The Many Faces of US Politics...

[foxcommander]

I guess I should know better - I'll delete my post. You do the same.

Nice job San Francisco!

There is no justice for American people in these sanctuary city cess pitts, the seven time felony loser gets to go back to Mexico after killing a young American woman who was simply out for a waik on a pier with her dad before an illegal alien decided to fire a gun that just happened to be sitting under his swivel chair, not his gun mind you!

He gets deported for the 7th time now, great deterrent that and well played sir, if you want to kill yanks simply go to a sanctuary city, it will be the Presidents fault, just sk the defence attorney! f**king disgraceful decision.

I hope that all liberals who support sanctuary cities are very proud of themselves today.
Kate Steinle died because of your smug sense of worth. Never forget that.

It took the defence attorney less than 30 seconds to mention Jeff Sessions, Mike Pence and President Trump in his victory speech. Absolutely disgraceful. You've just walked out of a trial where your client has got away with murder and you're now attacking the government to get more leverage for people who shouldn't be in the country in the first place. What an arrogant p***k. His sidekick wasn't much better. Don't pretend to have sympathy for the family you've just help destroy again.

It's not surprising that a verdict like this was returned in San Francisco. A city filled with degenerates and deviants.
The message to illegals is that you now can shoot with impunity. Break any law you want. Why bother following rules. That is absolutely crazy.

I'm actually surprised he wasn't charged with attempted murder of a seal. That might be one cause the f**king liberals would actually get behind. Twats.

[foxcommander]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

[screenexile]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

If he was trying to shoot her why did the evidence show that the bullet hit the ground first??

Is that how you would shoot someone?#

Plus we're only reading highly summarised versions of testimony and evidence. Surely the jury were best placed to make the call on this and judging by how long they deliberated they didn't take it lightly!!

[foxcommander]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

If he was trying to shoot her why did the evidence show that the bullet hit the ground first??

Is that how you would shoot someone?#

Plus we're only reading highly summarised versions of testimony and evidence. Surely the jury were best placed to make the call on this and judging by how long they deliberated they didn't take it lightly!!

Do you think a jury in San Francisco would be unbiased, especially when 3 of the 12 members are immigrants themselves? This case had bigger consequences than just a regular homicide. Had he been found guilty it would have been a massive blow to sanctuary cities. I'm doubtful the jury would have been fully focused on the murder itself but what their verdict would mean for their political leanings. The US is just that polarised.

[screenexile]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

If he was trying to shoot her why did the evidence show that the bullet hit the ground first??

Is that how you would shoot someone?#

Plus we're only reading highly summarised versions of testimony and evidence. Surely the jury were best placed to make the call on this and judging by how long they deliberated they didn't take it lightly!!

Do you think a jury in San Francisco would be unbiased, especially when 3 of the 12 members are immigrants themselves? This case had bigger consequences than just a regular homicide. Had he been found guilty it would have been a massive blow to sanctuary cities. I'm doubtful the jury would have been fully focused on the murder itself but what their verdict would mean for their political leanings. The US is just that polarised.

Oh so you're assuming and making stuff up again. . . keep doing that!!! It helps everyone realise that you haven't a clue about the real world outside of your little Fox/Infowars Breitbart bubble!!]

MAGA!!

[screenexile]

Sounds like Flynn has got a deal to plead guilty for a reduced sentence. . . I wonder what he's given Mueller??!!

There's a few twists and turns in this investigation yet it looks like!

[J70]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

If he was trying to shoot her why did the evidence show that the bullet hit the ground first??

Is that how you would shoot someone?#

Plus we're only reading highly summarised versions of testimony and evidence. Surely the jury were best placed to make the call on this and judging by how long they deliberated they didn't take it lightly!!

Do you think a jury in San Francisco would be unbiased, especially when 3 of the 12 members are immigrants themselves? This case had bigger consequences than just a regular homicide. Had he been found guilty it would have been a massive blow to sanctuary cities. I'm doubtful the jury would have been fully focused on the murder itself but what their verdict would mean for their political leanings. The US is just that polarised.

Oh so you're assuming and making stuff up again. . . keep doing that!!! It helps everyone realise that you haven't a clue about the real world outside of your little Fox/Infowars Breitbart bubble!!]

MAGA!!

