Sad Boys Heading to Jail

#176
#176
illumiVOLi said:
Yeah Trumps choices were pretty $hitty all the way around from Tillerson to Fauci to Sessions to Scaramucci to McMaster to Bolton to Kelly. He’ll you could go on and on. I really wish he had the decency to just fade the **** into non existence
Click to expand...

Lighthizer was a rock star though.
 
#177
#177
Septic said:
What about those of us who want to watch both Antifa and the Jan 6 rioters get bent over by the law?

I'd love to see the proud boys and antifa thugs shank it out on the yard.
Click to expand...

Which antifa members got screwed by a bias court?
 
#181
#181
illumiVOLi said:
Yeah Trumps choices were pretty $hitty all the way around from Tillerson to Fauci to Sessions to Scaramucci to McMaster to Bolton to Kelly. He’ll you could go on and on. I really wish he had the decency to just fade the **** into non existence
Click to expand...
Biden's clown car is oh so much better though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman and AM64
#182
#182
luthervol said:
That's why I said you were making the wrong comparison.
Soldiers should be compared to police, firemen, prison guards, teachers etc....
Bureaucrats should be compared to O5/6 and above.

And in those comparisons, I just don't recognize a big difference........although they seem to be viewed completely differently by many
Click to expand...

That's an insult. I've always considered cops and others talking about others as "civilians" insulting and frankly wrong, too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Go aeiou, StarRaider and hog88
#183
#183
AM64 said:
That's an insult. I've always considered cops and others talking about others as "civilians" insulting and frankly wrong, too.
Click to expand...
An insult to soldiers? Not in the least. I've known numerous people who have enlisted. Some are great, some are turds, some have admirable motivations, some have lazy and selfish motivations. Pretty much exactly like police, fireman, prison guards, teachers, social workers etc.......

You must be seeing some dramatic difference that is simply not there.
 
#184
#184
luthervol said:
An insult to soldiers? Not in the least. I've known numerous people who have enlisted. Some are great, some are turds, some have admirable motivations, some have lazy and selfish motivations. Pretty much exactly like police, fireman, prison guards, teachers, social workers etc.......

You must be seeing some dramatic difference that is simply not there.
Click to expand...

Military is military. Others aren't. Cops are CIVIL law enforcement ... at least until your kind takes over. Cops are civilians just like the people they are supposed to "serve and protect".
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman, StarRaider and hog88
#185
#185
AM64 said:
Military is military. Others aren't. Cops are CIVIL law enforcement ... at least until your kind takes over. Cops are civilians just like the people they are supposed to "serve and protect".
Click to expand...
Well then I guess I should say I don't see a difference deserving of increased levels of respect between military and civilian positions.
 
#187
#187
hog88 said:
That’s because you’re not very bright. We get it.
Click to expand...
I understand why every nation throughout time has glorified the military and indoctrinated and propagandized its citizens from birth. I do not feel that Russian soldiers deserve nearly as much respect as Russian social workers or firemen. Now Ukrainian soldiers on the other hand, that's a different story.
I said earlier, people who volunteer during justifiable war deserve total respect. People who join during peace time because they have no good options or to get college paid for, good for them; but there is nothing about the decision that justifies a greater level of respect than that given to any other young person choosing to be a policeman, fireman, teacher, prison guard, social worker, etc....

The whole global practice of glorifying war and soldiers plays into the hands of the manipulative elite more than any other single thing,
 
#188
#188
luthervol said:
Well then I guess I should say I don't see a difference deserving of increased levels of respect between military and civilian positions.
Click to expand...

Let me give you two things to consider. Who after a bad day on the job cannot say "I quit" and just walk away? Who can at the spur of the moment be shipped off for months to a place where everybody wants to kill you, and they have any number of devices to do so? I'll throw in another. Who goes home at night to a nice bed, fresh clothes, a shower, and time out; and who might be sleeping on the ground in a poncho and eating cold rations ... if there's sleep and rations to be had? I know MREs are the thing now, but have you ever eaten cold C-rations; I'm talking delicacies such as potatoes and pork slices canned years earlier?
 
