All things Derek Chauvin trial

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
I strongly disagree with your 'bothsiderism'.

1) Plenty of us said Maxine was out of line. Check out the thread.

2) As far as the "both sides are equally egregious" line goes, here's an interesting read:

Millions of Americans think the election was stolen. How worried should we be about more violence?​


A recent survey showed an estimated 50m Republicans believe the false claim, but experts say many Trump supporters appear to be cooling down

Lois Beckett in Los Angeles
@loisbeckett
Fri 16 Apr 2021 06.00 EDT

Three months after an insurrection at the US Capitol, an estimated 50 million Republicans still believe the false claim that the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump, according to a recent national survey. But it’s far from clear how many Americans might still be willing to take violent action in support of that belief.

Early research on the continued risk of violence related to Trump’s “big lie” has produced a wide variety of findings. One political scientist at the University of Chicago estimated, based on a single national survey in March, that the current size of an ongoing “insurrectionist movement” in the US might be as large as 4% of American adults, or about 10 million people.

---

A March survey from Reuters/Ipsos found that more than half of Republicans endorsed a false claim that the attack was “led by violent leftwing protesters trying to make Trump look bad”, and also said they believed that the people who gathered at the Capitol “were mostly peaceful, law-abiding Americans”.

Six in 10 Republicans in that survey also said they believed “the 2020 election was stolen from Donald Trump.” That percentage of the sample would correspond with roughly 50 to 55 million Americans, Chris Jackson, the Ipsos senior vice-president for public affairs, told the Guardian.

LOL
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
Do tell.

Tell us, "lawyer" Bob, what was factually incorrect?
Shocking. Another lefty brings up my job! You all are really intimidated by this job. Jesus christ.

As to your post, you are pretending to know the difference between a good medical examiner and a crappy one. You assume this guy is a "quack" because he said something you don't like. You are not intellectually capable of knowing the difference, you are barely intellectually capable of regurgitating the sh!t you are told to think.

As far as me, I have no idea who is a good medical examiner and who is a bad one.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,811
Reaction score
2,180
Points
113
Shocking. Another lefty brings up my job! You all are really intimidated by this job. Jesus christ.

As to your post, you are pretending to know the difference between a good medical examiner and a crappy one. You assume this guy is a "quack" because he said something you don't like. You are not intellectually capable of knowing the difference, you are barely intellectually capable of regurgitating the sh!t you are told to think.

As far as me, I have no idea who is a good medical examiner and who is a bad one.
You responding to USAF.

 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
Shocking. Another lefty brings up my job! You all are really intimidated by this job. Jesus christ.

As to your post, you are pretending to know the difference between a good medical examiner and a crappy one. You assume this guy is a "quack" because he said something you don't like. You are not intellectually capable of knowing the difference, you are barely intellectually capable of regurgitating the sh!t you are told to think.

As far as me, I have no idea who is a good medical examiner and who is a bad one.
LOL. Cool rant.


Just ignores the part about 400 doctors and medical examiners calling his testimony outrageous, and the state of MD deciding to review every in-custody death during his tenure, but cool rant.

Now try it while addressing the point, rather than a "lawyerly" attack on me.

We'll wait.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
LOL. Cool rant.


Just ignores the part about 400 doctors and medical examiners calling his testimony outrageous, and the state of MD deciding to review every in-custody death during his tenure, but cool rant.

Now try it while addressing the point, rather than a "lawyerly" attack on me.

We'll wait.
You brought up my profession again, kudos! Next time you can just tell me that you feel inferior. I know you do, you should, but lets move on.

As far as my rant, I was simply pointing out that you are intellectually capable of calling anyone a quack. You're a really stupid person. When you attempt to judge the credentials of various medical examiners, it's the equivalent of my dog arguing about quantum physics. He can kind of make some noise but it's pointless.

This is going to be over your head, because like I said, you're a dummy. But I have no doubt there are tons of lefties who will cry that someone had the audacity to testify to something that didn't fit their narrative. I'm also shocked that Maryland has attempted to discredit this person. It's almost like we're in the midst of an extremely vitriolic culture war where the left cannot stand for anyone else's point of view.

My point, I have no idea if the guy is a quack or not and neither do you. I'd be shocked if you could tie your shoes.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
You brought up my profession again, kudos! Next time you can just tell me that you feel inferior. I know you do, you should, but lets move on.

As far as my rant, I was simply pointing out that you are intellectually capable of calling anyone a quack. You're a really stupid person. When you attempt to judge the credentials of various medical examiners, it's the equivalent of my dog arguing about quantum physics. He can kind of make some noise but it's pointless.

