Linkathon!

You may also like...

156 Responses

  1. Dread says:

    We just saw what justice looks like when the streets rule the courts. It’s a reversal of the Jim Crow era but it’s exactly the same.

  2. Michael says:

    BD,

    On what basis do you think Chauvin was innocent?
    Did the jury system fail?

  3. Dread says:

    Manslaughter? A very good case can be made.
    Murder by the legal definitions? There’s plenty of reasonable doubt. 10 hrs deliberation? The jury system just proved to be malleable to public pressure — they all knew what verdict they HAD to render.

    Chauvin definitely should have rendered aid. He’s not innocent. But is he a murderer? Only because of the public racial environment.

    It’s just an opinion. And this will mark a true change in our nation’s policing. We’ve already had dramatic increases in murder rates. More ahead.

  4. Dread says:

    I very likely just transgressed our nation’s new blasphemy codes. The dangers of speaking freely are very real.

  5. Michael says:

    I didn’t watch the trial, nor have I engaged with media coverage of it.
    I did see the actual killing…and it sure looked like extra judicial murder to me.
    I would have felt better about it if they would have had a change of venue…

  6. Michael says:

    I have no problem with speaking freely.
    I wonder, however, if the mistrust of institutions has now spread so far that every institution is untenable…thus ending government as we know it.

  7. josh hamrick says:

    Video cameras and social media have made fair trials impossible.

    But…he murdered that man.

    I mourn for what my old friend Dread has become.

  8. Bob Sweat says:

    Tucker Carlson echoed the same thing! Disgusting!!!!!!!!

  9. Dan from Georgia says:

    Oh brother.

  10. CM says:

    FWIW, there is always the appeals process for Chauvin.

    Dread and (idiots like Tucker Carlson) should actually _read_ criminal statutes of MN and get a clue first before flying off the handle.

    Chauvin was convicted on Murder of the 3rd Degree which is DEFINED below per the MN Criminal statutes:

    609.195 MURDER IN THE THIRD DEGREE.

    (a) Whoever, without intent to effect the death of any person, causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others and evincing a depraved mind, without regard for human life, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years.

    (b) Whoever, without intent to cause death, proximately causes the death of a human being by, directly or indirectly, unlawfully selling, giving away, bartering, delivering, exchanging, distributing, or administering a controlled substance classified in Schedule I or II, is guilty of murder in the third degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 25 years or to payment of a fine of not more than $40,000, or both.

    One could argue that Chauvin evinced a depraved mind and other aspects of part (a). I gave specific information regarding this and we will see if Dread has the stones to respond or ignore me

  11. CM says:

    Chauvin was convicted with Murder in the Second Degree (Unintentional).

    Let us reference the relevant MN Criminal Statutes shall we?

    609.19 MURDER IN THE SECOND DEGREE.
    Subdivision 1.Intentional murder; drive-by shootings.

    Whoever does either of the following is guilty of murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

    (1) causes the death of a human being with intent to effect the death of that person or another, but without premeditation; or

    (2) causes the death of a human being while committing or attempting to commit a drive-by shooting in violation of section 609.66, subdivision 1e, under circumstances other than those described in section 609.185, paragraph (a), clause (3).
    Subd. 2.Unintentional murders.

    Whoever does either of the following is guilty of unintentional murder in the second degree and may be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than 40 years:

    (1) causes the death of a human being, without intent to effect the death of any person, while committing or attempting to commit a felony offense other than criminal sexual conduct in the first or second degree with force or violence or a drive-by shooting; or

    (2) causes the death of a human being without intent to effect the death of any person, while intentionally inflicting or attempting to inflict bodily harm upon the victim, when the perpetrator is restrained under an order for protection and the victim is a person designated to receive protection under the order. As used in this clause, “order for protection” includes an order for protection issued under chapter 518B; a harassment restraining order issued under section 609.748; a court order setting conditions of pretrial release or conditions of a criminal sentence or juvenile court disposition; a restraining order issued in a marriage dissolution action; and any order issued by a court of another state or of the United States that is similar to any of these orders.

    Again, the first part of part (2) is what Chauvin was convicted on. But somehow I don’t think Dread nor the media talking heads he follows bothered to look up this particular statute either.

  12. Em says:

    Don’t mourn for Pastor Dread
    He IS a voice of reason

  13. CM says:

    Em,

    I highly doubt it. Maybe he should actually _read_ the relevant MN criminal statutes Chauvin was convicted under _before_ opening his piehole.

  14. Michael says:

    CM,

    I’m about done (again) with the lack of respect you show others here.

  15. Em says:

    FWIW
    i don’t think Chavin is without culpability, but guilty on all 3 counts? That is logically not possible! ! !
    don’t know what id do to subdue a big, strong man on drugs, but looks like id do jail time for it…

  16. Michael says:

    This thread is a classic example of why this site grows more pointless in my mind by the day.

    Dread has shown himself to be a man of intelligence and character over the years…I consider him a friend and a brother.

    I rarely agree with his political takes…rarely.

    However, the question in my mind is always about why he thinks what he thinks.
    Am I missing something?
    Are large cultural differences at play?
    What factors is he weighing heavily that I do not weigh at all?
    What do I need to consider that I haven’t considered?
    How many people does his view represent?

    How do we bridge the differences and live as citizens in a common country?

    I want to learn why we are so divided, so we may learn to live together.

    I am always right in my own eyes and my cats affirm me…

  17. Dread says:

    CM

    It doesn’t take stones to make a simple argument that the public atmosphere and not the elements of the charges being proved beyond reasonable doubt was the basis of the judgment. That is all I have asserted. It’s really only controversial in the present atmosphere.

    Nor does it take stones to know that every juror in that case knew what they would unleash by a verdict other than they gave.

    There will be appeals. Even the presiding judge knew he was overseeing a legitimate mistrial case.

    The felony murder case is vaporous. Chauvin was not committing a felony in the act of his restraint.

    The third degree charge “ causes the death of another by perpetrating an act eminently dangerous to others” who were these others?

    You might actually ask if I have looked at the statutes or had lawyers interpret them to me.

