Ahmaud Arbery A.K.A. Trayvon Martin II

[Diego in Seattle]

Trespassing--just like the previous times when tools and so forth had in fact been stolen. If you see a burglar leaving a house, you don't need evidence of something he's actually stolen to pursue him and initiate a citizen's arrest.

First off, TM never mentioned trespassing. My guess is that the property didn't have any "No Trespassing" signs to indicate that by entering w/o permission of the owner was trespassing. And all the time that TM was describing his pursuit of AA he never once mentioned trespassing as either his motivation to detain AA or that he told AA he was being arrested for trespassing. So trespassing wasn't the crime in question.

Second, others were observed walking around the house. How did TM know that AA was the one taking the tools? When TM confronted AA on the night of Feb 11th AA didn't have any tools on him. So TM had no specific knowledge that AA was taking anything from the house. So no, TM didn't see a burglar leaving the house. In fact, he never saw him leaving the house at all on the night of the 23rd. He went after AA only because the neighbors were pointing in AA's direction. TM didn't have enough of a case to detain AA as a police officer, much less as a civilian. And a detention requires a hell of a lot less reasonable cause than an arrest.

Well I certainly grant that they were clumsy in their efforts, but the point is that their intent was that of a Neighborhood Watch group, not a murderous racist lynch mob--as has been directly asserted and chanted and accepted as cannon by the Woke mob. But a No Trespassing sign is not necessary at all to distinguish private property--especially a house. You ignore the fact that tools and so forth had indeed been stolen recently--from other properties as well in the secluded community. As for the shooting, why is the fact of Arbery clearly being the assailant in the physical encounter with the son being ignored and dismissed? This is the central factor in the entire event, while the racial factor is the most irrelevant.

Quit spouting what you THINK is the law & actually read what the law actually says:

2010 Georgia Code
TITLE 16 - CRIMES AND OFFENSES
CHAPTER 7 - DAMAGE TO AND INTRUSION UPON PROPERTY
ARTICLE 2 - CRIMINAL TRESPASS AND DAMAGE TO PROPERTY
PART 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS
§ 16-7-21 - Criminal trespass
O.C.G.A. 16-7-21 (2010)
16-7-21. Criminal trespass


(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person.

(b) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:

(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;

(2) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that such entry is forbidden; or

(3) Remains upon the land or premises of another person or within the vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart.

(c) For the purposes of subsection (b) of this Code section, permission to enter or invitation to enter given by a minor who is or is not present on or in the property of the minor's parent or guardian is not sufficient to allow lawful entry of another person upon the land, premises, vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft owned or rightfully occupied by such minor's parent or guardian if such parent or guardian has previously given notice that such entry is forbidden or notice to depart.

(d) A person who commits the offense of criminal trespass shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

(e) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally defaces, mutilates, or defiles any grave marker, monument, or memorial to one or more deceased persons who served in the military service of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof, or a monument, plaque, marker, or memorial which is dedicated to, honors, or recounts the military service of any past or present military personnel of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof if such grave marker, monument, memorial, plaque, or marker is privately owned or located on land which is privately owned.

https://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/20 ... -1/16-7-21

Not only did Arbery not violate the GA law on trespassing, property owner Larry English testified in a deposition that Arbery had never disturbed anything on his property. English also testified that Arbery had not damaged or disturbed the property in any way. So the likelyhood of TM ever seeing AA committing a crime on that property is almost non-existent.

Additionally, English testified that not only did he never authorized either McMichael to confront anyone on his property, he barely knew them. This eliminates any possibility of the McMichaels ability to lawfully enforce or serve a trespassing notice on Arbery (as required by the law shown above).

And as to this being racially charged....

Property owner English also that a couple was seen on video (shown in court) with what he described as a tool bag. He called 911 3 times that night (calls played in court). This took place 3 months prior to the Arbery shooting. The couple was white. Yet the McMichaels pursued a balck man who they had not observed committing a crime.

Sure...no racial motivation found in this case....

[smackaholic]

Trespassing--just like the previous times when tools and so forth had in fact been stolen. If you see a burglar leaving a house, you don't need evidence of something he's actually stolen to pursue him and initiate a citizen's arrest.

First off, TM never mentioned trespassing. My guess is that the property didn't have any "No Trespassing" signs to indicate that by entering w/o permission of the owner was trespassing. And all the time that TM was describing his pursuit of AA he never once mentioned trespassing as either his motivation to detain AA or that he told AA he was being arrested for trespassing. So trespassing wasn't the crime in question.

