Beren wrote:It may also enhance Trump's campaign, but not because people will be so worried about law and order, America is pretty much used to such things happening from time to time, it's rather because his base get energised too.
Unlike most Republicans, Trump has the balls to say that these things are happening where the Democrats have been governing unchallenged for a long time. It will send the Democrats into orbit when he does it, but they don't have a solid come back. Mayor Frey's comments bordered on paranoia, as though nothing bad could happen in Minnesota unless white supremacists, protesters from other states, and (gulp) people from other countries were doing it. At least he didn't blame the Russians.
Pants-of-dog wrote:And there has never been a white cop charged with killing a black person in Minneapolis.
And Minneapolis has only had only 2 Republican mayors since 1945. Since, former Democrat Presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey became mayor in July 1945, only Ken Peterson had one 4-year term between 1957 and 1961. Richard Erdall was a Republican Mayor of Minneapolis for one day on December 31, 1973. So other than 4 years and 1 day of Republicans, and about 5 years of independent candidates, Democrats have ruled Minneapolis for the remaining 60 years. The Democrats will tell you that not only are they not racist, there is virtually no voter fraud to speak of either. Not a bit. The people of Minneapolis just love themselves some Democrats.
SpecialOlympian wrote:I don't care what videos of black people dying you want to share with me you old fucking racist.
Not even the ones in your own constituency either, where since 1961 only Richard Riordan was a Republican mayor from 1993 to 2001. So in the last sixty years, only one Republican served two four year terms, and that ended about 20 years ago--Riordan coming in to office to restore stability to Los Angeles after the LA riots following the Rodney King beating and 5 terms (20 years) of Tom Bradley's mayorlty (and no voter fraud whatsover. Not a smidgen). Maybe you should consider a little political competition.
Unthinking Majority wrote:These protestors (albeit violent ones) literally overran the police station and made the cops flee.
Yep. They retreated and lost control of the city.
Pants-of-dog wrote:The local prosecutor’s office probably charged this cop with third degree murder as groundwork to get the case dismissed.
This particular law is designed to go after people who recklessly endanger everyone around them. It is not meant to charge people who attack a specific individual. So the cop can end up getting all the charges dropped against him because he specifically attacked Mr. Floyd.
Atta boy! Now you're catching on...
Pants-of-dog wrote:This, combined with the suspect initial autopsy, strongly suggests that the medical examiner’s office, the district attorney, and the police union are colluding to get this guy off.
Ya think?
Beren wrote:Derek Chauvin Gestapovich will probably get away with this and people will cry, protest, and riot for justice, like in a movie.
Huh. He changed his name. I wonder why? Adopted? Ethnic shame?
SpecialOlympian wrote:Fuck off and stop quoting me blackjack. I do not read your dumb boomer block quote posts.
You said that four posts ago with nothing in response from me. Is there a reason you are randomly telling me to fuck off now? Or did you imagine I responded to you just like you imagined that George Zimmerman was let off by a grand jury when he was in fact tried and found not guilty?
Unthinking Majority wrote:In a better world, the police department would be sued for assaulting that black man. But it takes money to sue, and many working people don't have that cash, especially during a COVID lockdown. The price for justice is high.
Oh, they will be. I suspect lawyers are lining up right now to participate.
Unthinking Majority wrote:Have you ever seen footage like this? Burnt out cars next to destroyed, vandalized, and abandoned cop cars etc....This is like out of a movie. It looks like a war zone.
Looks like something out of Iraq, doesn't it?
XogGyux wrote:He still lost by a significant margin the popular vote which helps shine light into the fact that his idiocy does not represent the majority of the country.
You know it's not unreasonable to dislike your political adversary. However, when a guy with no prior political experience beats out 16 seasoned politicians to win a nomination and then beats another seasoned politician the establishment was effectively trying to coronate with an electoral inside straight, you have to consider one thing: he may not be an idiot.
XogGyux wrote:The unrest going on right now is not good news for him.
See my above reply to the poster whose name we shall not mention (like Eric Ciaramella). Tom Bradley was mayor of Los Angeles for 20 years straight until 1992, but left office after the LA riots. It was the first time a Republican had won the mayorship of Los Angeles since Norril Poulson left office in 1961. There hasn't been a Republican mayor since. Even the Democrats vote Republican when they get scared. That's why the put Rudy Giuliani in office in New York City. I don't think this is going to help the Democrats at all. I might be wrong, but we'll see soon enough.
XogGyux wrote:It has happened with everything from the firing of Comey, to the Ukrainian probe, to COVID and now we are seeing this happen.
Comey and Ukraine are in Trump's wheelhouse. Covid is not his doing by a long shot, and neither is the Minneapolis PD.
XogGyux wrote:What happens if this goes for months? what happens if cities cannot pay police and police either stop going or actually join protests?
Martial law.