    So far the ridicule of my opinion is pervasive. I don’t care.

    These are arguable issues.

    Rolling Stones Dread

  18. Em says:

    I have a question…
    Will the nation be able to justify shooting (to kill) rioters intent on destroying the Republic?
    Most folk i talk with are very concerned about a mental attitude of lawlessness that is developing.. .
    Yes, i am aware that the Church doesn’t defend God’s (coming) Kingdom with such force, but this nation as a society?

  19. Em says:

    Michael, you do a very good job of bringing your commenters back to center here. . 👍 👍

  20. Michael says:

    “Will the nation be able to justify shooting (to kill) rioters intent on destroying the Republic?”

    Rioters will not destroy anything but property and life…the Republic will fall from our inability to discuss issues, the lack of leadership, and the unholy misinformation throughout all media.

    People should be allowed to defend life and property.

  21. Xenia says:

    I had heard that there were people who didn’t agree with the verdict, but I couldn’t imagine who they could be. But here I find them.

    This is pretty upsetting.

  22. Michael says:

    Xenia,

    There has been lots of pushback from the right wing media…and those who consume it.

  23. Michael says:

    I will concede BD one point as it affected me personally.

    Had the jury found Chauvin not guilty the cities would have burned…and that’s a ton of pressure on a jury.

    I just booked my hotel in Portland to get a second opinion on my heart surgery in a couple of weeks…and that could have easily been impossible to attend.

  24. Xenia says:

    I never read/listen to right wing (or left wing) media as it smells like sulphur.

  25. Michael says:

    Xenia,

    Indeed it does…and we all up smelling like hell…

  26. Jean says:

    “This thread is a classic example of why this site grows more pointless in my mind by the day.”

    This thread is an example of why the church in America is dying. One has to visit a Christian blog (a “faith community”) to read that Chauvin was misjudged.

    Dread may be a credible source in theology, but he has no training, no education, no vocation at all to sit in judgment over the judicial system in MN. He deserves respect as a theologian and an individual but none whatsoever with regard to his opinion regarding the Chauvin verdict.

    The evidence for the prosecution was overwhelming on all counts, as it must be in a case where a jury must act by unanimous verdict to convict on beyond a reasonable doubt. The expert witnesses, the police witnesses, the bystanders, the medical examiner, the autopsy, and the video evidence all combined to produce a consistent, devastating testimony of the officer’s guilt on all three counts.

    We don’t want to hear it, but that police officer murdered an unarmed, cuffed, black man, who was in the custody and care of the police. He had a right to due process and equal protection, and he didn’t get it from the men who took an oath to protect him. Hopefully, this death and trial were not in vain and our society can reform policing to make it work for everyone and restore the confidence of our communities of color.

  27. Dan from Georgia says:

    Ok..here come yet another opinion (from me)…I didn’t follow the trial or sit on the jury or preside in any way over the proceedings, didn’t watch the video (don’t like seeing an actual death) to form a solid view, but all I know is that my sister and brother-in-law’s business in downtown Minneapolis was spared another round of vandalism.

  28. Michael says:

    “One has to visit a Christian blog (a “faith community”) to read that Chauvin was misjudged.”

    I could point you to 50 sites in 15 minutes that say that…without opposition or discussion.

  29. Xenia says:

    …and my daughter can go to her doctors’ appointment in downtown Minneapolis.

    So let this depraved Chauvin be a sacrificial lamb. It’s ok by me. It’s not like he’s innocent.

  30. Dan from Georgia says:

    Michael at 11:58am:

    Yes, I agree that there would have been much violence and destruction if the verdict went another way. I have many friends and some family around the Twin Cities, a few of whom live in or very near Minneapolis (not in downtown).

  31. Dread says:

    Jean

    Thou surely dost not assert that a law degree and practice removes doubt, discussion, and disagreement. Lawyers are not more unified than theologians.

    Morally what Chauvin did was repugnant and evil. I agree. Legally he’s been convicted — in a court of law — I also agree. I’ve not claimed him to be innocent. Not guilty does not mean innocent as every lawyer tells me. But law is still up for appeal and my pea brain has plainly pointed at appealable points.

    What I asserting that is being avoided is the role the culture has played in the whole matter.

    That was in my original post. And even the judge signaled that this trial is under threat because of the threats.

    Reasonable Dread

  32. Dread says:

    Right and Left wing media both smell bad. Both are grievously jaded. But the two political wings are operating under two widely varied salvation narratives.

  33. Em says:

    Someone today remarked to me that the jurors voted out of fear for themselves and their families… if so, doesn’t that seem a bit frightening?
    AND
    Some here seem to believe that experience and common sense are invalid? ? ?

  34. Xenia says:

    Perhaps it’s the hope that the culture is changing so that police brutality is no longer tolerated and there will now be hell to pay if it continues.

  35. Jean says:

    Dread,

    I just reread your previous comments and unless I missed something, you haven’t pointed at one appealable point. But if you think there’s an appealable issue, what is it?

  36. Dread says:

    I’m about to board a plane.

    I pointed at them — we’ll see. I’ll come back later and double down if needed

    I see you puffing out the lawyer chest

    Lil Ole Dread

  37. Michael says:

    “Perhaps it’s the hope that the culture is changing so that police brutality is no longer tolerated and there will now be hell to pay if it continues.”

    I’ll say the amen…

  38. Jean says:

    Not only are the armchair lawyers coming out of the woodwork, but now we have the armchair psychologists on their heels. I don’t know what is more scary.

    I agree with Xenia at 12:26 pm. And I will add, maybe one may hope that guilt played a role in the conscience of the police witnesses who heretofore would cover for the bad ones. Because in this case, the police witnesses were all on the side of the prosecution. Maybe there is hope for a reformation.

    All of this is to say, that we do not know the inner motivations of the jury and it is not given to us to speculate, and most likely, though to some here it doesn’t matter, when we speculate about others’ motivations we more often than not likely are bearing false witness, which used to mean something in Christianity.

