US prosecutors Portland dropping almost all charges on rioters

Hello T. A. Gardner,

T. A. Gardner said:
One word: Kavanaugh

https://nypost.com/2021/04/23/biden-committed-to-finding-neera-tanden-a-job-psaki-says/



During his Senate confirmation hearing...
https://thefederalist.com/2021/03/1...on-extremist-xavier-becerra-as-hhs-secretary/

If a private hospital chooses not to do an elective procedure, they should have the right to do so. You say "Religion is voluntary." Well, so is abortion. Very few people need an abortion for valid medical reasons. A person can also go elsewhere than that private hospital for care.
Don't leave out that he prosecuted pro-life groups for exposing Planned Parenthood's selling of organs from aborted fetuses...
Or, that he is against laws circumventing parental consent for minors to have an abortion including smuggling and trafficking them across state lines to avoid such laws.



Anyone who defends human rights abuses in countries like China and Cuba is not a hero of any sort. Her deal with Iran, as we know now, did nothing to stop nuclear proliferation but instead likely sped it up. Today Iran is openly admitting enrichment to over 60% putting them most of the way to having weapons grade material.
https://apnews.com/article/iran-uranium-enrichment-60-percent-ed89e322595004fddc65fd4e31c1131b



Again, Kavanagh. As for her and FOX, I could care less. The reason Biden appointed her to a temporary position was to avoid her having to go through a confirmation hearing. The administration was that worried that she couldn't get vetted. She hasn't had to make her massive lobbying ties known this way because she doesn't have to make a financial disclosure statement for a temporary position. The position she's in right now is one that is the same as that of Karl Rove, David Axelrod, and others in the past with the President's ear. Unlike them, she was deliberately made a temporary position to avoid disclosure and scrutiny. Why?
Also anyone who thinks Mao's writing is worth studying that much should be taken with the same incredulity as someone who thinks Hitler's writing is worthwhile. After all, Mao is easily the most brutal and deadly dictator in all of human history.
Click to expand...

And these people you have mentioned are somehow preventing punishment of those who deserve it? How are they doing that? Are they directing the prosecutors in Portland?

And how do you know those whose cases were dropped deserve punishment if the prosecutors don't think they can prove a case? Just because you feel like they should be?

The only reason the ones in Portland were is because the (somebody's in charge) administration is rife with radical Leftists who don't want to punish their own...
Click to expand...
 
AProudLefty said:
LOL. No. The opposite is true. That defense will be brought up for the Capitol rioters. ;)
Click to expand...

Then the destroying public property charges will be brought up. That will be a good defense since the Portland rioters destroyed and burned police cars. That's a tough one to deny.
 
PoliTalker said:
Hello T. A. Gardner,



And these people you have mentioned are somehow preventing punishment of those who deserve it? How are they doing that? Are they directing the prosecutors in Portland?

And how do you know those whose cases were dropped deserve punishment if the prosecutors don't think they can prove a case? Just because you feel like they should be?
Click to expand...

Better reason to have just shot them.
 
RB 60 said:
Then the destroying public property charges will be brought up. That will be a good defense since the Portland rioters destroyed and burned police cars. That's a tough one to deny.
Click to expand...

Only if they were released and charges dropped.
 
AProudLefty said:
What games? You said they destroyed and set the police cars on fire. I see nothing about that in the OP and the article.
Click to expand...

Releasing those in Portland who were responsible for burning police cars is a good defense for those who destroyed public property at the capitol.
I cannot explain it any simpler. And I won't.
 
RB 60 said:
Releasing those in Portland who were responsible for burning police cars is a good defense for those who destroyed public property at the capitol.
I cannot explain it any simpler. And I won't.
Click to expand...

As I have stated, IF they were released after being arrested for destroying the police cars. I see nothing about that in the OP and the article. If that happened, then yes it would make for a good defense.

From the article, it seems that most of them are assaults and violence. The Capitol rioters can use that as a defense.
 
AProudLefty said:
As I have stated, IF they were released after being arrested for destroying the police cars. I see nothing about that in the OP and the article. If that happened, then yes it would make for a good defense.

From the article, it seems that most of them are assaults and violence. The Capitol rioters can use that as a defense.
Click to expand...

We shall see, but releasing those Portland rioters won't bode well for the prosecution at the capitol rioter's trials.
 
NiftyNiblick said:
Trumpanzees are rioters.
Humans are protesters.
Click to expand...
Dehumanization. Burning, looting, and pillaging cities and towns is NOT peaceful demonstrations. Trump does NOT support either Antifa nor BLM.
NiftyNiblick said:
It's both a simple concept and an easily demonstrable one.
Click to expand...
Redefinition fallacy.
NiftyNiblick said:
Even the trumpanzees would possibly realize that if their so-called brains were larger than fava beans.
Click to expand...
Insult fallacies. Bulverism.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
OK.. Link me to the actual indictments from Portland because the news reports on the names where charges are being dropped don't include arson or assault as any of the charges being dropped.
Click to expand...
Yes they do. RQAA.
Poor Richard Saunders said:
You don't recall that the Vice President is the person in charge of the counting of electoral votes?
You don't recall that the VP's family was also at the Capitol?
You don't know that a sitting VP has Secret Service Protection? You don't know that the family of a sitting VP also has Secret Service Protection? And you claim you know more than I do?
Click to expand...
No one is talking about the VP. Irrelevance fallacy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top