Glad I could get you disassociated from it.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Edit your post, please, to remove my username. I did not say that. I most certainly would not say that, although others here would.

William Barr has my full support.

Sorry. That was an error in cutting and pasting on my part. Fixed. I didn't notice it when I posted it and didn't mean to insinuate it was your statement.

My mistake.

quote:

Originally posted by Micropterus:
Yes, IndianaBoy, I said it. And I stand by it. If indictments arise from the Durham investigation that amount to anything substantial, I will gladly admit I am wrong. But I am skeptical that will happen. Barr has already said that Obama and Biden would not be investigated in connection spying on the Trump campaign and the "pee" dosier because "that would be political." Hell, even Biden's blatant gloating of his quid-pro-quo threat to the Ukraine went nowhere.

https://www.washingtonexaminer...coronavirus-outbreak



Durham doesn't leak. And it seems like he doesn't tolerate people on his staff who leak.

An actual person in the government who does their job, it appears.

Durham has a history of putting corrupt politicians and FBI agents in jail.

https://www.washingtonexaminer...eteran-investigators

from the topic on the previous page, about the inoperable pistol

Missouri law:

*571.030. Unlawful use of weapons — exceptions — penalties. — 1. A person commits the offense of unlawful use of weapons, except as otherwise provided by sections 571.101 to 571.121, if he or she knowingly:

(4) Exhibits , in the presence of one or more persons, any weapon readily capable of lethal use in an angry or threatening manner; or

so the reports now are that the firing pin spring was in front of the firing pin, and thus the pistol was inoperable.

https://www.stltoday.com/news/...58-37cd10d97f4c.html

Mark and Patricia McCloskey each face a single felony count of unlawful use of a weapon — exhibiting . Charging documents say he pointed an AR-15 rifle at protesters and she wielded a semiautomatic handgun, placing protesters in fear of injury.

Is there a shortage of big floppy clown shoes? The rioters, Gardner, and the McCloskeys are all a bunch of clowns and this whole story is a circus. I initially didn't lump the McCloskeys in, but come on, defending one's property with an inoperable handgun and a rifle for which you apparently don't have ammo for? Both of which just happen to fall under an exception to the crime they've been charged with?

Allow me to disagree.

Gardner is not a clown. She has been an effective, dedicated, well-funded warrior for the Transform-America-into-a-commmunist/socialist movement.

Prove me wrong.

And, the rioters are not clowns, although sometimes they provide some mirthful entertainment.

They are useful idiots, pawns, cannon-fodder. And, they serve their purpose in the revolution.

quote:

Gardner is not a clown. She has been an effective, dedicated, well-funded warrior for the Transform-America-into-a-commmunist/socialist movement.

She is not a clown. She is the enemy.

quote:

Originally posted by tleo205:
A good attorney will have a great time with that bit of stupidity.

I have a feeling that "Karen" Gardner does stupid extremely well, from decades of practice.



.

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
She is not a clown. She is the enemy.

Enemy combatant.



.

Attorney for McCloskeys moves to disqualify prosecutor from pursuing case over 'impropriety'

https://www.washingtonexaminer...ase-over-impropriety



The attorney for a couple who brandished firearms at protesters on their property filed a motion to dismiss charges brought by the St. Louis Circuit Attorney’s Office.

Attorney Joel Schwartz, who is representing Mark and Patricia McCloskey, accused St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner on Wednesday of a partisan campaign against the husband and wife after it was revealed that she sent campaign emails stating that the couple had "pointed guns at peaceful citizens."

"Here, a reasonable person with access to all the facts would find that there was at least the appearance of impropriety, in that Ms. Gardner's decision may have been affected by her personal, political, financial, and professional interests, and that her neutrality, judgement, and ability to administer the law in an objective manner may have been compromised," the filing stated.

Schwartz's filing included exhibits of Gardner's reelection emails, which told her supporters that they "might be familiar with" the McCloskeys before attempting to smear the two by linking them to President Trump and Gov. Mike Parson, who each defended the couple's right to protect their property.