  39. Michael says:

    Jean,

    The presiding judge said that the comments by Maxine Waters and others were a gift to the defense for the appeal process…

  40. Everstudy says:

    Jean,

    BD said, “the public atmosphere and not the elements of the charges being proved beyond reasonable doubt was the basis of the judgment.”

    He’s making the case that the jury based their guilty verdict, not on the evidence presented by the prosecution or refuted by the defense at the trial.

    Even the judge mention Rep. Waters’ comments as a possible reason to have the conviction overturned on appeal.

    Geez, I think you guys purposely read past each other.

  41. Dread says:

    Real quick

    The venue
    The failure to sequester
    The points of law in the count requiring commission of a felony. The felony/murder charge.
    The evaluation to the phrase concerning ‘danger to others’
    The straight up compromising of the jurors safety in event of a not guilty.

    There will be appeals on all these things. We will see.

    Just the emotional offense everyone has over my questioning of the verdict shows the atmosphere of intimidation.

    Double Dread

  42. josh hamrick says:

    It’s gross because you lack compassion. We all saw the video. Nothing else matters.

  43. Duane Arnold says:

    “These are arguable issues….”

    Indeed, and they have been argued… in a court, with a judge, with 12 jurors, with a defense and prosecution and an unanimous verdict. Oh yes, and with the right to appeal.

    I’m not intimidated, I’m comforted.

  44. josh hamrick says:

    Again, I’ll admit that with the video and proliferation on social media, a fair trial was impossible.

    But how do you watch this guy slowly kill another man for 10 minutes…while the crowd is yelling “You are killing him” and the man himself is yelling “you are killing me”…and say, oh yeah, Chauvin got a raw deal?

    Come on.. COME ON!!

  45. Duane Arnold says:

    “I do not pretend to understand the moral universe. The arc is a long one. My eye reaches but little ways. I cannot calculate the curve and complete the figure by experience of sight. I can divine it by conscience. And from what I see I am sure it bends toward justice.”

    Theodore Parker

  46. Jean says:

    “The straight up compromising of the jurors safety in event of a not guilty.”

    Do you have one shred of credible evidence that any juror received a threat or felt threatened?

    Do you have one shred of credible evidence evidence that anyone threatened any juror with physical harm?

  47. Em says:

    Jean, an uncontrolled, but egged on mob? Thank you, Maxine. An unsequestered jury? You think any juror with an ounce of common sense wouldn’t feel treatened? Hmmm

  48. Jean says:

    Ah, the hunch defense. That’s what I thought. And from the law and order crowd. Ironic.

  49. Michael says:

    I agreed with the verdicts based on what I saw…but you can’t tell me that the jurors weren’t keenly aware that they could set the country on fire. How much that affected them if at all is open to question,

  50. Em says:

    Hunch? Try logic. 😇

  51. Jean says:

    When would be the right time to afford people of color the same due process and equal protection under the law that are afforded to white people? What must they do, say or plead to receive the same justice white people receive? Will there ever be a right time?

    Can Americans have a voice in the world as a people of freedom, liberty, faith, and human rights, if we fail to deliver these inalienable rights to our own citizens?

  52. Jean says:

    This isn’t the first trial to have societal ramification (or social unrest ramifications) and it won’t be the last. That doesn’t mean law breakers get a pass. The defendant isn’t forced to even have a jury hear his case, it’s a defendant’s right. Then he gets a say in the selection of the jurors. Then he receives the presumption of innocence. Then a guilty verdict must be by unanimous consent. Then he must be proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That is why so many lawbreakers go free, because of the painstaking demands of our criminal justice system, unless your are poor or a person of color. Then you’re in a whole different situation.

  53. Em says:

    Jean, coming from a poor background, i prefer to go with Martin Luther King….
    Content of character can and should prevail…
    Entitlement and victim hood are poison – the world needs good teachers also

  54. Jean says:

    Where was the content of the character of the insurrectionists who were allowed to waltz right out of the capital? Where was the content of Jeffrey Epstein’s character. Why is the content of the character of the wealthy and connected irrelevant?

  55. Jean says:

    If there’s a litmus test to earn due process and equal protection in this country, should it not apply to everyone?

  56. Dread says:

    Can’t it be true that
    1. What Chauvin did was evil
    2. He’s guilty of a crime
    3. He’s perhaps not guilty of Murder 2 and 3
    4. The jury is intimidated
    5. The people in the streets are planning evil
    6. Our system still needs healing
    7. Lots of things are askew on all ends

    This thread is the definition of binary thinking

  57. Jean says:

    No it can’t be true, because he was guilty. That’s a fact. That was the verdict of the trier of fact.

  58. Dread says:

    Fair enough I’ve said enough

    I’m out on this subject.

  59. Jean says:

    If one is to postulate possible “truth” without the bare minimum of credible evidence, then how would one oppose the contention that the earth is flat and NASA never sent a man to the moon?

  60. Duane Arnold says:

    “I’m out on this subject…”

    For the best…

  61. Michael says:

    So…this is probably not the time to say that I think there’s a good chance the whole thing is overturned on appeal and we do it all over again…

  62. Everstudy says:

    While this doesn’t necessarily ‘prove’ that anyone on the jury received a threat or felt threatened, if I’m on a jury and I hear about this, I’m feeling threatened.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/18/us/chauvin-witness-barry-brodd-pigs-blood-santa-rosa/index.html

    And if you believe someone (not necessarily Chauvin) is guilty just because a jury finds them guilty, peruse the Innocence Project for a few minutes ( https://innocenceproject.org/ )

  63. Dread says:

    ^^^^^

    Ditto Dread

  64. Everstudy says:

    Comment in moderation due to links… sorry…

  65. Jean says:

    Assuming everything in the report is factual, the target was police (pig is a pejorative directed at police), and nothing in the report suggests a threat against jurors.

  66. Michael says:

    Jean,

    Do you seriously believe that a sentient juror wouldn’t feel the gravity of this trial?
    I would have feared for their lives if they came back with anything else.

  67. Michael says:

    I’m not saying that they didn’t reach a just verdict…but they were under the most heat since the O.J. trial…

  68. Everstudy says:

    That’s why I said it doesn’t prove that anyone on the jury received a threat. The house was a former house of one of the defense witnesses, so the target wasn’t just the police in general. His (former) home was a specific target.

