Trump on neo nazies

Ya no one should accept corpus vile's game as anything but race baiting, and the defense of racists.

He has also lied over and over when dealing with me, in suggesting that I also, was arguing the CP5 were 'exonerated' and then him counterpointing 'they were not'.

That is a position I have never once taken in this, or any thread. And yet it is a strawman he stuffs over and over and repeats. Why?

Because he understand for those who have not followed the CP5 case closely saying 'they were not in fact exonerated of the crimes' sounds like they are still guilty or at best could not establish their innocence to the sufficiency of a court and thus are getting off on a loop hole.

its a very deliberate tactic to impugn the CP5 without an actual argument to do so. He is casting aspersions of guilt for those inclined to believe it and he knows it.

As you point out, and i have prior, neither you nor I, nor corpus vile have been exonerated for that same murder. Why? We CANNOT be, as we are not facing charges or prosecution and that is a requirement to then win exoneration. You CANNOT be exonerated if you are never indicted and tried.

Should I, or you or cv or the CP5 demand the prosecutor charge us so we can then win and proclaim our exoneration? Nonsense. No one would do that and the prosecutor would not cooperate just so we could gain that badge.

We are all INNOCENT of those crimes. That is reality in the US. If you have not been charged and found guilty you are INNOCENT.

But you won't see corpus vile admit that. Instead you will see him going back to stuffing that strawman of 'they were nt exonerated' as if they 'should be' or its even possible. It is not.

That's nazi rhetoric to you? So Theresa May was using nazi rhetoric with her "Better Britain" slogan?
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-36768148

Except there's no physical evidence indicating they did and there is every indication that they actually didn't upon the later review of the case.

You'll have to read something from the DA if you want to understand why the charges were vacated.

Obviously the cops think they did a good job. They always do.
Did you see the NYC guy crying that no one give him the respect he deserves ? It's best not to take their opinion as final say on anything ime.

The parents where present when the DA interrogated them in what later would be called the confessions. They weren't present when they were manipulated into making those confessions though. And that's the problem with the techniques used by the NYPD at that time. They're known to produce false confessions. Again, read up on it yourself. It's not even debated. False confessions are common even though in 1989 the average person didn't know it.

There's no excuse for what they did but there's also no excuse to pin something on that that they didn't do. And that's the point where we're at here. If you believe in the American system of justice you have to allow that they were never charged with the rape.

Now you can say what you like. You're not even an American. But Trump is the president and needs to understand these little details.

Question to those who aren't fans of Trump: Which POTUS do you dislike more and which POTUS do you think harmed America more in terms of international perception and possible danger?

Trump or GW Bush? This isn't some form of "gotcha question" I can assure you, I'm merely genuinely curious and would be interested in thoughts on this, cheers.

Let's start reading...

"In 2014, Mayor Bill de Blasio and New York City finally settled with the Central Park Five, a group of teenagers who were convicted and later exonerated in connection with the rape and brutal assault on a jogger."

Okay then, thanks for the link I guess.

But nevermind all that, this is about Trump's racism. You should start a CP5 thread if you're so into hanging on to your racist hate like this. Trump's acts and statements surrounding the case are racist either way.

Sure it is. The state doesn't vacate charges.

But that's not the point. The point is Trump, as a private citizen interjected himself and now as a public official refuses to accept the system he is a part of.

It's just typical bush league Trump nonsense. All he has to do is say the charges were vacated and as president I can't comment.

But no. He has to play his racist games. THAT is a problem. You may not see it as one, but it really is. It's why police think they can bash 75 year old men on the street and get away with it.

The fish rots from the head down as they say.

How will that information further the discussion about Trump's racism?

the law system is far from perfect. you see that everyday. you sound like you have a perfect system.

as you say it the police beat a 75 year old man. How can this be if your system is so perfect. and then you expect your lawsystem to work perfectly? how is it oj. simpson was innocent? nono you have many leaks in your system.

You're right. It's best to only look at studies produced by the police.
That way we can fix the system because police are perfect.
At least that you you righties seem to think. lol

I hate the right and especially alt right. so how can I be right?
that is almost an insult to me lol. Im the most liberal and left you can think of.
what made you think that?

I don't know. You don't seem to be attacking this cp5 think with an open liberal mind I guess.

No offense. sorry. lol

Yes there was physical evidence which was covered and physical evidence isn't required for a conviction.

I know and understand why the convictions were vacated. I don't have an issue with this either. However that has nothing to do with factual innocence/guilt and I can still consider them guilty after studying the facts, just as you can consider them guilty of assaulting patrons of the park that night. Neither of our opinions re the assaults are especially controversial either when the totality of the case is examined

Indeed and I'll agree with this. However they were absolved of wrongdoing and the convictions weren't vacated over police misconduct anyway but because:
. The Armstrong report itself was actually made in order
Not because they were facing charges for actual misconduct


Again cops don't need parents present full stop. Again some kids are abused by their parents which is why it's not needed as the kid might wish to press charges against the parents. So with respect it's not a valid point

I have an issue with your point here on two counts:
1) False confessions do indeed occur but the logic here seems to be that false confessions occur ergo occurred here which is like saying everyone in prison is innocent because wrongful convictions occur.