"You might be familiar with the story of the couple who brandished guns during a peaceful protest outside of their mansion," one of Gardner's email said. "Instead of fighting for the millions of Americans affected by the pandemic, including 31,000 Missourians, President Trump and the Governor are fighting for the two who pointed guns at peaceful citizens during the Black Lives Matter protests.”

Gardner's emails included a link to a donation page that read in part that she would "hold those accountable who are perpetuating a system of police brutality.”

A date for the motion to dismiss has yet to be set, but the McCloskeys are expected to appear in court for the first time on Aug. 31.

This is an interesting watch, and references the fact that the gun was made functional AFTER it was confiscated.

quote:

Gardner's emails included a link to a donation page that read in part that she would "hold those accountable who are perpetuating a system of police brutality.”

A date for the motion to dismiss has yet to be set, but the McCloskeys are expected to appear in court for the first time on Aug. 31.

Hopefully, that will be after Kim Gardner loses the August 4 primary.
Mary Pat Carl previously worked as the city’s lead homicide prosecutor.
https://www.marypatcarl.com/

Even If They’re Acquitted, Charging The McCloskeys Endangers Self-Defense

The McCloskey case remains an important legal precedent as private property owners increasingly find themselves without police protection in the face of violence.

Last Monday, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner announced she has charged Mark and Patricia McCloskey with felony unlawful use of a weapon for standing outside their home holding legal guns as a mob encircled them. The McCloskey case remains an important legal precedent in a rapidly changing legal environment as private property owners increasingly find themselves without police protection in the face of violence.

Within hours, Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmidt filed an “Amicus Brief” opposing the charges on the grounds that the McCloskeys simply exercised their rights under the Second Amendment of the Constitution. He wrote, “A highly publicized criminal prosecution of Missouri citizens for exercising these fundamental freedoms threatens to intimidate and deter law-abiding Missouri citizens from exercising their constitutional right of self-defense.” Schmidt’s brief alleges that at least one of the protestors carried an “assault rifle.”

Missouri law does not give the attorney general the power to overrule a local prosecutorial decision the way the U.S. attorney general may overrule a local U.S. attorney’s office. Schmidt contends that he has the authority to challenge the local prosecutor under the general statutory provision that allows him to represent the interests of the state of Missouri.

The law under which Gardner charged the McCloskeys specifically exempts the use of a weapon to repel a trespasser “who unlawfully enters, remains after unlawfully entering, … private property that is owned or leased by an individual…claiming a justification of using protective force under this section.” Further, as I wrote here, Missouri court decisions also appear to allow a homeowner to brandish a weapon to repel trespassers who refuse to leave. The law does not recognize a right to “peacefully” protest on private property unless the owner decided to open the property to the general public.

The Gun Twist

Gardner seized both of the McCloskey firearms pursuant to a search warrant. The Missouri law under which Gardner charged the McCloskeys can only be invoked if the weapons were “readily capable of lethal use.” But, in another twist, local St. Louis media has revealed that Gardner’s staff “ordered crime lab experts to disassemble and reassemble” the small handgun Patricia McCloskey brandished.

According to the McCloskey’s, the prosecutor did this because the handgun “was inoperable when it arrived at the St. Louis police crime lab.” As noted by St. Louis television station KSDK, “Specifically, the firing pin spring was put in front of the firing pin, which was backward, and made the gun incapable of firing, according to documents obtained by 5 On Your Side. Firearms experts then put the gun back together in the correct order and test-fired it, finding that it worked, according to the documents.”

The McCloskeys appear to have intentionally disabled the firearm so it could be safely used as a prop in a lawsuit.
A Survey of the Scene

A few days after Mark McCloskey confronted the trespassing protesters, I had the opportunity to view his house and the surrounding Portland Place neighborhood. The physical layout of the scene provides important context to what happened during the confrontation that resulted in Gardner charging them with a felony.

