Couple who pointed guns at protesters tell Republican convention that suburbs in peril

[Chomper Higgot]

1 minute ago, Smigel said:

Superb post and summation of events. 

It beggars belief, that the Democrats ( an oxymoron if ever there was one) and their supporters, really think that almost 90 days of violence, arson, looting, intimidation and murder, will result in middle Americans voting for them in droves, is beyond parody. 

All they have is hatred and divisiveness. 

Unify the nation, pull the other one.! 

Anyone else heard the screams of MSN, and Democrat outrage over the murder of Cannon Hinnant, a 5 year old boy shot in the head from point blank range. 

No, neither have I, doesn't fit the narrative. 

It beggars belief that Trump thinks violence and rioting in America under his administration is something he can blame on the Democrats.

[mikebike]

37 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

And the "peaceful protesters" who were illegally trespassing on private property...

Ok. You got it now. Trespassing (ticket, small fine) vs weapons charges (jail time).

[Logosone]

5 minutes ago, mikebike said:

Ok. You got it now. Trespassing (ticket, small fine) vs weapons charges (jail time).

There will be no jail time for the McCloskeys.

 

Republican Senator Josh Hawley called it "an outrageous abuse of power" by the circuit attorney. Missouri's conservative governor said if convicted, he would pardon the McCloskeys. 

 

Missouri's Attorney General Eric Schmitt also filed a legal brief in support of dismissing the case, writing that prosecuting the McCloskeys is a violation of their right to bear arms, and their right to defend their property under Missouri's "castle doctrine" law.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53891184

Edited August 26, 2020 by Logosone

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Logosone said:

It is absolutely scandalous what is happening in the US.

Totally agree; as manifested by the trump convention

[mikebike]

18 minutes ago, Logosone said:

There will be no jail time for the McCloskeys.

It was a comparison of the seriousness of the crimes... wasn’t that clear?

 

Otherwise, time will tell how the charges play out. No need to speculate.

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

It was a comparison of the seriousness of the crimes... wasn’t that clear?

 

Otherwise, time will tell how the charges play out. No need to speculate.

No crime has been committed by the McCloskeys. A crime was committed by the violent mob who broke and vandalised a beautiful gate and trespassed on private property in order to intimidate mayor Lyda Krewson in her private home. They also vandalised the private road by scrawling graffiti in front of Lyda Krewson's house.

 

Many of the mob were armed and some had threatened the McCloskeys' lives. Some said "We are coming back to revisit,". Very threatening and aggressive behaviour, not just "trespassing".

 

So you are comparing one of the actual crimes, not all of them, with a mere accusation that was made for political reasons and has not been determined to be a crime so far.

 

Obviously if the governor of the state says he will pardon the McCloskeys if they are convicted it is very unlikely they will do "jail time" for defending themselves and their property.

[MikeN]

17 hours ago, scammed said:

the right to self defense is universal, name me one country in the world

that doesnt give that basic right

Obviously you did not look at the photo .....why was a firearm needed for “self defence” against a camera ? I know that in my country excessive force, ie unnecessary use of a firearm, is not a basic right. But then, I come from a civilized country, not the Wild West.

[simple1]

3 minutes ago, Logosone said:

the governor of the state says he will pardon the McCloskeys if they are convicted

 

Which would be political interference in the Rule of Law.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No crime has been committed by the McCloskeys. A crime was committed by the violent mob who broke and vandalised a beautiful gate and trespassed on private property in order to intimidate mayor Lyda Krewson in her private home. They also vandalised the private road by scrawling graffiti in front of Lyda Krewson's house.

 

Many of the mob were armed and some had threatened the McCloskeys' lives. Some said "We are coming back to revisit,". Very threatening and aggressive behaviour, not just "trespassing".

 

So you are comparing one of the actual crimes, not all of them, with a mere accusation that was made for political reasons and has not been determined to be a crime so far.

 

Obviously if the governor of the state says he will pardon the McCloskeys if they are convicted it is very unlikely they will do "jail time" for defending themselves and their property.

So actions that you don’t think should be crimes are not yet crimes, while actions you think should be crimes are to be accepted as such.

 

A prosecutor is acting for ‘political’ reasons but a governor (who is elected) is acting out of an apolitical public spirit.

 

And of course protestors are ‘a violent mob’.

 

[stevenl]

17 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No crime has been committed by the McCloskeys. A crime was committed by the violent mob who broke and vandalised a beautiful gate and trespassed on private property in order to intimidate mayor Lyda Krewson in her private home. They also vandalised the private road by scrawling graffiti in front of Lyda Krewson's house.

