Democrat terrorists released by the hundreds while every 1/6 protester faces prison

Arminius said:


Um...no. Showing the idiocy of you pretending that one can only be identified as a flight risk once it is too late...in no way impacts the arguments being made by the adult-level IQ debaters here.

:nono:



That's never what I claimed. You just struggle with reading comprehension. :palm:

Judges base flight risk calculations on means (money), how famous the person is (can they easily disappear), and other similar factors, all of which can be determined without waiting to see if they run first, which only a complete moron would ever suggest in the first place.



Just stop. We aren't even talking about what the judge decides to make possible. We're talking about Democrats DECIDING to fund the bail, which is wholly irrelevant to the judge deciding whether bail CAN be obtained, and at what level.

Try to keep up. :cool:
Click to expand...

Wow. You are confused and ignorant of the bail process. Bail is based on much more than your claims. In fact the flight risk is pretty minor in calculating bail since someone considered a flight risk wouldn't be released at all. See Ghislaine Maxwell as an example. In MN, bail is set based on criteria that the judge follows. The judge followed those criteria. The judges are following similar criteria in allowing bail for the majority of those arrested on Jan 6. I don't see you complaining about any of those people getting out on bail after they attacked the US Capitol.

Democrats didn't decide to fund the bail. A non profit funded the bail. The non profit accepts donations. The people donating have no say in who is bailed out by the fund. If we accept your argument then we have cases of Republicans bailing out murderers and terrorists but you aren't attacking Republicans for doing the exact same thing you are attacking Democrats for. Your hypocrisy seems to know no bounds. Perhaps when you grow up you can discuss this with the adults because you clearly are not currently an adult.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
have any of them been charged with arson or assault?.....if so, I believe they ARE being held without bail.......trespass?......obviously not......you don't set bail on folks who will get a $100 fine.....
Click to expand...

Some of them are being held without bail. Some of those charged with assault are out on bail.

Perhaps you should explain that to Arminius who seems upset that people were arrested and then released during the protests across this country. Most of them were charged with misdemeanors.
 
Concart said:
You fucking morons pretend that the Constitution is your Holy Grail, and you don't even know what the fuck is in it.
Click to expand...

frickin hilarious, coming from you idiot liberals. YOU don't know what's in the Constitution and you show it every fucking day. You're a failed American because not only do you need the government to tell what's IN the constitution, you let the goverment ignore it, or even worse, you let them use it against you.

you're a shit stain on the nation and we'd be better off if you just killed yourself.
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Some of them are being held without bail. Some of those charged with assault are out on bail.

Perhaps you should explain that to Arminius who seems upset that people were arrested and then released during the protests across this country. Most of them were charged with misdemeanors.
Click to expand...

did Harris bail out arsonists or not.....
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Wow. You are confused and ignorant of the bail process. Bail is based on much more than your claims. In fact the flight risk is pretty minor in calculating bail since someone considered a flight risk wouldn't be released at all. See Ghislaine Maxwell as an example. In MN, bail is set based on criteria that the judge follows. The judge followed those criteria. The judges are following similar criteria in allowing bail for the majority of those arrested on Jan 6. I don't see you complaining about any of those people getting out on bail after they attacked the US Capitol.

Democrats didn't decide to fund the bail. A non profit funded the bail. The non profit accepts donations. The people donating have no say in who is bailed out by the fund. If we accept your argument then we have cases of Republicans bailing out murderers and terrorists but you aren't attacking Republicans for doing the exact same thing you are attacking Democrats for. Your hypocrisy seems to know no bounds. Perhaps when you grow you can discuss this with the adults because you clearly are not currently an adult.
Click to expand...

why are you afraid to admit the simple fact that your VP supported bailing out terrorists.....
 
Arminius said:


giphy.webp


Having the Vice Resident on the record sponsoring, rooting for, and funding domestic terrorists is the checkmate moment for this debate.

:nodyes:
Click to expand...

This is such bullshit. Have you no pride?
 
US Taxpayers are paying millions of dollars for public defenders for the scumbag traitors who attacked the capitol and for cleaning up their mess.

I guess that isn't something the fucking morons want to discuss, is it?
 
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Wow. You are confused and ignorant of the bail process. Bail is based on much more than your claims. In fact the flight risk is pretty minor in calculating bail since someone considered a flight risk wouldn't be released at all.
Click to expand...

Flight risk comes up all the time. It is absolutely routine. And when the prosecution argues that there is a flight risk to consider, judges often compensate by confiscating the person's passport and raising the bail. This is all very well-known first year law student kind of stuff.

:palm:

Hilarious that you are ignorant of such a common knowledge fact...while trying to condescend to and insult others for being better informed than you. :rofl2:

Poor Richard Saunders said:
See Ghislaine Maxwell as an example. In MN, bail is set based on criteria that the judge follows. The judge followed those criteria. The judges are following similar criteria in allowing bail for the majority of those arrested on Jan 6.
Click to expand...

None of this refutes anything I have stated. :dunno:

Poor Richard Saunders said:
I don't see you complaining about any of those people getting out on bail after they attacked the US Capitol.
Click to expand...

Well 99% of the time, it is Democrat domestic terrorists being released en masse despite heinous violent felonies, so why WOULD I only complain about the one time it's not a Democrat doing something violent (and again, don't steal elections if you don't want reasonable people to revolt) and being able to be released?

Poor Richard Saunders said:
Democrats didn't decide to fund the bail. A non profit funded the bail.
Click to expand...

Blatantly dishonest hypocrisy. You don't get absolved from responsibility for intentionally raising funds for terrorists just because the money that raised by your efforts wasn't directly from your own bank account. Total horseshit and you know it.

200w.webp


Poor Richard Saunders said:
Democrats didn't decide to fund the bail. The non profit accepts donations.
Click to expand...

Which you know damn well has zero bearing on Democrats deciding to raise funds for terrorists. :nono:

They didn't advocate for people to give money just because it's some upstanding organization that helps murderers and rapists re-offend...they specifically and expressly said to donate because these "protesters" (violent rioting criminals) were being arrested.

200.webp
 
Last edited:
Poor Richard Saunders said:
Some of them are being held without bail. Some of those charged with assault are out on bail.

Perhaps you should explain that to Arminius who seems upset that people were arrested and then released during the protests across this country. Most of them were charged with misdemeanors.
Click to expand...

All conservatives facing stiff prison sentences while four years straight of Democrat terrorism gets forgiven and everyone is released...that is the stated objection. Learn how to comprehend what you read. :nono:
 
PostmodernProphet said:
why are you afraid to admit the simple fact that your VP supported bailing out terrorists.....
Click to expand...

Because that requires acknowledging that this false narrative of conservatives being the REAL threat for one single (understandable) "revolt" versus the other 99% of ACTUAL domestic terrorism that is all committed by Democrats...is deliberately invented horseshit.

:nodyes:
 
Nordberg said:
This is such bullshit. Have you no pride?
Click to expand...

Or it's just correctly comprehending that party leaders participating in terrorism removes the ability of the partisan demagogues to deny it as some kind of fringe kook deviation.

:dunno:

That's not declaring a victory, it's comprehending that you can't lie your way out of admitting that you're the terrorists. :laugh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top