|
They should have went after them for vandalism, they wouldn't be able to get out of that.
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
Snowden continues to be an idiot: https://twitter.com/snowden/status/703733273504018432
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Do we have any proof at all that this was jury nullification or is that just goon speculation? I think we can classify it as informed best guess. There are literal weeks of video of the armed occupation and millions of dollars in damage. None of the facts are reasonably disputable. botany posted:I think anybody actually claiming jury nullification on the Bundy trial should at the very least explain what charge they think the defendants are actually guilty of and why. The charges in this trial were conspiracy to impede federal officers and possession of firearms in a federal facility. There are literal weeks of video of the Bundy militia doing both of those things. It's not a complicated charge. I think anyone maintaining this isn't an example of nullification needs to explain what possible rationale there was to find these men innocent of those specific charges. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 13:59 on Oct 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Zanzibar Ham posted:They should have went after them for vandalism, they wouldn't be able to get out of that. Well, you see, only black people can be vandals and hoodlums, and the truth is in the middle you see, and- 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:55
|
|
|
Radish posted:My personal hot take is that the people who said that this election has actually been very consistent are right. The people who were looking for reasons to legitimize their hatred of Hillary and desperate need to vote Republican will latch on to any excuse to do so and if it wasn't the emails it would be something else. The emails could be pages of butter cookie recipes and they would be saying she's in the tank for Big Sugar and "can't be trusted." At the end of the day it's become clear that the state of the US is that white Republicans will vote for anyone it totally doesn't matter and the media has to legitimize them or face massive blow back. If they had nominated Vermin Supreme (a superior candidate) we would be talking about how boots on heads is a clearly presidential look. The big thing we'll see is how much the fact that a lot of Trump's support is 'eeeggghhh Supreme Court' and how much his lack of organization fails to get those people to the polls. The fact that the race has varied between "Clinton winning but relatively normally" and "Clinton blowout" shows the GOP's voters ARE wavering, just they keep coming back. Who knows how firm they are?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:57
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think we can classify it as informed best guess. There are literal weeks of video of the armed occupation and millions of dollars in damage. None of the facts are reasonably disputable. Was it really a conspiracy if they did it openly tho
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Was it really a conspiracy if they did it openly tho This is irrelevant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Was it really a conspiracy if they did it openly tho I realize you're joking but . . . yes? quote:The general federal conspiracy statute is 18 U.S.C. § 371. This statute criminalizes both conspiracies to defraud the United States as well as conspiracies to violate any other provision of federal law. By the text of that provision you can see how the two elements work. The statute says that it is a crime, https://www.whitecollarcrimeresources.com/federal-conspiracy-charges.html There's really no orthodox interpretation of the law under which these guys weren't guilty as all hell.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Geostomp posted:If this race somehow manages to become close after all this, I will be utterly disgusted with this country as a whole in ways I haven't been since the Bush administration. I think we are headed for an Obama 2012 map that trades IA for NC. If it were not for the Access Hollywood tape we would probably be looking at a 2 point race. I also think the threat of right wing terrorism is overblown. There will be some vandalism at worst, and a lot more chatter and interest in militia groups, but we are not going to see any violence. The people who threaten violence aren't people who are down and out with nothing to lose. Sure some nutcases might plot some terrorist activity, like those 3 guys who were arrested a few weeks ago, but I'd be surprised if there weren't dozens of threats such as those that get nipped in the bud, and it just doesn't make the news.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 13:59
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Was it really a conspiracy if they did it openly tho I'll quote the Wikipedia article on the legal definition of criminal conspiracy, because I'm feeling lazy: Wikipedia posted:In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at some time in the future.[1] Criminal law in some countries or for some conspiracies may require that at least one overt act must also have been undertaken in furtherance of that agreement, to constitute an offense. There is no limit on the number participating in the conspiracy and, in most countries, no requirement that any steps have been taken to put the plan into effect (compare attempts which require proximity to the full offence). For the purposes of concurrence, the actus reus is a continuing one and parties may join the plot later and incur joint liability and conspiracy can be charged where the co-conspirators have been acquitted or cannot be traced. Finally, repentance by one or more parties does not affect liability – unless, in some cases, it occurs before the parties have committed overt acts – but may reduce their sentence. (emphasis mine, source) I'm pretty sure that taking over Malheur constitutes an "overt act... undertaken in furtherance of that agreement [to overthrow the government]." Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 14:03 on Oct 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
botany posted:I think anybody actually claiming jury nullification on the Bundy trial should at the very least explain what charge they think the defendants are actually guilty of and why.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
I keep hearing Republicans talk about "SUPREME COURT  " as their sheepish excuse for voting for an obviously incompetent, huckster, sexual predator but I pisses me off just as much even though Democrats can be accused of doing the same thing. There's no attempts at the legislative level to stop them from voting, tell them what to do with their bodies, stop them from marrying who they want, make it so they can be abused by their employers, etc. I know the top guys want the supreme court on their side to rule in favor of giving their donors lots of tax breaks and government hand outs while loving their employees but what does Joe Republican get out of it? A Republican court is a real and dangerous threat to lots of disadvantaged groups but a Democratic one isn't going to affect their life at all.Like I know that it's 100% stupid culture bullshit where their guns will be taken and babies will be torn from wombs but it still pisses me off since it's really about them just trying to gently caress over everyone else yet again and they won't lose anything if Hillary appoints a Justice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:03
|
|
|
Hitler B. Natural posted:Can white people be convicted of anything in America? Yes if Trump is elected!  
