Utter lawlessness - Kate Steine's illegal alien murderer is acquitted

[ths61]

I guess the OJ sham trial was not enough. Now California has acquitted the dirt bag repeat felon illegal alien of all murder and man slaughter charges for murdering Kate Steinle. And this coming within a week of finding the mastermind of the Benghazi massacre not guilty of murder.

WTF is the USA justice system coming to? If you are a US citizen driving a getaway car and someone gets killed in the bank, you are guilty of murder. If you are an illegal alien felon deported 5 times with a stolen gun that pulled the trigger or a foreign terrorist architect, you get acquitted. Have a nice day, and do you know about our generous amnesty program with taxpayer funded benefits ???

[shortleg0521]

I guess the OJ sham trial was not enough. Now California has acquitted the dirt bag repeat felon illegal alien of all murder and man slaughter charges for murdering Kate Steinle. And this coming within a week of finding the mastermind of the Benghazi massacre not guilty of murder.

WTF is the USA justice system coming to? If you are a US citizen driving a getaway car and someone gets killed in the bank, you are guilty of murder. If you are an illegal alien felon deported 5 times with a stolen gun that pulled the trigger or a foreign terrorist architect, you get acquitted. Have a nice day, and do you know about our generous amnesty program with taxpayer funded benefits ???

You should have seen this coming, look at the area this so called trial was held.
This will go on and on till a1ll of these people get killed trying to save the world.
Then and only then will the rest of us get back to using the word illegal.
Pray that the big one hits and the West coast becomes an island .

[willtill]

We are going the way of Rome; the demise of our once great country will be from corruption and loss of morals from within.

I am more especially concerned about little rocket man successfully being able to deliver an ICBM over the U.S. and detonating a EMP now. What really concerns me about that is the batshit crazy liberals will not support our military response back onto the NORK’s. Sad time we live in gentleman.

[choptop]

I am sure countless people before me have uttered the phrase " I am glad I am at the age I am because I would not want to ..." Things are getting crazy out their and I fear for our future and unless their is a revolution, I am afraid the politicians are going to take us right down the shtr.:yikes:

[Heatnbeat]

Look at that batshit crazy Maxine Waters. She's afraid that if the Norks drop a bomb on us that Trump will get us into a war. She ain't qualified to be a follower let alone a leader.

[taxfree4]

Don't think there weren't people in that courtroom including jurors, defense lawyers and spectators that heard that verdict and wanted to do a fist pump in the air. This is a game to lawyers, a game of bragging rights, like when they caught Hillary on tape who was defending a rapist laughing about passing the lie detector test. All the defense lawyers wanted to do was get a couple of spanish people, or white liberal (same thing) on the jury to hold out for a not guilty or aquittal, and they succeeded. The bigger picture here is there is no difference between this oily little illegal jumping over the border or assassinating an American citizen, it is an assault either way on America. Aided and abetted by self-hating white liberals whether they be attorneys, jurors or judges there is a thought collective that this is the way to get even on Trump, the stupid people that elected him, the wall and Hillary losing. They are ecstatic on this verdict and the jurors will probably hold a party for the him, honoring him as a hero, like they did for the thug that was aquitted here at the Crown Heights riot. The only answer is vigilanteism, period, violence is the only thing they listen to.

[willtill]

Don't think there weren't people in that courtroom including jurors, defense lawyers and spectators that heard that verdict and wanted to do a fist pump in the air. This is a game to lawyers, a game of bragging rights, like when they caught Hillary on tape who was defending a rapist laughing about passing the lie detector test. All the defense lawyers wanted to do was get a couple of spanish people, or white liberal (same thing) on the jury to hold out for a not guilty or aquittal, and they succeeded. The bigger picture here is there is no difference between this oily little illegal jumping over the border or assassinating an American citizen, it is an assault either way on America. Aided and abetted by self-hating white liberals whether they be attorneys, jurors or judges there is a thought collective that this is the way to get even on Trump, the stupid people that elected him, the wall and Hillary losing. They are ecstatic on this verdict and the jurors will probably hold a party for the him, honoring him as a hero, like they did for the thug that was aquitted here at the Crown Heights riot. The only answer is vigilanteism, period, violence is the only thing they listen to.

Agree with your closing remarks.

[lake_carl]

Really! Anyone know some facts? How about the fact that 12 feet from the felon the bullet hit the ground, ricocheted then traveled 78 feet before fatally striking the victim. How about the fact that the gun company has issued recall because when dropped this gun often fires. If felon was rich white guy no trail or national press.

[Sorcerer]

Really! Anyone know some facts? How about the fact that 12 feet from the felon the bullet hit the ground, ricocheted then traveled 78 feet before fatally striking the victim. How about the fact that the gun company has issued recall because when dropped this gun often fires. If felon was rich white guy no trail or national press.

Was he not a convicted felon who should not of had a gun? Who should not have been in this country to begin with. Again. A gun in a hand only goes bang when the booger hook is on the bang switch.

[willtill]

Really! Anyone know some facts? How about the fact that 12 feet from the felon the bullet hit the ground, ricocheted then traveled 78 feet before fatally striking the victim. How about the fact that the gun company has issued recall because when dropped this gun often fires. If felon was rich white guy no trail or national press.

Blame the gun. A typical liberal tactic.

Not sure of the validity of your facts... but if he was not there, the gun would've not been there, and she would still be here with us.

[lake_carl]

Yes he was convicted and previously deported. He was fpund is disoriented state drugs or alcohol at scene of shooting. No evidence presented of how he got the gun. One of his confused stories was he found gun it was wrapped in cloth dropped it then it shot. Google sig sauer 40 caliber recall. He was found guilty of felon in possession of firearm.

[crossbowme]

We are going the way of Rome; the demise of our once great country will be from corruption and loss of morals from within.

I am more especially concerned about little rocket man successfully being able to deliver an ICBM over the U.S. and detonating a EMP now. What really concerns me about that is the batshit crazy liberals will not support our military response back onto the NORK’s. Sad time we live in gentleman.

Gibbons in his complete analysis of the Roman Empire (The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire), lists the major reasons for the Fall. The most important was when the citizens no longer were required, or felt the need, to participate in the defense of their country and volunteers and mercenaries were good enough.

The Steine killing is just another step towards the Fall.

[lake_carl]

The Roman failure was more like the small elitist society lost control or the majority who would no longer fight for themselves to remain poor. The subject of this thread is this murder that racist and elitist depicted as murder to further their fear agenda when all facts indicate and jury accepted as proof was an accident

[Ixol Phaane]

Really! Anyone know some facts? How about the fact that 12 feet from the felon the bullet hit the ground, ricocheted then traveled 78 feet before fatally striking the victim. How about the fact that the gun company has issued recall because when dropped this gun often fires. If felon was rich white guy no trail or national press.