    Again, if I’m on that jury, and I read that one of the defense witnesses was targeted like that, I start to wonder, ‘What if…’

  69. BrideofChrist says:

    Thank you, Xenia. You expressed what I think about all of this. I couldn’t stand to see the video of this poor African American man’s horrific death under the knee of this “police officer”..My God, he cried for his mother, like a man being killed in cold blood, like a baby, like my 16 month old grandson. This “police officer” was a sadist. He brings shame to our noble police officers – the men and women in blue who risk their lives everyday. If Babylon’s Dread ( and Tucker Carlson) are right, then the verdict will be appealed and everything ( they think) warrants a mistrial will be proven to be true and justice will prevail. We shall see. Our justice system is based on the Judeo Christian model of justice. It is probably the best justice system in the world-class let it take it’s course. Stop undermining it. My
    second daughter surprised us by choosing a husband who is half African American and half Latino. ( He’s quite a catch – a Harvard educated architect who has lived all over the world). Your child too might one day marry a person of color, like my daughter did . Your own grandchild would then also be a person of color, as well. Nothing like that scenario to bring home the reality that we ALL God’s children. He’s a Christian ( his parents and sister don’t even drink alcohol because of their religious convictions). I have two Christian son-in-laws and I couldn’t be happier for my two daughters. I want to thank Jean for giving us a lawyer’s perspective on this verdict, and Babylon’ s Dread has a right to express his feelings about the matter. But they are just that ; feelings.

  70. Everstudy says:

    Michael,

    I agree.

  71. Michael says:

    When I’m in the car I only listen to sports talk radio…and even the Vikings beat person was down at the scene doing live feeds…this was an international event…and I think we do ourselves no favors by simplifying or minimizing the case.

  72. Jean says:

    I assume every juror in every murder trial feels the weight of his or her responsibility to reach a just verdict when holding the liberty of the defendant for years to come in the balance.

  73. Michael says:

    Jean,

    I’m sure they do…but they rarely have to feel the weight of setting a nation on fire…

  74. Michael says:

    One more note…because I find some of this disturbing, as I do most of these exchanges.

    I believe that everyone commenting here desires justice in this case.
    We all agree that an evil act was committed by an evil man.
    We all agree that he belongs in prison.
    Let’s focus on what we agree on without thinking ill of each other over the things we don’t.

  75. Jean says:

    I don’t know Michael? How much time does the evil man spend in jail on good behavior under the sentence that Dread thinks the man is guilty of?

  76. Dread says:

    I guess I need to actually check out Tucker. He must have made a lot of sense.

  77. Michael says:

    Jean,

    We don’t know these things.
    I would bet a substantial amount that the trial will be done over thanks to politicians rendering early verdicts and threats of “confrontation”.
    I have a hard time believing he will last long in prison…

  78. Michael says:

    Emotionally, I’m fine with this guy never seeing daylight again.
    He had a history of brutality.
    It certainly sends a clear message and may establish a benchmark for when these things happen again.

    However…I want him to go away having had no questions raised about his guilt or the sentence.

  79. Jean says:

    His victim lasted around 9 minutes.

  80. Jean says:

    Michael,

    No amount of evidence will ever convince a sizable minority of our country.

  81. Jean says:

    If Trump comes out tomorrow and says the defendant was railroaded, 10s of millions will believe him.

  82. Michael says:

    Jean,

    I get it.
    Look…back in the seventies we had a high profile murder case here.
    Because I knew the cops I knew just how horrible it was…and to this day wish I did not know these things.
    When the suspect was finally captured a mob gathered outside the jail demanding that they serve justice immediately.
    I was in that mob.
    I would have gladly killed him with my bare hands.
    They moved the trial out of the valley, sequestered the jury, and he got life.
    That was not justice, but the best our system can do.
    True justice will be administered later…

  83. Michael says:

    Jean,

    Just what we needed…drag Trump into the discussion.
    I’m out.

  84. Jean says:

    Sorry, please delete the comment.

  85. Everstudy says:

    “No amount of evidence will ever convince a sizable minority of our country.”

    This is what I say every time there’s a police shooting and the politicians and the athletes start tweeting and making pronouncements about racist cops before any of the facts come out

    Just like yesterday and the police saving the life of a young black girl that was about to be stabbed by another young black girl. LaBron James tweets (and then deletes) “You’re next” to the cop (implying arrest and conviction for murder). Rep. Cori Bush defends the attacker. Psaki, in her statement implies that it was a bad shoot.

    The policeman should be heralded as a hero, saving two young black women, but the facts don’t matter.

  86. Everstudy says:

    Jean,

    If you change your statement to read “If [LaBron James] comes out tomorrow and says the [policeman] was [racist], 10s of millions will believe him”, that would also be true.

    We’ve become a society that doesn’t care about the facts. The media will get the story wrong, and the correction (if there ever is one) is hardly noticed.

  87. Jean says:

    I’ve said my piece. I will go into listening mode for a while.

  88. Steve says:

    Jean says, “If Trump comes out tomorrow and says the defendant was railroaded, 10s of millions will believe him.”

    LOL. I think you may have TDS. It afflicts many.

    By the way I think you are going to get 1 of your top 10 list hopes for the future worked on. I saw where Mitt Romney has introduced a bill called TRUST act which aims to address the short falls in social security and other federal programs that rely on trust funds. Of course that has been talked about for years. Maybe kind of foolish to put much hope in any that. But who knows.

  89. DH says:

    Michael’s 11:58 am and Xenia’s 12:13 pm comments reminded me of this verse.

    You know nothing at all. Nor do you understand that it is better for you that one man should die for the people, not that the whole nation should perish.

