Who is saying rioting is a solution? Your institutionalized patronizing attitude is one reason people ( you would say black people) are pissed enough to burn shit down. Just for a moment imagine the frustration you would have to feel in order to riot. What would it take for you personally to riot? Of course you would never do that, or feel compelled to, because you feel you have a voice, that there would be some avenue of constructive solutions to your grievance. But of course, blacks are just shiftless and want free stuff, so I supposed itâs the white manâs burden to put out the fires.
6 Likes
Heh, I think Rudy wants a seat on the clown car for the entertainment it would provide in an otherwise stale and boring life.
4 Likes
âThe danger to a black child â if it was my child â the danger is another black.â
Maybe. But what about the rest of the black childrenâthose you arenât the father of?
8 Likes
You were doing just fineâuntil that last sentence, which is not only a logical fallacy, but which you included in the comment to cause a reaction, so that you could feel justified in making such a stupid remark.
2 Likes
Youâre way overgeneralizing. Only a few people in the community engaged in rioting and looting, and some of the rioters werenât even from Ferguson. Some African Americans even guarded white-owned businesses from looters.
13 Likes
Indeed, it sounds like this pathetic also-ran opportunist is desperately trying to ride some perceived wave of popular racism to get his name back in the headlines. Youâre still an asshole Rudy.
4 Likes
Whites kill whites. Blacks kill blacks. The âwho kills whoâ stats are in the link below- open it in a new window.
http://politicalcalculations.blogspot.com/2011/03/who-kills-who.html#.VHi9FjHF95c
Rudy, prejudice is his passion. He is himself when he can hate freely, without having to apologize. very small man, very small heart, very small mind, very large ego. freak
6 Likes
I could be wrong, but I read that last sentence as snark.
6 Likes
Itâs only a matter of time before this bigot uses the N word.
2 Likes
No homicide in the white community? Has he forgotten Sandy Hook? Columbine? The shooting in the Amish school in Nickel Mines? The Oklahoma City bombing? John Wayne Gacy? David Berkowitz? Scott Peterson? Susan Smith? Homicides by white people are in the news every day. What planet is Rudy Giulani living on?
And this is a man who thought he was fit to be president of the United States.
13 Likes
I just googled him. Looks like the nut didnât fall all that far from the tree, got his bullying character from his father. I also see that he was a draft-dodger of the Dick Cheney type. You know, I see this pattern happening a lotâutter cowards being bullies. Reminds me of that cop, Wilson. They only have guts when they have a gun ( or some other form of power) in their hand and the other guy doesnât.
7 Likes
And yet you didâŚ
10 Likes
Actually, thatâs what made this particular grand jury so strange.
Normal practice is for the prosecutor to bring proposed charges
before the grand jury and show that there is sufficient evidence
to justify going to trial. And grand juries USUALLY agree. A grand
jury ruling âNo billâ (insufficient evidence to justify bringing a
charge) is rare and a major rebuke to the prosecutor. In this case
my understanding is that the prosecutor didnât propose charges,
just dumped a lot of evidence on the GJ - not a normal proceeding
at all.
5 Likes
2016 yes.
It worked for St. Ronnie and scripted by Lee Atwater.
4 Likes
Then thereâs reward of g(R)ifting the (R)ubes.
Free money is hard to pass up.
jw1
3 Likes
âReasonable doubtâ is not the standard for an indictment; the standard for an indictment is âprobable causeâ. And the prosecutor could have established probable cause very easily had he really wanted to.
The chief complaints about the process I have heard from people on this site are (a) the unusual choice to go to a grand jury to obtain an indictment rather than the more common practice of a preliminary hearing, a choice which meant that the evidence was presented in secret rather than in a public forum; (b) the fact that the prosecutor seemed to be acting more as a defense attorney than a prosecutor; and (c) the misuse of the grand jury process to throw the burden of investigation and determining the proper charges on the shoulders of jurors ill-prepared to carry out those tasks rather than the prosecutor doing that himself.
9 Likes
Is Guiliani running for something again? It would be great to see him take another pounding.
2 Likes
Yes, my current impression of Sharpton is that he has mellowed considerably since he first appeared on the national scene, and he is well worth listening to on the subject of race in this country. Dismissing him out of hand is willful blindness.
7 Likes
So you condemn an entire community for the actions of a very few â at least some of whom are not even members of that community?
9 Likes
Well, I doubt any prosecutor wants to try a case that he doesnât think he can win. But the standard for the jury in deciding whether to return a true bill is nevertheless probable cause, not âbeyond a reasonable doubt.â Normally at a grand jury hearing, itâs just the prosecutor presenting enough of his evidence to establish that the elements of the charges have been met. The defense does not present a case at all, so there is no opportunity to even raise the question of reasonable doubt.
That said, if the prosecution is in possession of evidence that is exculpatory to the accused, they are ethically obliged to present that, too, but I donât know how rigorously that is enforced. And even then, the standard of judgement is still âprobable cause.â A grand jury doesnât decide guilt or innocence, only whether there is enough of a case to even take it to trial.
3 Likes