Second, others were observed walking around the house. How did TM know that AA was the one taking the tools? When TM confronted AA on the night of Feb 11th AA didn't have any tools on him. So TM had no specific knowledge that AA was taking anything from the house. So no, TM didn't see a burglar leaving the house. In fact, he never saw him leaving the house at all on the night of the 23rd. He went after AA only because the neighbors were pointing in AA's direction. TM didn't have enough of a case to detain AA as a police officer, much less as a civilian. And a detention requires a hell of a lot less reasonable cause than an arrest.

Well I certainly grant that they were clumsy in their efforts, but the point is that their intent was that of a Neighborhood Watch group, not a murderous racist lynch mob--as has been directly asserted and chanted and accepted as cannon by the Woke mob. But a No Trespassing sign is not necessary at all to distinguish private property--especially a house. You ignore the fact that tools and so forth had indeed been stolen recently--from other properties as well in the secluded community. As for the shooting, why is the fact of Arbery clearly being the assailant in the physical encounter with the son being ignored and dismissed? This is the central factor in the entire event, while the racial factor is the most irrelevant.

You’re going to have to do away with your antiquated notions of property comrade.

Everything belongs to “the people” now.

Well, not quite everything. You try hoping the wall at Nancy Pelosi’s place. An armed guard will meet you and if you go for his weapon, he will shoot you.

I hope and pray enough sensible people out there will see this bizarre racial kabuki theatre to force them to change tactics.

If they do, maybe we can get back to a sensible discussion of liberal/conservative solutions to running things.

If not, either these racial arsonists go down with their ship or we descend into tribal warfare.

Sadly, that unthinkable option has been the inevitable default setting throughout history.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Diego in Seattle]

First off, TM never mentioned trespassing. My guess is that the property didn't have any "No Trespassing" signs to indicate that by entering w/o permission of the owner was trespassing. And all the time that TM was describing his pursuit of AA he never once mentioned trespassing as either his motivation to detain AA or that he told AA he was being arrested for trespassing. So trespassing wasn't the crime in question.

Second, others were observed walking around the house. How did TM know that AA was the one taking the tools? When TM confronted AA on the night of Feb 11th AA didn't have any tools on him. So TM had no specific knowledge that AA was taking anything from the house. So no, TM didn't see a burglar leaving the house. In fact, he never saw him leaving the house at all on the night of the 23rd. He went after AA only because the neighbors were pointing in AA's direction. TM didn't have enough of a case to detain AA as a police officer, much less as a civilian. And a detention requires a hell of a lot less reasonable cause than an arrest.

Well I certainly grant that they were clumsy in their efforts, but the point is that their intent was that of a Neighborhood Watch group, not a murderous racist lynch mob--as has been directly asserted and chanted and accepted as cannon by the Woke mob. But a No Trespassing sign is not necessary at all to distinguish private property--especially a house. You ignore the fact that tools and so forth had indeed been stolen recently--from other properties as well in the secluded community. As for the shooting, why is the fact of Arbery clearly being the assailant in the physical encounter with the son being ignored and dismissed? This is the central factor in the entire event, while the racial factor is the most irrelevant.

You’re going to have to do away with your antiquated notions of property comrade.

Everything belongs to “the people” now.

Well, not quite everything. You try hoping the wall at Nancy Pelosi’s place. An armed guard will meet you and if you go for his weapon, he will shoot you.

I hope and pray enough sensible people out there will see this bizarre racial kabuki theatre to force them to change tactics.

If they do, maybe we can get back to a sensible discussion of liberal/conservative solutions to running things.

If not, either these racial arsonists go down with their ship or we descend into tribal warfare.

Sadly, that unthinkable option has been the inevitable default setting throughout history.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm betting that Speaker Pelosi's property is well-marked with signage that it is private property, and that trespassing is prohibited. This would fulfill the California's legal requirements for enforcing trespassing laws there.

I'm sorry if you lack the intellectual capacity to understand legal matters.

[smackaholic]

Well I certainly grant that they were clumsy in their efforts, but the point is that their intent was that of a Neighborhood Watch group, not a murderous racist lynch mob--as has been directly asserted and chanted and accepted as cannon by the Woke mob. But a No Trespassing sign is not necessary at all to distinguish private property--especially a house. You ignore the fact that tools and so forth had indeed been stolen recently--from other properties as well in the secluded community. As for the shooting, why is the fact of Arbery clearly being the assailant in the physical encounter with the son being ignored and dismissed? This is the central factor in the entire event, while the racial factor is the most irrelevant.