What?! Are you reasonably using logic and rational interpretation of the facts to post a thoughtful response to an obviously emotional outcry for vengeance? What the hell is wrong with you? Why can’t you just fall in line with the mob mentality and demand we exercise vigilante justice against this “illegal”? Next I suppose you’re gonna start ranting about Human Rights as guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights upon which our fine country is built. C’mon... that stuff is only for ‘mericans! OMG! :stirthepot:

:tomatohit:

[ths61]

Yes he was convicted and previously deported. He was fpund is disoriented state drugs or alcohol at scene of shooting. No evidence presented of how he got the gun. One of his confused stories was he found gun it was wrapped in cloth dropped it then it shot. Google sig sauer 40 caliber recall. He was found guilty of felon in possession of firearm.

My Sig .40 cal has never gone boom by itself, nor has any of my other Sigs, Rugers, Smiths, Glocks, Wathers, H&K's, Berettas, Marlins, POFs, KelTecs, etc. over 50 years. All guns sold in California have to go through the OEMs drop tests as well as pay the State's extortion fees for their additional drop tests. His lawyer's fabricated rehearsed parroted testimony is total BS designed to confuse the gullible. All the biased liberal prosecutor would have had to do is have the gun drop tested and presented the trigger weight to prove his defense lawyer supplied testimony was total BS. Wonder why that did not happen in a sanctuary state court system ???

The dirt bag tossed the gun into the ocean after murdering Kate showing knowledge of his illegal behavior. He admitted to taking the stolen gun to the ocean to shoot sea lions. Any lawful gun owner in the PRK would have been held guilty no matter what they were aiming at as well as slapped for may other violations (felony possession of firearm, possession of stolen property, carrying a loaded firearm in public without permit, brandishing a firearm, manslaughter (at a minimum), etc., etc. etc. as well as compounding the severity of punishment of doing crimes while in the possession of a firearm). The PRK would have made an anti-2A poster child out of the American citizen, but acquitted the repeat illegal alien felon of all charges. The illegal alien recanted and parroted what his lawyers told him to say while the liberal prosecutor could have easily debunked the fabrication. The liberal court prevented the jury from knowing anything about his past including all of his prior felonies, deportations and the rest of his wrap sheet. They made him out to be a choir boy with no priors, not to mention the PRK refused to hold him for ICE which GAVE HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO MURDER Kate Steinle. Can you say rigged and coverup ???

The mere fact that the liberal left did not make this a nationwide anti-2A campaign should be deafening to anyone with a pulse. It was purely a political SJW sanctuary state campaign putting illegal alien trash over the lives of American citizens while hiding the repercussions resulting from failed sanctuary city/state policies. His lawyer made that very clear by going after Trump within his second sentence after leaving the court room.

[ths61]

What?! Are you reasonably using logic and rational interpretation of the facts to post a thoughtful response to an obviously emotional outcry for vengeance? What the hell is wrong with you? Why can’t you just fall in line with the mob mentality and demand we exercise vigilante justice against this “illegal”? Next I suppose you’re gonna start ranting about Human Rights as guaranteed by the Constitution and Bill of Rights upon which our fine country is built. C’mon... that stuff is only for ‘mericans! OMG! :stirthepot:

:tomatohit:

Do you really think this was a fair trial (and not a political statement/coverup) in a sanctuary state court system, in a sanctuary state, in a sanctuary city with a liberal defense, liberal judge, liberal prosecution, suppression of evidence, coverup of failed sanctuary polices and liberal agencies that allowed the perp to murder and failure of the liberal prosecutor to present unbiased documented laboratory evidence to debunk the fabricated testimony ?

Where is the justice for murdered Kate Steinle and her family ?

A guilty verdict would have had blow back on the failed sanctuary state policies and politicians as well implicated the agencies that failed to hold the perp for ICE as accessories. There is absolutely no way those parties in the super-majority would be implicated. They are covering their collective azzes while making a political statement at the harm of American citizens.

[opas ride]

At the ripe old age of almost 78 having seen and observed many things in my life, I have placed my faith in the Lord and try to live his teachings as best I can....but with current left wing corrupt liberal politicians, self serving lawyers, judges that "suck" and all that is currently destroying America with these "self-righteous" people, I am slowly losing faith in the future of our great country and hope that the man above, one day, judges these people accordingly for their misguided and stupid decisions.....Ride safe ....

[Ewreck]

Born, raised, and lived in Commiefornia for 46 of my 50 years on planet earth. I'm actually surprised people are shocked at the verdict as this crap happens daily and its thrown in your face. Hopefully this particular piece of scum meets his demise quickly and in the most horrible way possible. I wish her family the ability to find peace one day.

[Ixol Phaane]

Do you really think this was a fair trial (and not a political statement/coverup) in a sanctuary state court system, in a sanctuary state, in a sanctuary city with a liberal defense, liberal judge, liberal prosecution, suppression of evidence, coverup of failed sanctuary polices and liberal agencies that allowed the perp to murder and failure of the liberal prosecutor to present unbiased documented laboratory evidence to debunk the fabricated testimony ?

Where is the justice for murdered Kate Steinle and her family ?

A guilty verdict would have had blow back on the failed sanctuary state policies and politicians as well implicated the agencies that failed to hold the perp for ICE as accessories. There is absolutely no way those parties in the super-majority would be implicated. They are covering their collective azzes while making a political statement at the harm of American citizens.


That’s a pretty good conspiracy theory ya got goin’ there.

[ths61]

That’s a pretty good conspiracy theory ya got goin’ there.

I see you have your head firmly planted in the sand by not responding to any of the facts.

I suppose you think OJ was innocent as well ? Hint, his civil trial was not able to suppress the evidence that his criminal trial did.

[ths61]

The director of ICE (Thomas Homan) just reported that California refused to hold the illegal alien for ICE pickup for deportation to Mexico. This is a well known fact.

California turned the illegal alien loose on the streets. California's violation of Federal Law facilitated Kate Steinle's murder.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJbB1gsjgbQ


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvRZdNoHEf8

[Ixol Phaane]

I see you have your head firmly planted in the sand by not responding to any of the facts.

I suppose you think OJ was innocent as well ? Hint, his civil trial was not able to suppress the evidence that his criminal trial did.

Oh, I’m sorry. When you say “facts”, are you referring to that nonsensical garbage that you presented in the form of opinion/editorial in your prior message? This stuff...

Originally Posted by ths61...

”Do you really think this was a fair trial (and not a political statement/coverup) in a sanctuary state court system, in a sanctuary state, in a sanctuary city with a liberal defense, liberal judge, liberal prosecution, suppression of evidence, coverup of failed sanctuary polices and liberal agencies that allowed the perp to murder and failure of the liberal prosecutor to present unbiased documented laboratory evidence to debunk the fabricated testimony?”

Apparently you have trouble distinguishing fact from opinion. Just because something spews across your keyboard from the depths of your brain doesn’t make it factual, no matter how many times you regurgitate it.