Fences and walls surround the neighborhood. A sign adjacent to the gate through which the protesters entered conspicuously warns that the entire interior neighborhood is private property. Once inside, the street and sidewalk pass in front of the McCloskey house, which is the first house on the right.

When I viewed the fragile metal gate, I could see that it was not intended as a fortification but as a decorative feature in the otherwise sturdy barrier of fencing and walls. I saw that somebody bent the gate back into shape to restore the barrier. But the breaks in the delicate structure of the gate remained.

Somebody laced a heavy tow chain through the gate to strengthen it against future assaults. Graffiti and trash marred the sidewalk outside the gate. While it appears the protesters likely damaged the gate, that does not appear to be how they gained access to the interior. Video shows the crowd entering through an open gate. That same video shows a protestor in a lime-green face covering carrying an object that resembles a rifle as he enters the gate.

Around the corner, police and private security manned a checkpoint through which residents accessed the neighborhood by car. I approached a masked police officer to ask if he was in the neighborhood the night of the incident. I could hear nervousness in his voice as he confirmed that he did come to the scene on the night of the confrontation. But he politely refused to answer any other questions.

I stopped at a nearby cafe at which workers had begun to prepare for additional protests anticipated after dark. They moved tables and chairs inside to remove them from the expected path of the protesters.

I approached an African American woman enjoying an iced tea. Although friendly and engaging, she denied knowing anything about the confrontation and had no opinion about the McCloskeys. Continuing to retrace the path of the march leading up to the confrontation, I passed by a row of stately mansions that were not protected by the Portland Place walls.

Homeowners placed “BLM” or “Black Lives Matter” signs in their front yards. I counted at least three such signs. When I happened to catch one of these homeowners returning from walking her dog, she too denied having any knowledge or opinion about the confrontation.

Coincidentally, on the same day Mark McCloskey brandished his AR-15 to deter the trespassing protestors, the Colorado Supreme Court upheld a ban on the type of magazine McCloskey had loaded in his weapon.

In the same announcement cited above, Gardner also stated that she charged “an individual who assaulted peaceful demonstrators at the King Louis IX statue on June 27.” In that incident, unrelated to the McCloskey confrontation, a counter-demonstrator slapped the victim as he stood praying for the protection of the statue. In announcing this misdemeanor charge in the same announcement of the McCloskey charge, Gardner attempted to cast the McCloskey charge as apolitical.

Schmidt’s intervention in the case draws attention to the important difference between a Second Amendment “defense” and a “right.” As a practical matter, a prosecution can punish the exercise of the right to bear arms without ever obtaining a conviction. An acquittal is cold comfort to a homeowner forced to spend thousands of dollars on attorneys’ fees to protect his rights.

https://thefederalist.com/2020...angers-self-defense/

https://justthenews.com/politi...secutors-re-election

George Soros has contributed $116,000 to a political action committee supporting St. Louis prosecutor Kimberly Gardner, whose pursuit of Missouri's former GOP governor and a couple who displayed their guns during Black Lives Matters protest have stirred national controversy and legal repercussions.

A Missouri Ethics Commission filing on Saturday showed the Soros donation to the Missouri Justice and Public Safety PAC formed to support Gardner, and indicated the liberal philanthropist was the sole donor to the group so far.

The PAC reported it has spent about $104,393 so far, including about $77,804 directly on Gardner. Soros' donation allowed the group to pay off prior debts it incurred in supporting Gardner, who faces a primary this Tuesday, the new report showed.

Gardner, a Democrat, was elected in 2016 and supported by Soros-funded PACs, which financially back several prosecutors across America on a progressive criminal justice reform platform.

She drew national attention when she filed criminal charges against then-Republican Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens, forcing him to resign, only to reveal later she did not have evidence to substantiate her allegations. She is facing investigation for her conduct in the Greitens case, and her former chief investigator is awaiting trial on tampering charges.

