17 thoughts on “Bedfellows”

1. DG,

   Alas, you’ve gone back to your old habits – making snide, dismissive, condescending claims that your facts (“ironically”) can’t support, and scampering away, thereby using my comment section as a metablog.

   I told you I wouldn’t tolerate it.

   So this time, in addition to needing you to start discussing the claims you make in my comment section, I’m going to need some answers from you.

   • You recently claimed you’d been “published” in the London School of Economics’ blog. I’ve asked you repeatedly; the “publication” was actually just a link to one of your articles on “Minnesota Progressive Project”. Am I correct? If not, please provide a link, either publicly or privately to me. it appears you are trying to stretch five pounds of bag over ten pounds of reality.
   • Another: many years ago, you claimed that Salem Twin Cities was in imminent danger of being sued into receivership, because of a scam being run by one of its paid programs. You made a big show of it, in fact. You made a big show of how one of your neighbors – an expert in corporate law, but naturally nobody we could talk to, of course – backing you up on this.
     . So – whatever became of that? That was at least seven years ago; any updates?
   • In 2012, you claimed that Rep. Cornish’s “Stand your Ground” bill – which passed both chambers of the legislature with a bipartisan majority – was “crap legislation”. When asked to substantiate the claim beyond the level of opinion, you provided some stats that, in fact, proved that Stand your Ground was excellent legislation that did exactly what I said it would; you just didn’t know any better. So – please either substantiate your claim with actual facts (and be prepared to defend your defense!), or admit you were talking out your ass

   I could find a lot more, but I have a life.

   God bless ya, DG, but I’m calling BS on you.
   ———-
   

   Walking on a highway is not a crime; it has a long history as legal protest. Maybe you should go rent the movie Selma which involved the march on the Edmund Pettus bridge.

   And no, when other people join your groups and behave violently while you work with police – as did Black Lives Matter – to ensure the safety of everyone, including law enforcement, you correctly differentiate yourself from those who are outsiders and who are violent.

   Do your homework better Doakes; the interviews on WCCO television following the interstate incident showed both the chief of police and a leader of BLM both acknowledging that cooperation and that the organized protesters were not the people guilty of violence.

   Arrest them for civil disobedience by all means, but no, those people were not associating with gangs. You lie; the question remaining is, deliberately or are you just willfully ignorant of the facts before you write?

   I may answer some of your more baseless claims later, if time permits.

   But then, you owe me some answers first.

2. Mitch, may I suggest you use the same shade of grey the background is for dog’s text? She adds nothing of value what so ever; even if she sobers up, she is clearly not intelligent enough to have anything of interest to say.

   Even mocking someone so dim witted brings no joy; there is no sentience, just a flat line and dull, buzzing, white noise.

   Your blog, your rules…just a suggestion.

3. Swiftee,
   DG is the red-headed stepchild of SiTD and whenever she shows up we get to beat her like a baby seal, where’s the harm in that?

4. Every member of the conspiracy should be equally liable for whatever additional crimes are committed during their intended criminal act.

   Indeed, that’s the way things are in nearly all criminal cases. For example, if you and a buddy commit armed robbery and in the process of that your buddy shoots and kills the victim, you are also on the hook for a murder charge, not just the guy who pulls the trigger. You form part of a criminal conspiracy and as part of that criminal conspiracy you are responsible for the actions of all its members during the commission of the crime.

5. DG,

   This comment illustrates how very confused you are on the basic facts.

   Walking on a highway is not a crime; it has a long history as legal protest.

   FACT CHECK!

   No, pedestrians are not allowed on the interstate. The “long history as legal protest” is called “civil DISOBEDIENCE” for a reason; it means “we’re going to break the law and accept the consequences, to highlight the law’s injustice”.

   Maybe you should go rent the movie Selma which involved the march on the Edmund Pettus bridge.

   Maybe you should rent it again, and absorb the lesson. Civil DISOBEDIENCE is about breaking the law.

   The protesters broke the law by demonstrating on the bridge. Here’s an article on the subject by someone who actually knows the facts.

   Do your homework better Doakes;

   No, DG – you do your homework. The freeway protests aren’t “civil disobedience”, since they know the political leadership in both cities will never lift a finger to their protests.

   So when you say…

   Arrest them for civil disobedience by all means

   Well, what is it? You said walking on a freeway isn’t a crime! So what would you have them, by your dismal comprehension of the ‘facts’, arrested for?

   The city governments in Minneapolis, Saint Paul and Bloomington have let the protesters block 94 and 35W three times in the past year without any legal consequences, on top of blocking Snelling during the Fair, the Green Line on Vikings opening day, occupy the MOA once without consequence (and once with some resistance), block the airport once, and University Avenue 3-4 times. It’s not disobedience if it’s generally known there will be no consequences.

   the question remaining is, deliberately or are you just willfully ignorant of the facts before you write?

   Heh.

   Heh heh heh.

   Heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh heh.

   Sorry. That’s just hilarious.