    The jury in the Chauvin case should have been sequestered…

  90. CM says:

    Another factor that has not been mentioned…

    During the trial of Chauvin, a cop in MN killed Duante Wright after supposedly mistaking her gun for her Taser. Considering that the Taser is bright yellow or orange, shaped differently and in a different holster than her service pistol, this doesn’t pass the smell test. I wonder if people like Dread and Tucker Carlson will give this cop a pass on negligent homicide (you know like a drunk driver hitting a killing a pedestrian) because they think it doesn’t apply LEOs. Perhaps they think this was an honest mistake that any cop can make. Wonder if they will think that if a surgeon removes wrong breast during their wife’s mastectomy and not sue for damages.

    Never mind that the incident escalated because Duante Wright had an air freshener hanging from his mirror. So-called Law and Order “conservatives” never consider that perhaps we have too many laws on the books to begin with.

    Here is an article from Reason.com (hardly a bastion of progressive and “woke” politics):

    https://reason.com/2021/04/21/can-cops-pull-you-over-for-hanging-an-air-freshener-from-your-rearview-mirror-youd-better-check/

    From the article linked above:

    Daunte Wright, who was shot and killed this month by a Brooklyn Center, Minnesota, police officer who apparently mistook her handgun for a Taser, was pulled over because of an expired registration sticker. But after the cops stopped him, they also noted that the air fresheners hanging from his rearview mirror violated Minnesota’s traffic code, which by itself would have been legally sufficient to detain him. That rule illustrates how easy it is for police to justify traffic stops by citing a petty civil violation, even when it is merely an excuse for conducting a criminal investigation that would otherwise be unconstitutional.

    Maybe reducing the number of laws on the books and getting rid of qualified immunity for police would help (something I am sure Tucker Carlson and probably Dread are opposed to). People like Tucker and Dread bemoan the SJW on the Left, but they are kosher with the SJW on the right with regards to the endless War on Drugs and other things.

  91. Dread says:

    The restraint of evil is breaking down at an alarming pace. That is what concerns me. I don’t give a tinker’s damn about Chauvin. He’s the lever that’s being wielded to remove restraint. The mob had a lust for the ruling to give them an excuse. They will not stop until it manifests.

    Police are the thin line of restraint that remains and they are being flipped by the mob. Soon they will
    Simply stop policing. They will allow the cup of wrath to spill. It’s coming.

    That’s what I care about. I get bogged in details about a trial that I don’t care about except in what the details reveal. That was my first post. That’s where I stand concerned. I know this crowd doesn’t see it and reads me as what I’m not. Hell with it.

    Pale Horse Dread

  92. Jean says:

    Dread,

    How many mass shootings have there been in America in the past month? How many State capitals were occupied by armed mobs last year? What about January the 6th?

    You only bring up the restrain of evil that you judge as evil. You are either blind to or willfully negligent of the lack of restrain of evil going on in many other spheres of our society, including by evil law enforcement and dishonest DAs.

    The society doesn’t have a police force that restrains evil unless justice is color blind, both of the skin color of a human being as well as the color of his or her work clothes.

    CM mentioned the Daunte Wright murder. What thin line protected him?

  93. Dread says:

    Jean

    Was Daunte Wright murdered? The police woman willfully executed that man? Is that your position? No crime in evidence just a guilty assertion by a lawyer?

    You presume guilt and are a lawyer?

    I was clear about Jan 6 and have given no quarter to Christian nationalists.

    I’m willful that is for sure.

  94. Jean says:

    “No crime in evidence”

    You must have missed the video and audio. That is evidence for sure. The crime will be adjudicated. Perhaps the “oops” defense.

    If there was a way for white men to walk in the shoes of a black man in America for a week, I think, no I am certain, many minds would be changed. Not all, but many.

  95. CM says:

    You just made my point Dread.

    You don’t seem to think we have too many laws on the books to begin with (since you never addressed it). I guess Dread was OK with civil asset forfeiture by LEOs using traffic violation as a pretext for a search. Who gives a rat’s a** about the Constitution and Bill of Rights because evildoers take advantage of it.

    Bet you would have fit right in with all those who wanted extra religious laws in 1st Century Israel. I am sure you would have been cool with Gentile converts to Christianity being forced to be circumcised too.

    The fact that police for the most part are revenue collection agents for the State, doesn’t enter the picture either.

    “The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws.” – Tacitus

    “The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons.”
    – Dostoevsky

    When a higher percentage of the US population is incarcerated than many so-called “evil” and repressive countries in the world, I would say we have a problem with overcriminalization. Funny even the Heritage Foundation used to think so — until their guy Trump was elected.

  96. Dread says:

    Jean

    One more time. You’re a lawyer and you assume guilt and you want me to be quiet when you address the law? As you said yesterday COME ON.

    CM

    Do you know me?

    Let’s have coffee. Let’s have human conversation because you are attempting to dehumanize me by your claptrap.

    None of what you say is true of me. Except I’m definitely a conservative. But you can keep your foreskins to yourself.

    That obsession was last week with Priddis.

    It’s fine that you keep coming at me personally just note that I don’t return the favor.

  97. CM says:

    As for the thin blue line, let us forget that police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to specific citizens based on the public duty doctrine based on SCOTUS and Appeals Court precedent. IOW, they are not required to respond to specific crimes or calls.

    Makes so it much easier for them to pass on the tough ones and only collect traffic tickets.

  98. CM says:

    Dread,

    Do you even know what a “conservative” is anyways? Define it as how you see with specific policy positions and principles and will be more than happy to point out where you are wrong in calling it “conservative”. And also point where you _specifically_ violated that belief or position by supporting a POTUS who was either

    a) Contrary to that position

    or:

    b) That position that you and your POTUS said was “conservative” but really isn’t.

    It is OK to admit you made a Faustian bargain and are OK with going against your principles and being purely transactional and Machiavellian in your voting choice for POTUS. It just makes you like 95% of the others that’s all.

  99. Michael says:

    Justice means the verdict would be the same irregardless of the race of the defendant and the victim.

