Charlie Kirk murder

Quote: AZDuffman

He pissed you off because he made your side look like fools.

He was simply not a good debator. He was alright bamboozling random kids on the sidewalk on campus with weird questions. But, any kind of structured debate on approved topics, he was out of his wheelhouse on.

Of all the people on the right to be a sign of high end debate, Kirk is not the one.

Before he died I think I watched 2 Politicon events with him (we are talking back in 2018-2019,) and there was nothing good about him. And, then forgot he existed until a few weeks ago when he was murdered, and watching old stuff now, there is still nothing interesting about him.

This may sound mean, but the only reason people care about him now is because he was killed, otherwise he would still be just another semi-popular YouTuber with a weird niche, but is mostly rising due to external funding, not organic growth.

Quote: AZDuffman

He pissed you off because he made your side look like fools.

What "side?"

I certainly am not a progressive, nor am I a democrat.

I just call things the way I see them.

Quote: missedhervee

What "side?"

I certainly am not a progressive, nor am I a democrat.

I just call things the way I see them.

Duffman has his face buried in Trump's posterior. He can't understand why everyone doesn't.

Quote: Gandler

He was simply not a good debator. He was alright bamboozling random kids on the sidewalk on campus with weird questions. But, any kind of structured debate on approved topics, he was out of his wheelhouse on.

What videos are you watching? He had an open mic and took all kinds of kids who disagreed with him. He usually tore them apart because lefty logic makes no sense. He would ask them what a woman is, usually they answered "someone who identifies as a woman!" Which is circular logic that makes zero sense. Kirk did not let them get away with it.

When Trump was elected I thought Kirk would make a great Press Secretary. He had command of the facts and knew how to intellectually defend his position.

I can see why you do not think he was a good debater, because liberals do not like logic and intellectual debate. They like to call names and chant.

https://www.themirror.com/news/us-news/ex-police-officer-arrested-over-1469432

Retired cop arrested over mean Charlie Kirk memes. Apparently Trump's directive to keep enforcing is quite the thing.

The party of free speech continues to cement their reputation. No mean memes and no burning flags....

Quote: Gandler

https://www.themirror.com/news/us-news/ex-police-officer-arrested-over-1469432

Retired cop arrested over mean Charlie Kirk memes. Apparently Trump's directive to keep enforcing is quite the thing.

The party of free speech continues to cement their reputation. No mean memes and no burning flags....

He is being charged with making a threat of mass violence. As is always the case, he is innocent until proven guilty. The crime was referred to the DA by a bunch of concerned citizens. A jury of his peers will determine his innocence or guilt. He will be able to hire counsel to represent him. Isn’t this EXACTLY how our system is supposed to work?

‘But Trump is a bad man’!

Quote: SOOPOO

He is being charged with making a threat of mass violence. As is always the case, he is innocent until proven guilty. The crime was referred to the DA by a bunch of concerned citizens. A jury of his peers will determine his innocence or guilt. He will be able to hire counsel to represent him. Isn’t this EXACTLY how our system is supposed to work?

‘But Trump is a bad man’!

It starts, however, with an arrest being made only if there is probable cause that a crime has been committed, and a criminal trial only if there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

And Trump can still be a bad man, even if the above conditions are-or are not-met.

Quote: GenoDRPh

It starts, however, with an arrest being made only if there is probable cause that a crime has been committed, and a criminal trial only if there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

And Trump can still be a bad man, even if the above conditions are-or are not-met.

Seems like someone whose job it is to make the determination felt there was probable cause that a crime was committed. That’s why he was arrested! And it’s up to a jury to decide if the evidence presented exceeds the reasonable doubt bar. If a prosecutor believes it does, that is irrelevant. He just presents the evidence he has. It’s the jury that weighs the evidence.

Just because an arrest was made does not automatically mean that this or any criminal case WILL go to trial.

It could be dismissed at a later date, either voluntarily or involuntarily. before trial.

Quote: SOOPOO

Seems like someone whose job it is to make the determination felt there was probable cause that a crime was committed. That’s why he was arrested! And it’s up to a jury to decide if the evidence presented exceeds the reasonable doubt bar. If a prosecutor believes it does, that is irrelevant. He just presents the evidence he has. It’s the jury that weighs the evidence.

Well, there's a reason why there are preliminary hearings, to determine probable cause, There's a reason why there are grand juries, to determine probable cause for felonies. Ask your girl Janine Pirro all about that.

It is unethical and a violation of civil rights for a case to go to trial if there isn't evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. Cases get kicked all the time before they even get to a jury for not meeting that standard. It's not like any prosecutor can haul any person in to court and have a trial, if there is no admissible evidence.