Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Re: "Did Votes By Noncitizens Cost Trump The 2016 Popular Vote? Sure Looks That Way "
2 views
Skip to first unread message
Wile E. Coyote
Nov 10, 2019, 9:37:47 AM11/10/19
to
David Hartung wrote
> This from 2017:
>
> https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-votes-by-noncitizens-co
> st-trump-the-2016-popular-vote-sure-looks-that-way/
Trump says 290 million votes for him in the south were seized by ACORN and
burned by militant blacks, led by Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and Allen
West. He as told this by their fellow black Ben Carson, now working on an
improved idea that the Pyramids were actually secret diamond factories and
not wheat silos as previously believed.
> This from 2017:
>
> https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-votes-by-noncitizens-co
> st-trump-the-2016-popular-vote-sure-looks-that-way/
Trump says 290 million votes for him in the south were seized by ACORN and
burned by militant blacks, led by Walter Williams, Thomas Sowell and Allen
West. He as told this by their fellow black Ben Carson, now working on an
improved idea that the Pyramids were actually secret diamond factories and
not wheat silos as previously believed.
DDr Jai
Nov 10, 2019, 9:42:09 AM11/10/19
to
Mitchell Holman wrote
>
>
> So you cannot identify a single illegal who
> voted but you are just sure there were millions
> of them. Gads......
>
>
Trump's friend David Duke claims it was THE JEWS.
Trump supporter and prominent effeminate neo nazi Richard Spencer agrees.
Richard is still working on getting that fist out of his ass.
>
>
> So you cannot identify a single illegal who
> voted but you are just sure there were millions
> of them. Gads......
>
>
Trump's friend David Duke claims it was THE JEWS.
Trump supporter and prominent effeminate neo nazi Richard Spencer agrees.
Richard is still working on getting that fist out of his ass.
Rudy Canoza
Nov 10, 2019, 1:08:21 PM11/10/19
to
On 11/10/2019 6:05 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> This from 2017:
>
> [complete horseshit]
> This from 2017:
>
"Kobach’s strongest evidence of non-citizen registration was anemic at
best: Over a 20-year period, fewer than 40 non-citizens had attempted to
register in one Kansas county that had 130,000 voters. Most of those 40
improper registrations were the result of mistakes or confusion rather than
intentional attempts to mislead, and only five of the 40 managed to cast a
vote."
https://www.propublica.org/article/kris-kobach-voter-fraud-kansas-trial
There are not "millions" of non-citizens voting. That claim is a lie.
Rudy Canoza
Nov 10, 2019, 1:18:44 PM11/10/19
to
On 11/10/2019 6:05 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> This from 2017:
>
> https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/did-votes-by-noncitizens-cost-trump-the-2016-popular-vote-sure-looks-that-way/
> This from 2017:
>
>
The "study" cited in this editorial is worthless - fatally flawed and has
been completely debunked.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/trump-noncitizen-voters/
Even the lead author of the study says Trump *completely* misrepresented it.
Rudy Canoza
Nov 10, 2019, 1:34:02 PM11/10/19
to
These [discredited] papers — I think of them as “zombie research” — can
lead people to believe things that aren’t true, or, at least, that don’t
line up with the preponderance of scientific evidence. When that happens
— either because someone stumbled across a paper that felt deeply true
and created a belief, or because *someone went looking for a paper* that
*would back up beliefs they already had* — the undead are hard to kill.
"Looking for a paper that would back up beliefs they already had" - that's
Hartung to a 'T'.
Hartung won't read the 538 piece, but it *shreds* the position taken in the
editorial that his right-wingnut aggregator lie site led him to. Hartung
did not "just happen to find" the Investors Business Daily editorial that
is based on the discredited paper - he was lured to it by one of his
aggregator lie sites. We know this. We also know the editorial writer was
lured to the discredited paper in the way described in the 538 piece: went
looking for it to confirm beliefs already held.
This is Hartung's dishonesty at its worst, yet he claims others to be liars.
