|
Perfectly Safe posted:Got to say, as a UK goon who followed the Malheur occupation religiously, I'm horrified and genuinely angry at the verdict here. This is essentially a theoretical faraway event for me, though - I can't begin to imagine how people in the US feel, but you all have my sympathy and internet goonhugs. Being in the UK this matters to you, as you also have sovcits in your midst
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 10:48 |
|
|
jBrereton posted:The guy who tried to flim flam the zim zam wasn't trying to defend himself lol it was road rage What is it with the alt right and cutesy bullshit phrases like this? Go gently caress off back to /pol/, garbage man. quote:"He said he was acting in self-defense and that Zimmerman had pointed a gun at him — a claim Zimmerman denied." hmmm yeah this sure seems like an implausible story given zimmerman's history and temperament
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:45
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Being in the UK this matters to you, as you also have sovcits in your midst UK sovcits are interesting, because the obsession with English common law makes more sense, but when they site things like the UCC (a US law), it's funny.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Being in the UK this matters to you, as you also have sovcits in your midst a billboard near me gets this quite a bit 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
ChristopherRobin posted:How much you want to bet this encourages the "armed insurrection" Trump people if/when he loses? This is what gets me. The whole affair would be a lot less frightening if we didn't have a sociopathic manchild calling for a revolution if he doesn't get to be godking of the USA. Jose posted:a billboard near me gets this quite a bit Clearly the solution I'm getting here is to refer to anyone who insists on this as "rear end in a top hat" since I'm not allowed to use their legal name.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Being in the UK this matters to you, as you also have sovcits in your midst I'm really glad that I don't have my job anymore where I dealt with sovcits constantly I'll just look back with fondness on having police kick in their barricades and move on with life because gently caress they're gonna be everywhere now
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 14:58
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:What is it with the alt right and cutesy bullshit phrases like this? Go gently caress off back to /pol/, garbage man. Appleton is like that dumped British guy stuck in the US who ended up living out of a car and thought he would be a hero by trying to steal a cop's gun to shoot Trump. A retard. Even if killing Zimmerman would be any justice for Trayvon Martin's death (and it isn't, there can be no justice for that), what would Appleton like to change that would be affected by a drive-by shooting of someone he'd apparently stalked before? Like does he think that would change the Stand Your Ground laws?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
Jose posted:a billboard near me gets this quite a bit I don't know what this means. Could you please explain further?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:08
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:Being in the UK this matters to you, as you also have sovcits in your midst We do - there are special snowflakes everywhere. What we don't really have is entire districts from which one might draw a jury that are sufficiently anti-government as to return a not guilty verdict for crimes that are as well-evidenced as these, for reasons (I suppose) of population density, political structure, and culture, among other things.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:09
|
|
|
So it turns out we were wrong and the sovcits were right.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
Jose posted:a billboard near me gets this quite a bit 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:10
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:lol dude just gtfo, you outed yourself as alt-right already
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:I don't know what this means. Could you please explain further? well if you can make sense of this word salad http://legalnamefraud.com/
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
WrenP-Complete posted:I don't know what this means. Could you please explain further? Explained by an actual lawyer, with some jokes: http://loweringthebar.net/2016/06/is-it-illegal-to-use-a-legal-name.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:11
|
|
|
This is how I felt after seeing that jury in Texas gave a "not guilty" verdict to Robert Durst.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:20
|
|
|
We may have lost the battle, but Hillary will win the war.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:33
|
|
|
Condiv posted:dude just gtfo, you outed yourself as alt-right already The proof? I used the phrase "flim flam the zim zam", which is not at all amusing and is a sign of being a fascist pepe.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
ChristopherRobin posted:How much you want to bet this encourages the "armed insurrection" Trump people if/when he loses? Honestly, that's the terrifying part. This is coming on the heels of Trump claiming that the election is rigged if he doesn't win and even encouraging voter intimidation. Knowledgeable people on the subject like our own Prester Jane (who has a history of eerily accurate predictions of these kinds of things thanks to her childhood being raised by people like them) have already predicted that a Trump loss is likely to see more incidents like Malheur or even the attempted immigrant bombing in Kansas. Now, the precedent this acquittal sets (and I know it's not a literal legal precedent, gently caress off with the semantics) will only add fuel to that fire. It combines the newfound bravery sovereign citizens and government protesters will feel from seeing their heroes get acquitted with the rage of their candidate losing the presidency, believing he only lost because the Democrats rigged the system. I not only won't be surprised if we see more right-wing terrorist attacks, I downright expect them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:38
|
|
|
jBrereton posted:That's it, the reason I am against drive-by assassination attempts by misguided idiots/killing mentally ill people over trespass and tax offences is because I love Trump. it is definitely not amusing to refer to a murderer and white supremacist by a cutesy pet name
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:45
|
|
|
Mirthless posted:it is definitely not amusing to refer to a murderer and white supremacist by a cutesy pet name Not even Charlie "the man" Manson? (Although he never actually killed anybody, did he?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:48
|
|
|
ChristopherRobin posted:How much you want to bet this encourages the "armed insurrection" Trump people if/when he loses? I'd like to see them try. It'd thin the herd pretty quickly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
Lol at the poor fuckers who took a plea deal. Who got the longest sentence from a deal? How bad was it, knowing now he would have been free.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:50
|
|
|
prefect posted:Not even Charlie "the man" Manson? His nickname is "chuck."
