Sheriff investigating Trump for Inciting a Riot in NC

ml1 said:

ridski said:

jeffhandy said:

I apologize to the rest of you, I'll stop poking him with the stick.

I think we've finally figured out the REAL topic of this thread.  "> 

as alway, the topic of the thread is the topic of the thread.

Oh, Jeez. You said "always". Now you've done it.

ridski said:

ml1 said:

ridski said:

jeffhandy said:

I apologize to the rest of you, I'll stop poking him with the stick.

I think we've finally figured out the REAL topic of this thread.  "> 

as alway, the topic of the thread is the topic of the thread.

Oh, Jeez. You said "always". Now you've done it.

even worse. it's "alway."  

jeffhandy said:

BCC, do you really think that someone choosing not to pursue charges is the same as no crime being committed?  You yourself admitted that he encouraged violence.

But I will give you an example of a crime being committed but ignored by authorities.  I have many times been speeding (10 mph above) along the highway along with many other cars and we have passed by police with their radar out.  I got no ticket even though I readily admit that I was breaking the law.  Clearly the police felt that it was not worth the hassle even though it would have been a slam dunk case.  So according to you, every legal community in the nation feels that I was not speeding.

By the way, my legal experience is 6 years as a police officer, I've seen the decision making process.  What is your experience in the criminal justice system.

Please proceed to embarrass yourself.

Speeding is not a crime.  You may want to rethink your analogy.

===============================================

In New Jersey, the primary laws that your average citizens deals with are:

1. Motor vehicle offenses which are set forth in Title 39 of the NJ statutes;

2. Disorderly persons offenses (described in other states as misdemeanors) which are set forth under Title 2C;

3. Indictable offenses* (or crimes) which are also set forth under Title 2C; and

4.  Municipal Ordinance Offenses which are enacted by each municipality. Ordinance violations are set forth in each municipality's code of ordinances (these municipal ordinances are not found Title 39 or Title 2C.

Title 39 offense convictions appear on your driving record/abstract (not on your criminal record) because motor vehicle offenses in NJ are not disorderly persons offenses nor indictable offenses/crimes.

* Indictable offenses (or crimes) are referred to as felonies in almost every other state.

RealityForAll said:


Speeding is not a crime.  You may want to rethink your analogy.

Ok, I've been to some music festivals where people have been smoking pot and have been openly drinking in public and I have seen police ignore it because they are there to keep things peaceful.

Better?

jeffhandy said:

BCC said:


Every legal community in the nation that is involved with Trump has chosen not to indict. 

With your six years experience, does that give you a clue as to what's happening?

You think they are all afraid, or that they are in the tank for Trump, or they don't care?

Give it a rest already. I'm not the one embarrassing himself.

And how many legal communities in the nation are involved with Trump.  Jurisdiction does not mean involvement.  Being arrested or charged would bring involvement.  And even when charges are brought on a defendant with overwhelming evidence, the courts will sometimes not pursue conviction if they feel that it is counterproductive to the community.

I don't think that they are afraid, I think that they don't want to deal with the hassle of the circus that they would have to deal with for what would amount to a misdemeanor charge.  A charge that Trump would throw millions at to fight.  All of this would hinder their ability to properly police their communities.  It is a cost benefit analysis.

But I apologize to you BCC, we will all defer to the expertise that you obtained watching Law and Order.

'And how many legal communities in the nation are involved with Trump'

Every community where violence has occurred and every community where police have made arrests and there are a number of them

Charges have been brought against the assaulter in Chicago and he is being prosecuted.

'I don't think that they are afraid, I think that they don't want to deal with the hassle of the circus that they would have to deal with for what would amount to a misdemeanor
charge.I don't think that they are afraid, I think that they don't want to deal with the hassle of the circus that they would have to deal with for what would amount to a misdemeanor charge.'

They are dealing with the 'circus'. They have the violence. They have Trumps comments. No one is talking of indicting him. Is everyone afraid of him? Do you have a shred of
evidence to back this up, other than your own opinion. Snide insults don't count.

Pay no attention o the dog pile. Terp correctly identified them a little while back.

lol

jeffhandy said:

RealityForAll said:


Speeding is not a crime.  You may want to rethink your analogy.

Ok, I've been to some music festivals where people have been smoking pot and have been openly drinking in public and I have seen police ignore it because they are there to keep things peaceful.




Better?

Really? You equate the violence that has taken place with pot smoking? You think the guy who cold cocked the protester was the equal to some one smoking pot?

Maybe that's why your opinion is worthless.

BCC said:
'And how many legal communities in the nation are involved with Trump'

Every community where violence has occurred and every community where police have made arrests and there are a number of them

Charges have been brought against the assaulter in Chicago and he is being prosecuted.

