Kierland wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 2:08 am
You really suck at this.
Why are you even here?
Sounds more like something a judge would say to you. :doh:
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 11:44 am
by Kierland
IKYABWAI
Are you sure you moved to SC and not KC.
Crawl back under your rock.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 12:59 pm
by Softball Bat
poptart wrote:Fucker Carlson
o_0
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:12 pm
by Kierland
[The judge] wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive(s) with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."
Vyskocil, an appointee of President Trump's, added, "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable."
Vyskocil's ruling last week, dismissing a slander lawsuit filed against Carlson, was a win for Fox, First Amendment principles and the media more generally, as Fox News itself maintains. As a legal matter, the judge ruled that Karen McDougal, the woman suing Carlson, failed to surmount the challenge.
He literally can’t slander you because he lies so much.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:27 pm
by Softball Bat
Kierland wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:12 pm [The judge] wrote: "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive(s) with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes."
Vyskocil, an appointee of President Trump's, added, "Whether the Court frames Mr. Carlson's statements as 'exaggeration,' 'non-literal commentary,' or simply bloviating for his audience, the conclusion remains the same — the statements are not actionable."
Vyskocil's ruling last week, dismissing a slander lawsuit filed against Carlson, was a win for Fox, First Amendment principles and the media more generally, as Fox News itself maintains. As a legal matter, the judge ruled that Karen McDougal, the woman suing Carlson, failed to surmount the challenge.
He literally can’t slander you because he lies so much.
Yep.
His is just a cartoon show.
Only there to be laffed at.
And yet the pitiful low IQ crowd actually thinks the little twat is presenting them with news.
rotf...
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:29 pm
by Softball Bat
shutyomouth wrote:Floyd was a fucked up idiot. Cop is a fucked up idiot.
Pretty much, yes.
That said, fucked up idiots are not in charge of snuffing out other fucked up idiots.
We definitely don't want that kind of a world.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 3:22 pm
by Smackie Chan
Softball Bat wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:27 pmHis is just a cartoon show.
Only there to be laffed at.
And yet the pitiful low IQ crowd actually thinks the little twat is presenting them with news.
Very true. Alex Moffat (who is about the WORST stand-up comic I've ever seen, and I've seen many) does a good job on SNL of lampooning him...
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2021 5:37 pm
by ML@Coyote
smackaholic wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:46 am
The biggest victim has been the people who live in the hood who are dependent on cops doing the hard but necessary job of aggressive policing in places that badly need it. Murder rates have skyrocketed because the cops have decided to look the other way. And who can blame them? If I was a cop 2 years from retirement, I would do the same.
A cop who isn't willing to have his actions scrutinized shouldn't be a cop. It's all part of the job. We are all scrutinized for our job performance. Just because you carry a badge and a gun, it doesn't let you off the hook. Cops who "look the other way" ought to be fired. I don't believe that holding cops to a high job performance standard is going to create a shortage of them. The more a community appreciates and respects its police force, the more attractive the job will be to applicants.
smackaholic wrote:That mob was put down. One of them was even shot dead.
The cop they allegedly killed, yeah, he had a stroke. Likely pushed over the edge by all the commotion. Could have just as easily had it brought on by his OL yelling at him.
Yeah, the whole thing was pretty much a big nothing.
No, it wasn't a big nothing. But, had the Capitol cops had the backup they requested, maybe it could have been.
But Pelosi and company wanted a big something, so they denied help.
Pelosi isn't part of calling out the NG. The chief of Capitol police is. What time did that request from the chief go out, and when did the NG actually arrive?
And note what time the VPOTUS (president of the Senate) put out a request for the NG. But yeah, it's all Pelosi's fault.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 1:58 am
by Softball Bat
Roach wrote:rotfc . . . crying sad and mad at the apparent large number of LoIQ reptile brains out there. Jesus, who other than that would buy into his antics? Not the judge hahaha.
smackaholic wrote: ↑Thu Apr 22, 2021 1:46 am
The biggest victim has been the people who live in the hood who are dependent on cops doing the hard but necessary job of aggressive policing in places that badly need it. Murder rates have skyrocketed because the cops have decided to look the other way. And who can blame them? If I was a cop 2 years from retirement, I would do the same.
