Biden Goes to Kenosha

[Eric]

We all know of the inherit hypocrisy of that particular group of people (not going to call them conservatives, since they're really not). They'll call out the media for supporting Biden and his sexual harassment allegation, supposedly overriding their support for #metoo, yet they're happily supporting a guy with 20+ rape and sexual harassment allegations.

What you need to realize is that it's not about being right or wrong. It's all a game, and that the Democrat aren't as good at playing it as the Republicans are.

Perhaps, but on this specific issue I'm calling out systemic racism and IMO it's something more people need to be doing instead of giving these people a free pass. Trump has not only given them a voice, he's giving them a platform. It's my hope that after Trump is gone this will all tone down a bit but as it stands they're running rampant and unchecked.

 

[Eric]

Innocent until proven guilty, correct? I’ve seen many people go out of their way to defend Kyle Rittenhouse of multiple murders. We aren’t supposed to call the policeman who shot Blake 7 times guilty yet either, right?

He has no felony convictions and has spent no time in prison. He is accused of assault but they left the warrant open for 3 months with no arrest? Makes me think the evidence is probably not compelling... but I could be wrong.

Fact check: Jacob Blake is accused of sexually assaulting a woman, not a child

Claims that Jacob Blake has raped a minor or is facing sexual assault charges involving a teenager are false.

www.usatoday.com

Only if they're white cops, apparently.

 

[SuperMatt]

Again, you read something that I never wrote. Where did I say that the prior convictions/warrants/crimes/actions/thoughts justified the shooting?

I am saying that if Charles Manson was unjustly shot by the cops I still wouldn’t want the president, or any leading figure such as a candidate for POTUS to visit him at the hospital, or any of his family, or even elevate him a little bit. The fact that Mr Blake was shot (justly or unjustly) doesn’t change the fact that he was a violent criminal, a rapist, and a low life who was victimizing one of his prior victims.

Jacob Blake = Charles Manson? Weren’t you telling people not to compare Trump to Hitler? Geez....

And doubling down on accusations that have never been tried in a court of law, on somebody never convicted of a felony..... ?

 

[SuperMatt]

Only if they're white cops, apparently.

Kyle wasn’t a cop, but he was white...

 

[yaxomoxay]

Jacob Blake = Charles Manson?

I guess that the concept of making an example using an extreme case so that the point argued is easier to understand escapes you.

 

[SuperMatt]

I guess that the concept of making an example using an extreme case so that the point argued is easier to understand escapes you.

Is trump the new Churchill? Sorry but this thread is dumb. You can find parallels with anyone if you look closely. I guess that now I can finally say that all dog owners that are vegetarian are literally Hitler.

Let's stop this bullshit. Hitler was Hitler, Stalin was Stalin, Churchill was Churchill, and yaxo is yaxo. Yes, we can learn from history, and we can learn from historical figures, but history doesn't repeat like that, and I do find this type of parallels very superficial - and annoying.

Ok boomer.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Ok boomer.

I never claimed that Mr Blake is Mr Manson, or even remotely similar, contrary to the allegation that Mr Trump is similar to Chancellor Hitler.

Let me spell it for you in a different way you might be able to process: the fact that an individual is victim of something unjust - such as a police shooting - does not erase other important factors such as - but not limited to - criminal history that might be relevant when making certain evaluations (such as visiting the person in question), especially those that have to do with public perception.

So, by using Mr. Manson - due to the extreme circumstances of his criminal history and his well known history - I am not comparing Mr. Manson to Mr Blake but I am saying that an event (in this case the shooting) - even an unjust one - does not change prior elements that should be considered.

If you don’t like the name of Mr. Manson, chose an alleged violent felon of your choice in a similar situation (if you prefer), known or unknown. You can even chose Mr Weinstein if you want. If Mr. Weinstein were unjustly shot by the police prompting a national conversation on police shootings, you would not recommend for Mr Biden a visit to his family.