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Bombadilillo posted:Lol at the poor fuckers who took a plea deal. Think of how peeved Finicum’s ghost must be. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 15:56
|
|
|
They got off? Seriously? What the hell? I guess at least I can at least find solace in a ten-months-old "I told you so" to the people who thought the feds should have just charged in on day one because the charges would be a slam dunk, but drat, they were there for over a month and the jury still wouldn't let them stick? I hate juries
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:02
|
|
|
Maybe next time the US Attorneys might not try for a conspiracy charge "to impede federal employees" where the employees themselves testified that their bosses just told them to telecommute instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
do u know jenny posted:This is how I felt after seeing that jury in Texas gave a "not guilty" verdict to Robert Durst. i'd forgotten that. them being interview on the jinx was incredible
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
Justice was served and gently caress any fascist who thought the feds should have crushed a peaceful protest
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:16
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Maybe next time the US Attorneys might not try for a conspiracy charge "to impede federal employees" where the employees themselves testified that their bosses just told them to telecommute instead. Do conspiracy charges require the conspiracy to be successful? I thought conspiracy charges are about the plan and its intentions, rather than its result.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
Burt Sexual posted:Why would they let criminals that committed multiple federal and state crimes walk away? Theyre white isn't an answer lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:22
|
|
|
What about damages to the facility? Are they liable for any of that or is it up to the feds to pay for everything?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Justice was served and gently caress any fascist who thought the feds should have crushed a peaceful protest should've called in an air strike while we had the chance
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:27
|
|
|
Well at least they got tarp man
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Maybe next time the US Attorneys might not try for a conspiracy charge "to impede federal employees" where the employees themselves testified that their bosses just told them to telecommute instead. Their explicit purpose, stated on camera, was to stop the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge from doing its work. The charge was appropriate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
CrazyLittle posted:Maybe next time the US Attorneys might not try for a conspiracy charge "to impede federal employees" where the employees themselves testified that their bosses just told them to telecommute instead. What about the blatant property theft? Medenbach stole an actual truck and was found not guilty. The attorneys weren't the problem here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:What about the blatant property theft? Medenbach stole an actual truck and was found not guilty. The attorneys weren't the problem here. They were because they somehow let a jury of 11 sovcits plus one alternate sovcit get empaneled.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
R u saying that the system is Rigged? Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
Nocturtle posted:What about the blatant property theft? Medenbach stole an actual truck and was found not guilty. The attorneys weren't the problem here. That truck was borrowed!
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:Justice was served and gently caress any fascist who thought the feds should have crushed a peaceful protest Counterpoint: It wasn't peaceful. This is what a peaceful protest looks like. Also related, this is what police crushing a peaceful protest looks like.  The standoff was anything but peaceful and the videos of Tarpman begging to die prove that. They wanted a confrontation with the feds, the difference being they wanted the confrontation on their terms (at the Wildlife Refuge, with women and children as human shields) and they got snatched at their most vulnerable instead.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 10:48 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:They got off? Seriously? What the hell? I guess at least I can at least find solace in a ten-months-old "I told you so" to the people who thought the feds should have just charged in on day one because the charges would be a slam dunk, but drat, they were there for over a month and the jury still wouldn't let them stick? I hate juries How's it an "I told you so" from you. Your entire premise was the wait and see will not empower RWM whereas I cannot see the nullification doing anything but. The feds should have just slaughtered those fucks, like any minority, on day 1.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 16:37
|
|