You’re going to have to do away with your antiquated notions of property comrade.

Everything belongs to “the people” now.

Well, not quite everything. You try hoping the wall at Nancy Pelosi’s place. An armed guard will meet you and if you go for his weapon, he will shoot you.

I hope and pray enough sensible people out there will see this bizarre racial kabuki theatre to force them to change tactics.

If they do, maybe we can get back to a sensible discussion of liberal/conservative solutions to running things.

If not, either these racial arsonists go down with their ship or we descend into tribal warfare.

Sadly, that unthinkable option has been the inevitable default setting throughout history.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm betting that Speaker Pelosi's property is well-marked with signage that it is private property, and that trespassing is prohibited. This would fulfill the California's legal requirements for enforcing trespassing laws there.

I'm sorry if you lack the intellectual capacity to understand legal matters.

I see.

Nancy deserves protection of her private property. She has billions and can afford private protection.

She’s better than the unwashed Trump supporters. Just take it. That poor lad is in the position he is because your forefathers mistreated his.

You really are a detestable POS.

Hope you enjoy the coming racial strife which you and your ilk are 100% responsible.

This is far worse than any 9 year old girl attractions you may have.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Left Seater]

I'm betting that Speaker Pelosi's property is well-marked with signage that it is private property, and that trespassing is prohibited. This would fulfill the California's legal requirements for enforcing trespassing laws there.

I'm sorry if you lack the intellectual capacity to understand legal matters.

If Diego is correct, and we all know that is a long shot, then CA is going CA again.

If a no trespassing sign is required to let citizens know that they have no business walking around, in or thru homes that do not belong to them then they are dumber than I thought.

Do not enter property that doesn’t belong to you.

[Screw_Michigan]

If Diego is correct, and we all know that is a long shot, then CA is going CA again.

If a no trespassing sign is required to let citizens know that they have no business walking around, in or thru homes that do not belong to them then they are dumber than I thought.

Do not enter property that doesn’t belong to you.

Allegedly walk into and off property that "doesn't belong to you" does not justify lynching. Hate to break it to your Connies.

Cannot believe you guys keep trying to find ways to justify the actions of these Georgia rednecks. Then again, you're Connies for a reason.

[Left Seater]

If Diego is correct, and we all know that is a long shot, then CA is going CA again.

If a no trespassing sign is required to let citizens know that they have no business walking around, in or thru homes that do not belong to them then they are dumber than I thought.

Do not enter property that doesn’t belong to you.

Allegedly walk into and off property that "doesn't belong to you" does not justify lynching. Hate to break it to your Connies.

Cannot believe you guys keep trying to find ways to justify the actions of these Georgia rednecks. Then again, you're Connies for a reason.

Nice strawman.

I was speaking only to what I put in quotes. But you are going to do what you do and make shit up. And you want to run reading comp smack.

Again with your hypocrisy.

[smackaholic]

If Diego is correct, and we all know that is a long shot, then CA is going CA again.

If a no trespassing sign is required to let citizens know that they have no business walking around, in or thru homes that do not belong to them then they are dumber than I thought.

Do not enter property that doesn’t belong to you.

Allegedly walk into and off property that "doesn't belong to you" does not justify lynching. Hate to break it to your Connies.

Cannot believe you guys keep trying to find ways to justify the actions of these Georgia rednecks. Then again, you're Connies for a reason.

I will admit, I’ve walked onto construction sites just to look at the construction. I find it interesting.

This is technically trespassing.

Had a nosy neighbor walked over decided to hold me at bay with his shotgun, wanna know what I wouldn’t do?

I wouldn’t attempt to disarm him.

I would maybe tell
Him he’s nuts and start walking away. Or maybe I’d just grab a seat and wait for the po-po.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Screw_Michigan]

Again, your justification for Arbery's murder is that he "had it coming," you just excuse it in many different ways. You need a shrink.

[Diego in Seattle]

You’re going to have to do away with your antiquated notions of property comrade.

Everything belongs to “the people” now.

Well, not quite everything. You try hoping the wall at Nancy Pelosi’s place. An armed guard will meet you and if you go for his weapon, he will shoot you.

