Chicago principal claims teacher who made sick Charlie Kirk gesture is the victim

[Chesterton]

Charlie Kirk wanted the Epstein client list/ files released. Charlie Kirk believed in God. Charlie wouldn't support people, that were in the file. He wouldn't be quite about it either. Margery Green said that during the shutdown. They care more about signing a petition, not to release the Epstein file. Then making sure the poor and middle class get insurance. I'm sure they are protecting Trump and other politicians. Trumps people know who's in the Epstein files. And Kirk wouldn't be okay with it.

Thanks for the info, but which part of that post describes "the fallout"?

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I don ‘t believe Cuomo has proposed City run grocery stores or higher taxes on certain white people.

Yeah and that’s why he’s losing to the guy with an actual plan for New Yorkers.

I have, you just ignore them . I posted videos showing unhinged , uninformed protesters who show no respect for the rule of law , a duly elect president and blindly follow paid agitators.

None of that shows or proves the millions of people who attended these protests hate their country. Anger and dissatisfaction with the trajectory the country is on and the administration taking it down that path isn’t hatred.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Yes but they are all angels. They were only there to serve milk and cookies to law enforcement, and to get an autograph from Nancy Pelosi.

See? I can make stuff up, too.

The poster you're speaking to is correct. From a very legal and very public perspective they did admit guilt.

What they never got was good lawyers, I'm assuming they are lower working class and probably couldn't afford a decent attorney so what occurred was a public admission of guilt to some pretty hairy stuff.

I don't know what their real story is but the public record doesn't favor them if they were those on the breaking down the doors side of the Capital.

I don't believe they deserved all that 20 years in prison nonsense, most especially the way the left treats crime these days, but they do seem to be guilty of criminal behavior. They weren't the angels they were carried by emotion in that instance and made themselves political pawns of the left.

We should pray for them, at least. They probably weren't bent on evil or anything, but stupid and criminal they were. I think they spent 4 years in prison and that served as rightful punishment for what I think the crimes were in reality. Likely more than they would have gotten in another situation where they were more fairly treated.

I won't condemn them, they have been punished for any crime and pardoned, let them continue on with their lives in peace.

 

[Postvieww]

How do you make the determination of who's on a plane and what their intent is?

I don’t that is the job of authorities, military or otherwise.

Nobody sells drugs specifically to kill the buyer.

But that is the result. Dead none the less.

So far, we haven't established that a danger exists.

Open your eyes!

Let me know when you figure out who is trying to kill us.

Numerous terrorist, globalist, radicalized Islamist, political murderous crazies (examples: those who threatened Trump , Bondi, Noam and actually killed Charlie Kirk).

So far we've seen no evidence that Trump has prevented a single death

Again open your eyes. Deporting and arresting murders, gang members, human traffickers, rapists and recently going for cartel members kidnapping pregnant women for baby organ harvesting and selling babies. If you can’t see how this saved lives I don’t know what to tell you.

We've seen no evidence to support that claim.

Seriously? Just watch and listen to the unhinged actions of many protesters and liberal politicians.

 

[Bradskii]

If a truck driven by designated terrorist bringing drugs to kill US citizens crosses our borders, can we justifiably blow it up?

That's right. That's the question I'm asking. And if it's a house where they're making drugs can you simply blow it up and kill everyone?

Tell me if you think it's the acceptable way to deal with criminals. If you need to check on the current penalty for drug smuggling in the US then I can check if you like. I know some countries like Indonesia have the death penalty but I'm pretty certain that you don't. And even in Indonesia they arrest the people and put them on trial. Have you heard about that system? A lot of civilised countries use it.

I'll wait here while you think of a response.

 

[Chesterton]

Congratulations. You've obviously never been a criminal defendant in our federal court system.

The poster you're speaking to is correct.

No, he's wrong, and his untruthiness is blatant and overwhelming.

From a very legal and very public perspective they did admit guilt.

I've already addressed that.

What they never got was good lawyers, I'm assuming they are lower working class and probably couldn't afford a decent attorney so what occurred was a public admission of guilt...

If they're lower working class, one wonders how they were able to obtain an arsenal costing "hundreds of thousands of dollars".

I'm not a lawyer, but I worked within the legal profession, including with the federal courts, for a long time. Federal prosecutors can pretty much do what they want. They have unlimited money and resources. They are not beholden to the voters as county District Attorneys are. They can drag the process out and turn the process into your punishment, even before the official punishment. Yes this happens. And remember, these attorneys are employed by the deep state the Oath Keepers were in effect protesting.

