The Political Memes Thread (memes too spicy for Channel Zero)

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

This one's for @Kults, egg boy was wrong all along lol

 

[One Man Banned]

9 hours ago, Mercer said:

COSBY B?

[One Man Banned]

9 hours ago, Mercer said:

Was waiting to see who would comment on this.  Would say the above is inaccurate but anyhow was curious who thought it was good, or 'justice,' and who was pissed off by it?

[Kults]

30 minutes ago, One Man Banned said:

Was waiting to see who would comment on this.  Would say the above is inaccurate but anyhow was curious who thought it was good, or 'justice,' and who was pissed off by it?

I think it sets a terrible precedent. If he had just come clean and been like ya I lied and owned it I think I wouldnt have cared. Now though? Fuck that guy. Also DOJ and FBI looking into it now, he's not off the hook just yet.

[Kults]

1 hour ago, Mercer said:

This one's for @Kults, egg boy was wrong all along lol

 

I gotta agree, that line of reasoning is a slippery slope

[Mercer]

1 hour ago, One Man Banned said:

Was waiting to see who would comment on this.  Would say the above is inaccurate but anyhow was curious who thought it was good, or 'justice,' and who was pissed off by it?

I'm assuming a key piece of evidence was obtained illegally somehow, and it may have lead to following up and gathering  more crucial evidence  which would also be inadmissible, crumbling the entire case.

 

Personally liked this for the memes which have been hilarious to say the least. Never watched Empire so I'm not a fan of the show, or Smollet. With that said I'm not really pissed at the guy for this stunt  like most people seem to be extra. Th main thing pissing people off is the cops wasted their time and effort investigating this case. I don't care because 1. fuck Chicago PD (obviously). and 2. most of their time is wasted enforcing  crimes with imaginary victims anyway (weed, drugs, prostitution, etc.). I'm glad it was dismissed,  he was wrong but better this, than another person in jail as an unproductive tax burden, for what would have been an undoubtedly excess amount of time.

Edited March 28, 2019 by Mercer

[One Man Banned]

@KultsI feel like if you're in legal trouble you generally do not admit guilt until that becomes your best card to play in front of a judge and with the advice of a lawyer.  No doubt dude is a douchebag for what he did, but from a legal perspective it's likely best to make no statement at all, not even a denial, and then let it play out in court.

 

 @Merceryou might be right on the evidence, but I saw an interview with either the prosecutor or the maybe it was the state AG or something.  Basically said I think dude did what's been said but he's being afforded an opportunity given to 1st time non-violent offenders to avoid the charges as well as forfeit his $10,000 bail.  I believe that this has been done before, but maybe rarely or much more quietly.  I also imagine to people who are whiter.  

 

No joy that in America a black man can be arrested red handed and dim witted, and beat the charges?!  He did drop 10Gs and has some community service or something.  Te system works, we can be happy?  Or a flaw in the system is exposed, he used it to his advantage, well played? People mad that if you're rich enough you can buy your way out?  Lot of angles to it.

[Mercer]

@One Man Bannedagreed mostly, but doubt they'd drop it like that because just because  1st time offense plus 10k bonus. 1st time offense is normally something only a judge would take into account. To me this looks like a way for him to save face (and his own ass) somewhat, and for the Chicago PD, who must have royally fucked up yet again to cover their own incompetence in building this case, thus the gag order, and their mutually beneficial agreement to cut their losses.

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

Edited March 28, 2019 by Mercer

[Kults]

1 hour ago, One Man Banned said:

@KultsI feel like if you're in legal trouble you generally do not admit guilt until that becomes your best card to play in front of a judge and with the advice of a lawyer.  No doubt dude is a douchebag for what he did, but from a legal perspective it's likely best to make no statement at all, not even a denial, and then let it play out in court.

 

 @Merceryou might be right on the evidence, but I saw an interview with either the prosecutor or the maybe it was the state AG or something.  Basically said I think dude did what's been said but he's being afforded an opportunity given to 1st time non-violent offenders to avoid the charges as well as forfeit his $10,000 bail.  I believe that this has been done before, but maybe rarely or much more quietly.  I also imagine to people who are whiter.  