2) With respect you're not viewing the totality of the evidence and are viewing it in isolation from each piece.
Again one of them states in his confession that TM scratched Richardson's face. Richardson in his confession confirms this independently and there's a scratch on his face as evidence of this.
Furthermore again Reyes said he could prove he did it and mentions he took T's walkman and fanny pack. This is in 2002. Yet Wise in 1989 one day after the attack tells the cops a guy named "Rudy" took a walkman and fanny pack from TM. No way Wise could have known this unless he was there as Reyes wasn't even known at the time and wouldn't become known until 13 years later. Wise also told his friend he only held TM down while Richardson raped her. His friend reported this to the cops as she thought it would exonerate Wise when in fact it simply compounded his guilt as an accessory. Plus Santana laughed "Well I already got mine" and this was before cops even found TM- they were questioning him about beating people up in the park as they weren't aware of TM at this point.So I don't regard the confessions as false and the walkman/fanny pack and Wise's phone convo from prison proves this

Burt nobody's pinning anything on them. I believe Wise didn't engage in rape and but think it's quite possible Richardson & Santana may have and again there's evidence to suggest this such as the blood semen and grass stains on Richardson's underwear as well as Wise's prison convo.

They were charged with rape and convicted of rape except Wise who was charged with and convicted of sexual assault
I never said I believed in the US judicial system and think it could do with reform tbh in general terms. I'm going by the facts and evidence. I'm certainly not saying I think they're guilty because I blindly believe in the US system, to clarify, as that would be an argument for authority. I think they're guilty as I'm viewing the totality of the evidence not taking a piecemeal approach to it

No problem bro, Yes I tried to look at it with an open mind.
Im still not done with this case. I dont know wtf was going on.
Still not sure why oprah, was inviting them or why the victim is still traumatized and not happy with the results of this case.

Oh, let's not forget sprinklings of calling for journalists and political opponents to be jailed, and calling the media the enemy of the people.

Even though the US is not (except for Louisiana, I think) a civil-law jurisdiction, where all court rulings have to be consistent, Judge Tejada accepted the defence motions to vacate the charges against the CP5 simply because the courts had accepted Reyes' boast that he committed the crime alone, despite his remark to the DA that he entered the park as part of the gang: 'There was a whole bunch of us.' That would be the same gang of which the CP5 were part.

Since the courts apparently accepted Reyes' claim to have acted alone, and he was convicted on that basis, even though there is no evidence to support his claim -- there is evidence to show his involvement, but there is none to exclude the involvement of others except his own unsupported word, and, to put it mildly, he is not the sort of person one would normally regard as entirely reliable -- a legal conflict was thrown up in regard to the existing convictions of the CP5 and the judge felt that the convictions could not be sustained in that light.

The city did not admit any wrongdoing in its settlement with the CP5 (it should be noted that they preferred to settle, for a fraction of their claim, rather than risk a full hearing which would put them on oath). So, just as the position in law is that the CP5 can't be held guilty, the position in law is that the police did not extract false confessions. The CP5 did not want to try and prove that in court. They didn't want to go there, and they gave up hundreds of millions so they didn't have to go there. And there's probably a reason for that.

Cite were I defended racists. Link it. I already linked several times over what I said about the McMichaels here it is yet again and your trolling is terrible
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...&postcount=845
Furthermore I made my position clear re Mr Arbery
I also said the same thing when another poster mentioned a stabbing in Ireland where the attacker was black and the victim white. I stated that there was no evidence at present to suggest it was a racially motivated stabbing, simply because of the races involved because unlike you, I'm consistent with my reasoning
https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/s...postcount=2681

The response was to this post
To which I responded

I also referred to the McMichaels as "scumbags" and stated I hoped t"they never see the light of day again"
I challenge you to back up your lies and false accusations by linking what you claims I said the way I've linked what I actually said. I have no problem linking what I said as again the truth is easy to defend.
.
You've done nothing but lie in this regard and every so often you troll threads to lie some more.You should be banned for your constant lies, persistent false allegations, trolling and bad faith posting and sleazy innuendo you scumbag little hybristophiliac murderer groupie worm.

It doesn't and read what I wrote about being simply curious.

Now you've falsely accused me of being a white supremacist and falsely accused me of using "racist sources" and falsely accused me of espousing racist views none of which are true so cite and link where I did any of these things. Or else show some integrity and apologise the way I readily apologised to you for being wrong about a claim I mistakenly attributed to you

Are you going to man up? You going to show some integrity? Or continue to lie and refuse to provide what I challenged you to provide?

I get that you think that a secondary media source somehow trumps the primary court sources. It doesn't and you know they weren't exonerated. You're stupid and a coward for not providing any proof of your false accusations you leveled at me.

Cite were I defended racists you trolling little James Blunt.

No, but there is an issue over Trump's loud use of the term 'America First', which was probably fed to him, and which evokes the non-interventionist 'America First' movement of 1940-41, which was part-Communist (Stalin's Russia being Nazi-allied at that time), part-Fascist and all-idiot.

Say and do? You mean like Trump condemning neo nazis and declining invitations to clubs due to their racist anti Semitic policies?
Or pardoning Jack Johnson? Or signing off on the second chance bill which examines prisons sentence which may be too harsh, which benefits minority prisoners?

Again your argument is Trump's a racist cuz he's Trump which is completely circular reasoning. Hope you're never on a jury because your reasoning has a lot to e desired for ad is deeply flawed, I'm sorry to tell you.

This was covered several times over and proves how correct I was when I stated to well named that the same two non points were being repeated ad nauseam as a proof by assertion fallacy. He wasn't referring to neo nazis and the Transcripts of the entire pc have already been provided several times over.
You should go over the thread again mate.

Because a jury acquitted him and found him "not guilty" as opposed to "innocent", same way as a jury acquits people in your country and mine. It has nothing to do with the US system specifically.