Jump to content

Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty


Cairn Horn88

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, RomaVicta said:

Appreciate the perspective and the Twice Horn upvote for it. No offense taken.

I'm surprised to hear an argument from a criminal lawyer stating that a white woman of a higher class would receive the same justice as a black man accused of the same crimes. I had not researched it as you suppose.

So, I went to google and entered this:

Is a black man more likely to be convicted than white person

Here's what you see on page 1:

image.png.91043f16376e9efad980ce1dfe57e7ce.png

image.png.7256802f47acc7ba0fa6397c3edb90d3.png

Then I realized we were talking mostly about sentencing, but I believe the above reflects why I wrote what I did above. 

I then entered the below into google:

Is a black man more likely to get harsher sentencing?

image.png.4f58d1dfc28b73ad2b042b6182c43fb4.png

 

With such vast evidence and research showing inequitable treatment for Black men, I don't think my statement is ill-founded. Is your evidence purely personal experience? Have I missed the point?

Thanks for leading me to look this up. I'd accepted it as true having made no effort to verify. I think what I found on google does verify my initial post that you object to.

Written without rancor.

It's not wrong, at all. 

But I think the most apt explanation for this is the subtle, maybe subconcious racism that still exists in our society.  Prosecutors, sentencing judges, even jurors are apt to believe that black men are more likely to have committed a more serious crime and deserve harsher punishment than a similarly situated white guy, or woman, for that matter.

Then you add in criminal legislation like the VCCLA  with its fairly obviously racially biased crack disparity, among other things, and the economic disadvantage suffered by black men, and you have a recipe for this.

The problem is that it is out of context.  There are a lot of "unpleasant" situations in the legal system (meaning outcomes you don't like because you have a deep interest in the outcome), that have nothing or very little to do with the problems that make the system inequitable.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

It's not wrong, at all. 

But I think the most apt explanation for this is the subtle, maybe subconcious racism that still exists in our society.  Prosecutors, sentencing judges, even jurors are apt to believe that black men are more likely to have committed a more serious crime and deserve harsher punishment than a similarly situated white guy, or woman, for that matter.

Then you add in criminal legislation like the VCCLA  with its fairly obviously racially biased crack disparity, among other things, and the economic disadvantage suffered by black men, and you have a recipe for this.

The problem is that it is out of context.  There are a lot of "unpleasant" situations in the legal system (meaning outcomes you don't like because you have a deep interest in the outcome), that have nothing or very little to do with the problems that make the system inequitable.

Appreciate that. I started another post to point out that I'd indeed made a sweeping statement based on a general truth. @Foosters addressed the very specific context whence my statement emerged. I abandoned the post because I wasn't writing anything he didn't already know, we'd both made our points, and I'm not sure how interested anybody else was in further discussion.

On the issue of what happens in the specific case of what someone on parole says and does, I don't doubt y'all are correct. I'd expanded to the more general treatment of Black people which, I still believe, would be harsher in the actual sentencing rather than the carrying out of parole.

Thanks to you both. It's illuminating.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, locodos said:

So already some good is coming out of all of all this

Trump supporter indicted for threatening Fulton County D.A. and sheriff

An Alabama man has been indicted for making alleged threats against officials in Fulton County, Georgia, involved in the arrest and prosecution of former President Donald Trump.

A federal grand jury in Atlanta has indicted 59-year-old Arthur Ray Hanson II on charges of transmitting interstate threats to injure Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis and Fulton County Sheriff Patrick Labat over their connection to the arrest and prosecution of the former president. Trump's trial over alleged efforts to overturn the presidential election result in Georgia will take place next year.

Hanson made his first appearance in federal court in Huntsville, Alabama, and will be arraigned in Atlanta next month.

Prosecutors say Hanson called the Fulton County government customer service line twice on Aug. 6, 2023, leaving two voicemails — the first for Labat and the second for Willis.

