Hijinx
Well-Known Member
Absolutely, but our fellow forumites are still not likely to condemn him because...... trump
I can easily condemn him if you can easily condemn those who got bused in to start the trouble to begin with.
Absolutely, but our fellow forumites are still not likely to condemn him because...... trump
I can easily condemn him if you can easily condemn those who got bused in to start the trouble to begin with.
Nobody was beating on his car when he flew through that intersection towards the demonstrators. Yes, at some point the demonstrators were hitting his car, but that came after he drove into the crowd.
You are in denial. The guy backed up his car to get a better run at the crowd.From one account I read, they had already smashed through his rear window with bats and he claims someone was approaching him with a gun.
(Admittedly, another account says they did it AFTERWARD. I have to admit, it makes more sense that a deeply disturbed man would
REACT violently panicking to a perceived threat than to just drive from Ohio to drive over people).
He was a disturbed individual and had a history of violence, but he had no weapon (besides the car) or helmet - as others did.
He's responsible for deaths as a result of his actions, but I am puzzled by the charge of first degree murder when the only actual death
occurred indirectly in a way that is hard to describe as pre-meditative.
I suspect they will appeal for a lesser charge that doesn't carry the death penalty.
I can easily condemn him if you can easily condemn those who got bused in to start the trouble to begin with.
You are in denial. The guy backed up his car to get a better run at the crowd.
Why do you think you know more than the jury?
Sad watching you defend this POS murdering nazi.
Reading comprehension your problem? Not defending him. CLEARLY stated he is responsible for the deaths he caused.
That never translates into "not his fault" or "he should be acquitted" - unless you're a Democrat politician saying
"I take full responsibility". I'm seeing second degree murder. This is what I often see in trials - the prosecution
tries for the brass ring instead of getting the charge that will convict.
Just trying to figure out why it happened, because the details the press gave don't make sense to me.
He clearly backed up from the accident to attack again. I just can't factor out why unless he was in a rage
at that point, because it seems to me he could have just RUN or driven away.
You are in denial. The guy backed up his car to get a better run at the crowd.
Why do you think you know more than the jury?
Sad watching you defend this POS murdering nazi.
Absolutely, but our fellow forumites are still not likely to condemn him because...... trump
Obviously the state did not over charge as they got the conviction. The jury heard all the evidence, he is guilty of 1st degree murder. :shrug:
So:
Not one person has defended this guy, but clearly that's what the progs have been programmed to insist. What's that called, when someone makes a statement that has no relationship to the conversation at hand?
"non sequitur"
That's it
And if trump said there was a problem with baby it’s cold outside Trumpers would be lining up to burn those records. Just like trump defended white supreacist and now you guys are stuck defending a convicted murder and nazi.Just out of curiosity, what does the latest furor over "Baby It's Cold Outside" have to do with Trump?
Because this didn't have anything to do with him other than he SAID something afterward the left didn't like -
you know, like, there was blame on both sides (referring to the two groups of people).
Other than that, the whole of events had nothing to do with him.
Are you SURE you're not, like, channeling trans, who can be found on EVERY discussion topic, linking
the discussion to something to do with Trump?
I'm not defending the guy. I'm surprised. FIRST degree murder implies premeditation and motive.
The people he injured, he did that with intent, but they did not die. He was correctly charged with their
injuries, but the woman who died, he had no idea it had happened at all, as she was injured indirectly.
Yup. And O.J. was innocent.
I just think they got him on the wrong charge.
Gurps most certainly did. He made the claim it was self defense. But I know words are hard for you.So:
Not one person has defended this guy, but clearly that's what the progs have been programmed to insist. What's that called, when someone makes a statement that has no relationship to the conversation at hand?
Gurps most certainly did. He made the claim it was self defense. But I know words are hard for you.
That right there is what defending him looks like.
Gurps most certainly did. He made the claim it was self defense. But I know words are hard for you.
I made a statement, I never claimed it was MY Opinion dumb ass