This is going to be over your head, because like I said, you're a dummy. But I have no doubt there are tons of lefties who will cry that someone had the audacity to testify to something that didn't fit their narrative. I'm also shocked that Maryland has attempted to discredit this person. It's almost like we're in the midst of an extremely vitriolic culture war where the left cannot stand for anyone else's point of view.

My point, I have no idea if the guy is a quack or not and neither do you. I'd be shocked if you could tie your shoes.
And the 400 doctors and medical examiners?

Are they stupid too?

Perhaps it's not me with an agenda here, lawyer Bob.

As an aside, I'm not going to debate you about intelligence. I'd have to spot you a few dozen IQ points.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
And the 400 doctors and medical examiners?

Are they stupid too?

Perhaps it's not me with an agenda here, lawyer Bob.

As an aside, I'm not going to debate you about intelligence. I'd have to spot you a few dozen IQ points.
Even the people who agree with you know that you couldn't afford to spot a tennis shoe a a few dozen IQ points. You're a profoundly stupid person and deep down you know I'm right. It's why you bring up my profession all the time. You're intimidated by anyone with a big boy job. You should be.

I already explained this and I did already tell you that explanation was over your head. So I'm not shocked you missed it. Like I said, you're a dummy and this isn't going to make sense to you. But here we go again.

As to the 400 doctors and medical examiners, I addressed them. It's a a pretty vitriolic time. You can find "experts" on every side of every issue that has any sort of political controversy. You can find hundreds of doctors and experts who don't believe in global warming. My guess is that those folks are almost all democrats. My guess is a ton of more conservative folks agree with him. There are tons of people who are 100% driven by their politics.

Again, I don't know which group of folks are right but I do know that you have absolutely no idea. None.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,811
Reaction score
2,180
Points
113
You brought up my profession again, kudos! Next time you can just tell me that you feel inferior. I know you do, you should, but lets move on.

As far as my rant, I was simply pointing out that you are intellectually capable of calling anyone a quack. You're a really stupid person. When you attempt to judge the credentials of various medical examiners, it's the equivalent of my dog arguing about quantum physics. He can kind of make some noise but it's pointless.

This is going to be over your head, because like I said, you're a dummy. But I have no doubt there are tons of lefties who will cry that someone had the audacity to testify to something that didn't fit their narrative. I'm also shocked that Maryland has attempted to discredit this person. It's almost like we're in the midst of an extremely vitriolic culture war where the left cannot stand for anyone else's point of view.

My point, I have no idea if the guy is a quack or not and neither do you. I'd be shocked if you could tie your shoes.

 

Nax5

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 24, 2012
Messages
1,290
Reaction score
717
Points
113
You can find "experts" on every side of every issue that has any sort of political controversy. You can find hundreds of doctors and experts who don't believe in global warming.
I guess the safest option is to not listen to any experts.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
I guess the safest option is to not listen to any experts.

I never said that. I said a really stupid person isn't capable of differentiating between the opinions of two medical experts. He isn't.

With experts, I think they often are good sources of information but you need to keep in mind that they often are coming from a selfish point of view. I go to the mechanic, I hear them out, but do I get every single upsell? Of course not. That doesn't mean that I think my mechanic is a hack.

This isn't that complicated. Have enough humility to know what you don't know and enough skepticism to not fall for everything.
 

stocker08

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 2, 2009
Messages
24,034
Reaction score
5,387
Points
113
What a load. You are one of the few that feel the need to support any and all party lines and twist yourself up in utter hypocrisy in the attempt to do so. Most people aren’t a sheep like you Howie. Most people would simply say, “yeah, I watch the guy and usually like him, but don’t agree with him on that.” Somehow you are so lost that doesn’t seem like a normal response so you assume everyone who disagrees with you is some binge watcher of everything extreme, supports it all, and is lying if they say otherwise. Doesn’t having only stalker and sidekick supporting your wacko theories tip you off? So pathetic.

This is rich coming from the guy who follows around deuce so that he can agree with everything he says....rational or otherwise.

Also rich coming from the wonky fool who got so broken over the Trump loss....that he completely abandon the sports boards in order to devote every free moment to spewing right wing trash along with the seditionists on the OTB.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
Even the people who agree with you know that you couldn't afford to spot a tennis shoe a a few dozen IQ points. You're a profoundly stupid person and deep down you know I'm right. It's why you bring up my profession all the time. You're intimidated by anyone with a big boy job. You should be.