Yep, that's why they skimmed through the evidence and feigned discussion and came to a quick decision within a mere six days!

[Gabriel_Hurl]

[foxcommander]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

If he was trying to shoot her why did the evidence show that the bullet hit the ground first??

Is that how you would shoot someone?#

Plus we're only reading highly summarised versions of testimony and evidence. Surely the jury were best placed to make the call on this and judging by how long they deliberated they didn't take it lightly!!

Do you think a jury in San Francisco would be unbiased, especially when 3 of the 12 members are immigrants themselves? This case had bigger consequences than just a regular homicide. Had he been found guilty it would have been a massive blow to sanctuary cities. I'm doubtful the jury would have been fully focused on the murder itself but what their verdict would mean for their political leanings. The US is just that polarised.

Oh so you're assuming and making stuff up again. . . keep doing that!!! It helps everyone realise that you haven't a clue about the real world outside of your little Fox/Infowars Breitbart bubble!!]

MAGA!!

Yep, that's why they skimmed through the evidence and feigned discussion and came to a quick decision within a mere six days!

Yes. If you want to believe that jurors hadn't already made their minds up based on their political beliefs then I think you're seriously naive.

[J70]

Seems to me it was a horrible accident which happens when guns are involved.

Oh come on.

He gave different versions of what happened. First he said he was shooting at a seal then changed it to saying he stepped on the gun.

Then he threw the gun into the sea.

You believe him? Seriously?

If he was trying to shoot her why did the evidence show that the bullet hit the ground first??

Is that how you would shoot someone?#

Plus we're only reading highly summarised versions of testimony and evidence. Surely the jury were best placed to make the call on this and judging by how long they deliberated they didn't take it lightly!!

Do you think a jury in San Francisco would be unbiased, especially when 3 of the 12 members are immigrants themselves? This case had bigger consequences than just a regular homicide. Had he been found guilty it would have been a massive blow to sanctuary cities. I'm doubtful the jury would have been fully focused on the murder itself but what their verdict would mean for their political leanings. The US is just that polarised.

Oh so you're assuming and making stuff up again. . . keep doing that!!! It helps everyone realise that you haven't a clue about the real world outside of your little Fox/Infowars Breitbart bubble!!]

MAGA!!

Yep, that's why they skimmed through the evidence and feigned discussion and came to a quick decision within a mere six days!

Yes. If you want to believe that jurors hadn't already made their minds up based on their political beliefs then I think you're seriously naive.

OK, I'll bite, one more time.

Six days of debate...

Maybe, unlike people like YOU, they were able to separate the FACTS of the case from the political hype and implications surrounding it i.e. they made their judgment based on the evidence before them concerning whether this man intended to or was negligent in killing that poor woman, not on the Trump/Fox News political campaign about sanctuary cities.

Sanctuary city policy was not on trial here. This man picking up a gun and causing the death of this woman was. Completely separate issues.

The man may or may not be really guilty. The cops or the prosecution may have fucked up the case. The jury may have been biased. The judge might have made a balls of things. It would not be the first time for any of those scenarios, amazingly. Or everyone may have played brilliantly and they just couldn't convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. I have no idea, and unless you have something to disclose or you've been watching every utterance and proceeding in this trial, neither do you.

Don't worry though, I'm sure we'll not have to wait too long before the various people are on the morning news shows selling their stories.

[Gabriel_Hurl]

Hey FakeNewsFox, your thoughts?

Former Trump national security adviser Michael Flynn will plead guilty Friday to "willfully and knowingly" making "false, fictitious and fraudulent statements" to the FBI about conversations with Russia's ambassador, according to court documents.

[Gabriel_Hurl]

and

.@BrianRoss: Mike Flynn is "prepared to testify" against Trump, his family, & the campaign, including Trump ordering him to talk to Russians

[Gabriel_Hurl]

Fox?

[heganboy]

Well now,

"prepared to testify that the candidate Donald Trump directed him to contact the Russians. Will testify against Trump personally, his family and senior members of the White House."

don't that put the cat amongst the pigeons...

[Esmarelda]

I'm probably missing something really obvious here. I understand that he's admitting that he lied.  However, what is it that he's actually supposed to have said or done to the Russian ambassador? Was it not some chit chat about reacting to sanctions? Is that not allowed?