The defendants were charged in a court in D.C., where the citizenry is 92% liberal Democrat. (92%, that's not a typo.) They had no hope of receiving a fair trial. And if convicted at trial, which they certainly would have been, they each would have been hammered with punishment worse than what got by pleading guilty.

...to some pretty hairy stuff.

There was no hairy stuff. You want hairy stuff? Remember when the inside of the State Capitol of Wisconsin was occupied by thousands of Leftists for two weeks?! They were met with no resistance, and were hailed as heroes in the news.

 

[Postvieww]

Yeah and that’s why he’s losing to the guy with an actual plan for New Yorkers

A plan offering free stuff he will never be able to provide. He is a communist con man.

None of that shows or proves the millions of people who attended these protests hate their country. Anger and dissatisfaction with the trajectory the country is on and the administration taking it down that path isn’t hatred.

Some of the videos show a very different story. Very sad to see some justify the unhinged behavior at these protests.

If this is what you support you have my prayers!

 

[Hazelelponi]

Congratulations. You've obviously never been a criminal defendant in our federal court system.

No, he's wrong, and his untruthiness is blatant and overwhelming.

I've already addressed that.

If they're lower working class, one wonders how they were able to obtain an arsenal costing "hundreds of thousands of dollars".

I'm not a lawyer, but I worked within the legal profession, including with the federal courts, for a long time. Federal prosecutors can pretty much do what they want. They have unlimited money and resources. They are not beholden to the voters as county District Attorneys are. They can drag the process out and turn the process into your punishment, even before the official punishment. Yes this happens. And remember, these attorneys are employed by the deep state the Oath Keepers were in effect protesting.

The defendants were charged in a court in D.C., where the citizenry is 92% liberal Democrat. (92%, that's not a typo.) They had no hope of receiving a fair trial. And if convicted at trial, which they certainly would have been, they each would have been hammered with punishment worse than what got by pleading guilty.

There was no hairy stuff. You want hairy stuff? Remember when the inside of the State Capitol of Wisconsin was occupied by thousands of Leftists for two weeks?! They were met with no resistance, and were hailed as heroes in the news.

That’s fair commentary on the federal system in general, and I don’t actually disagree that it’s deeply flawed and often politically stacked. From everything I’ve seen, many of the Jan. 6 defendants were unfairly treated, inadequately represented, and railroaded into plea deals under enormous pressure. There’s no question that defense options were limited—lawyer associations were quietly blacklisting attorneys who took those cases, and few were willing to stand between the defendant and the full weight of the DOJ.

That said, the fairness of the process and the finality of the verdict aren’t the same thing.

From a legal perspective, once a guilty plea is entered and accepted, guilt is formally established. Even if the surrounding circumstances were unjust, the plea and subsequent acceptance of a pardon constitute two separate affirmations of guilt in the eyes of the law. The pardon may lift the sentence, but it doesn’t erase the conviction.

Whether they were truly “guilty” in moral or factual terms is another matter entirely—and I don’t claim to know that. But legally, that admission remains binding unless overturned. In fact, it’s so sound on paper that it could expose them to civil suits if anyone claimed injury as a result of their actions.
I’ve never been a federal defendant (I tend to do this whole clean living thing), but even from the outside it was clear the deck was stacked against them. Still, that doesn’t make the convictions non-existent—it just makes the justice uneven.

As for the Oath Keepers, yes—they swore to uphold the Constitution, and that includes the Second Amendment. Many were likely lawfully armed. Guns alone don’t shock me; they’re not inherently criminal. But storming a federal building under emotional and political frenzy crossed a line the law couldn’t ignore, however inconsistently applied.

So while I agree they were mistreated and over-charged, the legal record stands: guilty, punished, and pardoned—not “innocent.” And I’ll still stand by my call that we pray for them, not vilify them. They’ve borne enough already.

 

[Chesterton]

That’s fair commentary on the federal system in general, and I don’t actually disagree that it’s deeply flawed and often politically stacked. From everything I’ve seen, many of the Jan. 6 defendants were unfairly treated, inadequately represented, and railroaded into plea deals under enormous pressure. There’s no question that defense options were limited—lawyer associations were quietly blacklisting attorneys who took those cases, and few were willing to stand between the defendant and the full weight of the DOJ.

That said, the fairness of the process and the finality of the verdict aren’t the same thing.