If you’re really interested in debating the issues, I’ll go there with you. I could use the entertainment. Bring your substantiated points and cite your sources and lets see what happens.

[willtill]

I've sat on a jury before, and completely understand the limitations placed upon what can be introduced as evidence and what may not be considered when rendering a verdict.

:icon_frown:

[Ixol Phaane]

The director of ICE (Thomas Homan) just reported that California refused to hold the illegal alien for ICE pickup for deportation to Mexico. This is a well known fact.

California turned the illegal alien loose on the streets. California's violation of Federal Law facilitated Kate Steinle's murder.



ICE tried to pull this crap in Arizona earlier this year, requesting that local law enforcement agencies hold individuals illegally until such time that ICE officers could take custody. Unfortunately for them, it is unconstitutional for a person to be held beyond a specified period of time without being criminally charged. Local law enforcement gave ICE notification for the pending release of detainees, however ICE officials could not be troubled to appear in a timely manner to re-apprehend these individuals.

The Constitutionality of law exists for a reason. No Police State for me, yet...thank you very much.

[Ixol Phaane]

I've sat on a jury before, and completely understand the limitations placed upon what can be introduced as evidence and what may not be considered when rendering a verdict.

:icon_frown:

So you can appreciate the rules of law. They’re not just these arbitrary rules that change on a case to case basis. Obviously we aren’t going to agree with all the rules every time, especially when a case goes the way this one did. But to claim that the rules are unjust and advocate for throwing them out because they don’t suit your purpose today is to risk breaking a system that is meant to serve all, as fairly as possible. If change is required and demanded, the process for change is in place and prescribed... by the Constitution.

I really hate having discussions like this. The rules are the rules, like em or not. Following the rules of law is generally a good thing. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who advocates for the wild west doesn’t truly appreciate the depth and meaning of the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights...nor fully grasps the meaning of the freedoms that those documents guarantee in American society.

And that’s all I have to say about that.

Ride safe. Ride free.

[willtill]

I do wish the rule of law was followed by all regarding illegal immigration. Sanctuary Cities do purposely impede Federal immigration enforcement by openly declaring they will not work with such.

Not all follow the rules.

[ths61]

Oh, I’m sorry. When you say “facts”, are you referring to that nonsensical garbage that you presented in the form of opinion/editorial in your prior message? This stuff...

Originally Posted by ths61...

”Do you really think this was a fair trial (and not a political statement/coverup) in a sanctuary state court system, in a sanctuary state, in a sanctuary city with a liberal defense, liberal judge, liberal prosecution, suppression of evidence, coverup of failed sanctuary polices and liberal agencies that allowed the perp to murder and failure of the liberal prosecutor to present unbiased documented laboratory evidence to debunk the fabricated testimony?”

Apparently you have trouble distinguishing fact from opinion. Just because something spews across your keyboard from the depths of your brain doesn’t make it factual, no matter how many times you regurgitate it.

If you’re really interested in debating the issues, I’ll go there with you. I could use the entertainment. Bring your substantiated points and cite your sources and lets see what happens.

Again, you ignored all of the facts including suppression of priors (probably eligible for the 3 strikes law), suppression of evidence, failure of the prosecution to have the gun tested, failure to charge for a plethora of applicable associated violations, violating federal immigration laws by both the illegal alien and the state, etc., etc. etc.. Those are all facts, not opinions. Nice obfuscation though.

BTW, the DOJ just unsealed an arrest warrant for the POS.

[ths61]

I do wish the rule of law was followed by all regarding illegal immigration. Sanctuary Cities do purposely impede Federal immigration enforcement by openly declaring they will not work with such.

Not all follow the rules.

Jose Ines Garcia Zarate stated he specifically went to SF because he knew the sanctuary city would protect him. Sanctuary policies are an open invitation for lawlessness and crime and the illegal aliens know it.

[Ixol Phaane]

Again, you ignored all of the facts including suppression of priors (probably eligible for the 3 strikes law), suppression of evidence, failure of the prosecution to have the gun tested, failure to charge for a plethora of applicable associated violations, violating federal immigration laws by both the illegal alien and the state, etc., etc. etc.. Those are all facts, not opinions. Nice obfuscation though.

BTW, the DOJ just unsealed an arrest warrant for the POS.

Okay, since you insist, I’ll play.

I do believe it was a fair trial. Your opinion may differ.
I do not believe it was a political statement or coverup. Your opinion may differ.
Suppression of priors is a lawful defense tactic. Fact.
“Probably eligible for the 3 strikes law”. Sounds like your opinion or guess.
Suppression of evidence is a lawful defense tactic. Fact.
Failure to test the gun was poor prosecution. Fact.
Failure to charge for a plethora... How many? What specifications?
Violation of Federal immigration laws by defendant. Apparently factual.
Violation of Federal immigration laws by State. Alleged by you.
Etc., etc., etc. ... padding? Or do you just like to see yourself type? You do understand how debate works, right? Point/counterpoint?

Yeah, you know, on second thought this really does sound like it was a political statement or coverup. :jerkit:

[ths61]

Okay, since you insist, I’ll play.

I do believe it was a fair trial. Your opinion may differ.
I do not believe it was a political statement or coverup. Your opinion may differ. - Unless both prosecution and defense are both party to generate predetermined outcome.
Suppression of priors is a lawful defense tactic. Fact. - Unless both prosecution and defense are both party to generate predetermined outcome.
“Probably eligible for the 3 strikes law”. Sounds like your opinion or guess. - He has 7 prior felony convictions. - fact.
Suppression of evidence is a lawful defense tactic. Fact. - Unless both prosecution and defense are both party to generate predetermined outcome.
- Suppress 7 prior felony convictions, jurors don't know if 3 strikes apply. (Hint: 7 is more than 3)
- Suppress 7 prior felony convictions, jurors don't know if felony possession applies.
- Suppress 6 prior deportations, jurors don't know he is guilty of federal felony reentry of 5 counts. (not including 7 felony priors)
- ...
Failure to test the gun was poor prosecution. Fact. - Unless both prosecution and defense are both party to generate predetermined outcome.
Failure to charge for a plethora... How many? What specifications? -
These are a few that come to mind.
- Involuntary manslaughter. The definition of negligent use of a firearm which results in killing a person. - fact
(NOTE: The defense's "not-guilty" argument was the actual definition of Involuntary manslaughter. E.g. He is not guilty because he is guilty ???)
- Possession of stolen property. - fact
- Brandishing a weapon in public. - fact
- Carrying a loaded firearm in public without a permit. -fact
- Violation of supervised release. - fact
- Felony possession of a firearm. - fact
- Possessing a magazine with the capacity of over 10 rounds. - fact
- Carrying a firearm outside of a locked container - fact
- Discharging a firearm in a public place - fact
- Federal Felony Illegal reentry after removal - 5 counts - fact
- Attempting to kill protected wildlife. - Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) - by own admission
- Attempting to conceal or destroy evidence. - fact (see also: HRC)
- More drug charges

Violation of Federal immigration laws by defendant. Apparently factual. - Repeat offender 7 times, Felony reentry 5 counts. - fact
Violation of Federal immigration laws by State. Alleged by you. - As declared by Director of ICE Thomas D. Homan - fact

Etc., etc., etc. ... padding? Or do you just like to see yourself type? You do understand how debate works, right. Point/counterpoint?
Since you failed to address any of the specific points I made until this post, why should I have elaborated any further? Obfuscation is your game.

