ewsieg

And note, I argued what health department did as a result of the EO, but since it wasn’t explicitly in the EO, I must have been a liar. Funny how you take such a literal view of law when it suits you.

No idea what you’re talking about, movie reference? But man, you’re testy when you get caught lying. What I do know is anytime I said Whitmer has the power, you argued semantics that she specifically couldn’t do it, even when I pointed out she could still issue EO’s, just not one that stayed in effect forever, you said that was not possible. Most of this forum will back you, but they remember, lying about it isn’t really scoring any points for you.

I’m not sure if they have all powers that the state health department has and I’m sure not the powers an EO from Whitmer would have, but they do have powers. Pretty sure they can determine mask mandate in schools for example.

You posted for months that nothing could be done because of the evil GOP. I pointed out what the health director could have done, or what Whitmer could have forced her to do since this time last year, but nope, it was always that the GOP stripped away all powers. I’m glad you’re realizing it, but don’t pretend you weren’t on the wrong side for a year.

He might follow him so when the next person says “I heard……”, he can quickly respond “stop listening to Dr Oz”.

Idk, maybe the health director has been hearing the same news and following the same people you and Oblong followed for the last year and truly believes the GOP has prevented any of those actions from happening/enacted by the Whitmer admin?

I was playing off of the judge/jury/executioner line. Self defense is any force to alleviate the threat, up to and including death. And with that, then you hope that force is deemed necessary by the DA or a jury if it goes that far.

Incorrect, in self defense you become the executioner. You then hope that the DA agrees with your belief that it was self defense. If he doesn’t agree, then you hope the trial acts as judge and jury and sides with you.

This is the problem, too many folks want to focus on the evidence that only supports the vew they want portrayed. You (and I) would have supported the police if they killed an unarmed person that was showing no violence to any other person, but trying to break into the courthouse in Portland as an unlawful mob was pushing them on. We would use the same argument that the left is using to argue about Babbit, in support of the officer that shot her.

His mom didn't drive him there, just more MSM reports that were never corrected. And as I stated, he, nor anyone, has the right to be judge/jury/executioner. But from a legal standpoint, he violated a curfew, that's it. You're allowed to be stupid and not go to jail, which is a good thing for Rittenhouse.

I take that back, the one battled bi-polar. Additionally, the one that got shot in the arm, his attack on Grandma was 10 years before when he was a minor. Still ironic that all the folks he happened to shoot had a checkered past.

Actually, all three were folks had rap sheets, all with some serious crimes in them. Folks against Rittenhouse want to claim he went out searching to kill people, if so, just how ironic the three he shot all are horrible people.

Absolutely true, but don't make the mistake of thinking that feeling is on just a political side of the aisle. While praised as the best thing since sliced bread, the BLM riots were not pleasant for folks that lived/worked in or were just near areas that were destroyed. Law and Order candidates even won when it came to candidates with a D attached to their name.

I'm currently in Corpus Christi visiting my BIL. Went to an HEB which is like a Kroger and the mask situation was the same I'd expect in Michigan. Most workers are wearing masks too when you go into gas stations, restaurants, etc. My BIL says the more rural places aren't wearing masks, similar to Michigan. That said, Texas numbers are around 1/2 of what we're seeing in Michigan.

Kyle Rittenhouse Is No Hero If a jury acquits him, it will not be a miscarriage of justice—but an acquittal does not make a foolish man a hero.  By David French Well said by French.

Anyone that did should ask for their money back. As bad as the prosecution was, his defense was atrocious as well. Luckily for him, both were equally bad and cancelled out.

Take 5 minutes out of your life to read up about them. To note, as I said, only a jury has the right in the US to imprison or take someone's life. Rittenhouse doesn't have the right to do so. But, the one was only found guilty of strangulation and false imprisonment of his brother, and later for kicking his sister. But for the other one that died, if anything, when i'm president, Rittenhouse would go to jail for killing him, as he deserved so much worse than what he got. Well, she did deserve to die. IMO, you clearly are determining your view based on MSM. He was there in the first place because 1/2 of the country felt law enforcement should f-off and stay out as lawlessness ruled the day. Legally there is nothing against the law from being a vigilante either. I have every right to approach a stranger in my neighbors yard and tell him to leave if he can't give me a reason why he's there. And should he end up being a danger to me, I have every right to defend myself. As I mentioned, I don't like the idea of a 17 year old with a gun in a dangerous situation, but it wasn't illegal. I would just like to point out that no one else was shot at the Capitol on 1/6. So obviously you're good with outing the law enforcement that shot Babbit, right? But yes, I get you're point. A 17 year old legally brought a rifle into the town, whereas allowing a town to burn in an act of Anarchy, while allowing a child molester, who was just released from the hospital that day for a recent suicide attempt, to run around and start flres likely would have ended well....if it were not for that evil 17 year old that had no issues with anyone else.

