Prosecute me Lynch, I DARE YOU.

[Tilly]

Threatening death or violence isn't protected speech. Where's the overstepping?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

That's for the courts to decide, not me or you. There have been "riot acts" for years that cover much of the same territory.

Riot Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Well I think it would be better if that were clarified instead of waiting for the courts to decide.

 

[Tilly]

As long as people don't threaten muslims with death or violence...Well, I have no problem with people speaking their minds. Lynch is over stepping on this one.

Threatening death or violence isn't protected speech. Where's the overstepping?

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

So, why weren't some BLM members arrested and charged after directly calling for the killing of cops and whites? As usual, the administration is being selective.

Who did that? I think you are exhibiting the typical nutbag tendency to treat rumor and bullshit as fact.

 

[ogibillm]

Threatening death or violence isn't protected speech. Where's the overstepping?

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

 

[Wildman]

So FUCK YOU LYNCH, you fascist PIG, Fuck You and your meat muppet faggot boss, and fuck all the sniveling parasite bed wetters who empower sick sociopaths like you. I DARE YOU to try and prosecute me for resisting the asinine policies that endanger innocent people.

Go ahead and report this post to your moonbat messiah bed wetters. If the criminally insane sociopaths you vote for were so confident that their intimidation was working, they wouldn't be so desperate to undermine the 2nd Amendment.

that makes two of us.

Miss commie bitch lynch, you putrid decaying sack full of assholes.., come for me too!! you will find a huge army behind Pete and me!!

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

Like the BLM shit heads?

 

[PredFan]

As long as people don't threaten muslims with death or violence...Well, I have no problem with people speaking their minds. Lynch is over stepping on this one.

Threatening death or violence isn't protected speech. Where's the overstepping?

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

Obviously it's in the definition of threat. I don't trust Obama and his administration to not abuse that.

 

[Wildman]

Where's the overstep?

you are too stupid to see it if we were to draw pictures of it.

 

[PredFan]

Lynch is an idiot and she is just amping up the rhetoric because it's an election year. They are trying to motivate their idiot base.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Former Congressman Unleashes on Attorney General in Rant Against Islam: ‘Go Ahead and Prosecute Me. I Dare You.’

Walsh continued to slam Lynch in his video for the comments she made at Muslim Advocate’s 10th anniversary dinner one day after law enforcement officials say two people opened fire at a holiday party in San Bernardino, California, leaving 14 people dead and more than one dozen injured. According to reports, the wife pledged allegiance to the Islamic State on her Facebook page just moments before the attack.

You know what?

I wholeheartedly support that idea.

Islime is a sick cult of slavery, death and conquest.

Are all muzbots "warriors" or jihadists?

Of course not. Not all Americans are soldiers, not all members of primitive tribes were warriors either. Not all Christians were Crusaders, not all Japanese were Kamikaze, not all Germans were Nazis, and not all Russians were commies. However as social animals we all support the groups we belong in, except for bed wetters who always support the enemy.

Muzbots draw no distinctions between warrior or innocent civilian. It's time that the people of the world who are sick of being involved in conflicts started by primitive lunatics who kill indiscriminately to rise up and purge their regions of these assholes. They contribute NOTHING, they take everything they can get their asswiping hands on, and if you're lucky they'll kill you quickly.

So FUCK YOU LYNCH, you fascist PIG, Fuck You and your meat muppet faggot boss, and fuck all the sniveling parasite bed wetters who empower sick sociopaths like you. I DARE YOU to try and prosecute me for resisting the asinine policies that endanger innocent people.

Go ahead and report this post to your moonbat messiah bed wetters. If the criminally insane sociopaths you vote for were so confident that their intimidation was working, they wouldn't be so desperate to undermine the 2nd Amendment.

Lynch is on MTP now avoiding answering any and all questions. Her only point is to say "we are searching for the motivation for the San Bernadino shootings".

As long as people don't threaten muslims with death or violence...Well, I have no problem with people speaking their minds. Lynch is over stepping on this one.

Threatening death or violence isn't protected speech. Where's the overstepping?

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

Obviously it's in the definition of threat. I don't trust Obama and his administration to not abuse that.

Exactly, it's not like they haven' abused anything else....IRS anyone?

 

[jknowgood]

As long as people don't threaten muslims with death or violence...Well, I have no problem with people speaking their minds. Lynch is over stepping on this one.

Threatening death or violence isn't protected speech. Where's the overstepping?

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

Why doesn't she protect Christians the same?

 

[SassyIrishLass]

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

She must have been asleep through the entire BLM movement

 

[Tilly]

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

No, it's not clear to me because point she said 'edging toward'. That's like saying you are going to criminalise someone for thinking something. So, again, at what point is someone 'edging towards' said crime?

 

[ogibillm]

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

She must have been asleep through the entire BLM movement

Can you show specific rhetoric you would want prosecuted?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

She must have been asleep through the entire BLM movement

Can you show specific rhetoric you would want prosecuted?

How about calling for the murder of police?

 

[ogibillm]

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

No, it's not clear to me because point she said 'edging toward'. That's like saying you are going to criminalise someone for thinking something. So, again, at what point is someone 'edging towards' said crime?

When someone could take up the mantle of that rhetoric as justification for violence.

Or when the rhetoric incites violence

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

No, it's not clear to me because point she said 'edging toward'. That's like saying you are going to criminalise someone for thinking something. So, again, at what point is someone 'edging towards' said crime?

Lynch is another one that is in over her head, once again Obungles picks the worst possible person for the job

 

[ogibillm]

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.
AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

She must have been asleep through the entire BLM movement

Can you show specific rhetoric you would want prosecuted?

How about calling for the murder of police?

Let's see it

 

[SassyIrishLass]

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

She must have been asleep through the entire BLM movement

Can you show specific rhetoric you would want prosecuted?

Calling for the murder of police officers....you must have been asleep also

 

[Tilly]

I said if people didn't threaten those things.

Lynch only said that those who did would be prosecuted, so what's the beef? Where's the overstep?

She actually said 'edging toward'. Can you tell us what that means exactly?

In context it's pretty clear she's talking about inciting violence.

“Now obviously this is a country that is based on free speech,” she said. “but when it edges towards violence, when we see the potential for someone lifting that mantle of anti-Muslim rhetoric or, as we saw after 9/11, violence against individuals… when we see that, we will take action.”

AG Loretta Lynch Promises to ‘Take Action’ Against ‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’

But at what point does something 'edge towards'? Sounds like before you commit the crime, whilst you're 'edging toward' it, you have now committed a crime? Nothing clear about it whatsoever.

What she's saying is if someone is out there spreading rhetoric that inspires others to act violently they'll be prosecuted.
If it's not clear to you it's because you want it to be something it's not

Don't you already have a law about hate speech? And now you're going to have another one for people who 'edge toward' (whatever that means) specifically anti Muslim speech? Why do you need such a vaguely worded dictat, and for Muslims only?