 

Many of the mob were armed and some had threatened the McCloskeys' lives. Some said "We are coming back to revisit,". Very threatening and aggressive behaviour, not just "trespassing".

 

So you are comparing one of the actual crimes, not all of them, with a mere accusation that was made for political reasons and has not been determined to be a crime so far.

 

Obviously if the governor of the state says he will pardon the McCloskeys if they are convicted it is very unlikely they will do "jail time" for defending themselves and their property.

Why would the governor pardon if no crime was committed?

[Tippaporn]

43 minutes ago, Logosone said:

There will be no jail time for the McCloskeys.

 

Republican Senator Josh Hawley called it "an outrageous abuse of power" by the circuit attorney. Missouri's conservative governor said if convicted, he would pardon the McCloskeys. 

 

Missouri's Attorney General Eric Schmitt also filed a legal brief in support of dismissing the case, writing that prosecuting the McCloskeys is a violation of their right to bear arms, and their right to defend their property under Missouri's "castle doctrine" law.

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53891184

If this were an incident that happened 50 years ago in the United States the only news reports you would have heard about it would be the ones about the names of the "protesters" who got arrested for property destruction and trespassing.  Fast forward after 50 years of liberal brainwashing and we get this.

[Sujo]

21 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No crime has been committed by the McCloskeys. A crime was committed by the violent mob who broke and vandalised a beautiful gate and trespassed on private property in order to intimidate mayor Lyda Krewson in her private home. They also vandalised the private road by scrawling graffiti in front of Lyda Krewson's house.

 

Many of the mob were armed and some had threatened the McCloskeys' lives. Some said "We are coming back to revisit,". Very threatening and aggressive behaviour, not just "trespassing".

 

So you are comparing one of the actual crimes, not all of them, with a mere accusation that was made for political reasons and has not been determined to be a crime so far.

 

Obviously if the governor of the state says he will pardon the McCloskeys if they are convicted it is very unlikely they will do "jail time" for defending themselves and their property.

No one tresspassed on their property. They are known for being 'difficult' neighbors.

[Logosone]

17 minutes ago, Sujo said:

No one tresspassed on their property. They are known for being 'difficult' neighbors.

"Most legal analysts agree that the protesters were trespassing when they entered Portland Place."

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53891184

 

However "difficult" the McCloskeys were, they never ripped the gate of their property, they did not trespass and they did not seek to intimidate the mayor in her private home.

 

Nor did they come with weapons to another person's house and threatened their lives. Nor did they scrawl graffiti on a private road.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Logosone

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Smigel said:

<SNIP>

Anyone else heard the screams of MSN, and Democrat outrage over the murder of Cannon Hinnant, a 5 year old boy shot in the head from point blank range. 

No, neither have I, doesn't fit the narrative. 

 

 

Motive yet to be established, but easily located examples...

 

• “A 25-year-old man has been charged in the shooting death of 5-year-old Cannon Hinnant” (CNN)
• “5-year-old shot to death in North Carolina; suspect sought” (The Associated Press)
• “Authorities capture suspect in 5-year-old’s fatal shooting” (The Associated Press)
• “Motive a Mystery in 5-Year-Old’s Murder” (NBC New York and NBC Boston).
• “Funeral planned for 5-year-old boy shot at point-blank range in N.C.”(NBC12 in Richmond, Virginia).
• “Wilson man wanted in fatal shooting of 5-year-old apprehended” (WRAL-TV, an NBC-affiliated station, in Raleigh).
• “‘He meant the world to me’: Family, friends honor life of Cannon Hinnant, the 5-year-old boy shot and killed while riding bike in Wilson” (ABC11 in Raleigh).
• “5-year-old shot and killed while outside on bike, 25-year-old charged with murder” (ABC7 in Los Angeles).
• “Funeral, vigil scheduled for Cannon Hinnant, the 5-year-old boy killed in North Carolina” (ABC6 in Philadelphia).
• “Boy, 5, ‘shot dead by neighbour’ as he played with sisters” (Yahoo! News)

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cannon-hinnant/

Edited August 26, 2020 by simple1

[Logosone]

St. Louis prosecutor used McCloskey case in campaign literature and should be dismissed, according to new motion

 

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner referenced case involving couple who pointed guns at protesters in campaign literature before charges were issued, motion says.