funny and all, but while on vacation, this trial is about the only thing I've been paying attention to and man, MSM manages to screw it all up. Is the kid an idiot, yup. But based on the law, there just isn't anything there. Plus MSM is trying to turn this into a racial thing, as the reason Rittenhouse was there was because of the race related event, but he killed two white guys and the third was white as well. The world is better off with both of them dead, but legally, that shouldn't score Rittenhouse points. Should a 17 year old bring a rifle to a hostile protest, nope. Should there be a law against it....i'd support it. But he didn't do anything illegal in doing so. Crazy how the media portrays it and uses the prosecutor for all their soundbites. Also ironic that the media by and large supported BLM and the overall idea behind them. I'm not saying the media and all the left were ACAB supporters, but they were definitely ACAB sympathizers. This prosecutor has ben misrepresenting and over-charged this kid, while painting him as 'bad' while offering so little evidence he did anything legally wrong. The entire closing arguments they clearly pushed for a 'well, if you don't like him, just convict him' approach. MSNBC and all the left wing media sites are going to celebrate unrest, that they created by not providing the facts of the trial and preparing folks for it. Instead they won't just celebrate the unrest, they will bring more folks on to help further incite.

Absolutely true, just an added touch to show their bias.

As I stated from the beginning, this isn't a right or wrong question, there are many different thoughts on this subject which have been shared via social media, media, and politicians. I think you are correct that many were confused and found it juvenile, and as I stated earlier, that was the case for many on the right when it became socially OK to say 'f Trump' (ironic as how those I would expect to get upset with this vulgar langauge (white old people) are now perfectly fine throwing it out there when it fits them). But yes, many people condemned it too: nypost.com/2021/11/01/sorry-media-lets-go-brandon-isnt-a-new-low-in-us-politics/ https://thefederalist.com/2021/11/01/hysterical-nbc-journo-calls-secret-service-over-lets-go-brandon-merch/ https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/11/01/cnn-and-msnbc-commentator-gets-educated-after-saying-lets-go-brandon-is-maga-sieg-heil-1156697/

Ahh, ok. And yes, I did say that, because it's true. One of the many 'ewsiegisms' which I think is better defined as 'trueisms' where people on each side find themselves offended by one and proudly saying the other.

So FYI, don't be surprised when Kyle Rittenhouse is found not guilty, at least on the bigger charges. Heading into the trial and with the video's i've seen before and the news coverage, I kind of had the thought that if those first shots were a toss up on if he was truly scared for his life, it almost didn't matter as he illegally had that gun. Sort of like a drunk driver that gets hit by someone going through a red light. Even if he wasn't technically at fault for the accident...he's still drunk. At least that's the rough idea I had based on the MSM reports of the shooting. I'm just not sure how that works with self defense, at least in Wisconsin. Plus it looks like there is some question on if he was illegally carrying. Add into it that the first guy he shot was absolutely the aggressor and Rittenhouse attempted to stay and report the shooting, until it was obvious it was too dangerous for him to stay. The guy he shot in the arm stated he thought Rittenhouse was an active shooter and hence why he was following him, but stated he was scared for Rittenhouse's life, especially when he was attacked with the skateboard and than added that Rittenhouse did not shoot him until he lowered his hands and pointed his gun at Rittenhouse. If you're interested in what you shouldn't do if you're a lawyer, go watch the photographer that was on the stand go at it with the prosecutor. 'No more questions' would have been his best friend, but nope, kept going after the witness and kept getting put in his place. Simply unreal.

I'm not going to lie, i'm lost. It's obvious you threw off your shirt and ready to rumble, but that's about all I can figure out right now. Did some media and members of the left point to anyone saying "Let's go Brandon" and call them racist, horrible human beings...yes. Are folks on the right saying it because they think it's a neat way to say Fuck Joe Biden...yes. Did the woke left/media work to put SouthWest airlines under pressure over a pilot saying "Let's go Brandon", which surprisingly faded away after the supposed audio that was used to prove it had some folks ask if it could have been 'Let's go Braves" and then it was determined that pilot audio was from a flight weeks earlier, before "Lets go Brandon" even started...yes. When the dems were able to get the Infrastructure bill over the hill, did democrats use the same "Let's go Brandon" to mock republicans....yes. And finally, did something that you think "Let's go Brandon" represented happen, which I didn't explicitly mention above....probably yes.

Anyone watching/following the Rittenhouse or Arbery trials? I've watched a little of the Rittenhouse one, doesn't seem to be going well for the prosecution IMO. Outside of Buddha, any other lawyers? From a legal standpoint, very curious about the one lesser charge, the curfew. The defense indicated they were done to the judge, the defense than asked for the curfew charge to be dismissed for lack of evidence, citing the only mention of it was a detective mentioning there was a curfew. Now the judge is allowing the prosecutor to submit further evidence to prove the curfew, which now is also under question as another court has stated the curfew was not legal. It's just a mess, and pretty much sums up everything else I saw from the prosecution. For Arbery, sounds like the prosecution is doing well building the case outside of just the video for the Arbery trial. I still feel that video alone gets the guilty verdict there, but good to build around it as well.

Not sure what you're speaking off? You mean how after the left went off their rocker about how horrible this was, they co-opted it to tout Biden's infrastructure bill? If so, yes, the left realized how to take a joke only after they found a way to 'own the right'. To note, I found it somewhat funny on both sides.