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
Here's my hot take. It disturbs me that one bad outcome leads to a bunch of goons echoing the sentiments of Trump supporters and going "The system's broken! Burn it all down!" but with the justice system instead of our election process. Yes, I realize the justice system has a lot of flaws, particularly when it comes to racial disparity of sentencing, but I don't think sitting around going "gently caress juries, they're worthless" is helping anything. If someone wants to propose a substantial positive change they'd like to see in the justice system, I'm all ears.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:02
|
|
|
Technically they weren't charged with attempting to overthrow the government, just with impeding federal officials. The simple fact that the staff of the federal wildlife reserve couldn't go to work and count bird eggs all day or whatever they did there normally, that alone is federal officials being impeded. WampaLord posted:Here's my hot take. It disturbs me that one bad outcome leads to a bunch of goons echoing the sentiments of Trump supporters and going "The system's broken! Burn it all down!" but with the justice system instead of our election process. As far as that goes I'll agree that there's no good solution for the jury nullification issue. It's even a boon in some situations (see: Kevorkian) but this, like 1940's southerners refusing to convict for lynching, is the other side of the coin.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:Here's my hot take. It disturbs me that one bad outcome leads to a bunch of goons echoing the sentiments of Trump supporters and going "The system's broken! Burn it all down!" but with the justice system instead of our election process. A hot take indeed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
botany posted:I think anybody actually claiming jury nullification on the Bundy trial should at the very least explain what charge they think the defendants are actually guilty of and why. I'm not claiming jury nullification but they weren't leaving their guns outside when they hosed around inside the building(s) on the refuge so that's  18 USC Sec. 930 - possession of a firearm in a federal facility. The broke the poo poo out of those bird cameras, that's 18 USC Sec. 1361 - destruction of federal property. I'm sure there's others regarding the damage they did to the buildings by just being slobs inside of them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Snowden continues to be an idiot: Hieronymous Alloy posted:I think we can classify it as informed best guess. There are literal weeks of video of the armed occupation and millions of dollars in damage. None of the facts are reasonably disputable. No there isn't. There's footage of their lovely occupation, but you can't exactly capture intent to impede federal officers on camera. There's also the argument that if their intent was to impede the Bureau employees from doing their job, they would have picked a place to occupy that actually had people working in it. As it is literally nobody was impeded, so if you're trying to convict them on that charge you have to argue that despite their intent they were too goddamn stupid to go about it in a reasonably way. It's like trying to convict somebody for attempted bank robbery for donning a ski mask and running into the nearest Toys'R'Us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:04
|
|
|
I am really loving angry those pieces of poo poo aren't in prison. That's some Grade A BULLSHIT.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:06
|
|
|
WampaLord posted:If someone wants to propose a substantial positive change they'd like to see in the justice system, I'm all ears. Professional juries? Also, make it so positions like county sheriff or judge are not decided by a general vote. These should be professionally hired or appointed positions like most other seats in the public sector and the bureaucracy, not voted on by the general electorate. e: And for the record, I'm not advocating for throwing out jury nullification because it was used for "the Other Team." It is indeed a double-edged sword, and I wish more goons would realize that instead of taking it for granted as a weapon for their side. Ideally, I'd believe in an objective sense of justice and a criminal justice system that serves society fairly, regardless of whether the outcome is the one you personally like or not. That being said, our criminal justice is deeply flawed and far from perfect. Patently bullshit results resulting from white militia spite thumbing their collective nose at the rule of law and being legitimized for it should absolutely be called out; and quite frankly, you and other goons are reaching and exaggerating when you start saying "well, this is just like what the Trumpists do, you hypocritical goons!!  ", maybe in some attempt to feel morally superior to the DnD rabble.Long story short, I'm putting my foot down and sticking to my case for calling out the acquittal as bullshit.  e2: Let me remind you all that this does set precedent and will embolden other white militia members (ie racists) to feel emboldened that they can damage property, intimidate others with violence, and maybe even hurt or kill people now and get off with impunity because they were active in a community with white militia sympathizers and are likely to be nullified if tried in court. That is some scary and terrifying poo poo to me. Teriyaki Koinku fucked around with this message at 14:18 on Oct 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:05
|
|
|