I hope and pray enough sensible people out there will see this bizarre racial kabuki theatre to force them to change tactics.

If they do, maybe we can get back to a sensible discussion of liberal/conservative solutions to running things.

If not, either these racial arsonists go down with their ship or we descend into tribal warfare.

Sadly, that unthinkable option has been the inevitable default setting throughout history.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm betting that Speaker Pelosi's property is well-marked with signage that it is private property, and that trespassing is prohibited. This would fulfill the California's legal requirements for enforcing trespassing laws there.

I'm sorry if you lack the intellectual capacity to understand legal matters.

I see.

Nancy deserves protection of her private property. She has billions and can afford private protection.

She’s better than the unwashed Trump supporters. Just take it. That poor lad is in the position he is because your forefathers mistreated his.

You really are a detestable POS.

Pelosi doesn't have private protection, imbecile. As 3rd in line to the presidency she's protected by Capitol Police in DC, and either CPD or California Highway Patrol at home (the same was true for Paul Ryan and John Boehner).

And the difference with their properties & English's is that the formers' properties had signs (read: gave notice) that trespassing wasn't allowed, whereas English didn't.

[Diego in Seattle]

If Diego is correct, and we all know that is a long shot, then CA is going CA again.

If a no trespassing sign is required to let citizens know that they have no business walking around, in or thru homes that do not belong to them then they are dumber than I thought.

Do not enter property that doesn’t belong to you.

Allegedly walk into and off property that "doesn't belong to you" does not justify lynching. Hate to break it to your Connies.

Cannot believe you guys keep trying to find ways to justify the actions of these Georgia rednecks. Then again, you're Connies for a reason.

I will admit, I’ve walked onto construction sites just to look at the construction. I find it interesting.

This is technically trespassing.

Read the law above and tell us how that would have been considered trespassing in the state of GA.

TIA

[LTS TRN 2]

Allegedly walk into and off property that "doesn't belong to you" does not justify lynching. Hate to break it to your Connies.

Cannot believe you guys keep trying to find ways to justify the actions of these Georgia rednecks. Then again, you're Connies for a reason.

I will admit, I’ve walked onto construction sites just to look at the construction. I find it interesting.

This is technically trespassing.

Read the law above and tell us how that would have been considered trespassing in the state of GA.

TIA

The property owner, Mr. English, immediately threw them under the bus--desperately afraid of being doxxed by the Woke mob. Notice that the security camera footage has been limited to about two seconds of Arbery's inspection of the house, though he was in fact inside for about ten minutes. Gee, I wonder what sort of picture would emerge if we saw the whole tape?

[Diego in Seattle]

I will admit, I’ve walked onto construction sites just to look at the construction. I find it interesting.

This is technically trespassing.

Read the law above and tell us how that would have been considered trespassing in the state of GA.

TIA

The property owner, Mr. English, immediately threw them under the bus--desperately afraid of being doxxed by the Woke mob. Notice that the security camera footage has been limited to about two seconds of Arbery's inspection of the house, though he was in fact inside for about ten minutes. Gee, I wonder what sort of picture would emerge if we saw the whole tape?

What do you think would be on the video of AA if he never took anything?

[Left Seater]

The jury saw the entire tape from what I understand. If they didn’t, I imagine that will be part of their appeal.

At the end of the day, the jury found them guilty.

[LTS TRN 2]

The jury saw the entire tape from what I understand. If they didn’t, I imagine that will be part of their appeal.

At the end of the day, the jury found them guilty.

The jury, just like the property owner, was terrified at the very real threat posed by the Woke mob were they to deliver a not-guilty verdict. The exact same with the Chauvin jury. That the mob has been given full approval to threaten riots and looting by the entire DNC and media is as horrifying as anything since the whole "racial reckoning" became the 500+ violent riots of last summer.

As for what Arbery was doing during the ten minutes inside the house, obviously he was looking for anything worth stealing. And this would be obvious if we were to see the video. Having already lost items to the same sort of theft, the contractors wisely stopped leaving anything laying around.

[smackaholic]

Again, your justification for Arbery's murder is that he "had it coming," you just excuse it in many different ways. You need a shrink.

No, he didn’t “have it coming” and have already said that the necks made a number of dumb decisions, but the moment he attacked the neck, in an attempt to get his gun, well, yeah, he kinda had it coming.