Q:  What do arrests in Chicago, where Trump didn't speak, have to do with an argument about whether Trump's speech incited violence?

A:  Absolutely nothing.

BCC said:

nohero said:

BCC said:

EricH said:

ridski said:

I'm waiting until the final(?) Benghazi panel's report comes out so I can read what it says

There is no such thing as a Final Benghazi panel. So far they have spend more than $20 Million on investigations by 10 Congressional committees (not counting the 7 prior congressional investigations).

There have been 32 hearings and 11 published reports, totaling 784 pages.

ZERO of them have found any administration wrongdoing.

But Hillary is still running for president!!! What should they do?! 

Easy, answer: FORM ANOTHER COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE IT AGAIN!!

There already is another committee. It's called the FBI and it is investigating her e-mails during the Benghazi disaster.

The FBI isn't investigating the Benghazi communications.

The FBI is investigating all e-mails turned over by Hillary which include those posted during Benghazi.

In case you care to know.. not like it matter...

http://bigstory.ap.org/260d4ff55af34d969a2e27ae8d8f1c7b

nohero said:

BCC said:
'And how many legal communities in the nation are involved with Trump'

Every community where violence has occurred and every community where police have made arrests and there are a number of them

Charges have been brought against the assaulter in Chicago and he is being prosecuted.

Q:  What do arrests in Chicago, where Trump didn't speak, have to do with an argument about whether Trump's speech incited violence?

A:  Absolutely nothing.

Trump didn't speak but that was because there was violence there, the police were in the middle'. He claimed he was ready to speak but was unable to because of the violence.

There was also violence in St Louis with 32 people arrested.

That's what violence has to do with it.

BCC said:
Trump didn't speak but that was because there was violence there, the police were in the middle'. He claimed he was ready to speak but was unable to because of the violence.

There was also violence in St Louis with 32 people arrested.

That's what violence has to do with it.

Not going to go round-and-round, and please don't lecture in bold letters as if you're stating something that nobody knows.  To repeat, Trump didn't speak in Chicago, so it's irrelevant with regard to whatever point you were trying to make about indicting Trump for what he says in a speech.

And, for what it's worth, please read the actual accounts regarding Trump's cancellation in Chicago, and when any punching or other fighting started.

jeffhandy said:

RealityForAll said:


Speeding is not a crime.  You may want to rethink your analogy.

Ok, I've been to some music festivals where people have been smoking pot and have been openly drinking in public and I have seen police ignore it because they are there to keep things peaceful.




Better?

Today is St. Patrick's Day. Thousands, maybe tens of thousands will be guilty of public intoxication. Few will be charged by the police.

All these discussions of definitions may be considered absurd until we remember that this is "Politics" and the most skilled politician of our time famously said:

"It depends what your definition of "is" is". 

LOST said:

Today is St. Patrick's Day. Thousands, maybe tens of thousands will be guilty of public intoxication. Few will be charged by the police.

I would think arresting them would cause a great deal of strain on the resources of the community.  Discretion might be a good call on the part of the police.  Or maybe the courts will agree that none of them are doing anything illegal.

jeffhandy said:

LOST said:

Today is St. Patrick's Day. Thousands, maybe tens of thousands will be guilty of public intoxication. Few will be charged by the police.

I would think arresting them would cause a great deal of strain on the resources of the community.  Discretion might be a good call on the part of the police.  Or maybe the courts will agree that none of them are doing anything illegal.

You are seriously comparing that to so called 'incitement' and actual violence and no legal authority doing anything about it? The authorities just let go because it would be a strain?

How far fetched are you prepared to go.

LOST said:

jeffhandy said:

RealityForAll said:


Speeding is not a crime.  You may want to rethink your analogy.

Ok, I've been to some music festivals where people have been smoking pot and have been openly drinking in public and I have seen police ignore it because they are there to keep things peaceful.




Better?

Today is St. Patrick's Day. Thousands, maybe tens of thousands will be guilty of public intoxication. Few will be charged by the police.

Read my response to JH.

The authorities can make an informed decision that charging a Presidential Candidate with a crime of incitement to violence because of what he said at a rally is more of a danger than not charging him even if they believe that he is actually guilty of incitement to violence. It might not be right, I may not agree with it, but it certainly could happen.

LOST said:

The authorities can make an informed decision that charging a Presidential Candidate with a crime of incitement to violence because of what he said at a rally is more of a danger than not charging him even if they believe that he is actually guilty of incitement to violence. It might not be right, I may not agree with it, but it certainly could happen.

Rather far fetched and you know what happened in Skokie.

There has just been a whole whoopie-do about 'riots' When you actually look at what he sid, most people on MOL would agree with him.