 

St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner used the McCloskey case in solicitations for campaign donations before she charged the couple for pointing guns at protesters, and should, therefore, be disqualified from the case, according to a motion filed by the couple’s attorney Wednesday.

 

“The July 17th email drew a direct line from the incident, which had not yet resulted in criminal charges, to Ms. Gardner’s political antagonists and from there to a call for donations to further her re-election efforts,” he wrote. “It implied that the defendant was among those ‘perpetuating a system of systemic racism and police brutality.’”

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/mccloskeys-attorney-files-motion-to-disqualify-circuit-attorney-gardner-from-case/63-8fedfaf7-2dab-4d2e-8521-f80064c17f61

 

So there we have it. Clear evidence that Kim Gardner prosecuted this couple for her own gain, to solicit donations to further her re-election efforts. There is nothing more sacred to some people than their career.

Edited August 26, 2020 by Logosone

[simple1]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Nothing for you to be Grousing about them.

 

But you are correct about one thing, there is politicking at play.

 

The Trump campaign think it good politics and a vote catcher to invite two people to speak at their convention who’s only qualification to do so is they pointed guns at protestors.

And extremist political ideologues in the same mould of many trump supporters

Edited August 26, 2020 by simple1

[Sujo]

9 minutes ago, Logosone said:

"Most legal analysts agree that the protesters were trespassing when they entered Portland Place."

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-53891184

 

However "difficult" the McCloskeys were, they never ripped the gate of their property, they did not trespass and they did not seek to intimidate the mayor in her private home.

 

Nor did they come with weapons to another person's house and threatened them with their lives. Nor did they scrawl graffiti on a private road.

No one went onto their property. By your own admission they were never interested in going onto their property.

[riclag]

4 hours ago, simple1 said:

There appears to be lack of clarity if the protestors were actually on the home owner's property. In any case pointing loaded weapons at people passing by does, to me, even if they were verballing threats, appear to be an act of total stupidity as they had no idea if armed persons within the crowd would open fire. Highly probably if fire had been exchanged, they would have been killed, as well as unarmed people in the protester group. 

 

Disingenuous? far right people in the US have so far murdered more than those from the extreme left of US politics. I have yet to read a report from the FBI affirming Anitfa and BLM members being the primary movers for property destruction,. 

 

BTW which US cities have undergone "mass destruction" in the riots of the past months?

Does the msm cover a possible motive as to why the left claims "these two nuts" on June 28, felt threaten and scared,no!

 

One would only have to look at the events that transpired in the weeks prior to the incident all over the country and especially St. Louis,MO.

 

 June 2,A retired St. Louis ex police officer acting as security, defending a business was murdered on site,during rioting! Another 4 officers shot!

 June,   Mayor of St.louis, imposes a curfew on what was reported in this video by a CBS affiliate as  "violent protests". 

 

In searching for pics to substantiate people trespassing on a private gated community, I didn't expect much from the protesters taking pictures!(side note, I'm using this picture only to show where these intruders are and nothing else). 

  I'll say again it's Missouri law( "castle doctrine") gives people the right to protect their property , by lethal force if necessary.

https://www.fjrcriminaldefense.com/blog/2017/09/how-well-do-you-understand-missouris-stand-your-ground-law/

New York Post

https://nypost.com/2020/07/31/st-louis-man-in-blm-standoff-says-cops-have-armed-protesters-video/

Edited August 26, 2020 by riclag

[scammed]

3 minutes ago, Sujo said:

No one went onto their property. By your own admission they were never interested in going onto their property.

reality is what fits you

[NanLaew]

On 8/25/2020 at 10:47 AM, riclag said:

I'm glad you don't live in my country! In the USA your innocent till proven guilty! The couple hasn't been to trial!

 

The way the law is structured in Missouri, a citizen has the right to protect themselves and  property and if they feel  threaten, they can exercise lethal force! 

 

Under what is referred to as “The Castle Doctrine”, Missouri laws allow individuals to use deadly force against intruders who disrupt the sanctity of private property and intend to cause harm. A legal owner of private property has no duty to retreat and has the right to use deadly force to prevent an attack.Jun 17, 2019.

 

https://kcdefensecounsel.com/the-criminal-defense-of-self-defense-in-missouri/#:~:text=Under what is referred to,force to prevent an attack.

 Have you followed the events that led up to that!!!!

 

 

Blah, blah, blah... if you look at the picture in the OP, the lady felon-in-waiting is standing outside her 'castle' wall, probably on the sidewalk and waving a gun around. That behavior will get a black guy shot in most other American neighborhoods.

