Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 21:18:30 +0000 From: BTR1701 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: NBC Historian Takes Media's "Bloodbath" Insanity To A Whole New Level References: <17bed5b715bf3f58$7434$1098985$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com> <17bf2142c28c7c76$917$1588242$4cd50660@news.newsdemon.com> <17bf328db608e354$2$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com> User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 14:26:08 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 60 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-pXRud3rEiJCfpAXvstXgEYtu0WDeRcuy9uvo4UG0lWuhcHsLvkvuckVAXZRV24ApU1vg5qGpGriaGKk!yflu4H8UQJaJa32nnp2tzf2U31um+BikrXu8dfd80NS8xofWFCkHGehsIr6KMct+ZdMOh2UIR1HP!idc= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 3964 In article <17bf328db608e354$2$3384359$c2d58868@news.newsdemon.com>, moviePig wrote: > On 3/22/2024 4:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > > On Mar 22, 2024 at 8:55:51 AM PDT, "moviePig" wrote: > > > >> 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 withdrawn or dismissed?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. > >>>> 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-shitters. > >> > >> So, the guilt-threshold requires matching a rioter's DNA to his feces? > > > > It requires matching the crime to the actual person who did it. > > So, the getaway-car driver *isn't* guilty of killing the bank teller? Depends on the state.