 

No joy that in America a black man can be arrested red handed and dim witted, and beat the charges?!  He did drop 10Gs and has some community service or something.  Te system works, we can be happy?  Or a flaw in the system is exposed, he used it to his advantage, well played? People mad that if you're rich enough you can buy your way out?  Lot of angles to it.

Oh I agree for sure. Problem is he didn’t even do that! He gave a press conference doubling down. Takes nerve 

[Mercer]

[Mercer]

 

 

 

Hot topic right now, had no idea this was publicly funded by taxes.

[Mercer]

[One Man Banned]

32 minutes ago, Mercer said:

 

 

 

Hot topic right now, had no idea this was publicly funded by taxes.

It's not, entirely.  A portion comes from taxes, although 18M sounds like a significant contribution.  

Did not see this in the news but I believe Trump saved the fundung under the premise that the olympics are pretty cool, so Special Olympics has to be a step cooler.

 

Also this just in, the Special Olympics are being sued by The Olympics for use of the suffix 'lympics.'

[One Man Banned]

12 hours ago, Mercer said:

@One Man Bannedagreed mostly, but doubt they'd drop it like that because just because  1st time offense plus 10k bonus. 1st time offense is normally something only a judge would take into account. To me this looks like a way for him to save face (and his own ass) somewhat, and for the Chicago PD, who must have royally fucked up yet again to cover their own incompetence in building this case, thus the gag order, and their mutually beneficial agreement to cut their losses.

Oh man, I see you display so much distrust and contempt for the system but you doubt it could, and sometimes does, work this way?  A prosecutor likely had to agree, but it was the judge who sealed the record.  People's records do get sealed and there are people who get off virtually scot free in the system (again, usually much whiter people).  The general public just doesn't get to see this every day, and not so publicly or from such a mass spectacle, and definitely not form a case that appears open and shut.  

 

As for any smoking gun here, did just recall that the lead prosecutor recused herself on ethical advice from above her due to familiarity and having had some contact with associates of his related to this case, so maybe that worked in his favor.  One associate formerly worked for Michelle Obama.  I know how much you love CNN but it came up first in a quick search:

https://www.cnn.com/2019/03/28/entertainment/jussie-smollett-states-attorney-recusal/index.html

 

 

Also of note that the Feds are going after him, likely on the hate crime piece and using it to tie up the police.  Will be interesting to see how imaginative the feds get with charges, if they bring any.

 

 

[Mercer]

I still assert the system didn't work properly this time, and that in general the criminal justice system in the United States is extremely flawed. That's not to say it's completely worthless, I do think we're lucky some of the criminals that have been physically removed, were removed. I just think most people behind bars wouldn't need to be there if we returned to a country that valued liberty, and didn't focus so much on victimless crimes, or using the system as some sort of nanny state "punishment" tool, as opposed to using it to reduce crime.

[One Man Banned]

Mostly agree w/ above save 1 point- I believe the system worked exactly as it is currently designed to.  There are rules and ethics involved, it's the prosecutor's job to know them inside and out.  If it was the recusal that made the difference in this case then the prosecutor fucked up and a guilty man got off with little legal consequence thus far.  People may not like the outcome, but that is how it works.  O.J. was similar.  I think most believe he's guiilty, and if they hadn't let him handle the glove he was likely going away for a long time.  But think of it in terms of our little pasttime.  If you were caught in the act doing a tag you still don't admit to it.  You let that play out in court if it has to.  Was he tagging?  Just spraying a can he found in front of an already done tag?  Found an act of vandalism and was erasing/covering it up?  There's many ways it can play.  Of course you know you're guilty, but if you get off, you're certainly not complaining and most other graffers will be claiming win status for you.  This is on a larger, and more serious level, but same concept applies.  Stupid cops fuck this up all the time wiith Miranda, either not reading it or pressing someone for more info after they request an attorney.  Case gets thrown out and you have more fodder for anti-police memes.

[One Man Banned]

Sure looks like prosecutor fucked it up:

 

In light of the case, the National District Attorneys Association released a statement on best prosecutorial practices in high-profile cases. Among its recommendations: recusals of chief prosecutors should apply to the entire office; prosecutors should not take advice from politically active friends of the accused; alternative prosecution should include the defendant admitting culpability; and Smollett's record should not have been expunged immediately in the interest of transparency.