I was actually referring to the act itself. It basically meant that the government can arrest people arbitrarily as long as it suspected them of being in the Klan right?
they already won in the minds of the public because most people only skim headlines
Same case with Trump being impeached, let alone it happening twice.
It's analogous to being arrested, getting to court, then 'being found not guilty'/'having charges dismissed' except many NPCs are too fucking retarded to realize that.
Arrests can quite literally mean no lasting legal matters in the end if any subsequent charges go nowhere, yet going by many the fact an arrest/impeachment was made is enough to affirm that clearly something must have happened and therefore anyone involved must be guilty of said situations.
Then again this is the same unhinged group that pushes that false-accusations aren't a thing and nobody would ever lie about such things because "what would they have to gain from it?" which is as much a stupid question as it is insidious to suggest. Such accusations don't go away despite what may be found out as the Rolling Stone gang rape story highlights. In addition there are still countless stories of similar things that tend to have fairly limited endings, most of them suicide of the accused because of how much their life gets ruined by the accusation alone despite any evidence they may turn out in their defense [if that is even allowed given some outright draconian rules in play there].
Unless they can find direct announcements from the leadership of the Proud Boys telling people to get violent, this shit show is just going to get thrown out.
I'm guessing Trump is going to be fine if he can find a decent lawyer that would defend him. Lets face it the left is going to blacklist any lawyer that will do that.
They need to prove Trump purposely spread misinformation, this would imply that he did not think the election was stolen so how in the world can they prove what Trump believed? A lot of us believe that the election was stolen.
Second they want to say Trump instigated but we already have the entire speech that says civil and peaceful.
And targeting Proud Boys is going to be interesting.
They are trying to impose guilt by association in the eyes of the public. If Trump is being sued with the proud boys, then the media can claim that Trump is allying with "Domestic terrorists" in court and will claim Trump has ties to the Proud Boys because they were sued together by the NAACP. Doesn't matter if he actually has any ties or not, and it clearly doesn't matter that the proud boys are being unfairly maligned by the media, because the normies will not do independent research on any of it.
How did Trump intimidate BLACK voters who overwhelmingly voted for HIM in far greater percentages than past GOP candidates?
Is it not even MORE hubris to claim that black people only vote for the party that CREATED THE KKK?!?
(side note - I had an odd hypothesis hit me around the election and its weirdly gaining traction - but it seems to me that the ultimate goal of the DNC is trying to reverse their "stain" of losing the Civil War and get revenge on the GOP by reversing everything the Civil War and Civil Rights legislation did.)
Huh, I wasn't aware of that. Sounds pretty unconstitutional.
Reminds me of that new Watchmen trainwreck.
I was actually referring to the act itself. It basically meant that the government can arrest people arbitrarily as long as it suspected them of being in the Klan right?
Meanwhile: https://i.imgur.com/17NbHNv.png
Same case with Trump being impeached, let alone it happening twice.
It's analogous to being arrested, getting to court, then 'being found not guilty'/'having charges dismissed' except many NPCs are too fucking retarded to realize that.
Arrests can quite literally mean no lasting legal matters in the end if any subsequent charges go nowhere, yet going by many the fact an arrest/impeachment was made is enough to affirm that clearly something must have happened and therefore anyone involved must be guilty of said situations.
Then again this is the same unhinged group that pushes that false-accusations aren't a thing and nobody would ever lie about such things because "what would they have to gain from it?" which is as much a stupid question as it is insidious to suggest. Such accusations don't go away despite what may be found out as the Rolling Stone gang rape story highlights. In addition there are still countless stories of similar things that tend to have fairly limited endings, most of them suicide of the accused because of how much their life gets ruined by the accusation alone despite any evidence they may turn out in their defense [if that is even allowed given some outright draconian rules in play there].
Unless they can find direct announcements from the leadership of the Proud Boys telling people to get violent, this shit show is just going to get thrown out.
I'm guessing Trump is going to be fine if he can find a decent lawyer that would defend him. Lets face it the left is going to blacklist any lawyer that will do that.
They need to prove Trump purposely spread misinformation, this would imply that he did not think the election was stolen so how in the world can they prove what Trump believed? A lot of us believe that the election was stolen. Second they want to say Trump instigated but we already have the entire speech that says civil and peaceful.
And targeting Proud Boys is going to be interesting.
They are trying to impose guilt by association in the eyes of the public. If Trump is being sued with the proud boys, then the media can claim that Trump is allying with "Domestic terrorists" in court and will claim Trump has ties to the Proud Boys because they were sued together by the NAACP. Doesn't matter if he actually has any ties or not, and it clearly doesn't matter that the proud boys are being unfairly maligned by the media, because the normies will not do independent research on any of it.
How did Trump intimidate BLACK voters who overwhelmingly voted for HIM in far greater percentages than past GOP candidates?
Is it not even MORE hubris to claim that black people only vote for the party that CREATED THE KKK?!?
(side note - I had an odd hypothesis hit me around the election and its weirdly gaining traction - but it seems to me that the ultimate goal of the DNC is trying to reverse their "stain" of losing the Civil War and get revenge on the GOP by reversing everything the Civil War and Civil Rights legislation did.)