I already explained this and I did already tell you that explanation was over your head. So I'm not shocked you missed it. Like I said, you're a dummy and this isn't going to make sense to you. But here we go again.

As to the 400 doctors and medical examiners, I addressed them. It's a a pretty vitriolic time. You can find "experts" on every side of every issue that has any sort of political controversy. You can find hundreds of doctors and experts who don't believe in global warming. My guess is that those folks are almost all democrats. My guess is a ton of more conservative folks agree with him. There are tons of people who are 100% driven by their politics.

Again, I don't know which group of folks are right but I do know that you have absolutely no idea. None.
You "guess" this and you "guess" that, and the experts are all Democrats and the state of Maryland is going to waste a big pile of money investing this man's work. His testimony was unsupported by any other medical testimony, the jury convicted.

I post a story, and you go on an unhinged rant.

Whatever, lawyer Bob.

You're not only not particularly bright, you're a dishonest hack on top of it. You might actually BE a lawyer, you have the character.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
23,811
Reaction score
2,180
Points
113
You "guess" this and you "guess" that, and the experts are all Democrats and the state of Maryland is going to waste a big pile of money investing this man's work. His testimony was unsupported by any other medical testimony, the jury convicted.

I post a story, and you go on an unhinged rant.

Whatever, lawyer Bob.

You're not only not particularly bright, you're a dishonest hack on top of it. You might actually BE a lawyer, you have the character.

That's how trials work, you dummy! The prosecution brings in witnesses who testify to one thing, and the defense brings in witnesses who testify to something else. We don't persecute defense witnesses in the United States. Take that sh*t back to Venezuela, or whatever Marxist sh*thole that corrupt thinking came from.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
That's how trials work, you dummy! The prosecution brings in witnesses who testify to one thing, and the defense brings in witnesses who testify to something else. We don't persecute defense witnesses in the United States. Take that sh*t back to Venezuela, or whatever Marxist sh*thole that corrupt thinking came from.
OK Mr Vernon.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
You "guess" this and you "guess" that, and the experts are all Democrats and the state of Maryland is going to waste a big pile of money investing this man's work. His testimony was unsupported by any other medical testimony, the jury convicted.

I post a story, and you go on an unhinged rant.

Whatever, lawyer Bob.

You're not only not particularly bright, you're a dishonest hack on top of it. You might actually BE a lawyer, you have the character.
Nice. You brought up my job twice this time. You must be feeling especially intimidated in this conversation.

As as my "unhinged rant", I wrote 1 sentence to you. LOL. That's quite the rant, dummy. This is the sentence that hurt your feelings: You really have a skill of speaking with confidence on things you know nothing about. The world's shortest rant!

The point of your argument is that the state of Maryland wouldn't waste money? LOL. Holy hell, this is a dumber take than when you kept saying "children of illegal aliens are illegal aliens". Yes, the state of Maryland would waste money for political reasons. Almost every case has dueling experts, do you really think the experts that testify for their losing side are all quacks? Are you really pointing to the verdict that he was a quack?

Of course I'm just guessing, I don't have a medical background. Here is the point, neither do you. You're one of the dumbest people I've ever interacted, you would never be able to discern the difference between a good medical examiner and a sofa cushion.

You are the epitome of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
18,121
Reaction score
1,999
Points
113
The first story on last night's 60 Minutes was on the Chauvin trial prosecution team. It is well worth the watch - for folks from every side of the spectrum.

Ellison is the primary interviewee, but Falwell and Schleicher are also interviewed together. The three of them objectively come off as complete professionals, in search of accountability and not revenge. Of note, Ellison was asked if he thought the judge should make an example of this case with his sentencing. Ellison's response was very impressive - he said he thought sentencing should not be used to make an example and that each case should stand alone and be sentenced as appropriate for that case. He even expressed some sympathy for Chauvin, noting that everyone in the trial is a human being, including Chauvin. Ellison said he was a criminal defense attorney for 15+ years, so brings that perspective.

I was extremely impressed.

 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
Nice. You brought up my job twice this time. You must be feeling especially intimidated in this conversation.

As as my "unhinged rant", I wrote 1 sentence to you. LOL. That's quite the rant, dummy. This is the sentence that hurt your feelings: You really have a skill of speaking with confidence on things you know nothing about. The world's shortest rant!

The point of your argument is that the state of Maryland wouldn't waste money? LOL. Holy hell, this is a dumber take than when you kept saying "children of illegal aliens are illegal aliens". Yes, the state of Maryland would waste money for political reasons. Almost every case has dueling experts, do you really think the experts that testify for their losing side are all quacks? Are you really pointing to the verdict that he was a quack?