From a legal perspective, once a guilty plea is entered and accepted, guilt is formally established. Even if the surrounding circumstances were unjust, the plea and subsequent acceptance of a pardon constitute two separate affirmations of guilt in the eyes of the law. The pardon may lift the sentence, but it doesn’t erase the conviction.

I've said that I don't disagree with this. It's just that the other guy is trying to tell me that they are actually guilty because they pled guilty, which is nonsense. There is such thing as a "legal fiction", and this happens every day in state and federal courts across the land - people who are not guilty plead guilty because they fear the risk of a harsher punishment.

Many were likely lawfully armed.

I followed their cases back then. None of them were armed.

But storming a federal building under emotional and political frenzy crossed a line the law couldn’t ignore, however inconsistently applied.

The storming of a state capitol in Wisconsin by Leftists for two weeks wasn't ignored - it was celebrated.

So while I agree they were mistreated and over-charged, the legal record stands: guilty, punished, and pardoned—not “innocent.”

A little pedantic but legally important trivia - no one is ever found to be "innocent". You're either found guilty or not guilty.

 

[Postvieww]

That's right. That's the question I'm asking. And if it's a house where they're making drugs can you simply blow it up and kill everyone?

I did say designated terrorist. They are enemy combatants and we kill them . Just like Obama did.

Tell me if you think it's the acceptable way to deal with criminals. If you need to check on the current penalty for drug smuggling in the US then I can check if you like. I know some countries like Indonesia have the death penalty but I'm pretty certain that you don't. And even in Indonesia they arrest the people and put them on trial. Have you heard about that system? A lot of civilised countries use it.

Absolutely an American citizen will be treated differently for drug crimes. Designated terrorist are different, I shouldn’t have to explain the difference to you.

I'll wait here while you think of a response

Did you enjoy some pop corn while you waited?

 

[ThatRobGuy]

It's just that the other guy is trying to tell me that they are actually guilty because they pled guilty, which is nonsense. There is such thing as a "legal fiction", and this happens every day in state and federal courts across the land - people who are not guilty plead guilty because they fear the risk of a harsher punishment.

Restricted-income folks being pressured into taking bad deals from prosecutors used to be a pretty well-understood issue with the justice system that many folks were upset about when it involved circumstances that didn't have political undertones.

People seem to conveniently ignore now when certain political conditions are present.


While not disclosed for federal trials of that nature, I would be interested in how many of the J6 defendants had their assets frozen pre-trial.

Because that used to be a common tactic among prosecutors as well. If there was someone they were really looking to drop the hammer on, and they were afraid the person may actually have enough money for a good lawyer, they'd simply find a flimsy reason to label their assets as "tainted assets" which allows them to freeze it, so the person is stuck with a low-budget defender.

According to reports, nearly 300 of the J6 defendants were using public defenders in their cases. And let's just be honest, that's not the same caliber of legal representation as the "full-paying" customers get.

...it's common sense. If you're a prosecutor, do you want to have to take on Johnny Cochrane (who got paid millions to practice his craft)? Or some rando who's usually fresh out of law school and getting paid peanuts compared to what the "big-timers" make.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The poster you're speaking to is correct. From a very legal and very public perspective they did admit guilt.

What they never got was good lawyers, I'm assuming they are lower working class and probably couldn't afford a decent attorney so what occurred was a public admission of guilt to some pretty hairy stuff.

The Federal Public Defenders in DC are quite good. They were among the best lawyers practicing in the J6 defense.

I don't know what their real story is but the public record doesn't favor them if they were those on the breaking down the doors side of the Capital.

I don't believe they deserved all that 20 years in prison nonsense, most especially the way the left treats crime these days, but they do seem to be guilty of criminal behavior. They weren't the angels they were carried by emotion in that instance and made themselves political pawns of the left.

only those convicted of seditious conspircy got anywhere near 20 years.

We should pray for them, at least. They probably weren't bent on evil or anything, but stupid and criminal they were. I think they spent 4 years in prison and that served as rightful punishment for what I think the crimes were in reality. Likely more than they would have gotten in another situation where they were more fairly treated.

No one spent 4 whole years in prison, and certainly not anyone sentenced to a dozen or more years. The first arrests were less than 4 years before the pardons.

I won't condemn them, they have been punished for any crime and pardoned, let them continue on with their lives in peace.

I do condemn them and the man who pardoned them.

 

[NxNW]

I don’t that is the job of authorities, military or otherwise.

I wonder if you can explain how that works.

But that is the result. Dead none the less.

Irrelevant. People eat and smoke themselves to death, too.

Open your eyes!