Yeah, you know, on second thought this really does sound like it was a political statement or coverup.
Obviously your head is still in the sand, nor have you spent any time in California politics.



..

[Ixol Phaane]

..

Ths61, you are an amazing individual. Not only do you ride, but apparently you’re also a prodigious legal analyst and mind reader. I take my hat off to you.

Too bad you’re not particularly adept at selling conspiracy. I assume that the whole point of your response to my complimenting your theory is to convince me that “...both prosecution and defense are both party to predetermined outcome.” But I’m not buying it.

I believe lawyers are particularly self serving people. In this case a win would be huge for either of them. To think that the prosecution would act unethically and risk his career and livelihood for an illegal immigrant, an accused murderer and obviously bad guy no less, is beyond me. It is not beyond me to believe the prosecution was simply incompetent in this case, as evidenced by the lack of firearm testing, for example.

Couple an unskilled prosecutor with a solid defense attorney and the outcome of the trial can be anticipated. If, as you state, the defense of murder is that the man is guilty of manslaughter and the evidence supports that, then the jury cannot return a verdict of guilty of murder... they are two different specifications. But you know that because you’re a smart guy.

In my opinion, to seriously consider, much less believe, that all parties, judge included, conspired to rig the outcome of this murder trial is ludicrous and pathetic.

But I’ll stand by my original statement: “That’s a pretty good conspiracy theory ya got goin’ there.”

And, by the way, your use of combined color and bold font to get a point across is kind of impressive. Do you walk and chew gum at the same time, too?

[ths61]

Ths61, you are an amazing individual. Not only do you ride, but apparently you’re also a prodigious legal analyst and mind reader. I take my hat off to you.

Too bad you’re not particularly adept at selling conspiracy. I assume that the whole point of your response to my complimenting your theory is to convince me that “...both prosecution and defense are both party to predetermined outcome.” But I’m not buying it.

I believe lawyers are particularly self serving people. In this case a win would be huge for either of them. To think that the prosecution would act unethically and risk his career and livelihood for an illegal immigrant, an accused murderer and obviously bad guy no less, is beyond me. It is not beyond me to believe the prosecution was simply incompetent in this case, as evidenced by the lack of firearm testing, for example.

Couple an unskilled prosecutor with a solid defense attorney and the outcome of the trial can be anticipated. If, as you state, the defense of murder is that the man is guilty of manslaughter and the evidence supports that, then the jury cannot return a verdict of guilty of murder... they are two different specifications. But you know that because you’re a smart guy.

In my opinion, to seriously consider, much less believe, that all parties, judge included, conspired to rig the outcome of this murder trial is ludicrous and pathetic.

But I’ll stand by my original statement: “That’s a pretty good conspiracy theory ya got goin’ there.”

And, by the way, your use of combined color and bold font to get a point across is kind of impressive. Do you walk and chew gum at the same time, too?

Again, complete obfuscation. Totally ignored every applicable State and Federal law on the books that I listed. Amazing, absolutely amazing.

What happened to your flaccid point/counterpoint comment ??? You are proved wrong on each count and then you resort back to generalized obfuscation. You got nothing.

If you knew anything about California politics, you would know how a SF prosecutor keeps his job. He doesn't bite the super-majority hand that feeds him. If you want to become AG of California, you sleep with Willie Brown.

[Ixol Phaane]

Again, complete obfuscation. Totally ignored every applicable State and Federal law on the books that I listed. Amazing, absolutely amazing.

What happened to your flaccid point/counterpoint comment ??? You are proved wrong on each count and then you resort back to generalized obfuscation. You got nothing.

If you knew anything about California politics, you would know how a SF prosecutor keeps his job. He doesn't bite the super-majority hand that feeds him. If you want to become AG of California, you sleep with Willie Brown.

What’s wrong, ths61? Do you need validation of your sad delusion of conspiracy? You won’t get it from me. Are you upset that evidence didn’t support a verdict of guilty in this murder trial? Too bad, get over it. Oh, you want to convict someone for murder because they have prior unrelated felony convictions. Good luck with that.

What do you want, man? Why are you listing every applicable State and Federal law on the books? What’s your point? Will you be making it anytime soon?

Could you be any more obtuse?

Seriously, somebody get this tick off me!

[Radical Taz]

:popcorn::

[willtill]

NBC news has a pretty good detailed summary on this:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kathryn-steinle-shooting-politics-aside-experts-say-verdict-based-reasonable-n825731

IMO the prosecution was weak. They should've went after manslaughter charges. They stepped on their own collective wieners regarding this case.

[lake_carl]

I will support a conspiracy theory. The prosecution tested the gun and like many sig sauer of the model it fired, so they said nothing. Sig Sauer has spent millions trying to correct and compensate for this problem, Google it

[Ixol Phaane]

NBC news has a pretty good detailed summary on this:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/kathryn-steinle-shooting-politics-aside-experts-say-verdict-based-reasonable-n825731

IMO the prosecution was weak. They should've went after manslaughter charges. They stepped on their own collective wieners regarding this case.

+1

There is no conspiracy here. This is an example of the system at work. As stated in the article Willtill refs... reasonable doubt is the standard that has to be met in capital crimes. Obviously the prosecution was less than convincing in presenting their case.

[ths61]

I will support a conspiracy theory. The prosecution tested the gun and like many sig sauer of the model it fired, so they said nothing. Sig Sauer has spent millions trying to correct and compensate for this problem, Google it

The defense conflated 2 different Sig Sauer gun models to intentionally mislead the jury. If the prosecution did not debunk that misinformation with 1 internet search or news article, you should wonder why not.

The Sig Sauer model that is in the news for drop testing issues is the recently released model that the military chose. It is a Sig P320, not the model used to murder Kate Steinle.

sig-sauer-issues-voluntary-upgrade-p320-pistol (https://www.sigsauer.com/press-releases/sig-sauer-issues-voluntary-upgrade-p320-pistol/)

p320-m17-drop-test-roblem (http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a27683/p320-m17-drop-test-roblem/)

The Sig Sauer model that the murderer used to kill Kate Steinle is a Sig P239. Not the P320. The P239 has a DA/SA 6lb - 10lb trigger pull which does not have any record of drop problems.

experts-question-decision-that-kept-steinle-jurors-from-handling-gun (http://abc7news.com/experts-question-decision-that-kept-steinle-jurors-from-handling-gun/2724549/)

So you can toss the defense's faux defense argument out with the truth that they are conflating 2 different guns models.

