then you read the article and they go to the tired "pounce" language. It would be nice if they could come up with a novel rhetorical device every now and then. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/deliberations-start-for-2-men-charged-in-gov-whitmer-plot/2022/08/23/c8aff026-22e1-11ed-a72f-1e7149072fbc_story.html Prosecutors said some of the best evidence against Adam Fox and Barry Croft Jr. came from their own words, either written by them or secretly recorded by FBI agents and informants during weeks of surveillance in three states. Defense lawyers, meanwhile, pounced on the FBI in their closing arguments, linking any scheme to rogue operatives, not a band of anti-government rebels. Meanwhile on Fox - cringe:
TH3 Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 2 hours ago, BillStime said: YOU CHANGED THE TITLE OF THIS THREAD AGAIN - per Julie? lmao i mean - to be fair ....Julie has an extensive backgound as a ....housewife...to back up her points. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 20 minutes ago, TH3 said: i mean - to be fair ....Julie has an extensive backgound as a ....housewife...to back up her points. I have wondered “who is this Julie Kelly that our Trumpy posters seem obsessed with?” So I finally took a few minutes and discovered that she is, in fact, a proud “stay at home mom” and sometime food writer. Good enough to be some people’s Svengali I guess. Now I see she’s opining on jury instructions. Should I add some fresh cracked black pepper to those instructions, Julie?
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: This thread didn’t age well. It depends on your perspective. If justice was served, it was served. Still, lots of people have lots of complaints about the police, law enforcement tactics, systemic and widespread issues in the criminal justice system. It's not uninteresting that the defendants were not convicted the first time around by THAT jury of peers, and the government opted to load up and try again. Eventually, when the weight of the government is coming for you, it seems logical it will eventually win. People seem worried only about overreach and injustice when they don't like the defendants. I haven't followed this story all that closely for a couple reasons. First, this whole concept of entrapment always makes me wonder. I can't imagine a time when a reasonable person would find themselves entangled in anything that can be referred to as a "plot" absent a reasonable explanation of innocent activity. If your buddy, we'll call him Sam, calls and asks if you can stop by the auto shop to pick up an alternator because you drive by, you do, and it turns out it's a bag of plutonium, I can see how you might have thought it was an alternator. Much beyond that, words like "kidnapping", "storming", and "zip ties for Gretchen" would be off-putting. Second, anyone who would voluntarily enter into a kidnapping type relationship resulting in hearing this crazy authoritarian woman yammering on and on should be imprisoned on on principle alone. She's a nut.
wnyguy Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 5 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I have wondered “who is this Julie Kelly that our Trumpy posters seem obsessed with?” So I finally took a few minutes and discovered that she is, in fact, a proud “stay at home mom” and sometime food writer. Good enough to be some people’s Svengali I guess. Now I see she’s opining on jury instructions. Should I add some fresh cracked black pepper to those instructions, Julie? So you're saying a mere "housewife" is incapable of sharing an informed educated opinion on events? Seems to me she is well informed on these issues despite having to do dishes and cook supper.
The Frankish Reich Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 Just now, wnyguy said: So you're saying a mere "housewife" is incapable of sharing an informed educated opinion on events? Seems to me she is well informed on these issues despite having to do dishes and cook supper. I am saying that here she is clearly out of her depth. She also says she worked as a political consultant (I haven’t checked her references, but I assume she’s not making it up), so I imagine her take on campaigns, elections, etc, may be worth listening to. But jury instructions? The application of the federal rules of evidence? Umm, no.
wnyguy Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I am saying that here she is clearly out of her depth. She also says she worked as a political consultant (I haven’t checked her references, but I assume she’s not making it up), so I imagine her take on campaigns, elections, etc, may be worth listening to. But jury instructions? The application of the federal rules of evidence? Umm, no. And yet here you are.
The Frankish Reich Posted August 23, 2022 Posted August 23, 2022 3 minutes ago, wnyguy said: And yet here you are. True. Because: I am a lawyer. I have proposed and objected to jury instructions. And I have other relevant experience. You’re welcome. (but please, keep listening to your proud housewife instead!)
Recommended Posts