#190
#190
  • Like
Reactions: SlingBlayde, Vol8188, AM64 and 1 other person
#191
#191
AM64 said:
Let me give you two things to consider. Who after a bad day on the job cannot say "I quit" and just walk away? Who can at the spur of the moment be shipped off for months to a place where everybody wants to kill you, and they have any number of devices to do so? I'll throw in another. Who goes home at night to a nice bed, fresh clothes, a shower, and time out; and who might be sleeping on the ground in a poncho and eating cold rations ... if there's sleep and rations to be had? I know MREs are the thing now, but have you ever eaten cold C-rations; I'm talking delicacies such as potatoes and pork slices canned years earlier?
Click to expand...
I get all of that. I understand the hardships that come along with it, there are unique hardships with every chosen service based job.
 
#192
#192
davethevol said:
A juror decided to convict because there were deleted messages on the proud boys phone that weren’t recoverable. How in the world is that admissible in court?
Proud Boys juror says group’s deleted messages weighed on jury
Click to expand...
I don’t think you read past the headline.

He didn’t say they got convicted just because of deleted text messages. The juror said that was one factor but that it was a combination of the messages that remained, their actions on January 6, that they were trying to conceal what was discussed (to the point of deleting some messages), and because once the violence started there was nothing to indicate that they tried to get people to de-escalate or that they were opposed to it. Also one of them got caught lying on the stand about being violent towards police.

I don’t know why you would even want any of that to be inadmissible in a conspiracy case. That’s insane. If police get a warrant to search a home and find the blood of a missing person but not the body, do you think the jury shouldn’t hear that the resident of the home bought a shovel and tarp around the time the person went missing?
 
Last edited:
#194
#194
hUTch2002 said:
Regardless of what you think of the Proud Boys, January 6 or any other factors surrounding this trial, it’s surprising that it’s ok to use a lack of evidence as evidence.
Click to expand...

Try asking your attorney about the rules of evidence and the rules of civil procedure. I think you will find that active deletion/ destruction of potential evidence can be a crime in and of itself. The 5th Amendment does not say that you have the right to destroy evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RockyTop85
#195
#195
WBO said:
Try asking your attorney about the rules of evidence and the rules of civil procedure. I think you will find that active deletion/ destruction of potential evidence can be a crime in and of itself. The 5th Amendment does not say that you have the right to destroy evidence.
Click to expand...

Isn't that acting on a presumption that the deleted messages were about activities on 1/6. How can you know what you don't know? Even if the messages related to 1/6, wouldn't forced access be saying that you don't have the right to privacy and the right to not to self incriminate? It seems that forced access to private electronic messages (or penalty for not seeing them) would basically be the same as denying the right not to answer a question because it might incriminate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002 and davethevol
#196
#196
WBO said:
Try asking your attorney about the rules of evidence and the rules of civil procedure. I think you will find that active deletion/ destruction of potential evidence can be a crime in and of itself. The 5th Amendment does not say that you have the right to destroy evidence.
Click to expand...
Of course it is but you’re making a lot of assumptions to jump to that conclusion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#197
#197
WBO said:
Try asking your attorney about the rules of evidence and the rules of civil procedure. I think you will find that active deletion/ destruction of potential evidence can be a crime in and of itself. The 5th Amendment does not say that you have the right to destroy evidence.
Click to expand...

You another pretend attorney like @RockyTop85?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#198
#198
82_VOL_83 said:
Oh wow, seems to be ok for you guys. I guess the irony of double standards is lost on you.

When you leave, take his sorry butt with you. Your defense of his absolute ignorance in post 139 implies your agreement. Please show yourself out.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but who elected you hall monitor. Go screw yourself.
 
#199
#199
BigOrangeTrain said:
You another pretend attorney like @RockyTop85?
Click to expand...

No, but I work with them a lot for transactions and they love to talk about this stuff. Attorneys seem to enjoy critiquing one another. I wonder if it has to do with so much of their work being published (court records, registration filings, etc.)?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top