Shoulda just kept “jogging”.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[smackaholic]

I'm betting that Speaker Pelosi's property is well-marked with signage that it is private property, and that trespassing is prohibited. This would fulfill the California's legal requirements for enforcing trespassing laws there.

I'm sorry if you lack the intellectual capacity to understand legal matters.

I see.

Nancy deserves protection of her private property. She has billions and can afford private protection.

She’s better than the unwashed Trump supporters. Just take it. That poor lad is in the position he is because your forefathers mistreated his.

You really are a detestable POS.

Pelosi doesn't have private protection, imbecile. As 3rd in line to the presidency she's protected by Capitol Police in DC, and either CPD or California Highway Patrol at home (the same was true for Paul Ryan and John Boehner).

And the difference with their properties & English's is that the formers' properties had signs (read: gave notice) that trespassing wasn't allowed, whereas English didn't.

Once again, you can’t address the point which is the public’s right to protection of property, so you point out irrelevant parts of the description of what is going on.

Do you believe that citizens have any right to self defense? And when it comes right down to it, as with he Rittenhouse case, it is about an armed person shooting someone because he is being attacked.

Not saying that this or the Rittenhouse case are the same. They are not. The necks certainly made even dumber decisions than Rittenhouse did. And I believe the necks certainly deserve some time in jail.

Had the video showed Billy Bob shooting AA in the back as he “jogged” away, then yes, it’s murder. But the video shows AA moving to the neck in an apparent attempt to take his weapon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Diego in Seattle]

I see.

Nancy deserves protection of her private property. She has billions and can afford private protection.

She’s better than the unwashed Trump supporters. Just take it. That poor lad is in the position he is because your forefathers mistreated his.

You really are a detestable POS.

Pelosi doesn't have private protection, imbecile. As 3rd in line to the presidency she's protected by Capitol Police in DC, and either CPD or California Highway Patrol at home (the same was true for Paul Ryan and John Boehner).

And the difference with their properties & English's is that the formers' properties had signs (read: gave notice) that trespassing wasn't allowed, whereas English didn't.

Once again, you can’t address the point which is the public’s right to protection of property, so you point out irrelevant parts of the description of what is going on.

Do you believe that citizens have any right to self defense? And when it comes right down to it, as with he Rittenhouse case, it is about an armed person shooting someone because he is being attacked.

Not saying that this or the Rittenhouse case are the same. They are not. The necks certainly made even dumber decisions than Rittenhouse did. And I believe the necks certainly deserve some time in jail.

Had the video showed Billy Bob shooting AA in the back as he “jogged” away, then yes, it’s murder. But the video shows AA moving to the neck in an apparent attempt to take his weapon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

First off (while repeating myself), go watch all of TM's testimony on the stand. TM pursued AA, plain & simple. with his father in the back of the truck. Again, this is two white armed men pursuing a balck male in a state/region that is known for its racism. And again, he did so when even a sworn peace officer wouldn't be allowed to do. When someone consistently pursues someone they can no longer claim self-defense. And AA had every right to fear for his own life. Run? Run where? And outrun a brand new F-150 truck?

In sum the necks put themselves into a situation where confrontation was inevitable (and the funny part was that on the stand TM kept saying that he was all about "de-escalating") without legal authority. They placed a person in legitimate fear for his life via that pursuit/confrontation. AA had every right to grab the shotgun.

[smackaholic]

Again, the necks are guilty of criminal levels of stupdity and I won't shed any tears for them being locked away for a spell, but, IMO, the state didn't show that their intent was to lynch them a nigguh. Some level of manslaughter is appropriate. Put out the message that deputizing yourself and putting yourself in the position where you are forced to shoot someone, is a really, really, really bad idea.

But murder should be reserved for people who intend to kill, not those who end up killing as a result of things going sideways.

Let's say they got 5-10, do you think that would send a message that killing nigguhs for fun is OK?

Do you think that if Blly Bob and Daryll see Quadraphonic jog through the neighborhood, they'll think to themselves, let's go shoot his black ass, the worst we'll get is 5-10?

I doubt it.

[Screw_Michigan]

So DiS & Screwy - don’t you think those three guys should get the death penalty, and don’t you think they should be taken out within the next 48 hours?

No and no.

[smackaholic]

Why not?

If murderous racist don’t deserve the death penalty, who does?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Screw_Michigan]

Why not?

If murderous racist don’t deserve the death penalty, who does?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because the death penalty is wrong. Pretty simple.