botany posted:I mean that's flippant but not entirely wrong. It's not like the Clinton campaign tries to hide its connection to Goldman Sachs. It's easy to capture intent when you have weeks of webcam streams of explicitly stated intent. And there were people working in the refuge -- park officials, many of whom were unable to attend work for weeks at a time, and whose work was thus impeded. Don't be as dumb as this jury was and try to change the obvious facts by using your brain as a blunt instrument.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:07
|
|
|
Inferior Third Season posted:I wish cops encountering black children at the playground were held to the same strict standard that you hold random internet posters to on a dead comedy forum. FAUXTON posted:I'm not claiming jury nullification but they weren't leaving their guns outside when they hosed around inside the building(s) on the refuge so that's quote:The broke the poo poo out of those bird cameras, that's 18 USC Sec. 1361 - destruction of federal property. They were not charged for that though. edit: Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's easy to capture intent when you have weeks of webcam streams of explicitly stated intent. And there were people working in the refuge -- park officials, many of whom were unable to attend work for weeks at a time, and whose work was thus impeded. The sheriff in the case testified otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:I am really loving angry those pieces of poo poo aren't in prison. That's some Grade A BULLSHIT. Oh they still are. They're wanted on other charges in Nevada for other incidents and will face trial on those also.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:08
|
|
|
Aerox posted:Apologies for the super long post, but I spent a bit of time this afternoon looking into this whole case and what happened and here's where I've kind of ended up. My job involves a whole lot of jury work but that said, we won't know exactly what happened unless they do juror interviews. UFOTofuTacoCat posted:Regarding the Bundy Occupation trial, I served on a jury recently and it was extremely eye opening how difficult it is to even understand what you are supposed to be doing and how to move through the process as a layman... I don't buy this. Leaving aside the conspiracy charges, they clearly stole federal property. In particular Ryan Bundy stole a BLM truck and there was video evidence of them using said truck during the occupation. The defense's argument was that they were only borrowing it and intended to return it with "a full tank of gas". That was the actual defense, Bundy admitted he'd taken the car but tried to redefine the meaning of "theft" on the fly. This was actually the only charge on which the final jury was divided, as presumably a few members felt that excusing outright theft was a bridge too far. As it turns out, most of the jurors had no problems with this. I understand that the law is complicated, but people get convicted of stealing cars every single day. The jury was nullifying, the property theft verdict makes it completely clear. In this light it's disingenuous to blame the not guilty verdicts on the prosecutors or the presentation of the charges, or the complexity of the law. None of that mattered, this was an ideological verdict. edit: I got confused by all the obviously criminal behaviour, apparently it was Medenbach that stole the truck. Nocturtle fucked around with this message at 14:12 on Oct 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
botany posted:I mean that's flippant but not entirely wrong. It's not like the Clinton campaign tries to hide its connection to Goldman Sachs. Well, yeah, but if you're going to talk about their puppetmasters, the correct comparison would be an election between Russian Fascists and White Nationalists vs. Goldman Sachs I'd vote for Goldman Sachs in such a scenario.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:10
|
|
|
botany posted:
Well, sortof. quote:One of the occupiers, Kenneth Medenbach, was found not guilty of theft of a government-owned truck. The jury was hung on the charge of theft of government cameras against Ryan Bundy. So they were charged on theft of government cameras but the jury somehow hung on that charge. To my mind that's more evidence of nullification.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:Well, yeah, but if you're going to talk about their puppetmasters, the correct comparison would be an election between Russian Fascists and White Nationalists vs. Goldman Sachs Well yeah, me too  Nocturtle posted:I don't buy this. Leaving aside the conspiracy charges, they clearly stole federal property. In particular Ryan Bundy stole a BLM truck and there was video evidence of them using said truck during the occupation. The defense's argument was that they were only borrowing it and intended to return it with "a full tank of gas". That was the actual defense, Bundy admitted he'd taken the car but tried to redefine the meaning of "theft" on the fly. This was actually the only charge on which the final jury was divided, as presumably a few members felt that excusing outright theft was a bridge too far. As it turns out, most of the jurors had no problems with this. I thought he was specifically not acquitted of that charge, the jury did not reach a verdict.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:11
|
|
|