    I’m trying to schedule a heart surgery around a mob in a town where the police are no longer allowed to police…so I’m all for some nuance in this conversation…

  100. Michael says:

    Speaking of Faustian bargains…I’m probably the only one here that knows or cares that Biden has systematically broken every promise he made on immigration and migrant issues. They’re all a bunch of rat bastards…

  101. Michael says:

    I cannot breathe in an atmosphere where one is either an angel or a demon based on their opinions…I have long inhabited a middle ground where my wings smell like smoke…

  102. Bob Sweat says:

    Chauvin had 18 complaints of misconduct on his police record. I have two sons-in-law who are police officers, one of them is a training officer. I was told that what happened that day was not proper procedure! I believe that came out in the trial as well. Chauvin’s punishment is exactly what he deserved. With 18 previous complaints of misconduct, I question whether he should have even been wearing a uniform when this happened.

    Whether the jury was influenced by their verdict by the likelihood of violence if they did not find guilt, I don’t know. But let me tell you what I do know. My daughter is married to an African American and I have 3 grandchildren who are dark-skinned. My daughter and her family have been shouted at in their car by bigoted people passing by. My son-in-law has been pulled over repeatedly by the police without receiving a reason. While sitting in his car in a Starbucks line, a police officer in the car in front of him, got out of his car and stood in front of my son-in-law’s car, and stared at him saying nothing. How many on this blog are black? If you’re not, then there is no way you or I can understand their fear and anger.

  103. Michael says:

    Bob,

    I understand and affirm it.
    The question before the house is how we change the system and society…while making sure that justice is blind.

  104. Nathan Priddis says:

    Michael I don’t think we change it. But this has been a great week, and we can be thankful for little things.

    400 years of racism is baked into the cake. But sometimes God sends little gifts that remind us of hope. It’s not always going to be like this. The Kingdom will come.

  105. Bob Sweat says:

    Michael,

    Because of the fallen nature, I’m not sure it can be changed. You can call me a defeatist. If there is any hope, people will need to get off their conservative ass. That comment is made for me more than anyone.

  106. Duane Arnold says:

    Equal justice under the law should be a current reality rather than an aspirational hope, but I’ll take what happened this last week as a glimmer of hope.

    As long as people make use of terms like “culture” to shield what is really racial animus, we will not make the progress toward full equality under the law which, honestly, should be the goal of everyone here…

  107. Em says:

    Taking a page from my great grandmother’s book…
    The worst wrong done to our dark skinned brothers and sisters is the lack of mentoring of the children. Growing up thinking you are “less than” tends to perpetuate bad behavior and, yes, criminal activity. The result is an ongoing attitude of watch out for them! They can’t be trusted!
    Affirmation of worth brings great results. IMO
    Just sayn”….. just sayin’

  108. Dread says:

    CM

    So coffee is a no, figured as much. And now you want to vet me as per my fidelity to conservatism.

    I know very well that the past POTUS was a populist not properly a conservative and he’s gone.

    Seeing the policy decisions of the present office holder I have no regrets.

    Now you want to put me to a purity test as per conservatism. Apparently you are determined to get your circumcision.

    But let me be clear you and Jean have judged that Daunte Wright was murdered and no due process is required for your assessment. Stop telling me to have no legal opinions if you have no respect for basic principles.

    Definitely Deplorable Dread

  109. Dread says:

    Michael @8:33

    That describes the actual clear and present danger. I am no fan of the far right and no supporter of militia movements or race based identity groups on the right. I am also no fan of identity being the basis of our corporate life as it is being pressed in our legacy media outlets and in our public discourse in general.

    I am clear that the right can be wrong as per violence but I never hear this crowd admit that the incessant mob violence on the left is evil. We boarded up America for the election. That was not because of the right. We’ve turned DC into an armed camp … that is because of the right and it IS horrific.

    We prepared for the apocalypse in the instance that Chauvin would even get a not guilty verdict on just one of the cases. The mob has us on the razor’s edge of destruction.

    I think we could agree together that evil is evil and has no race. Evil is evil and has no party. Evil is evil and has no single creed.

    Seems we can agree on some things.

  110. Michael says:

    Dread,

    To be honest, I’m angry.
    Trying to co-ordinate the hotel and the hospital around the potential for mob violence has been a hell of a headache.
    This is supposed to be a hopeful trip, as well as a time for myself and my godson to get away together for the first time in years.
    Instead, it’s turning into a trial because of a bunch of hellions who use a political agenda as an excuse for violence.
    There was a day when left and right agreed on the preservation of the community and the freedom to live without the imposition of fear.
    Where I grew up…we would have solved this quickly…but I’m old and not quite as liberal as some think.
    They rioted in Portland despite the verdict…

  111. Michael says:

    Where we would disagree is that I believe without a doubt that racism is baked into American society…just as it is baked in to the fallen human nature…

  112. Dread says:

    Michael,

    They rioted because, as I have maintained, they are a revolution. Their intentions are revolutionary. They will not be appeased. And they are winning because the legacy media has given them cover. Andy Gno a voice with a critical eye toward them has been demonized and big tech is undergirding that.

    Of course we are all united that you would get the medical treatment and a lengthened and healthier life. I think we here can unite there. That is where we have hope. Face to face.

    The voice I have come to trust is Joshua Mitchell who talks of building a world together.

    “There is much to say about this, but before delving more deeply into why identity politics has taken hold, and what it does to and in the body politic, I will pause to consider what identity politics purports to repudiate—namely, the liberal idea of the competent citizen. This brief historical excursion into liberal thought will help bring to light the stark difference between what I will call the “liberal politics of competence” and the “identity politics of innocence.” Through the former, we can build a world together; through the latter, we cannot. Liberal thought has been more than three centuries in the making. Identity politics has been with us for less than a generation. We need to keep this in mind as we ponder the future. The liberal politics of competence requires our never-ending difficult labor in a mixed world of purity and stain; the identity politics of innocence asks only that we cover ourselves with the fig leaf of innocence, and leave it to the state to allocate resources to the innocents and their causes.”

    Mitchell, Joshua American Awakening (p. 13).

  113. Michael says:

    Dread,

    Second point of disagreement.
    Their intentions may well be revolutionary, but their capabilities to carry it out are nil.
    These are people for the most part who have never labored for sustenance, nor do they even have surety of what could be known by looking into their own pants.
    Quelling the revolution would take about 15 minutes of competent work.
    There will come a point where untrained folks do what the system won’t…which will be tragic.