Edited August 26, 2020 by NanLaew

[riclag]

1 minute ago, NanLaew said:

Blah, blah, blah... if you look at the picture in the OP, the lady felon-in-waiting is standing outside her 'castle' grounds on the sidewalk waving a gun around.

she hasn't been to trial!.  The AG in waiting  for the state said he will dismiss the charges once  it is finalized ,if it ever gets to that

[Logosone]

9 minutes ago, riclag said:

Does the msm cover a possible motive as to why the left claims "these two nuts" on June 28, felt threaten and scared,no!

 

One would only have to look at the events that transpired in the weeks prior to the incident all over the country and especially St. Louis,MO.

 

 June 2,A retired St. Louis ex police officer acting as security, defending a business was murdered on site,during rioting! Another 4 officers shot!

 June,   Mayor of St.louis, imposes a curfew on what was reported in this video by a CBS affiliate as  "violent protests". 

 

In searching for pics to substantiate people trespassing on a private gated community, I didn't expect much from the protesters taking pictures!(side note, I'm using this picture only to show where these intruders are and nothing else). 

  I'll say again it's Missouri law( "castle doctrine") gives people the right to protect their property , by lethal force if necessary.

https://www.fjrcriminaldefense.com/blog/2017/09/how-well-do-you-understand-missouris-stand-your-ground-law/

New York Post

https://nypost.com/2020/07/31/st-louis-man-in-blm-standoff-says-cops-have-armed-protesters-video/

Well done, great post. Clearly visible how one of the BLM protestors is pointing a gun at the couple.

 

Obviously they had every right to fear for their lives. The BLM nutters were pointing rifles at them.

 

Clear cut case. If this ever were to go to court, the couple would just have to show this photo. Case closed.

[Redline]

The blue states are far more wealthy, educated, healthy, cleaner ????

that’s supposed to be scary?

get guns off the streets, and much of the violence will stop-along with the “war on drugs”, which is a failure 

[CorpusChristie]

1 minute ago, Logosone said:

Well done, great post. Clearly visible how one of the BLM protestors is pointing a gun at the couple.

 

Obviously they had every right to fear for their lives. The BLM nutters were pointing rifles at them.

 

Clear cut case. If this ever were to go to court, the couple would just have to show this photo. Case closed.

That is a video camera live streaming, quick, you still have time to edit/delete your post

[mikebike]

59 minutes ago, Logosone said:

No crime has been committed by the McCloskeys.

Then why were they charged with a crime?

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, CorpusChristie said:

That is a video camera live streaming, quick, you still have time to edit/delete your post

It's obviously a gun disguised as a video camera.

 

That's how underhand these leftists are.

 

Shocking.

[Surelynot]

6 minutes ago, Logosone said:

Well done, great post. Clearly visible how one of the BLM protestors is pointing a gun at the couple.

 

Obviously they had every right to fear for their lives. The BLM nutters were pointing rifles at them.

 

Clear cut case. If this ever were to go to court, the couple would just have to show this photo. Case closed.

Shame it is a camera and the 'barrel' is a mic......doh!

[Logosone]

1 minute ago, mikebike said:

Then why were they charged with a crime?

Here's why mike, because Kim Gardner is using the incident to further her political ambitions. Even BEFORE the couple were charged Kim Gardner used the incident in a Black Lives Matter style solicitation for her political funds.

 

Kim Gardner is black, and her constituency is largely black, so she is trying to secure votes and funds by going after the old white couple who pointed guns at the BLM heroes. That is why they were charged with a crime.

 

Not because they committed a crime, but because Kim Gardner is using the incident for her own political purposes.

 

https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/local/mccloskeys-attorney-files-motion-to-disqualify-circuit-attorney-gardner-from-case/63-8fedfaf7-2dab-4d2e-8521-f80064c17f61

 

 

[simple1]

6 minutes ago, riclag said:

Does the msm cover a possible motive as to why the left claims "these two nuts" on June 28, felt threaten and scared,no!

 

Do you really think facing with weapons, a group passing by, was a good idea? Isn't that surprising they were verbally threatened is it, in fact, IMO, an act of gross stupidity by the couple. I'll make the observation from the photo you provided there were a few protesters facing the crowd, one assumes in an endeavour to deescalate tension - have to wait the outcome of the Court proceeding on felony weapons charges for facts to emerge; people were videoing the incident.

[Bluespunk]

48 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why would the governor pardon if no crime was committed?

Politics