Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 11:40:19 -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: 71 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: Sat, 23 Mar 2024 15:40:22 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 3909 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17bf6efe87d228ca$37$3121036$c0d58a68@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 4287 On 3/23/2024 10:22 AM, NoBody wrote: > On Fri, 22 Mar 2024 06:57:24 -0400, FPP wrote: > >> On 3/21/24 12:51 PM, 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 withdrawn or dismissed?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-january-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. >> >> Breaking in the windows with a battering ram, and smashing the doors >> down in kind of negates any "they allowed them in" argument. >> Throwing aside cops and throwing barricades down is the same. >> >> If you walked in a broken door or window, just a few feet away from >> where rioters were beating and brutalizing uniformed police officers, I >> don't see ANY argument to be made that you weren't aware that what you >> were doing was illegal. > > So you agree that the BLM "protests" were an insurrection. Good to > know. Now if I could only find your posts decrying those events and > demanding arrests. > > I *know* they must be out there somewhere. Perhaps you could find and > repost a few of them for us? Did you look under "Attempts To Undo A Presidential Election"?...