Klaus Schadenfreude
Nov 10, 2019, 1:37:46 PM11/10/19
to
On Sun, 10 Nov 2019 10:08:18 -0800, Rudy Canoza <c...@philhendrie.con>
wrote:
>n one Kansas county
Way to cherry-pick, shorty.
wrote:
>n one Kansas county
Way to cherry-pick, shorty.
Rudy Canoza
Nov 11, 2019, 2:44:02 PM11/11/19
to
On 11/11/2019 11:36 AM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 11/11/19 1:13 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> On 11/11/2019 10:51 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 11/11/19 12:41 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>> On 11/11/2019 10:39 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 11/11/19 11:55 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/11/2019 4:23 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/10/19 7:13 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/10/2019 4:11 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Perhaps the issue is Rudy's dishonesty?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No; yours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.justfactsdaily.com/substantial-numbers-of-non-citizens-vote-illegally-in-u-s-elections/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> As detailed below, this paper has uncertainties that the authors
>>>>>>>>> readily acknowledge, but attempts to dismiss it have been flawed
>>>>>>>>> and deceitful.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, they have not been. The study is beyond salvage, and the lead
>>>>>>>> author *expressly* says that Trump misrepresents the part of it she
>>>>>>>> got right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is *ZERO* evidence that "millions" of undocumented immigrants
>>>>>>>> are voting. The only reliable evidence points to a minuscule
>>>>>>>> number, and most of those are unintentional.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If one is in the USA illegally, he will know it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many people don't know they aren't eligible to vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, that is simply unbelievable.
>>>>
>>>> The legitimate research shows it. That woman in Texas who was
>>>> convicted of illegally voting twice and given an outrageous 8 year
>>>> sentence legitimately didn't know she was ineligible.
>
> By chance have you a link?
Of course I have a link, you slimy shitbag. I'll nonetheless point out
that you can *easily* find it yourself by doing a search on "texas woman
illegal voting eight years", without the quotes, which is exactly how I
found it (although I had read about it before, which is how I knew what
search terms to use.) In my search, in the excellent Google search engine,
the story at The Gold Standard was the second on in the result set.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/us/illegal-voting-gets-texas-woman-8-years-in-prison-and-certain-deportation.html
>>> Not knowing is not an excuse.
>>
>> That actually depends. Wannabe hard-asses like you love to bleat
>> "ignorance of the law is no excuse," but in fact, it *may* be an excuse.
>> It hinges on state of mind, and what a "reasonable" person ought to know.
>> No one can claim ignorance of the law against murder, because that simply
>> is an unreasonable position - any reasonable person would have to assume
>> that murder is illegal.
>>
>> But ignorance of some obscure provision of the tax code, or perhaps not
>> knowing about eligibility to vote? The woman in Texas was brought to the
>> USA as an infant, and has a sixth grade education. She had permanent
>> resident status. It is reasonable for someone in that circumstance
>> possibly to think, incorrectly, that she was eligible to vote.
>
> You are making excuses,
Nope. I'm not making excuse, you slimy shitbag. I'm offering the same
defense you would make if prosecuted over an obscure law that you could not
reasonably have known.
> sorry, ti [sic] doesn't wash.
You've been drinking or smoking crystal meth again.
>
>> The problem that all reasonable people (which excludes you) have is with
>> the severity of the punishment. This woman was sentenced to eight years
>> in prison, and will without doubt subsequently be deported. The sentence
>> is excessive, probably unconstitutional.
You have nothing to say over this, as I expected.
> On 11/11/19 1:13 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> On 11/11/2019 10:51 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> On 11/11/19 12:41 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>> On 11/11/2019 10:39 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>> On 11/11/19 11:55 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/11/2019 4:23 AM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/10/19 7:13 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/10/2019 4:11 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No; yours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.justfactsdaily.com/substantial-numbers-of-non-citizens-vote-illegally-in-u-s-elections/
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> As detailed below, this paper has uncertainties that the authors
>>>>>>>>> readily acknowledge, but attempts to dismiss it have been flawed
>>>>>>>>> and deceitful.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, they have not been. The study is beyond salvage, and the lead
>>>>>>>> author *expressly* says that Trump misrepresents the part of it she
>>>>>>>> got right.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There is *ZERO* evidence that "millions" of undocumented immigrants
>>>>>>>> are voting. The only reliable evidence points to a minuscule
>>>>>>>> number, and most of those are unintentional.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If one is in the USA illegally, he will know it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many people don't know they aren't eligible to vote.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, that is simply unbelievable.