"If you think you gonna take a mugshot of my President Donald Trump and it's gonna be ok, you gonna find out that after you take that mugshot, some bad [expletive]'s probably gonna happen to you," Hanson allegedly said in his message intended for the sheriff. "... I'm warning you right now before you [expletive] up your life and get hurt real bad."

In his messages for Willis, Hanson allegedly told her to "watch everywhere that you're going" and "there's gonna be moments when you're gonna be vulnerable," among other things.

Federal officials who investigated the case stressed the seriousness of the charges.

"Threats against public servants are not only illegal, but also a threat against our democratic process," said Keri Farley, Special Agent in Charge of FBI Atlanta. "The FBI's mission is to protect the American people and uphold the Constitution. We take this responsibility very seriously and seek to punish those who engage in this type of criminal behavior, and to send the message that such conduct will not be tolerated."

Multiple individuals charged in the sprawling Fulton County case have now accepted guilty pleas, including Jenna Ellis and Sidney Powell.

— Andy Triay contributed to this report 

 

FBI needs to farm these idiots hard

Speaking of MAGA death threats, this trial just started.

https://www.newsweek.com/abigail-shry-donald-trump-judge-tanya-chutkan-threat-1839133

Quote

"Mr. Shry believes that Defendant is a non-violent alcoholic. He testified that she sits on her couch daily watching the news while drinking too many beers. She then becomes agitated by the news and starts calling people and threatening them," Sheldon noted. "Mr. Shry stated that his daughter never leaves her residence and therefore would not act upon her threats."

 

Edited by Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

"During consensual questioning, SHRY admitted that the phone number" which made the call "belongs to her and that she did in fact make the call to Judge Chutkan's chambers," the affidavit said. "SHRY stated that she had no plans to travel to Washington, DC or Houston to carry out anything she stated, adding that if Sheila Jackson Lee comes to Alvin, then we need to worry," the affidavit shows.

“If she comes to Alvin, and then to my house…and she brings a gun…..and she leaves it near me loaded….and Dancing with the Stars re-runs aren’t on…THEN SHE NEEDS TO WORRY!!”

IMG_1880.jpeg.02ca6eaf6e6496e33784d78bf654d29f.jpeg

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/29/2023 at 5:22 PM, jimmyjazz said:
Was that the "rank all your peers on a bell curve from worst to first?"  We had to do that . . . once.  We managed to get that VP fired because he was such a dipshit.  The idea that 20% of a team should be fired every year is insane.

Yeah probably need to fire 70%

 

 

 

Speaking of management, just read this:

 

Quote

I saved my company half a million dollars in about five minutes. This is more money than I've made for my employers over the course of my entire career because this industry is a sham. I clicked about five buttons.

https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/i-accidentally-saved-half-a-million-dollars/

Edited by elfenix
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, elfenix said:

Yeah probably need to fire 70%

 

 

 

Speaking of management, just read this:

 

https://ludic.mataroa.blog/blog/i-accidentally-saved-half-a-million-dollars/

My god, I could have written this almost verbatim about my last company.

Quote

Every day, I dread someone asking me to explain what the change was, because I will have to fucking yeet some managers I like under a bus, but they can't resist talking about the change non-stop because it is the closest some of them will ever get to impacting the bottom line. And many of them are actually decent managers, it's just that this whole department, like many departments, is some sort of weird political PsyOp to get executives promoted. It's cosplaying as a real business and the board thinks the costume is convincing.

 

 

  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, tx ind said:

“There is still facts”

Look, Widener University School of Law doesn't monkey around teaching grammar and syntax.  They're all about crafting superior attorneys.

("He's protected by Secret Service, period.")

OK, Alina.  Pssst -- those Secret Service agents are cops.  They're kinda beholden to the law and law enforcement.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the property is worth 100x more than $18mm appraisal, why not just reveal your term sheet so we can see that you put 20-30% down on an $18bn property?  Or are you asserting that it simply appreciated in value 100x over since you bought it and made it famous?  In which case, there must be a YoY tax appraisal roll that affirms that, yes?  There's a number of very simple ways to publicly demonstrate your claims that wouldn't significantly compromise any negotiating leverage you may have in the event you want to sell the property.  

