Jump to content

Harrison Bergeron

Full Members
  • Posts

    1640
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Harrison Bergeron

  1. An earlier witness - do not recall his name - testified that the prosecution did some tomfoolery with him and his testimony. Obviously not evidence in the GG situation but points to a pattern / precedent. Maybe the deal was "if you say this maybe we can do something about that."
  2. I'd make Bo Davis head coach. This team and university has been soft for decades.
  3. That's been the funniest subtle part of this season. The Netflix black, fat, handicapped girl was an amazing triple threat. Second More Leon.
  4. The rifle thing ... I do not know if he lived in his mom's basement ... but he definitely didn't take a rifle from there. You can have all the masturbatory fantasies you want about the Capitol, MAGA, Russian hackers, white supremacy, etc. ... just get the basics correct.
  5. Charging Rittenhouse taints the process. Not charging the other guy with a gun charge taints the process. Applause just gives the mouthbreathers butthurt.
  6. Fuck Hollywood and its unoriginal bullshit. You do not remake classics.
  7. I'm not a legal scholar. As I noted - I think confidence in a juror to decide a complex case inherently means a juror can know when a cigar is just a cigar. I do think you had so much invested in this red meat, and it is hard coming to terms with the fact that you were lied to, so you're looking for any reason not to face reality.
  8. So asking the court to clap for a veteran on Veteran's Day is idiotic or biased? Is that what you're saying? How was the trial unfair to either side (I need specifics) - other than the fact that charges were even brought, which was clearly a response the the twatter lynch mob?
  9. Why was Rittenhouse charged with a gun crime but this guy was not?
  10. You're going to have to connect your dots for me. If you do not think it affected the trial, then who cares? While I agree applauding a witness for any reason should be avoided, what cards does it show?
  11. I do see your point, but I think it's a little overwrought. If a jury can decide a complex legal case, I think that same juror can understand a specific, veteran-focused appreciation even if fuzzy. I'm 100% certain if this had occurred in the Chauvin trial you'd have a different POV.
  12. I don't disagree with any of that. I am just pointing out that the spin from the ideological media and twatterverse will soon shift to "judge is a white supremacist" or some such. It is patently stupid that we have national media outlets doing long exposes on a judge that is president over a local self-defense case. And it is obviously one-sided - I do not recall reading similar critiques or exposes about judges in other cases. As it does, irony abounds here because for every one of those people bitching in a "blind taste test" they would to a person favor a pro-defense judge and have conspiracies about cops and prosecutors. I'm not a lawyer, but there does not seem to be anything legally that he's done poorly. I mean the mobile phone thing is silly that anyone would actually mention it.
  13. Looks like the ideological media and twatter shifting to attacking the judge. I'm sure by 6 p.m. he'll be a white supremacist.
  14. At least don't keep given more public fodder to the general belief that you're woefully uniformed about basic history and facts of this case. If you want to "but Capitol" fine, but at least try to not let your feelings get in the way of basic facts.
  15. Or the 1971 bombing ... or the 1953 shootings ... but you know ... #lowinformationtwatters
  16. Obviously he's a white supremacist. At least we know what tonight's outrage will be on the ideological media shows.
×
×
  • Create New...