 

[Alli]

We are talking about someone who has a history of violent crime, and sexual abuse, who was allegedly committing a crime on one of his previous victims who allegedly was scared shitless (here we're talking of penetration with a child in the room); the victim called the cops and the cops intervened. I am all for due process, and yes please consider him innocent until proven guilty, but perception is quite important especially if you're party of "believe all women."

And I STILL haven’t seen anything indicating the man was ever convicted of anything. Where did you find that/

 

[yaxomoxay]

And I STILL haven’t seen anything indicating the man was ever convicted of anything. Where did you find that/

The events are quite new (July) and they will go to trial. I thought you believed all women.

“Blake was charged July 6 with felony third-degree sexual assault and misdemeanor trespassing and disorderly conduct. All three offenses carried a penalty enhancer because they were connected to domestic abuse.

The charges - which have not gone to trial - stem from a May 3 incident in Kenosha County. A woman Blake knew told police he came into her house about 6 a.m., sexually assaulted her and then took a debit card and car keys before fleeing in her vehicle, according to a criminal complaint.”

 

[Alli]

The events are quite new (July) and they will go to trial. I thought you believed all women.

“Blake was charged July 6 with felony third-degree sexual assault and misdemeanor trespassing and disorderly conduct. All three offenses carried a penalty enhancer because they were connected to domestic abuse.

The charges - which have not gone to trial - stem from a May 3 incident in Kenosha County. A woman Blake knew told police he came into her house about 6 a.m., sexually assaulted her and then took a debit card and car keys before fleeing in her vehicle, according to a criminal complaint.”

So you have him convicted before he’s even gone to trial. That surprises me.

I don’t believe women just because they’re women. I believe accusations of sexual assault should be taken seriously. But I’m not willing to call this man a felon and absolve the cops just because of a single complaint. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

I never claimed that Mr Blake is Mr Manson, or even remotely similar, contrary to the allegation that Mr Trump is similar to Chancellor Hitler.

Let me spell it for you in a different way you might be able to process: the fact that an individual is victim of something unjust - such as a police shooting - does not erase other important factors such as - but not limited to - criminal history that might be relevant when making certain evaluations (such as visiting the person in question), especially those that have to do with public perception.

So, by using Mr. Manson - due to the extreme circumstances of his criminal history and his well known history - I am not comparing Mr. Manson to Mr Blake but I am saying that an event (in this case the shooting) - even an unjust one - does not change prior elements that should be considered.

If you don’t like the name of Mr. Manson, chose an alleged violent felon of your choice in a similar situation (if you prefer), known or unknown. You can even chose Mr Weinstein if you want. If Mr. Weinstein were unjustly shot by the police prompting a national conversation on police shootings, you would not recommend for Mr Biden a visit to his family.

You seem to be saying it from the angle of “The party of…” shouldn’t agree with this visit, but I’d like to point out that Trump has repeatedly taken a dump on his “party of….” values and somehow still has support. So that really isn’t a good gauge of what supporters put as their top values among many.

 

[Eric]

The events are quite new (July) and they will go to trial. I thought you believed all women.

“Blake was charged July 6 with felony third-degree sexual assault and misdemeanor trespassing and disorderly conduct. All three offenses carried a penalty enhancer because they were connected to domestic abuse.

The charges - which have not gone to trial - stem from a May 3 incident in Kenosha County. A woman Blake knew told police he came into her house about 6 a.m., sexually assaulted her and then took a debit card and car keys before fleeing in her vehicle, according to a criminal complaint.”

So based on this, your takeaway is:

No matter what, he's a sexual offender, who forcefully penetrated his victim, and he was harassing his victim who called 911 for help, resisted arrest multiple times, and had a weapon...Blake is a violent offender, a rapist, and a perpetrator of one of the vilest crimes.