XogGyux wrote:Then please, stop making references to causes of death and/or any potential reason for his arrest. If they are not going to change the fact that this was an avoidable brutal event, there is no need to try to paint the guy as a sickly criminal. As far as we are concerned he is the victim here, and the only crime we actually have a proof for, is the crime of murder/manslaughter or whatever this is legally speaking.
These stories aren't two dimensional. It will be asked and answered why they were arresting Floyd and the circumstances that led up to his death. Pretending that isn't going to happen is just being unprepared for trial. There's no virtue in it.
XogGyux wrote:Blaming people for political reasons is neither new nor unwarranted. Trump is not directly responsible for this guy's death but he is responsible for setting the tone for the nation.
At no point has Trump suggested that police treat people in a brutal manner unnecessarily.
XogGyux wrote:That after all these decades crying about the dictators in russia, china, venezuela, cuba you are completely incapable of identifying that this guy is slowly eroding our protections for democracy?
I'm pointing out to you that most of these problems are happening in places controlled almost exclusively by Democrats. In 21 of the 23 cities facing riots, they are run by Democrats and have been for a very long time.
XogGyux wrote:Accountability, free press, transparency, democracy, Abusing his power via the labradoodle that is W. Barr? This is no longer about conservatism vs liberalism this is about saving the core of this country.
Look at Wellsy's post above. Those events are happening in places where the political control of the police force is in the hands of Democrats almost exclusively. Trump has no control in those places. None.
XogGyux wrote:Yeah, let's compare your disgruntled reaction of what you perceive as an unjust traffic ticket with the murder of a subdue man in play daylight in front of multiple cameras and that they did not get immediately arrested, and quite frankly as far as I know as of the writing of this reply, 75% of them have still not been arrested even though at the very least they are defacto accessory to the crime that the other guy did. I'm telling you, this only makes it worse for the other guys. The longer it goes with the perception that they are getting preferential treatment, the harsher the punishment that the mob will demand.
Yes, but the legal system doing it is the same.
XogGyux wrote:I can objectively watch the video and I'm 90%+ certain that this is a slam dunk manslaughter case for the principal officer and some sort of lesser charge (accessory) to the rest.
I agree. I just think baying for blood is a classic mistake, and is likely used by the establishment to excuse these acts. In other words, the people calling for more are falling into a legal trap. He's guilty of excessive use of force and manslaughter. That's pretty much freedom ending and career ending. It's not a life sentence, but the guy is pretty much fucked. That's why they have him on suicide watch now.
XogGyux wrote:This is why leadership at all levels of government, from the mayor to the governor to the president should have been reconciliatory rather than inflammatory.
The president has already done what he can do--launch a civil rights investigation.
XogGyux wrote:Well... he was choked to death. You yourself admitted as such earlier if this event had not occurred, there is an almost absolute degree of certainty that this guy would still be alive today.
You are going with this "choking" meme too, but you should know better as you are a physician. You know its perfectly possible for Floyd to have suffered cardiac arrest, not asphyxiation. That's why I'm saying you have to be careful what you charge. What are the symptoms of myocardial infarction? Chest pain? Shortness of breath? If the autopsy report comes back with myocardial infarction, and the lawyers say "choked to death," they are going to lose because you need proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That's why you need to be careful. It's possible for the stress of this event to induce a heart attack. So the case has to be excessive and unnecessary use of force leading to manslaughter.
XogGyux wrote:Whether the direct cause of death was not enough air going into his lungs, not enough oxygenated blood going to his brain, a broken neck and/or some other explanation is complete besides the point.
It is relevant if you run into court and say, "the police choked him to death. I rest my case." Then the defense comes in and says, "myocardial infarction," and boom, you're fucked.
XogGyux wrote: But if I hang somebody in my basement (hypothetical, I dont actually have a basement) 
whether the head is ripped off by the rope/fall, wether the person is asphyxiated or wether the neck breaks (or any other possible combination) is mostly irrelevant.
Right. So don't make the specific case. Make the general one and use the defense's evidence against them.
XogGyux wrote:Please... as if this shit doesn't happen in Georgia, remind me is Georgia a democratic state?
In big city Atlanta and Fulton County, and even De Kalb county? Do you want to know the last time a Republican was mayor of Atlanta? Nedom Angier who left office in 1879; that is, 141 years ago. And believe me... there's no evidence of voter fraud anywhere in Atlanta. Uh uh. No siree bob! Not a bit of corruption either. Clean as a whistle. Anything you hear to the contrary is lies, lies, lies. They just really, really, really love the Democratic party in Atlanta.
XogGyux wrote:If your point had any merit I could sit here and find you a bizillion other examples but it is not worth my time because it is not a sincere point.
Yeah. You got me.
XogGyux wrote:The fact is, blacks, in general, tend to vote democrat, so it is not a fucking surprise that there is at least some democratic leadership, at least locally, where the shootings of these black people end up happening.
Yeah, but Georgia didn't allow blacks to vote in Democratic party primaries until 1960.
XogGyux wrote:Correlation does not imply causation.
