Chomper Higgot

So very different that making threats via the mail has it’s own law and penalties: 18 U.S. Code § 876 - Mailing threatening communications.

Well he’s not now, he deleted the post. I’m betting the DA’s office have a screenshot in their evidence files.

And there you have it ‘Image’. Thank you.

I’m looking for the level of absurdity you retreat to when Trump is arraigned and the subject social media post is presented as evidence of his behaviour for consideration in Trump’s bail application,

Quite clearly you are trolling.

I’m saying exactly what I posted. Don’t try to go all literal on stuff I didn’t say.

The retreat to literalism to which I referred to earlier.

I’m betting if someone posted a similar montage comprising them swinging a baseball bat alongside a picture of your child’s head or the head of your wife, with attendant text discussing possible violence, you’d take it very seriously.

Trump supporters suddenly go all literal when the dog whistle they them selves read and respond to is called out by others. They are cowards, incapable of displaying any courage in their convictions, hiding behind wafer thin plausible deniability. Trump and this kind of behavior from Trump makes them feel better about themselves. Think about that for a moment.

You’ve heard of stochastic terrorism?

See you in court.

OK, try this. If you hit me don’t blame me for what my brothers might do to you.

Let’s see what the trial judge says when Trump is arraigned, because the prosecution absolutely will present this as evidence of Trump attempting to intimidate the DA.

Nice car you’ve got their Mr, shame if anything should happen to it.

You don’t do montage then.

I believe that might cross the line for threatening an investigation, obstruction of Justice.

Trump’s violent rhetoric finds a home. Let’s hope the FBI catch the culprit, he clearly needs a bit of love and care in a Federal facility.

Classic armchair remark.

Perhaps something to consider when Trump is arraigned and asking for bail.

That wasn’t the question I asked, have another go.

Starmer was not ‘caught at it’. https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/police-say-uk-labour-leader-will-not-be-fined-after-lockdown-investigation-2022-07-08/

Which among the broke the rules then mislead Parliament about having done so?

Could have, but didn’t. Could have been but were not. You are getting offended by what wasn’t.

Not at all. It’s just I can point to my posting history on the issue of Transgender people in sport as comprising consistent arguments not rooted in moral outrage, let alone hysteria.

Do not presume to tell me what I should post. I have consistently stated over numerous threads discussing Transgender athletes that sports governing bodies need to deal with this and that the correct way to do do is apply competitor classifications. No need for hysteria or moral outrage, simply add some new competitor classifications to accommodate new developments.