In recents weeks, Gardner has garnered national attention for criminally summoning Mark and Patricia McCloskey for brandishing their guns when Black Lives Matters demonstrators trespassed onto their private neighborhood on June 28.

In recent weeks, President Trump, Missouri Gov. Michael Parson, Missouri U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, and Missouri U.S. Attorney General Eric Schmitt have all weighed in on the controversy.

Parson has said he will pardon the McCloskeys. Schmitt wants to dismiss the case.

The McCloskeys' attorney, Joel Schwartz, filed a motion recently to dismiss both Gardner and her office from prosecuting the McCloskeys based upon conflict of interest. It argues that Gardner's campaign has used the McCloskeys' incident to further her own financial, personal, and professional gain because Gardner sent out campaign solicitations for her re-election mentioning the McCloskeys.

Michael Vachon, a Soros spokesperson, told Just the News that the PACs he is funding have never denied that they supported prosecutors like Gardner for criminal justice reform.

George Soros pours $116,000 into PAC supporting controversial St. Louis prosecutor

https://justthenews.com/politi..._campaign=newsletter



Liberal billionaire George Soros has contributed $116,000 to a political action committee supporting St. Louis prosecutor Kimberly Gardner, whose pursuit of Missouri's former GOP governor and a couple who displayed their guns during Black Lives Matters protest have stirred national controversy and legal repercussions.

A Missouri Ethics Commission filing on Saturday showed the Soros donation to the Missouri Justice and Public Safety PAC formed to support Gardner, and indicated the liberal philanthropist was the sole donor to the group so far.

The PAC reported it has spent about $104,393 so far, including about $77,804 directly on Gardner. Soros' donation allowed the group to pay off prior debts it incurred in supporting Gardner, who faces a primary this Tuesday, the new report showed.

You can review the latest report here.
File
GardnerPACSorosDonation.pdf

Gardner, a Democrat, was elected in 2016 and supported by Soros-funded PACs, which financially back several prosecutors across America on a progressive criminal justice reform platform.

She drew national attention when she filed criminal charges against then-Republican Missouri Gov. Eric Greitens, forcing him to resign, only to reveal later she did not have evidence to substantiate her allegations. She is facing investigation for her conduct in the Greitens case, and her former chief investigator is awaiting trial on tampering charges.

In recents weeks, Gardner has garnered national attention for criminally summoning Mark and Patricia McCloskey for brandishing their guns when Black Lives Matters demonstrators trespassed onto their private neighborhood on June 28.

The incident has been elevated to a national conversation about Second Amendment rights, Missouri "Castle Doctrine" of protecting one's home, and if the prosecution was political.

In recent weeks, President Trump, Missouri Gov. Michael Parson, Missouri U.S. Senator Josh Hawley, and Missouri U.S. Attorney General Eric Schmitt have all weighed in on the controversy.

Parson has said he will pardon the McCloskeys. Schmitt wants to dismiss the case.

The McCloskeys' attorney, Joel Schwartz, filed a motion recently to dismiss both Gardner and her office from prosecuting the McCloskeys based upon conflict of interest. It argues that Gardner's campaign has used the McCloskeys' incident to further her own financial, personal, and professional gain because Gardner sent out campaign solicitations for her re-election mentioning the McCloseys.

Michael Vachon, a Soros spokesperson, told Just the News that the PACs he is funding have never denied that they supported prosecutors like Gardner for criminal justice reform.

Wonder if the AG couldn't investigate Gardner for evidence tampering?

quote:

Originally posted by XinTX:
Wonder if the AG couldn't investigate Gardner for evidence tampering?

I think he is waiting to see what happens today. If she loses the primary, she is out and problem is solved. If she wins, investigation goes forward.

Kim has a history of not really knowing the laws and rules of evidence with the Greitens case and this case.

quote:

Kim has a history of not really knowing the laws and rules of evidence with the Greitens case and this case.

By having the firearms altered, she obviously does not know the rules of evidence but with her it's more likely she does not care.