Indeed. Indeed. As I said, them folks in Atlanta, well they just really, really love themselves a Democrat. 141 straight years. Um um. Love them Democrats.
XogGyux wrote:Most alligators attacks happen in republican controlled states, so I guess if people don't like being attacked by alligators they should vote Democrat 
If the alligators are wearing police uniforms and carrying guns, that might be some good advice. Indeed, you are a wise man. If those Republicans are making alligators into police officers, well, well, well... I'd say that's a very good reason to consider voting Democrat. Yes sir. Excellent point sir.
XogGyux wrote:Seriously if you are trying to make the case "well he was a criminal, he kind of deserved it" kind of approach... stop it, it is quite distasteful and it wouldn't serve you as a good line of attack anyway.
If the charge is a felony, generally they will use more force if they find it necessary. It does appear that Floyd passively resisted by collapsing rather than getting into the police car. Again, that does not justify what Chauvin did. It does help explain why they used force, and again, lawyers will point that out to a trial jury with expert witnesses, etc. For example, a few months ago about a mile from my house, the police came with code 3s on, sirens blaring and a helicopter overhead to effect a felony arrest per a warrant. They do get a little keyed up if the charge is a felony. They probably didn't need to approach the house with lights or siren, and probably didn't need a helicopter. However, they do get keyed up on felonies.
Conspiracy to commit a misdemeaonor is in fact a felony... ;-) Too bad her line didn't make the clip, but copyright laws you know.
XogGyux wrote:IT DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. IT DOES NOT CHANGE ANYTHING. IT >>>> AINT CHANGE A FUCKING THING.
Morally? No. You need to be prepared for trial lawyers though. They are snakes.
XogGyux wrote:Cops OK to murder someone because that someone was holding counterfeit money does not seem like the explanation of someone that understands the system.
Until the early 1970s, it was legal to shoot a fleeing felon. Watch old cop shows. You'll hear a lot of "Stop! Or I'll shoot!" Can't do that anymore, but they certainly used to. It gave rise to a comedy skit about British bobbies who don't have guns where they shout, "Stop! Or I'll shout 'Stop' again!" If I recall correctly, you're an intern. So a lot of this is before your time, and your time is better spent reading medical texts.
XogGyux wrote: And that even if he was indeed a criminal, the police wouldn't have the right to be judge, jury, and executioner and therefore the "he was a criminal anyway" is not a justification.
Right, and that shoe on the other foot is that the mob does not get to charge people with crimes they didn't commit, because they want the harshest sentence possible because they are really angry.
XogGyux wrote:Cities are overwhelmingly democrat, and democrats seem to be the ones that actually care enough to protest/defend the rights of fellow human beings.
"Seem to be the ones" is the phrase you need to spend more time on. 141 years of Democrat mayors in Atlanta. Man do those Democrats care. Um hmm. Caring folks. Never get tired of 'em. No sir.
XogGyux wrote:Correlation does not imply causation if so we should all vote democrats unless you want to be attacked by alligators
Yes sir. Excellent point sir. If I am ever pulled over by an alligator, I will most assuredly vote Democrat at the next election. Yes sir.
XogGyux wrote:You are seriously telling me that you would give Obama or Bill Clinton even less than that? This is hilarious.
I don't agree with Clinton, but I think he was a very consequential president, precisely because the outsourcing to China and the repeal of Glass-Steagal happened under his watch as did the opening of the internet to commerce. I would give Clinton an A, but for doing things I don't want him to do. His Lewinsky scandal and both he and Hillary seeming to relish thwarting the law (like the Rose Law Firm billing records that magically appeared in the White House residence) ended up giving people a bad taste about the Clintons. Obama passed ObamaCare and a major stimulus and bailouts. Other than that, he pretty much floundered after 2010. I'd give Obama an A for delivering a canned speech and being a scratch dresser, but I was unimpressed otherwise.
XogGyux wrote:This is funny in a tragic and deluded way.
I don't want competence in my political opponents. They will competently steer the country in a direction I don't like.
XogGyux wrote:Tell me, what country would you consider the best country for the past 100 years.
I still think the US wins that prize, but I'm nowhere near as confident betting on the next 100 with the current establishment. I would sooner bet on China, or some corporation called, "The World Council" or some shit like that chartered in Delaware and having power over most countries in the world and not giving a damn about voters. That's why I'm pretty much against both of the major parties at this point.
XogGyux wrote:Seem like your buddies did what these police people would have done. I won't comment on the rest.
Law enforcement is an ugly and disillusioning business.
Beren wrote:I had a Star Wars feeling under Bush & Cheney, it was like The Empire Strikes Back, now I rather feel like I'm watching Shaft or some black slave movie, although the plots of such movies usually take place in the deep South rather than Minnesota.
Yeah, but the irony is kind of a nice twist.
"We have put together the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics."
-- Joe Biden
- By Pants-of-dog
- By FiveofSwords
- By litwin
- By Deutschmania