   Yet again, you are trying to stretch a five-pound bag of condescension, chanting points from “ThinkProgress” and half-understood facts to cover 25 pounds of ignorance.

   Honest question, here; do you ever learn?

6. involved the march on the Edmund Pettus bridge.

   While still illegal, those protesters purpose was MARCHING, not blocking the road.

   I swear, if I’d have been traveling that stretch, I’d have plowed into that Prius blocking the lane, opened the door and fallen to the pavement with the greediest ambulance chaser I could find on the other end of my cell phone.

7. ALSO – since DG never actually knows the facts related to her FACT CHECKS…

   …the protesters tried to obtain a demonstration permit for the bridge from the city. The City denied it – although according to the LATimes article above they were available to other groups. So the protest also related to unequal access to the First Amendment; it was classic civil disobedience.

   It’s exactly the opposite here; while BLM has apparent carte blance to protest wherever and whenever it wants with the city’s blessing and no permit required, if a pro-life or Tea Party or Tax Reform group tried to block Snelling during the Fair there’d be arrests and the street would be cleared immediately.

8. I’m afraid that Mr Doakes is flat out wrong with his attempt to define a criminal conspiracy. Coincidental attendance at an event would be insufficient absent some direct link between two parties at an illegal event. According to the woman i love — who was a criminal defense attorney for 37 years until she retired — there needs to be a connection and/or direction or direct knowledge on the part of the conspirator prior to the illegal action.

   It also appears that Mr Doakes is conflating conspiracy with participation in a felony which results in a death. While a Venn diagram may show some overlap, they’re not the same thus the statutory definitions for the latter.

   Just as Chris Christie was able to obtain a guilty verdict at the GOP Convention, it’s no surprise that this audience solemnly nods their heads in agreement with Mr Doakes’s unlearned treatise.

   Rick Mons

9. ” Coincidental attendance at an event would be insufficient absent some direct link between two parties at an illegal event.”

   Is there an opportunity to have a “direct link between two parties” through social networking? Maybe friends on Facebook or a following on Twitter or such.

10. CommonSense is trying to give the impression that he (or she) is a lawyer, but has never actually claimed to be a lawyer. Well played!

11. Here is a fellow named Rick Mons:
    https://www.linkedin.com/in/rick-mons-5a565a6
    According to linkedin, he lives in the Minneapolis, Saint Paul area.

12. good point Scott, “flash mobs” are an established phenomena of social networking sites(twitter, FB, Instagram, etc). At some point an ambitious prosecutor will make the case for “criminal conspiracy” and upon appeal will make it stick.

13. Mr Doakes’s unlearned treatise

    It is quite obvious that UnCommoSense has no clue about JD’s credentials and is just trolling to hear himself talk. The way he brings up his source makes me believe he is yet another of Peev’s neighbors. Tough neighborhood!

14. DG is the red-headed stepchild of SiTD and whenever she shows up we get to beat her like a baby seal, where’s the harm in that?

    I used to have a t shirt with a harp seal picture on it, and when I wore it, I’d occasionally ask people if they’d like to join my seal club. Not everybody got it,sad to say.

    Regarding Rick’s claim, um, we are to believe he’s unaware of volumes of communication organizing BLM events? Could be a senior moment, to be fair, but unless dementia is setting in, one really ought to concede something this obvious.

15. …there needs to be a connection and/or direction or direct knowledge on the part of the conspirator prior to the illegal action.

    So just following someone on foot onto the freeway with the intent to block it and then staying there when told to disperse does not involve direction or direct knowledge? Please explain how it does not involve both.

    I tend to agree that attending an event at which a riot broke out would probably not involve charges. But attending an event where either (1) you knew that illegal activity was intended or (2) you remained and participated in illegal activities would make you a co-conspirator and responsible for the activities of your conspirators. Or at least that’s what I’ve been told by a lawyer who was a former FBI agent.

16. I’m not a criminal defense attorney – thank GOD – much less a career public defender. I’m willing to be educated by a specialist but not by a hearsay lay witness.

    I could not stand in court to argue with a straight face: “My client had no direct link with the person who dropped the concrete. My client was merely taking a short-cut to church to make a sizeable donation as a fresh start to turn his life around so he could start college. The fact he was chanting: “What do we want? Dead Cops!” at the time other members of the not-affiliated-and-unconnected-group were attempting to kill police officers was entirely coincidental.”

    Might be a perfectly good defense, I don’t know. I just couldn’t do it.

17. Yeah Bento, that is Mons. He is known to Mitch and I from our old Saint Paul Issues Forum days. I’d guess that’s how he found his way here.

    SPIF is your usual leftist echo chamber where a conservative voice finds itself soon excommunicated. Neither Mitch or myself lasted very long, especially since a few local leftist politicians stuck their toes in there once in awhile; exposing them to embarrassing questions had to stop.

    On behalf of Mitch, I welcome Rick to SITD, where, as with most conservative public forums, we take Freedom of Speech seriously.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.