Hi guys. So, I have a question. Early voting is up up up right now among the democrats. Polls are based off LV screens. Voters who have voted cannot, by definition, be included in a poll about which way people are going to vote. Doesn't that mean we'd expect Clinton's advantage to get tighter as people early vote? I'm not trying to UNSKEW UNSKEW UNSKEW, I just think I have a logical case here and want to see if I'm crazy or anyone else sees this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:Oh they still are. They're wanted on other charges in Nevada for other incidents and will face trial on those also. And they could face state level charges too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
botany posted:I mean that's flippant but not entirely wrong. It's not like the Clinton campaign tries to hide its connection to Goldman Sachs. Has there been a presidential candidate not tied to Goldman Sachs? The guy leading Trump's fundraising efforts is second generation Goldman Sachs royalty. You know who else paid Hillary for a speech? Gap, A&E and Xerox. Is the election really a choice between Trump and affordable clothing, or bad TV, or printers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:14
|
|
|
botany posted:I mean that's flippant but not entirely wrong. It's not like the Clinton campaign tries to hide its connection to Goldman Sachs. Trump hired a former Goldman Sachs partner back in May as his campaign finance chair, so it's actually entirely wrong?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
botany posted:Not if the firearms are incident to hunting or other lawful purposes. You'd have to show that they brought them specifically for the purpose of an armed occupation rather than because they think they're cowboys. This was incidentally the defense argument, as far as I can tell. Who the gently caress hunts indoors
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:13
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:I don't buy this. Leaving aside the conspiracy charges, they clearly stole federal property. In particular Ryan Bundy stole a BLM truck and there was video evidence of them using said truck during the occupation. The defense's argument was that they were only borrowing it and intended to return it with "a full tank of gas". That was the actual defense, Bundy admitted he'd taken the car but tried to redefine the meaning of "theft" on the fly. This was actually the only charge on which the final jury was divided, as presumably a few members felt that excusing outright theft was a bridge too far. As it turns out, most of the jurors had no problems with this. Yeeup. The law is complicated but it's not so complicated in can't be explained to jurors, and there was a massive amount of video evidence in this particular trial. If the jurors didn't understand the charges and acquitted on that basis then the only explanation short of nullification is absolute prosecutorial incompetence. Federal prosecutors are generally pretty competent so I'm inclined to think that wasn't it. I also think it's possible that some of the jurors were intimidated into acquittal; there were armed protests outside the trial every day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:Hi guys. So, I have a question. I believe they're still polling people and just asking if they already voted, because who's a more likely voter than someone who already early voted? The thing is some of the variance in the polls is based on differences in likely voter screening. Our big hope should be that the +10/+12 ones are more accurate in who's likely to vote this year. Basically, the main outcomes likely right now are 'normal but comfortable victory' or 'Actually Clinton landslide.'
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
Donald Trump's infrastructure plan: $1 trillion in roads for free!quote:The idea is straightforward enough. Trump would push Congress to authorize $137 billion in tax credits for construction companies looking to build new toll roads, toll bridges or any other sort of infrastructure project that has a revenue stream attached to it. (The revenue is critical, in that it generates a return to the private builder of the project.) By the way, the plan's tax revenue estimates assume that nobody working on the construction projects was paying income tax. Luigi Thirty fucked around with this message at 14:17 on Oct 28, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
botany posted:Well yeah, me too Yes that was my actual point. It was such straightforward theft and he was so obviously guilty that even some of the nullifiers couldn't vote not guilty, maybe out of some nagging concern about "rule of law". The fact that he wasn't found guilty tells you all you need to know about the overall disposition of the jury. Why do you think he wasn't convicted on this charge?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:15
|
|
|
botany posted:Not if the firearms are incident to hunting or other lawful purposes. My bro did you even watch any of the web streams as it happened?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:16
|
|
|
The U.S. economy expanded at a 2.9% annual rate in the third quarter of 2016, the fastest economic growth in two years.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:Hi guys. So, I have a question. Early voting is not really a good predictor of where the race stands as it could simply be people who usually vote on election day voting early instead (especially in a year like this where people are sick of the election and want it to end as quickly as possible).
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 16:12 |
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Who the gently caress hunts indoors And those are also not hunting rifles
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:19
|
|