Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You didn't watch the Expert Witness testimony. The FBI broke it in testing. Thus, the gun could not simply go off on its own.Actually, they can't even prove that. The gun was taken apart by the FBI, so you can't tell if it discharged accidently or not.
They've already convicted the armorer. I'm curious how you can convict two people of the same offense.
Translation- Alec made fun of THE ONE TRUE GOD, DONALD TRUMP, and must be PUNISHED FOR HIS HERESY!!!Two people (at least) killed that woman. The other one is about to be tried for it.
Uh, the FBI had to break it to examine it, how is Alec's team supposed to review it?You didn't watch the Expert Witness testimony. The FBI broke it in testing. Thus, the gun could not simply go off on its own.
Prior to the FBI testing, it was in perfect working order, which means Alec had to both cock it, AND pull the trigger.
In other words, he's an idiot.
You keep bleating " no one is above the law!"Translation- Alec made fun of THE ONE TRUE GOD, DONALD TRUMP, and must be PUNISHED FOR HIS HERESY!!!
They have the FBI report, plus the other experts.Uh, the FBI had to break it to examine it, how is Alec's team supposed to review it?
Okay. No sensible person would convict you because a prop that someone else loaded and handed to you went off accidently and hit someone who just told you to point a gun at her.You keep bleating " no one is above the law!"
Abide by what you say, clown.
Then why did the FBI have to break it to examine it?They have the FBI report, plus the other experts.
That's all that's needed.
Your problem is the revolver was new.
Translation- Alec made fun of THE ONE TRUE GOD, DONALD TRUMP, and must be PUNISHED FOR HIS HERESY!!!
Yeah, they would. YOU NEVER POINT A WEAPON AT ANYBODY!Okay. No sensible person would convict you because a prop that someone else loaded and handed to you went off accidently and hit someone who just told you to point a gun at her.
They broke it trying to get it to fail. It didn't fail till THEY broke it.Then why did the FBI have to break it to examine it?
Where's the "Criminal Intent"?Translation: my DemoKKKrat friends should be allowed to gun down innocent women if they want to, and all my "gun control" posturing in the past is pure bullshit.
That's not true... they point guns at the camera all the time on movies... Like that scene in Goodfellas.Yeah, they would. YOU NEVER POINT A WEAPON AT ANYBODY!
The armorers have been working on safety rules for movies for over a CENTURY!
That is rule number one.
He broke it.
So now we have a gun in evidence that has been altered from it's original state.They broke it trying to get it to fail. It didn't fail till THEY broke it.
Where's the "Criminal Intent"?
Seems to me that you have to prove criminal intent on Baldwin's part.
I'm not seeing it.
Yes he was the one who hired the armorer. It was his picture, his production company.Except he wasn't the one making the decisions on who to hire.
He had a duty to run a safe production that went beyond his role as the lead actor.None of which apply to an actor who was taking direction from a director and handed a prop weapon by an armorer.
And he knew that was going on and probably doing it too.Yeah, it pretty much does. She handles the weapons, she loads the weapons. She was higher than a fucking kite when she was doing her job.
That's pretty retarded to conflate these two completely separate and unrelated things.So in your world, Baldwin should have personally checked what kinds of blanks they were buying, But Trump is totally innocent of signing half a million in payoffs to Daniels, Cohen and McDougal.
The charge is involuntary manslaughter.Where's the "Criminal Intent"?
Seems to me that you have to prove criminal intent on Baldwin's part.
I'm not seeing it.
Not for manslaughter, dipshit.
You surrendered the gun control debate for Alec Baldwin and Hunter fucking Biden! I hope it was worth it to you.
You think I'm going to do anything other than mock you the next time you bring up "universal background checks", gun locks, ammo restrictions, or the NRA?
Yes he was the one who hired the armorer. It was his picture, his production company.
YOu are right. Trump had criminal intent, Baldwin didn't.hat's pretty retarded to conflate these two completely separate and unrelated things.
They are just investors. They weren't running the production.A production company that had 13 Producers.
Why aren't the other 12 on trial?
And Trump's jury will have to find criminal intent, and Baldwin's jury won't.YOu are right. Trump had criminal intent, Baldwin didn't.
When did this happen? Baldwin has nothing to do with the gun debate. Frankly, tougher gun control SHOULD probably apply to movie sets, so people like Hannah Guiterrez are never hired.
As for Hunter... looks like the gun store were the ones who tampered with the form he filled out.
Hunter Biden defense team questions who actually filled out the key gun form
The heart of the government’s case is Hunter Biden checking a box on a government form, stating he was neither using drugs nor addicted at the time he was buying a gun.www.yahoo.com
However, there is another version of the form — a physical version — that was filled out at a gun store. It was revealed in court Friday a gun store employee, Gordon Cleveland, helped Biden fill out the physical form that day.
Cleveland is likely to be called to the stand, and Noreika suggested the government would likely ask him to testify that Biden filled out the form and signed it.
Noreika said she would rule later on whether the physical form would be allowed into evidence but seemed to agree that the gun store employees could be examined.
"Why can’t he question his credibility?" she asked.
The trial will begin with jury selection June 3, and both sides agreed it would run until approximately June 14, or possibly into the next week.
I guess you can, but it will be as weak as the rest of your ammosexual arguments.