THE JUDGE REFUSED TO ALLOW THE JURORS TO FELL HOW HARD THE TRIGGER PULL WAS:

"... "I think it was an incorrect decision by the judge," said former Alameda County Deputy District Attorney John Creighton, who told ABC7 News he believes, had jurors been able to try to pull the trigger, the verdict might have been different. ..."

"... gun expert Roman Kaplan said pulling the trigger on the Sig Sauer P239 takes more pressure than many other guns. The pressure required is from 6 to 10 pounds, he said, demonstrating at his Pleasant Hill store, City Arms East. ..."


Hmmm.... The judge refused to let the jurors know how heavy the trigger pull is and the prosecutor does not call out the misrepresentation of gun models. Just makes you wonder what decision all the SF legal participants are trying to achieve from the jurors.

[crossbowme]

The defense conflated 2 different Sig Sauer gun models to intentionally mislead the jury. If the prosecution did not debunk that misinformation with 1 internet search or news article, you should wonder why not.

The Sig Sauer model that is in the news for drop testing issues is the recently released model that the military chose. It is a Sig P320, not the model used to murder Kate Steinle.

sig-sauer-issues-voluntary-upgrade-p320-pistol (https://www.sigsauer.com/press-releases/sig-sauer-issues-voluntary-upgrade-p320-pistol/)

p320-m17-drop-test-roblem (http://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a27683/p320-m17-drop-test-roblem/)

The Sig Sauer model that the murderer used to kill Kate Steinle is a Sig P239. Not the P320. The P239 has a DA/SA 6lb - 10lb trigger pull which does not have any record of drop problems.

experts-question-decision-that-kept-steinle-jurors-from-handling-gun (http://abc7news.com/experts-question-decision-that-kept-steinle-jurors-from-handling-gun/2724549/)

So you can toss the defense's faux defense argument out with the truth that they are conflating 2 different guns models.

THE JUDGE REFUSED TO ALLOW THE JURORS TO FELL HOW HARD THE TRIGGER PULL WAS:

"... "I think it was an incorrect decision by the judge," said former Alameda County Deputy District Attorney John Creighton, who told ABC7 News he believes, had jurors been able to try to pull the trigger, the verdict might have been different. ..."

"... gun expert Roman Kaplan said pulling the trigger on the Sig Sauer P239 takes more pressure than many other guns. The pressure required is from 6 to 10 pounds, he said, demonstrating at his Pleasant Hill store, City Arms East. ..."

Good comment ths61. I might add that it is unusual for handguns to have a pull less than 6 and when they do it is because of a special trigger assembly replacing the original - in other words, someone probably pulled the trigger in this case.

[ths61]

Good comment ths61. I might add that it is unusual for handguns to have a pull less than 6 and when they do it is because of a special trigger assembly replacing the original - in other words, someone probably pulled the trigger in this case.

The more one looks at the details of this case, the more it stinks.

[taxfree4]

I love the spirited debate but as someone who used to sit in a courtroom day after day all day, court watching we call it, to think the rule of law has anything to do with it and politics doesn't you're fooling yourself. First of all if the rule of law had anything to do with it this greasy little slimeball would never have been in the country in the first place. It is precisely because of politics that the illegal immigrants were allowed to pour into this country. Second, if he did happen to slip by the first time the subsequent arrests would have returned him back to "his country" but precisely because of "Catch and Release", "Catch and return" etc. policies that allowed these felons to keep returning to commit more crime. Then when Sheriif Joe Arpaio is successful in catching these mudrats by extended patrols President Obama sics his Justice dept. after him,POLITICAL, racial profiling works,. Politics also put him on the Public Assistance he was probably getting. The Bill of Rights, and its' protections, was only for American Citizens, however, due to politics i.e. politically appointed judges, and their warped interpretations we have extended, what should be an exclusive right of Americans, to these felons and they have a cadre' of free attorneys and endless budgets waiting to support these invaders. I am telling you down at the ACLU they were pumping their fists in the air and saying "Take that Trump." It's never political when a multiple felon, frequently deported, illegal immigrant murders an innocent women in a sanctuary city and goes before a raciallly, handpicked jury that finds him not guilty, nah, but President Trump trying to cut off funds to these cities, NOW, he's being political. How do we say it oh, yeah :jerkit:

Court cases cannot help but be political as they are heard by politically appointed judges, politically active jurors, politically appointed DA's and politically motivated defense lawyers. To think otherwise is to not think in reality. Actually, to take out this lowlife would be fairly easy just get a pistol within range, drop it on the floor near him and you'd probably hit him being those pesky triggers are so hair. A little vigilanteism is a good thing because sometimes the law doesn't make sense as in this case. It's like having your daughter murdered again, to murder this bum would be compassionate.

[choptop]

I love the spirited debate but as someone who used to sit in a courtroom day after day all day, court watching we call it, to think the rule of law has anything to do with it and politics doesn't you're fooling yourself. First of all if the rule of law had anything to do with it this greasy little slimeball would never have been in the country in the first place. It is precisely because of politics that the illegal immigrants were allowed to pour into this country. Second, if he did happen to slip by the first time the subsequent arrests would have returned him back to "his country" but precisely because of "Catch and Release", "Catch and return" etc. policies that allowed these felons to keep returning to commit more crime. Then when Sheriif Joe Arpaio is successful in catching these mudrats by extended patrols President Obama sics his Justice dept. after him,POLITICAL, racial profiling works,. Politics also put him on the Public Assistance he was probably getting. The Bill of Rights, and its' protections, was only for American Citizens, however, due to politics i.e. politically appointed judges, and their warped interpretations we have extended, what should be an exclusive right of Americans, to these felons and they have a cadre' of free attorneys and endless budgets waiting to support these invaders. I am telling you down at the ACLU they were pumping their fists in the air and saying "Take that Trump." It's never political when a multiple felon, frequently deported, illegal immigrant murders an innocent women in a sanctuary city and goes before a raciallly, handpicked jury that finds him not guilty, nah, but President Trump trying to cut off funds to these cities, NOW, he's being political. How do we say it oh, yeah :jerkit:

Court cases cannot help but be political as they are heard by politically appointed judges, politically active jurors, politically appointed DA's and politically motivated defense lawyers. To think otherwise is to not think in reality. Actually, to take out this lowlife would be fairly easy just get a pistol within range, drop it on the floor near him and you'd probably hit him being those pesky triggers are so hair. A little vigilanteism is a good thing because sometimes the law doesn't make sense as in this case. It's like having your daughter murdered again, to murder this bum would be compassionate.:yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes::yes:: yes::yes::yes:and:yes:

[Sorcerer]

Well they did get him on felon with a gun. So he should do some prison time. Maybe just enough time for an inmate to take care of business. I would think the Arrion nation has an eye on this one.