>>>>
>>>> The legitimate research shows it. That woman in Texas who was
>>>> convicted of illegally voting twice and given an outrageous 8 year
>>>> sentence legitimately didn't know she was ineligible.
>
> By chance have you a link?
Of course I have a link, you slimy shitbag. I'll nonetheless point out
that you can *easily* find it yourself by doing a search on "texas woman
illegal voting eight years", without the quotes, which is exactly how I
found it (although I had read about it before, which is how I knew what
search terms to use.) In my search, in the excellent Google search engine,
the story at The Gold Standard was the second on in the result set.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/10/us/illegal-voting-gets-texas-woman-8-years-in-prison-and-certain-deportation.html
>>> Not knowing is not an excuse.
>>
>> That actually depends. Wannabe hard-asses like you love to bleat
>> "ignorance of the law is no excuse," but in fact, it *may* be an excuse.
>> It hinges on state of mind, and what a "reasonable" person ought to know.
>> No one can claim ignorance of the law against murder, because that simply
>> is an unreasonable position - any reasonable person would have to assume
>> that murder is illegal.
>>
>> But ignorance of some obscure provision of the tax code, or perhaps not
>> knowing about eligibility to vote? The woman in Texas was brought to the
>> USA as an infant, and has a sixth grade education. She had permanent
>> resident status. It is reasonable for someone in that circumstance
>> possibly to think, incorrectly, that she was eligible to vote.
>
> You are making excuses,
Nope. I'm not making excuse, you slimy shitbag. I'm offering the same
defense you would make if prosecuted over an obscure law that you could not
reasonably have known.
> sorry, ti [sic] doesn't wash.
You've been drinking or smoking crystal meth again.
>
>> The problem that all reasonable people (which excludes you) have is with
>> the severity of the punishment. This woman was sentenced to eight years
>> in prison, and will without doubt subsequently be deported. The sentence
>> is excessive, probably unconstitutional.
You have nothing to say over this, as I expected.
Rudy Canoza
Nov 11, 2019, 3:46:42 PM11/11/19
to
On 11/11/2019 12:27 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> You do realize that as the one who made the claim, it is incumbent on you
> to provide support for that claim?
Which, of course, I have done. But why is it you *never* seem to be able
to find anything on your own? I'm not saying you have the burden of
finding it, but I frequently go find it on my own rather than petulantly
and bitchily demand that someone else do it. Why don't you?
> As it is I will have to search because I refuse to pay for a New York Times
> subscription.
>
You can read about five articles per month at the Gold Standard without a
subscription. As you *never* read the Gold Standard, because of your
filthy ideological partisanship, crippling dishonesty and willful
stupidity, you have your five free articles remaining right now.
If you do the search as I instructed you, you will find numerous other
references to the same case. Even if you don't click on the New York Times
(Gold Standard) link to read the story, you can still see enough of it in
the "hit" to copy some of it, including the woman's name, and then do your
own search. Here's what comes up in the "hit":
Feb 10, 2017 - That may help explain the unusually heavy penalty imposed
on Rosa Maria Ortega, 37, a permanent resident and a mother of four who
lives outside Dallas. On Thursday, a Fort Worth judge sentenced her to
eight years in prison — and almost certainly deportation later — after she
So, to recap: I fully supported my claim, and you are a lazy whiny *bitch*
for not undertaking your own confirmation.
> to provide support for that claim?
Which, of course, I have done. But why is it you *never* seem to be able
to find anything on your own? I'm not saying you have the burden of
finding it, but I frequently go find it on my own rather than petulantly
and bitchily demand that someone else do it. Why don't you?