    Thank you much for the kind words…this trip will tell me whether or not I can have the less invasive surgery or if I must endure open heart surgery.
    A lot rides on the outcome.

  114. CM says:

    Michael,

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    Which unlike just about everybody (if not everybody), I have chosen neither the Giant Douche nor the Turd Sandwich for POTUS for the past several election cycles.

  115. Babylon's Dread says:

    Michael.

    It is true we disagree as I believe a tiny minority can create hell on earth… even as a tiny microbe can kill the body.

  116. Michael says:

    CM,

    Congratulations on your magnificent wisdom.
    I chose to vote in hope.

  117. Michael says:

    BD,

    Perhaps…but I pray for a return to sensibility and sanity before we go over the edge.
    These people have no plan to govern….simply one to ruin.
    At some point, the rest of us will have had enough.

  118. Duane Arnold says:

    Not to argue with Prof. Mitchell, but identity politics have been with us almost from the founding of the republic… on both sides. The Jay Treaty, the Jefferson/Adams contest, the populism of Jackson, the unjust Mexican-American War, the Civil War, Reconstruction, the No-Nothings, the genocide of Native Americans, Segregation, Fr. Coughlin, America First, the Bruderbund, McCarthyism, Vietnam… it goes on. We are not innocents…

  119. Em says:

    We are not innocents, yes… But…
    Will the day soon come wen a decision must be made to shoot the rioters, the “revolutionaries?”
    Dunno. Truly don’t… sigh

  120. Nathan Priddis says:

    Cir.. Wait.. what? Did I hear…Circumcision?
    BD? Was that you?

  121. Michael says:

    “Will the day soon come wen a decision must be made to shoot the rioters, the “revolutionaries?””

    No…we don’t live like that under the rule of law.

    We simply enforce the law as it is.

  122. Em says:

    Michael, point taken – praying
    Also praying for a good outcome in the medical procedires you are fscing – God keep

  123. Em says:

    Michael, point taken – praying
    Also praying for a good outcome in the medical procedures you are facing – God keep

  124. BrideofChrist says:

    Michael, my good friend, Milton had triple bypass open heart surgery a week ago and he is doing great. He was sitting up doing simple exercises the day after surgery, and we were texted a picture of of him sitting up and smiling surrounded by his family the day after surgery and he looked great! He is just 66 , but his problem is genetic. His father and older brother had the same surgery and they all were much improved by it. I hope this helps you a little as you contemplate what to do next. My friend went to five doctors getting second,third, fourth…opinions. We all are hoping that you don’t need open heart surgery, but most people have excellent outcomes ! We will pray for wisdom for you as you make these important doctor visits and serious decisions.

  125. Nathan Priddis says:

    What if I where to reframe American Church history and say that more then just racism is at play. Something like this:

    Africans are Anamist. By the 10th Century Islam reaches the West Coast. Horses get disease in the rainbelt, so the Muslim conquest is halted snd turns to a slow spread via preaching and trade. The soon to be slaves would therefore have a mixture of spirit-ism and Islamic thinking.

    Circa 1620 slavery begins in Virginia, with Africans beginning to adopt elements of Christianity. Simultaneously, white Colonialism is inventing denominations, an American phenomenon. Colonialist are suspicious of Black Christianity, and any separate development or activities.

    If this narrative fits, then it would be logical to discribe American history in part, as persecution of a category of believers in Christ. In time this persecution evolves from a general prevailing condition, to a more structured civil war within the Church of God. The SBC is specifically created to cause harm to slaves in 1845.

    This harm wouldn’t be limited to this lifetime. The underlying basis for slavery was religious. The African was not fully human in the sense of select European nationalities. It is illogical to say a person of lesser status would suddenly have equal status in the after life. If the slave was our brother in the next life, then he should be treated as such, in the life of the here and now.

    If we recast the past as a selective persecution, then why would we assume it ended if the same institutions remain?

  126. Duane Arnold says:

    Nathan

    Very good. Might I add that much of the Congo (a source of slaves) converted to Roman Catholicism beginning in 1491. In the intervening centuries, a portion of the slaves shipped to America were Catholic Christians…

  127. Dread says:

    Duane,

    Joshua Mitchell is a Georgetown political theory professor and he is using a definition of identity politics that you are rejecting by imposing a category on the past that does not properly fit as the tenants of the systems are very different. The new interpreters of American history are certainly recasting the history in new terms but Mitchell is writing and analyzing political narratives that have very different outcomes. I will choose you as one who can correct him on his theological categories … reading him there are times when that is appropriate… I will choose him for political theory especially as it comes to analyzing remedies for the current malaise.

  128. Dread says:

    Mitchell in no way asserts innocence to a class of people rather he notes that innocence has been ascribed to a class that are aggrieved. So i do not know what you comment about innocence meant in that he prefers the idea of original sin as a universal category.

    The fig leaf of innocence is a reference to a false innocence as you would know.

  129. Nathan Priddis says:

    Duane. I know nothing of Portugese history or their activities along the African Coast. That’s really something to think there were Christians so far south.

  130. Linnea says:

    If we think the rioting is over, we’re sadly mistaken. Instead, I believe they will increase since rioting has gotten a result. And, this gives me no joy to type this.

  131. Em says:

    Linnea, i fear you could be right
    Hope you are feeling better now

  132. Dread says:

    The riots will continue until morale improves.

  133. Jean says:

    Morale will improve when Smith & Wesson comes out with the 200 round magazine, because 100 isn’t enough.

  134. Dread says:

    🤥🤥🤥🤥

  135. Duane Arnold says:

    Dread

    I know who he is… and what he writes…

  136. Jean says:

    We still haven’t arrived at a definition of human race that includes all people and a desire for a nation that includes all human beings under a single justice system. Can this blog affirm these principles?

  137. Dread says:

    The kingdom of God is that nation.

  138. Dread says:

    Will policing survive this daily public shaming? Will the black community benefit? Early evidence exists.

  139. Duane Arnold says:

    “The kingdom of God is that nation”

    There’s a theocratic notion…

  140. Jean says:

    Public shaming is not inherently bad. If it produces reform, for example, shaming can have a positive impact. Bad policing should be shamed, should it not?