[ths61]

The prosecutor's name is Diana Garcia. Virtually no information about her 20 year career other than in reference to the Garcia Zarate case.

https://photos.lasvegassun.com/media/img/photos/2017/10/24/AP_17296729393578_t653.jpg?214bc4f9d9bd7c08c7d0f65 99bb3328710e01e7b

[ths61]

Well they did get him on felon with a gun. So he should do some prison time. Maybe just enough time for an inmate to take care of business. I would think the Arrion nation has an eye on this one.

He will be out on time served in SF. Hope the federal warrant has more teeth.

[willtill]

The prosecutor's name is Diana Garcia. Virtually no information about her 20 year career other than in reference to the Garcia Zarate case.

Her ass should be fired. Call me ignorant but she does have a Hispanic last name. Though probably more than half of Kalifornia does by now. Maybe she's a cloaked sympathizer to the liberal cause out there in Kali?

Makes me wonder how the Kalifornia Attorney General picked that nimrod to prosecute this case :icon_rolleyes:

As far as State officials go... this is interesting development in my neck of the woods... :shhh: One cannot seem to have confidence in anyone regarding their State government (in any capacity) to do what's right these days.... :icon_rolleyes:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/11/30/maryland-officials-26-indicted-in-prison-gang-conspiracy.html

[taxfree4]

The prosecutor's name is Diana Garcia. Virtually no information about her 20 year career other than in reference to the Garcia Zarate case.

https://photos.lasvegassun.com/media/img/photos/2017/10/24/AP_17296729393578_t653.jpg?214bc4f9d9bd7c08c7d0f65 99bb3328710e01e7b

They thought if they appointed a "Hispanic", whatever that is, in case of a guilty verdict it wouldn't look racist even though "Hispanic is not a race but it doesn't matter to them. BTW, he was cleared of not "intending" to kill her, dirty little secret is they merged crime and intent years ago, late 70's. Ask the sailor that was put in jail for the same crime Hillary repeatedly committed as they didnt give a shit about his "intent". Before that you would have to prove both, however, being we are under Public Policy the law, rules don't make a difference.

[taxfree4]

I love the spirited debate but as someone who used to sit in a courtroom day after day all day, court watching we call it, to think the rule of law has anything to do with it and politics doesn't you're fooling yourself. First of all if the rule of law had anything to do with it this greasy little slimeball would never have been in the country in the first place. It is precisely because of politics that the illegal immigrants were allowed to pour into this country. Second, if he did happen to slip by the first time the subsequent arrests would have returned him back to "his country" but precisely because of "Catch and Release", "Catch and return" etc. policies that allowed these felons to keep returning to commit more crime. Then when Sheriif Joe Arpaio is successful in catching these mudrats by extended patrols President Obama sics his Justice dept. after him,POLITICAL, racial profiling works,. Politics also put him on the Public Assistance he was probably getting. The Bill of Rights, and its' protections, was only for American Citizens, however, due to politics i.e. politically appointed judges, and their warped interpretations we have extended, what should be an exclusive right of Americans, to these felons and they have a cadre' of free attorneys and endless budgets waiting to support these invaders. I am telling you down at the ACLU they were pumping their fists in the air and saying "Take that Trump." It's never political when a multiple felon, frequently deported, illegal immigrant murders an innocent women in a sanctuary city and goes before a raciallly, handpicked jury that finds him not guilty, nah, but President Trump trying to cut off funds to these cities, NOW, he's being political. How do we say it oh, yeah :jerkit:

Court cases cannot help but be political as they are heard by politically appointed judges, politically active jurors, politically appointed DA's and politically motivated defense lawyers. To think otherwise is to not think in reality. Actually, to take out this lowlife would be fairly easy just get a pistol within range, drop it on the floor near him and you'd probably hit him being those pesky triggers are so hair. A little vigilanteism is a good thing because sometimes the law doesn't make sense as in this case. It's like having your daughter murdered again, to murder this bum would be compassionate.

Ditto:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/43bdfdef-4189-34d1-ac22-5fc357692cc2/ss_father-of-boy-killed-by.html

[jmdaniel]

I am sure countless people before me have uttered the phrase " I am glad I am at the age I am because I would not want to ..." Things are getting crazy out their and I fear for our future and unless their is a revolution, I am afraid the politicians are going to take us right down the shtr.:yikes:

At 57, I know I have, many many times.

[jmdaniel]

+1

There is no conspiracy here. This is an example of the system at work. As stated in the article Willtill refs... reasonable doubt is the standard that has to be met in capital crimes. Obviously the prosecution was less than convincing in presenting their case.

Honest question here, and please try to answer it without your escalating levels of snark; it's not a good look.

From the article:

Weisberg, the criminal justice professor, who was not involved in the case, said he was "particularly surprised" that the jury did not convict Garcia Zarate of manslaughter. "It's not improbable to think that the shooting showed a gross kind of negligence," he said.

Weisberg said prosecutors may have had trouble reconciling the first- and second-degree murder charges with the involuntary manslaughter charge. "It could be that they were just in a situation where they couldn't make an argument that the shooting was both accidental and intentional," he said.

I honestly don't know how/why the charges are/were connected; 1st, 2nd, and involuntary. I thought, (and I'm obviously not a lawyer), that juries could consider each charge in isolation. If so, at least in my mind, (but it appears also in others), that it was clear her death occurred at least in part due to careless handling of the gun by the perp. No intent, no malice, just a dumbass with a gun. Thanks for any info you can provide.

I did kinda chuckle when I saw the Feds are after him now. I suspect his treatment here in Texas will be a bit different.

[willtill]

...and into the fire :shhh:



I did kinda chuckle when I saw the Feds are after him now. I suspect his treatment here in Texas will be a bit different.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRmmIVnjqfQ


I would have to research the charging documents; but if a subject is charged with murder though not charged with manslaughter; can a jury arbitrarily find him guilty of that lessor charge?

Does not manslaughter have to be listed as one of the charges?

[Ixol Phaane]

Honest question here, and please try to answer it without your escalating levels of snark; it's not a good look.

From the article:

Weisberg, the criminal justice professor, who was not involved in the case, said he was "particularly surprised" that the jury did not convict Garcia Zarate of manslaughter. "It's not improbable to think that the shooting showed a gross kind of negligence," he said.

Weisberg said prosecutors may have had trouble reconciling the first- and second-degree murder charges with the involuntary manslaughter charge. "It could be that they were just in a situation where they couldn't make an argument that the shooting was both accidental and intentional," he said.

I honestly don't know how/why the charges are/were connected; 1st, 2nd, and involuntary. I thought, (and I'm obviously not a lawyer), that juries could consider each charge in isolation. If so, at least in my mind, (but it appears also in others), that it was clear her death occurred at least in part due to careless handling of the gun by the perp. No intent, no malice, just a dumbass with a gun. Thanks for any info you can provide.