Yet after the officer fired seven shots into his back, your takeaway was:

Appalled by the Governor's statement. Admits that he doesn't know all the relevant facts, jumps to a conclusion. Talk about pandering.
Hopefully we'll know soon if it's a justified shooting or not.

I hope you see my point here.

 

[yaxomoxay]

So you have him convicted before he’s even gone to trial. That surprises me.

I don’t believe women just because they’re women. I believe accusations of sexual assault should be taken seriously. But I’m not willing to call this man a felon and absolve the cops just because of a single complaint. Innocent until proven guilty, right?

Not calling him a felon. He deserves a fair trial, 100%, and he should not lose his job or anything else based on this until proven guilty.

However, from a political perspective/optics point of view, going to visit him is not a good move due to the serious charges that are pending (and, of note, a warrant is signed by a magistrate so at least the most basic level of scrutiny has been met). That’s all I am saying.

 

[yaxomoxay]

Yet after the officer fired seven shots into his back, your takeaway was:

Shots still have very little to do with what I am saying.

 

[SuperMatt]

I never claimed that Mr Blake is Mr Manson, or even remotely similar, contrary to the allegation that Mr Trump is similar to Chancellor Hitler.

Let me spell it for you in a different way you might be able to process: the fact that an individual is victim of something unjust - such as a police shooting - does not erase other important factors such as - but not limited to - criminal history that might be relevant when making certain evaluations (such as visiting the person in question), especially those that have to do with public perception.

So, by using Mr. Manson - due to the extreme circumstances of his criminal history and his well known history - I am not comparing Mr. Manson to Mr Blake but I am saying that an event (in this case the shooting) - even an unjust one - does not change prior elements that should be considered.

If you don’t like the name of Mr. Manson, chose an alleged violent felon of your choice in a similar situation (if you prefer), known or unknown. You can even chose Mr Weinstein if you want. If Mr. Weinstein were unjustly shot by the police prompting a national conversation on police shootings, you would not recommend for Mr Biden a visit to his family.

I understand perfectly what you’re doing. Nice change from a mass-murderer to a serial rapist.

Why not compare Blake with somebody who was accused of sexual assault but hasn’t been convicted? Surely somebody should come to mind:

Did Sexual Assault Allegations Against Donald Trump Only Start With the 2016 Election?

Although many women accused President Trump of sexual assault during the 2016 election, this wasn't the first time that he faced this sort of allegation.

www.snopes.com

You DID compare the two as much as you deny it. You want to have your cake and eat it too.

Quit complaining about people comparing Hitler and Trump if you’re going to compare mass-murder with alleged 3rd-degree assault.

You also stated as fact that Blake did the actions he is accused of. You didn’t stipulate that they are alleged... you stated it as fact.

 

[Thomas Veil]

I don't know, I have a different take on this. I don't think Biden went to offer sympathy to a potential criminal. I think he went because people see this as just one more sign the police are out of control, and talking to the family--as opposed to threatening to rain down hellfire on protesters--is a way to turn the temperature down. To me that is more important at the moment than whatever Blake is accused of. People are free to feel otherwise; I just don't see it myself.

 

[Renzatic]

I don't know, I have a different take on this. I don't think Biden went to offer sympathy to a potential criminal. I think he went because people see this as just one more sign the police are out of control, and talking to the family--as opposed to threatening to rain down hellfire on protesters--is a way to turn the temperature down.

Those are likely his intentions. How it can be spun and interpreted is another thing entirely.

As a politician, Biden should be well aware of how certain actions can be used against him, and try to head them off as best he can. Visiting dude guy the alleged rapist wasn't a good move, all things considered.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Ok boomer.

You know, you can attack, or address, the argument; no need to attack the person.

 

[SuperMatt]

You know, you can attack, or address, the argument; no need to attack the person.

It was a failed attempt at humor. I'm no spring chicken myself.....

 

[Scepticalscribe]

It was a failed attempt at humor. I'm no spring chicken myself.....

Okay.

Fair enough.