[Diego in Seattle]

When it comes to the death penalty, I don't really have any strong feelings either way. In some cases I'd rather have the POS have a long life of dealing emotionally/intellectually with what they've done. And that's especially true with these mensas. TM is going to spend many years hearing his fellow inmates with dark skin calling out to him, "Stop! I just want to talk to you!"

Manslaughter?

This was hardly an accident. TM knew exactly where the law was & did otherwise. Fuck manslaughter.

[Screw_Michigan]

Manslaughter?

This was hardly an accident. TM knew exactly where the law was & did otherwise. Fuck manslaughter.

Yes, but you have to remember, Suckaholic believes these Georgia rednecks were ultimately well intentioned but simply made a few mistakes. Instead of the lynching, murderous, racist piles of human wastes they were proved to have been.

[Diego in Seattle]

Manslaughter?

This was hardly an accident. TM knew exactly where the law was & did otherwise. Fuck manslaughter.

Yes, but you have to remember, Suckaholic believes these Georgia rednecks were ultimately well intentioned but simply made a few mistakes. Instead of the lynching, murderous, racist piles of human wastes they were proved to have been.

Relax, Screwy. The Civil War has been over for quite some time.

Let's review, shall we?

An obese redneck from Bacon, Georgia is telling someone to relax because "the Civil War has been over for quite some time."

Meanwhile, at Georgia's Stone Mountain....

[LTS TRN 2]

Yes, but you have to remember, Suckaholic believes these Georgia rednecks were ultimately well intentioned but simply made a few mistakes. Instead of the lynching, murderous, racist piles of human wastes they were proved to have been.

Relax, Screwy. The Civil War has been over for quite some time.

Let's review, shall we?

An obese redneck from Bacon, Georgia is telling someone to relax because "the Civil War has been over for quite some time."

Meanwhile, at Georgia's Stone Mountain....

But how can you possibly compare some rednecks who aren't shooting anyone--except thieving n-words--with the actual hordes of n-words shooting up every city in the country? You know, the usual fifty or so shooting victims in Chicago just this weekend? You're like AOC or Maxine Waters. What the fuck happened to you to become so thoroughly fucked up?

Here's what you and Maxine need to deal with...

https://leakreality.com/video/27990/nee ... -over-here

[LTS TRN 2]

And here's a good review of the case, most of which completely ignored in the media coverage.

https://vdare.com/articles/how-horrible ... -americans

[Diego in Seattle]

And here's a good review of the case, most of which completely ignored in the media coverage.

https://vdare.com/articles/how-horrible ... -americans

You provided a link to a white supremacy website as "a good review?"

Who gave schmuck the keys to Lets Tard 2?

[Screw_Michigan]

You provided a link to a white supremacy website as "a good review?"

Who gave schmuck the keys to Lets Tard 2?

Let's Tard 2 is quite the conundrum, isn't he? Anti-Semitic, but pro white supremacy. :|

[LTS TRN 2]

And here's a good review of the case, most of which completely ignored in the media coverage.

https://vdare.com/articles/how-horrible ... -americans

You provided a link to a white supremacy website as "a good review?"

Who gave schmuck the keys to Lets Tard 2?

Who says it's a "white supremacy" site? NPR? The ADL? PBS News Hour? Chuck Schumer? The automatic smear of "racist" is no surprise, but why do you believe it?

The facts it provides are verified, even though they've been desperately ignored in the media.

[LTS TRN 2]

You provided a link to a white supremacy website as "a good review?"

Who gave schmuck the keys to Lets Tard 2?

Let's Tard 2 is quite the conundrum, isn't he? Anti-Semitic, but pro white supremacy. :|

And your pathetic bile is hardly surprising, but as usual your semantics and syntax are those of a teenager. "Anti-Semitic"? "Semitic" is a linguistic distinction, not an ethnic one. But of course by "Semitic" you mean Jews, which is a clumsy and misleading description. However, I'm always clear in distinguishing "Zionist" from mere Jew, as the two are not the same. Frankly, I don't think you have a clue as to just what Zionism really is--beyond the simplistic definition offered by the usual hacks.

As for "white supremacy," this is another smear applied to anyone who rejects the BLM narrative and agenda. As for anyone pointing out the glaring pathologies which subsume black communities everywhere on earth, they're immediately termed "Nazis" and so forth. Just as you casually call the father and son all sorts of nasty names. So what's your point? You're actually taking the side of AOC and Pelosi and Schiff? How disgusting.