I did kinda chuckle when I saw the Feds are after him now. I suspect his treatment here in Texas will be a bit different.

I agree with your logic here... and I had the same thoughts and question of the multiple charges leveled in this trial. It seems reasonable to believe that jury consideration of each charge, in order of descending degree, would result in at least some finding of guilt. If the jury couldn’t get to 1st murder... and neither could they reach 2nd... then I would expect them to find for manslaughter, at least.

I would have loved to sit in the gallery on this and observe the proceedings first hand.

[taxfree4]

The jury, in a second-degree murder charge is allowed to consider first degree murder and involuntary manslaughter which means that the jury had no intention of returning a guilty verdict no matter what. If this doesn't scream involuntary manslaughter, in my opinion first-degree murder, nothing does. I'd like to see the transcripts from the voir dire which his how the defense lawyers look for their plants to set this miscreant free.

[ths61]

Honest question here, and please try to answer it without your escalating levels of snark; it's not a good look.

From the article:

Weisberg, the criminal justice professor, who was not involved in the case, said he was "particularly surprised" that the jury did not convict Garcia Zarate of manslaughter. "It's not improbable to think that the shooting showed a gross kind of negligence," he said.

Weisberg said prosecutors may have had trouble reconciling the first- and second-degree murder charges with the involuntary manslaughter charge. "It could be that they were just in a situation where they couldn't make an argument that the shooting was both accidental and intentional," he said.

I honestly don't know how/why the charges are/were connected; 1st, 2nd, and involuntary. I thought, (and I'm obviously not a lawyer), that juries could consider each charge in isolation. If so, at least in my mind, (but it appears also in others), that it was clear her death occurred at least in part due to careless handling of the gun by the perp. No intent, no malice, just a dumbass with a gun. Thanks for any info you can provide.

I did kinda chuckle when I saw the Feds are after him now. I suspect his treatment here in Texas will be a bit different.

This trial had absolutely nothing to do about Kate Steinle's murder and the guilt of the murderer. It was purely a national political statement on sanctuary state polices and a big F-U to the current administration's secure border policies, nothing more.

SF has run every gun store out of the its city limits. SF is located in the most anti-2A state in the union. CA is home of the 9th Circus Court, the most overturned liberal court in the nation. CA will make any shooting a political anti-2A statement UNLESS they have a more outstanding political statement to make which in this case is sanctuary city policies.

Garcia confessed to going to SF because he knew they would protect him in the sanctuary city. The prosecution is half responsible for choosing the jury. The judge refused to allow the jury to feel for themselves how heavy the trigger pull was. The BLM officer testified he had left his P239 in DA mode which means it was @ 10lbs in DA and if the murder had put it in SA, it would be @ 6lbs. The P239 has no record of drop fire problems so the gun did not fire itself.

The defense used the definition of Involuntary Manslaughter to argue the murder's innocence. Garcia confessed to shooting Kate Steinle. This by itself should have been a confession to Involuntary Manslaughter neither disputed by the defense nor the prosecution, and then was not charged with any death related charges. That right there is a political statement, nothing more, not a murder or accidental death trial.

A little history on California's liberal judges making sanctuary state policies from the bench at the expense of and against the will of the American citizens:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187

[willtill]

The jury, in a second-degree murder charge is allowed to consider first degree murder and involuntary manslaughter which means that the jury had no intention of returning a guilty verdict no matter what. If this doesn't scream involuntary manslaughter, in my opinion first-degree murder, nothing does. I'd like to see the transcripts from the voir dire which his how the defense lawyers look for their plants to set this miscreant free.

Thanks for explaining that Mike.


I have always been a proponent for placing nuclear cratering charges along the Kalifornia borders shared with Arizona/Nevada/Oregon. And detonating them.

Just make sure Feinstein, Pelosi and Boxer are resident in the state before it slides off into the Pacific.

[taxfree4]

Thanks for explaining that Mike.


I have always been a proponent for placing nuclear cratering charges along the Kalifornia borders shared with Arizona/Nevada/Oregon. And detonating them.

Just make sure Feinstein, Pelosi and Boxer are resident in the state before it slides off into the Pacific.

I know you would be the man for the job will, I'll drive the getaway Humvee. What you have here is a classic case of jury nullification. What they said loud and clear is we don't give a shit that this girl was murdered we are going to send a message that California will always be a sactuary for illegals regardless of what President Trump says or does. Come here and we will protect you. Liberals have always manipulated minorities, illegals, homos, et. al. to do their bidding. They stay in the background, like a puppetmaster, while maneuvering and targeting the American way of life they despise. They scoff at traditonal nuclear families, Christian values, patriotism, the superiority of Western Civilization and have these useful idiots at their disposal who are more than willing to volunteer for the job. Anything that may hint of the previously mentioned will be put into the cross hairs and have the full weight of their legal antagonists, money and ire fired at them. Example: It's not enough the Little Sisters of the Poor and Hobby Lobby won their cases at the Supreme Court, that wasnt enough for the California A.G. who filed a case against the Sisters in a direct snub to the Court. To say this is political would be an understatement as it always is.

[ths61]

One other observation. No D'RATs have made a single public statement since this acquittal.

Pelosi, SwineStein, Schumer, Kamala Harris (former CA AG), Boxter, Newscum, Leon, all of the CA Super-Majority, .... Absolute radio silence on their parts.

They know the toxic stench of their failed policies is too great to publicly defend it or go anywhere near it.

[jmdaniel]

I agree with your logic here... and I had the same thoughts and question of the multiple charges leveled in this trial. It seems reasonable to believe that jury consideration of each charge, in order of descending degree, would result in at least some finding of guilt. If the jury couldn’t get to 1st murder... and neither could they reach 2nd... then I would expect them to find for manslaughter, at least.

I would have loved to sit in the gallery on this and observe the proceedings first hand.


The jury, in a second-degree murder charge is allowed to consider first degree murder and involuntary manslaughter which means that the jury had no intention of returning a guilty verdict no matter what. If this doesn't scream involuntary manslaughter, in my opinion first-degree murder, nothing does. I'd like to see the transcripts from the voir dire which his how the defense lawyers look for their plants to set this miscreant free.

Okay, thx fellas. I just couldn't figure out why he didn't at least get found guilty on the involuntary, and it appears I am not alone in my confusion.

[taxfree4]

They know at the voir dire if they have the case clinched. Remember if you're guilty you want a jury, all you need is one, if you're not guilty then you usually go for a bench trial. I was rammed from behind in a telephone truck by a FedEx driver who they found out later was driving with a suspended license. My lawyer moved the case to another borough ( county) and I asked him why and he said "More people are on welfare in the Bronx so they don't care how much money they give away." These lawyers are in these courts every day all day and they know the judges and what jurys they need. If this had been a Bosnian illegal immigrant or a Canadian illegal immigrant he would have been guilty, it was precisely because he was an illegal Mexican that he was found not guilty.