To what?

Numerous terrorist, globalist, radicalized Islamist, political murderous crazies (examples: those who threatened Trump , Bondi, Noam and actually killed Charlie Kirk).

You're changing the subject now, which is shooting fishing boats and falsely claiming they're drug boats.

Again open your eyes. Deporting and arresting murders, gang members, human traffickers, rapists and recently going for cartel members kidnapping pregnant women for baby organ harvesting and selling babies. If you can’t see how this saved lives I don’t know what to tell you.

They're arresting US citizens and deporting innocent migrants who are here legally.

Seriously? Just watch and listen to the unhinged actions of many protesters and liberal politicians.

There are no such actions.

 

[NxNW]

Congratulations. You've obviously never been a criminal defendant in our federal court system.

Trump has, because he's a criminal.

No, he's wrong, and his untruthiness is blatant and overwhelming.

Every word I posted is true.

If they're lower working class, one wonders how they were able to obtain an arsenal costing "hundreds of thousands of dollars".

They didn't each spend that much.

I'm not a lawyer, but I worked within the legal profession, including with the federal courts, for a long time. Federal prosecutors can pretty much do what they want. They have unlimited money and resources. They are not beholden to the voters as county District Attorneys are. They can drag the process out and turn the process into your punishment, even before the official punishment. Yes this happens.

Your anecdotes are irrelevant.

And remember, these attorneys are employed by the deep state the Oath Keepers were in effect protesting.

There is no such thing. The Oath Keepers were trying to overthrow the government because they couldn't handle the fact that Trump lost to Biden.

The defendants were charged in a court in D.C., where the citizenry is 92% liberal Democrat. (92%, that's not a typo.) They had no hope of receiving a fair trial.

In every case they all agreed the jury was fair.

And if convicted at trial, which they certainly would have been, they each would have been hammered with punishment worse than what got by pleading guilty.

That's because the guilty deserve to be punished

There was no hairy stuff.

Trying to assassinate the VP & Speaker counts.

You want hairy stuff? Remember when the inside of the State Capitol of Wisconsin was occupied by thousands of Leftists for two weeks?! They were met with no resistance, and were hailed as heroes in the news.

Start your own thread on that. Stop trying to change the subject.

 

[rjs330]

Nobody sells drugs specifically to kill the buyer.

Actually the makers do. Particularly with fentynal. It adds to the high and the quality of the drug. The closer to death they get the better.

I have friends in the drug interdiction and investigation field and they have explained how it works. If the drug brings a certain amount of death it is know to be very powerful and give a very powerful high. So yes, they absolutely do create theae drugs with a certain level of lethality on purpose.

 

[Bradskii]

I did say designated terrorist. They are enemy combatants and we kill them . Just like Obama did.

Ah, I see. Trump can define people as terrorists and you can kill them with no problem. Of course, he's banking on people being so ill informed that they think that dealing in drugs can be described as terrorism thus enabling extra judicial killings.

What you must do, and I really mean that you must, is think about where that argument will end up. If you have a guy growing pot in his garden can you take him out? If there's a dealer on the street can you simply shoot him? How much drugs justify it execution with no due process. Yes, due process. Everyone MUST be granted that. Evidence produced. Legal arguments put forward. A verdict given.

You aren't thinking about this whatsoever. You're giving a basic knee jerk reaction. Bad guy...kill...kill good...bad man dead.

You're not heading towards a failed state. You're there already.

 

[rjs330]

Start your own thread on that. Stop trying to change the subject.

I honestly haven't read this entire thread, but somewhere, we got WAY off topic from some teacher celebrating Charlies death to narco terrorists being killed. For which there is already a thread.

Can we please get back on topic or has it been exhausted?

 

[Hazelelponi]

I followed their cases back then. None of them were armed.

I don't disagree with you and I'm not passing judgement just making a point. I wasn't meaning armed at the Capitol building but they did have guns at the hotel and vehicle is what is alleged.

I don't see that generally as an indictment on them. They didn't take any to the Capital building itself so they followed the law on that point. That is all.

 

[comana]

A plan offering free stuff he will never be able to provide. He is a communist con man.

Some of the videos show a very different story. Very sad to see some justify the unhinged behavior at these protests.

If this is what you support you have my prayers!

I was expecting to see some truly awful stuff given they had the opportunity to cherry pick the worst clips they could find. Unhinged is a bit of a dramatic take on that video.

 

[Postvieww]

I do condemn them and the man who pardoned them.

Now that’s a shocker!