Also, this 100% Disclaimer Clause.  This "Perfect" disclaimer.  Yeah, you gotta at least show us that.  I mean that'll change 250 years of contract law in this country.  Anthony Skrocki will be most interested in revising 60 years of Contract Law textbook authorship.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This.  

Say what you will about late 2015/early 2016 Trump up until about the end of the Mueller investigation/start of first impeachment.  He was a whiny cunt, but he was at least assertive, bold, and appeared to have a stiff upper lip (as they say).  I didn't buy it, but at least he was trying to come across that way to his snowflake base (who themselves wouldn't reveal how cunty they were for another year or two).  He feigned "alpha strength" as best he could.  It was bullshit, but he was trying to play the part as best he knew how.  Then around the time I mentioned, he pivoted to whiny, victimized, sniveling cunt.  And it has just absolutely hit mach-turbo speed since then.  He can't go three sentences at a rally, in an interview, or an online post without completely devolving into a crying, bitching child.  It's his only gear now.  He has no other "speeds."  It's just "Look what they've done to me!"  He barely mentions his own family or spouse or inner circle anymore, even though he's caused them so much fucking collateral damage---most of their lives are ruined for decades.  

Again, most critically thinking people never bought his ruse for a moment.  But at least he was trying to sell "alpha strength" to the stupids.  Now, he's not even trying anymore.  It's this whole new "Woe is me, can you believe how unfairly damaged I am.  Jermaine, stop teasing.  Tito, get me a tissue."  His 25mm far-right 1/3rd base is still lapping it up like his jizz on their AR-15's.  But even his middle 1/3rd is kinda scratching their heads like, "Jesus man, only time I worry about you now is when you quit bitching."  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Francisco 2.0 said:

The important thing here folks is we just need to leave his kids out of this.

 

Screenshot2023-11-01at5_41_57AM.thumb.png.1c815b6d28d8c726cb3d493c8454ce36.png

2 hours ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

1:28AM.  At the very least, I know that orange cunt is freaking the fuck out.  I still don't think he'll ever get his just due, but at least he's scared. 

2 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Living his best life.

aacd137d-583b-481b-b8db-d703010e84fd_tex

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, SilasCoade said:

I would love to see the case for who was worse. Trump alienated allies, reduced global influence, mishandled a public health crisis, actively strove to divide the citizenry, and, yeah, attempted a coup in the laziest most slap dash way possible.

Andrew Jackson was about as racist as you could get.

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SilasCoade said:

I would love to see the case for who was worse. Trump alienated allies, reduced global influence, mishandled a public health crisis, actively strove to divide the citizenry, and, yeah, attempted a coup in the laziest most slap dash way possible.

Remember that time he stood on a stage with Putin, and sided with him over the US? Good times.

  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, SilasCoade said:

I would love to see the case for who was worse. Trump alienated allies, reduced global influence, mishandled a public health crisis, actively strove to divide the citizenry, and, yeah, attempted a coup in the laziest most slap dash way possible.

Oh...just wait until his SECOND term*.  He'll pull us out of all our long-term alliances, he'll pull up the ladder on all future elections, and he'll fucking end the Republic.

 

*  Said term lasting from 2024 until his death, because that "limited to two terms" bullshit?  The future GQP authoritarian state will be putting an end to that as well.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

A. Johnson came after the insurrection. He didn't foment one. Advantage A.J.

He also tanked reconstruction and you might argue that he's one of the principle reasons the us South is the way it is.  Fuck that guy both of them.  

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trump wasn't a President.  Trump was and is a hatchet man for the US government.  If you want to see the U.S. federal government dismantled, he's the best President of all time.  He's kind of uniquely gifted to be that guy, because they have to have:

  • a ruthless CEO's sociopathy and lack of concern for others
  • a malignant narcissist' self-aggrandizement and unshakeable confidence
  • a career criminal's lack of morality and disdain for the law
  • a mental moron's stupidity so as to be oblivious when they are failing

 

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...