  141. Dread says:

    You mean like the shaming Biden heaped on police in response to the Columbus shooting? Isn’t Biden a lifelong leader of the system? Isn’t he an architect of it? If he woke up I missed his mea culpa.

    Here’s a little shaming from a couple of privileged white people. The president’s press secretary posturing a “child” as a victim of “police violence”

    “She was a child. We’re thinking of her friends and family in the communities that are hurting and grieving her loss. We know that police violence disproportionately impacts Black and Latino people in communities and that Black women and girls, like Black men and boys, experience higher rates of police violence. We also know that there are particular vulnerabilities that children in foster care, like Ma’Khia, face. . . . The White House is focused on addressing systemic racism and bias “head on” and passing laws that will put in place reforms at police departments around the country”

    And you did your own shaming yesterday calling the woman officer a murderer in keeping with the very best law principle of guilty till proven innocent.

    This kind of work is going to make us all safer.

    Yes bad policing can be shamed but shaming police as systemically racist is not positive in impact.

    You think this is good for the police?

  142. Dread says:

    So far we know murder went up 30% in 34 cities after all the defunding calls and the public shaming. Guess who is the primary victim of these increases? Right! Blacks are disproportionally affected. Is that racism on the part of the police detractors?

    My guess is someone will determine that giving out stats that expose this kind of disaster is racist and we won’t get such facts.

  143. Michael says:

    I’m too busy this morning to get caught up in this again…but I had a coherent thought for the first time in days and need to share it.

    I have some sympathy for what BD is trying to say.
    Well, I had some…until it struck me that the same hyperbole, misuse of statistics, and downright dirty lies have characterized the reporting on the border.
    I haven’t heard BD lament that…it’s not really the straight white guy that’s in the crosshairs, it’s the brown person fleeing poverty and oppression.

    Now, I don’t give a damn about any of it and I’m going to get my car fixed.

  144. Dread says:

    Michael

    No matter how I try I don’t understand the border and I don’t know who the villains are and who the heroes are. Well I know regular people are the heroes. I don’t know if this disaster is better than that one.

    I know the people who benefit financially are evil but who are they? I don’t think these political parties care that’s for sure.

    It’s not ever been a central focus either. I can’t care about everything. I just can’t.

    So get the car fixed. We’ll sort ourselves.

  145. CM says:

    Lost in all of this is a discussion of eliminating qualified immunity. Something the GOP is starting to look at now that Trump is out of the office. Of course, Trump and his allies (especially the police unions) were the biggest roadblocks to getting Qualified Immunity reforms passed last year.

    https://reason.com/2021/04/22/tim-scott-is-proposing-a-major-reform-to-qualified-immunity/

    Per the article linked above:

    Ironically it is was opposition from Trump and Dread’s newest media BFF Tucker Carlson that played role in Senator Tim Scott’s withdrawal of his proposal.

  146. Dread says:

    CM

    You must have joined Ben Shapiro in the criticism of qualified immunity he’s been on that train a while. Meanwhile you and I can agree that unions perform all kinds of mischief, protecting bad cops, irresponsibly closing schools and too often controlling agenda’s despite facts or science.

    I like Tucker, didn’t hear his take on Chauvin until you recommended it, he was a bit short of my criticism but he usually comes up with angles that inform though I wish he’d inflame a little less but we do that here as well so…

    Tucker is not my new BFF I enjoyed him when he co-hosted Crossfire when CNN was more entertaining. I do wish he’d drop the annoying laugh… Kamala could work on that too.

  147. Em says:

    Tucker and Greg Kelly – two men worth hearing out – doesn’t require down the line agreement, but they usually have their facts straight….
    From where i sit, a tax payer on a fixed income, we cannot reform the world! We’ll go broke trying. Yes we will ! ! !
    If God can’t, why do we think we can?

  148. Michael says:

    Tucker Carlson is a lying sack of dung.
    Thank you for coming to my TED talk…

  149. Em says:

    Michael, really don’t want to cause you to get your back up now.. My apologies. .🙏

  150. Michael says:

    Em,

    Carlson and Kelly have one function…that is to make people angry and come up with something new to make you angry every day.

    This is not for the purpose of information…it’s for ratings and ad dollars.
    Money.

    The more liberal networks do the same.

    It’s all a game and they don’t care that we might lose the whole country.

  151. Michael says:

    The only time I watch the news is election night or some horrific crisis.

    I tried watching CNN’s election coverage and it was endless hours of Wolf Blitzer begging the other correspondents to show him any way Biden could win.

    It was like he was awaiting a note from a high school crush and could barely contain himself.

    David Brinkley would have slapped him silly…

  152. Dread says:

    Apparently Blitzer sounded like the “prophets” post-election as they divined the paths by which the kraken might rescue them.

  153. Michael says:

    BD,

    Much the same…and equally as offensive.

  154. Anne Kohut says:

    Michael, please allow me to assure you that unless you are scheduling your surgery to be performed after dark, in the streets near the ICE detention center, the Portland Police Association union building or the four block area were the jails & courthouses are, your trip to Portland should be uneventful except for your surgery itself. Avoid May 1st however as it is a traditional date for all sorts of parades & marches. Traffic can be horrendous that day. The reports I read in the Oregonian are unbelievably exaggerated. No buildings have been burned down. Andy Ngo is especially infamous for splicing together local live streamers footage, marketing it etc. Since he got kicked out of PSU for plagiarism & libel he’s managed to rebrand himself with a new British accent and his idol Tucker Carlson’s brand of journalism. I’ve got receipts ☺️

  155. JD says:

    Our ongoing surrender to the will of Jesus Christ is most important now, not just to what we believe His will to be.

    “I can do nothing on My own. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is righteous, because I do not seek My own will but the will of Him who sent Me.“

    “Father, if You are willing, remove this cup from Me; yet not My will, but Yours be done.”

  156. CM says:

    Dread,

    I have been for getting rid of QA for a good 10-15 years at least. So who is the late-comer to the party?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.