This is the anti-American mentality thumbing their collective noses at us without any regard for the rule of law. So I say game on - build the wall, cut off funding to these cities, stop traveling there on vacation, and start some necessary vigilanteism at the border and in the city as the "just us" system has failed and not because the law is bad. The problem is the only requirement for a juror is to have a pulse, they don't look at the facts, the law or the rules they just hold their noses through the proceedings all the while knowing exactly how they will vote. It stems from the refusal of immigrants from the non-European 1965 immigration act to assimilate into the distinct American culture, thank you Ted Kennedy. They continually refer to the land they fled as "my country", makes me want to puke. I never heard any of my relatives from Italy, even my new daughter-in-law from Sicily, refer to the land they fled from as "my country" She is going through the long and expensive process of becoming a US citizen and only speaks English, albeit broken, to my grandson. Until we start letting in people who want to become Americans this will only get worse. There will be these polyglot of citizens who refuse to accept anything American but will have no problem syphoning off the benefits America provides but never contributing to or wanting to join the distinct American culture.

[willtill]

They know at the voir dire if they have the case clinched. Remember if you're guilty you want a jury, all you need is one, if you're not guilty then you usually go for a bench trial. I was rammed from behind in a telephone truck by a FedEx driver who they found out later was driving with a suspended license. My lawyer moved the case to another borough ( county) and I asked him why and he said "More people are on welfare in the Bronx so they don't care how much money they give away." These lawyers are in these courts every day all day and they know the judges and what jurys they need. If this had been a Bosnian illegal immigrant or a Canadian illegal immigrant he would have been guilty, it was precisely because he was an illegal Mexican that he was found not guilty.

This is the anti-American mentality thumbing their collective noses at us without any regard for the rule of law. So I say game on - build the wall, cut off funding to these cities, stop traveling there on vacation, and start some necessary vigilanteism at the border and in the city as the "just us" system has failed and not because the law is bad. The problem is the only requirement for a juror is to have a pulse, they don't look at the facts, the law or the rules they just hold their noses through the proceedings all the while knowing exactly how they will vote. It stems from the refusal of immigrants from the non-European 1965 immigration act to assimilate into the distinct American culture, thank you Ted Kennedy. They continually refer to the land they fled as "my country", makes me want to puke. I never heard any of my relatives from Italy, even my new daughter-in-law from Sicily, refer to the land they fled from as "my country" She is going through the long and expensive process of becoming a US citizen and only speaks English, albeit broken, to my grandson. Until we start letting in people who want to become Americans this will only get worse. There will be these polyglot of citizens who refuse to accept anything American but will have no problem syphoning off the benefits America provides but never contributing to or wanting to join the distinct American culture.

Spot on. Taxfree4 for President. After Trump completes his second term.

I know that he won't run, but Ill be in good company when he's around. :yes:

Seriously. There are more of us out there that think like this; then those you think you know of... :shhh:

The Silent majority. It rose up during the last general election. It will again.

[taxfree4]

Spot on. Taxfree4 for President. After Trump completes his second term.

I know that he won't run, but Ill be in good company when he's around. :yes:

Seriously. There are more of us out there that think like this; then those you think you know of... :shhh:

The Silent majority. It rose up during the last general election. It will again.

All I want to do is get close enough to sniff Melania's perfume, kiss Lynda Carter on the mouth and then I can die a happy man.

[ths61]

Spot on. Taxfree4 for President. After Trump completes his second term.

I know that he won't run, but Ill be in good company when he's around. :yes:

Seriously. There are more of us out there that think like this; then those you think you know of... :shhh:

The Silent majority. It rose up during the last general election. It will again.

Guess who is being groomed for 2020 with the qualifications of being a "Female BHO". Straight out of SF and Willie Brown's sheets.

U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) is the “inevitable” Democratic Party nominee for President of the United States in 2020, according to U.S. News & World Report senior politics writer David Catanese, citing political oddsmakers.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/02/Kamala-Harris-Associated-Press-640x480.jpg

u-s-news-kamala-harris-inevitable-2020-democratic-nominee (http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/12/01/u-s-news-kamala-harris-inevitable-2020-democratic-nominee/)

[taxfree4]

Good she's a train wreck and has about as much appeal as diaper rash. Although Hillary may see an opening and bribe the cash-strapped DNC, with the billions from the Clinton Foundation, to make her VP to give Harris gravitas. Once elected she'll have Harris taken out and finally slither in to the Presidency, seems far-fetched so did Ron Brown dying in a plane crash (with a bullet wound in the back of his head), Vince Foster's suicide (with the first witness on the scene reporting no weapon near the body).

[willtill]

Guess who is being groomed for 2020 with the qualifications of being a "Female BHO". Straight out of SF and Willie Brown's sheets.

U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) is the “inevitable” Democratic Party nominee for President of the United States in 2020, according to U.S. News & World Report senior politics writer David Catanese, citing political oddsmakers.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/02/Kamala-Harris-Associated-Press-640x480.jpg

u-s-news-kamala-harris-inevitable-2020-democratic-nominee (http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/12/01/u-s-news-kamala-harris-inevitable-2020-democratic-nominee/)


She has demon eyes :shock:

[crossbowme]

Guess who is being groomed for 2020 with the qualifications of being a "Female BHO". Straight out of SF and Willie Brown's sheets.

U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) is the “inevitable” Democratic Party nominee for President of the United States in 2020, according to U.S. News & World Report senior politics writer David Catanese, citing political oddsmakers.

http://media.breitbart.com/media/2017/02/Kamala-Harris-Associated-Press-640x480.jpg

u-s-news-kamala-harris-inevitable-2020-democratic-nominee (http://www.breitbart.com/california/2017/12/01/u-s-news-kamala-harris-inevitable-2020-democratic-nominee/)

Makes you wonder what (D)politician is not running for President in 2020!

[3Chief]

Spot on. Taxfree4 for President. After Trump completes his second term.

I know that he won't run, but Ill be in good company when he's around. :yes:

Seriously. There are more of us out there that think like this; then those you think you know of... :shhh:

The Silent majority. It rose up during the last general election. It will again.

Unfortunately the silent majority is going to have to be much more vocal next time. They'll be waiting for a Midwestern uprising again and are steadily working to destroy the silent majority at every turn.

[ths61]

The dirt bag's defense is feeling pretty confident now. What next, amnesty and honorary mayor of SF ???

Lawyers for Acquitted Kate Steinle Killer Seek to Have Gun Charge Dropped

lawyers-for-acquitted-kate-steinle-killer-seek-to-have-gun-charge-dropped (http://www.kmjnow.com/2017/12/04/lawyers-for-acquitted-kate-steinle-killer-seek-to-have-gun-charge-dropped/)

man-acquitted-of-kate-steinle-murder-seeks-gun-conviction-dismissal (http://kron4.com/2017/12/04/man-acquitted-of-kate-steinle-murder-seeks-gun-conviction-dismissal/)