Cont: Trump’s Coup - Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
acbytesla said:
Yeah, that was Richard Barnett of Arkansas. He went a little nuts during a bail hearing. I understand his frustration. He was hoping to get out on bail and this is the second time they pushed the bail decision into the future. I believe his next hearing will be on May 4th.

This guy probably doesn't get it. He became an icon of the insurrection by sitting with his feet up on Pelosi's deck. They are going to make an example out of him. There will be people who will avoid prison but he's certainly headed there.
Click to expand...

If convicted.
 
Resume said:
If convicted.
Click to expand...

Yes, of course, 'if convicted'.

But unless there will be some kind of jury nullification he's going down. Keep in mind that this White Supremacist will likely be tried in DC not Arkansas.

How fun.
 
Last edited:
acbytesla said:
Yes, of course, 'if convicted'.

But unless there will be some kind of jury nullification he's going down. Keep in mind that this White Supremacist will likely be tried in DC not Arkansas.

How fun.
Click to expand...

I worry about the one or two forever trumpers on the jury to throw a wrench in things.
 
Last edited:
Resume said:
I worry about the one or two forever trumpers on the jury to throw a wrench in things.
Click to expand...

I get it. This is going to be less likely in DC which Is the most Democratic place in the country. Trump received 8% of the vote there.
 
slyjoe said:
I'm curious - is a murder case the only case where the decision must be unanimous? Or am I mixing up civil and criminal?

ETA: It appears the Supreme Court decided just last year that criminal trials must be unanimous.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...ules-jury-verdicts-must-be-unanimous-n1187846
Click to expand...
Wow. Total news to me. Apparently Louisiana and Oregon allowed criminal convictions on a split vote, which I had never heard of before. A unanimous vote has been required in my state for at least as long as it's been a state, and I thought all states followed that rule.

It does not have to be a murder charge; any criminal conviction requires a unanimous vote.
 
Resume said:
I worry about the one or two forever trumpers on the jury to throw a wrench in things.
Click to expand...
As long as bail is denied, these folks will stay locked up until an outright acquittal. I am kind of surprised that people have been denied bail. In murder cases they will often set it at some high figure they know the defendant can't afford, but technically they could get out on bail.

I want the riot participants to really think on whether the photo opp was worth the years (in some cases) of freedom they will lose.

But oy, some of those demonstrators were so clueless - imagine their shock at realizing they are criminals and will be looked at that way for a good long time. "Waah! We were storming the Capitol and they Maced me!" What did these people expect?

I know some of them are dangerous but a lot of them are just easily manipulated crybabies who thought their little exercise in chaos could actually overturn democracy. There are sadly a lot of misinformed people who for reasons I can't fathom trust Trump, and believe he will help them when they need it.
 
acbytesla said:
Yes, of course, 'if convicted'.

But unless there will be some kind of jury nullification he's going down. Keep in mind that this White Supremacist will likely be tried in DC not Arkansas.

How fun.
Click to expand...

Is Barnett a white supremacist? I haven't heard that.

ETA: Never mind. I can Google. Here's a story which quotes him claiming to be a white nationalist.

"I am white," posted Barnett, in a page he maintains under a pseudonym. "There is no denying that. I am a nationalist. I put my nation first. So that makes me a white nationalist."
Click to expand...

Though, to be honest, he's redefined the term so that it means a white person who puts his nation first, not a person who wants a white-dominated nation. Is there anything more explicit to suggest he's a supremacist?
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
Is Barnett a white supremacist? I haven't heard that.

ETA: Never mind. I can Google. Here's a story which quotes him claiming to be a white nationalist.



Though, to be honest, he's redefined the term so that it means a white person who puts his nation first, not a person who wants a white-dominated nation. Is there anything more explicit to suggest he's a supremacist?
Click to expand...

No, I had read he said he was a white nationalist. Seems likely he thinks this is clever.

Anyway, he's going to be tried in DC. He called himself a smart man yet he has provided enough evidence proudly that proves his guilt. His little stunt alone of taking Pelosi's mail is a felony. It's not just theft. It is the theft of US mail.
 
Last edited:
Are there any black nationalists? Hispanic? Other ethnic group?

The dude is a white nationalist making excuses.
 
white nationalist = wants a "white" ethnostate
white supremacist = "whites" are superior to every other "race"

Distinct ideas though they heavily overlap.
 
Venom said:
white nationalist = wants a "white" ethnostate
white supremacist = "whites" are superior to every other "race"

Distinct ideas though they heavily overlap.
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like a distinction without a difference.

Barnett is basically saying I have rights and they don't. The difference? Their race.
 
Venom said:
white nationalist = wants a "white" ethnostate
white supremacist = "whites" are superior to every other "race"

Distinct ideas though they heavily overlap.
Click to expand...

What about "white supremists"? Well, that's how I hear it pronounced half the time.
 
alfaniner said:
What about "white supremists"? Well, that's how I hear it pronounced half the time.
Click to expand...

And my penchant for correct pronunciation results in this irking me. Especially from those I would hazard are reasonably well educated.
 
phiwum said:
Is Barnett a white supremacist? I haven't heard that.

ETA: Never mind. I can Google. Here's a story which quotes him claiming to be a white nationalist.



Though, to be honest, he's redefined the term so that it means a white person who puts his nation first, not a person who wants a white-dominated nation. Is there anything more explicit to suggest he's a supremacist?
Click to expand...

acbytesla said:
Venom said:
white nationalist = wants a "white" ethnostate
white supremacist = "whites" are superior to every other "race"

Distinct ideas though they heavily overlap.
Click to expand...
Sounds to me like a distinction without a difference.

Barnett is basically saying I have rights and they don't. The difference? Their race.
Click to expand...

Yup. Because I am white, I have the luxury of not having my race as part of my identity in a way that many others would - it's rarely come up so I haven't have had to think about it.

You also don't need to give a racist the benefit of the doubt. He was almost certainly very pleased with his sophistry, but as you say. It's a distinction without a difference.
 
alfaniner said:
What about "white supremists"? Well, that's how I hear it pronounced half the time.
Click to expand...

The White Supremes were a terrible singing group that paled* in comparison to the legendary Motown group.


* Pun intended
 
Trump on Fox phone in yesterday

Our Supreme Court and our courts didn't have the courage to overturn elections"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom