Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 11:55:51 -0400 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: NBC Historian Takes Media's "Bloodbath" Insanity To A Whole New Level Content-Language: en-US Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <6NydnWwGgNc0xWf4nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> <17bea7625eadf0f8$300665$2218499$46d50c60@news.newsdemon.com> <17bed5b715bf3f58$7434$1098985$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com> From: moviePig In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 52 Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 15:55:54 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 3158 X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17bf2142c28c7c76$917$1588242$4cd50660@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 3537 On 3/21/2024 1:14 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article <17bed5b715bf3f58$7434$1098985$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com>, > moviePig wrote: > >> On 3/21/2024 11:04 AM, FPP wrote: >>> On 3/20/24 10:42 PM, moviePig wrote: >>>> On 3/20/2024 7:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> On Mar 20, 2024 at 3:15:33 PM PDT, ""Adam H. Kerman"" >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> Mar 19, 2024 at 8:26:17 PM PDT, super70s >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> On 2024-03-20 02:46:53 +0000, BTR1701 said: >>>>>>>>> What if the cops held the door open for them. Is that still >>>>>>>>> unauthorized? >>>>>> >>>>>>>> Lie: The rioters were invited into the Capitol by police >>>>>> >>>>>>> There is clear video of the police holding the door open for people >>>>>>> who were later found guilty of unauthorized entry. >>>>>> >>>>>>> How does that logically hold up? >>>>>> >>>>>> With that evidence, why wasn't the charge of unauthorized entry >>>>>> withdrawn or dismissed? Seems to me that both the prosecution and judge >>>>>> were obligated to do so. >>>>> >>>>> One would think. Obviously this only applies to a very small number >>>>> of people who were there that day but for those to whom it did apply, >>>>> it seems that as a matter of law one cannot be guilty of unauthorized >>>>> entry if the people in charge of authorizing you let you in. >>>> >>>> Indeed. Not if one remains in the area he was let into. >>> >>> Jesus, pig... you don't believe that shit do you?  Judges and juries >>> sure didn't. >>> >>> https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/04/politics/fact-check-capitol-insurrection-janu >>> ary-6-lies/index.html >> >> I believe pretty much that whole article, including the admission that a >> couple of police might've allowed a couple of rioters in. But what I >> was addressing is the fact that allowing them into the building doesn't >> equate to allowing them into Pelosi's office to shit on her desk. > > Which would be relevant if the people who were let in were actually the > desk-sitters. So, the guilt-threshold requires matching a rioter's DNA to his feces?