A cop who isn't willing to have his actions scrutinized shouldn't be a cop. It's all part of the job. We are all scrutinized for our job performance. Just because you carry a badge and a gun, it doesn't let you off the hook. Cops who "look the other way" ought to be fired. I don't believe that holding cops to a high job performance standard is going to create a shortage of them. The more a community appreciates and respects its police force, the more attractive the job will be to applicants.
No, cops who look the other way should be jailed. Why are you so soft on pigs?
And I know I give cops a lot of shit but it’s not even really their fault. They are, for the most part, not very smart. I blame the DAs and judges that encourage this behavior because they could stop it and they know better.
The other officers are like “Naw Naw” I’m not going down with you. Good for them, maybe they saw what happened in Minn. when you stand around and let other cops commit crimes.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 4:42 pm
by ML@Coyote
What's your solution to the problem you perceive?
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:33 pm
by Kierland
I’m not arguing with you over a solution you don’t see as necessary. I will debate whether we need police reform and then if you do decide we need it debate the solution.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:39 pm
by ML@Coyote
Things can always be improved, so yes, I am all for reform. I do not, however, think that calling police officers "pigs" is a good starting point. I also don't agree with you that all cops are bad.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:42 pm
by smackaholic
He has no solutions.
He hates authority. He does everything he can to get the scumbags he represents off.
Are the there bad cops?
Sure there are. Chauvin is a good example of one. He never should have lasted on the job as long as he did. But getting rid of a unionized public sector person is nearly impossible.
There does need to be ample training. As for their pay, in my neck of the woods they’re paid pretty damn well.
But cops who have to work in areas where they sometimes have to be assholes to do the job, shouldn’t be second guessed. When a cop shoots a person when that person is moments from killing someone, people, especially overpaid athletes ought to shut the fukk up.
But these cops get absolutely no support from liberal politicians who, for political reasons, support the all cops are racist narrative
The result is these cops say “fukk it, you’re on your own”.
As a direct result, the real balck genocide, young balck males killing other young balck males is through the roof.
But the libs couldn’t possibly give the slightest of fukks, because balck lives matter.....when it’s in their political interest.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:49 pm
by Kierland
ML@Coyote wrote: ↑Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:39 pm
Things can always be improved, so yes, I am all for reform. I do not, however, think that calling police officers "pigs" is a good starting point. I also don't agree with you that all cops are bad.
I do tend to be a bit of a bombthrower, but nice people get no place. That said, what percentage do you think have lied on the stand or falsified a report at least once?
And I vaguely remember you being a CO or something in a past life.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:55 pm
by ML@Coyote
Kierland wrote: ↑Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:49 pm
What percentage do you think have lied on the stand or falsified a report at least once?
Probably something similar to the percentage of defense attorneys who have lied about their clients.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:02 pm
by Kierland
So 100%
And you don’t see a problem with cops lying all the time?
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:16 pm
by ML@Coyote
Your question was how many cops lied at least once. That hardly equates to lying all the time. And I don't know that defense attorneys lie all the time. You might. And maybe you're okay with that.
But we're getting off track. You still haven't presented any viable plan for police reform.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:39 pm
by Kierland
I already told you, I’m not wasting my time explaining a solution when you have not admitted there is a problem.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:32 pm
by Smackie Chan
Kierland wrote: ↑Fri Apr 23, 2021 5:49 pmnice people get no place
To what place are you trying to get?
ETA?
Asking for a friend.
Re: Chauvin verdict
Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2021 10:47 pm
by Mikey
Kierland wrote: ↑Fri Apr 23, 2021 7:02 pm
lying all the time?