Of course I'm just guessing, I don't have a medical background. Here is the point, neither do you. You're one of the dumbest people I've ever interacted, you would never be able to discern the difference between a good medical examiner and a sofa cushion.

You are the epitome of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
Lawyer Bob, when illegal aliens bring their children with them...the children are illegal aliens. They can't "dilute" your vote.

One would think a lawyer would know that.

When illegal aliens have children in the US, those children are US citizens. US citizens also can't "dilute" your vote, any more than your or my children.

One would think a lawyer would understand THAT.

You're not very bright, for a "lawyer."
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
19,729
Reaction score
4,416
Points
113
You are the epitome of the Dunning-Kruger effect.
BINGO. I don't have to see the other end of this discussion to know what is happening. It has been that way since I joined tOTB.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
BINGO. I don't have to see the other end of this discussion to know what is happening. It has been that way since I joined tOTB.
LOL.

Misperceptions of intellect indeed. Talk about irony.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
Lawyer Bob, when illegal aliens bring their children with them...the children are illegal aliens. They can't "dilute" your vote.

One would think a lawyer would know that.

When illegal aliens have children in the US, those children are US citizens. US citizens also can't "dilute" your vote, any more than your or my children.

One would think a lawyer would understand THAT.

You're not very bright, for a "lawyer."
You called out my job 4 times this time, you are really shaking in your boots.

Could you imagine how stupid someone would have to be to think a person had to be a lawyer to understand that some children of illegal aliens are citizens'?

I will tell you how stupid they'd have to be, precisely just as stupid as USAF. So really f'n stupid.

The "nuance" of that concept really threw ya for a loop for a couple days big guy. Your life would be better if focused less on being intimidated by men exponentially more successful men than yourself and kept it simple. Go play in the dirt, dummy.
 

Bob_Loblaw

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2009
Messages
13,102
Reaction score
2,748
Points
113
The first story on last night's 60 Minutes was on the Chauvin trial prosecution team. It is well worth the watch - for folks from every side of the spectrum.

Ellison is the primary interviewee, but Falwell and Schleicher are also interviewed together. The three of them objectively come off as complete professionals, in search of accountability and not revenge. Of note, Ellison was asked if he thought the judge should make an example of this case with his sentencing. Ellison's response was very impressive - he said he thought sentencing should not be used to make an example and that each case should stand alone and be sentenced as appropriate for that case. He even expressed some sympathy for Chauvin, noting that everyone in the trial is a human being, including Chauvin. Ellison said he was a criminal defense attorney for 15+ years, so brings that perspective.

I was extremely impressed.


Ellison is a profound scumbag, woman beater and a terrible lawyer. I am not sure I would trust anything he has to say.

Schleicher is a fantastic lawyer and I was extremely impressed with Blackwell. This is a good watch.
 

MennoSota

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Messages
9,856
Reaction score
1,409
Points
113
The first story on last night's 60 Minutes was on the Chauvin trial prosecution team. It is well worth the watch - for folks from every side of the spectrum.

Ellison is the primary interviewee, but Falwell and Schleicher are also interviewed together. The three of them objectively come off as complete professionals, in search of accountability and not revenge. Of note, Ellison was asked if he thought the judge should make an example of this case with his sentencing. Ellison's response was very impressive - he said he thought sentencing should not be used to make an example and that each case should stand alone and be sentenced as appropriate for that case. He even expressed some sympathy for Chauvin, noting that everyone in the trial is a human being, including Chauvin. Ellison said he was a criminal defense attorney for 15+ years, so brings that perspective.

I was extremely impressed.

Ellison is smooth. I don't trust him as far as I could throw him, but he is smooth.

He's trying to tone down the rhetoric now that the trial is over.
 

USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
3,710
Reaction score
3,751
Points
113
You called out my job 4 times this time, you are really shaking in your boots.

Could you imagine how stupid someone would have to be to think a person had to be a lawyer to understand that some children of illegal aliens are citizens'?

I will tell you how stupid they'd have to be, precisely just as stupid as USAF. So really f'n stupid.

The "nuance" of that concept really threw ya for a loop for a couple days big guy. Your life would be better if focused less on being intimidated by men exponentially more successful men than yourself and kept it simple. Go play in the dirt, dummy.
Someone "exponentially more successful" than me wouldn't feel the need to boast about it anonymously on a msg board.

Repeatedly.
 
Top Bottom