> As it is I will have to search because I refuse to pay for a New York Times
> subscription.
>
You can read about five articles per month at the Gold Standard without a
subscription. As you *never* read the Gold Standard, because of your
filthy ideological partisanship, crippling dishonesty and willful
stupidity, you have your five free articles remaining right now.
If you do the search as I instructed you, you will find numerous other
references to the same case. Even if you don't click on the New York Times
(Gold Standard) link to read the story, you can still see enough of it in
the "hit" to copy some of it, including the woman's name, and then do your
own search. Here's what comes up in the "hit":
Feb 10, 2017 - That may help explain the unusually heavy penalty imposed
on Rosa Maria Ortega, 37, a permanent resident and a mother of four who
lives outside Dallas. On Thursday, a Fort Worth judge sentenced her to
eight years in prison — and almost certainly deportation later — after she
So, to recap: I fully supported my claim, and you are a lazy whiny *bitch*
for not undertaking your own confirmation.
Rudy Canoza
Nov 11, 2019, 3:55:34 PM11/11/19
to
On 11/11/2019 12:34 PM, David Hartung wrote:
> On 11/11/19 2:29 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 11/11/19 2:27 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>
>>
>> [...]
>> To Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), this is an open-and-shut case
>> of voter fraud ― Ortega lied about being a citizen, voted multiple times
>> and now is being punished.
>>
>> But the evidence in Ortega’s case tells a far more complex story and
>> illustrates the enormous discretion that prosecutors have in pursuing
>> incidents of voter fraud.
>>
>> Throughout her trial, Ortega maintained that she had no idea she couldn’t
>> vote. She said she didn’t know the difference between a U.S. citizen and
>> a legal permanent resident. She was brought to the United States when she
>> was very young and two of her brothers were born in the U.S. According to
>> one brother, her entire family thought she was a citizen.
>> [...]
>>
>> That her family claimed that they didn't know she was not a citizen, is
>> not an excuse, this is just another liberal attempt to subvert the law.
>
> Apparently the woman did know that she was not a citizen
Exactly.
You, being stupid, don't know that Rosa Maria Ortega was a registered
Republican, either.
>
> I agree, eight years seems a bit much for this sort of situation, but there
> is no way this woman (sixth grade education or not) can use ignorance of
> the law as an excuse.
What part of *your* sentence, "Apparently the woman did know that she was
not a citizen," do you fail to understand? Even assuming Ortega *knew*
that citizenship is required for voting eligibility, and that is *not*
established, if she didn't know she wasn't a citizen - and you have
acknowledged that she more than likely did not know - then *this*
particular ignorance of the law *DOES* provide an excuse, or legal defense.
There are two elements here in which ignorance of the law can be an excuse:
* possible lack of awareness of citizenship being required for eligibility
* lack of awareness of one's own citizenship
The first, while not established, is eminently plausible; the second you
have already *stipulated*.
I never cease to be amazed at your stupidity and total inability to think
clearly. I seriously question your mental competence.
> On 11/11/19 2:29 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>> On 11/11/19 2:27 PM, David Hartung wrote:
>>> You do realize that as the one who made the claim, it is incumbent on
>>> you to provide support for that claim?
>>>
>>> you to provide support for that claim?
>>>
>>> As it is I will have to search because I refuse to pay for a New York
>>> Times subscription.
>>
>> https://www.huffpost.com/entry/texas-voter-fraud-prison_n_5c01a9afe4b0a173c02305c1
>>> Times subscription.
>>
>>
>>
>> [...]
>> To Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R), this is an open-and-shut case
>> of voter fraud ― Ortega lied about being a citizen, voted multiple times
>> and now is being punished.
>>
>> But the evidence in Ortega’s case tells a far more complex story and
>> illustrates the enormous discretion that prosecutors have in pursuing
>> incidents of voter fraud.
>>
>> Throughout her trial, Ortega maintained that she had no idea she couldn’t
>> vote. She said she didn’t know the difference between a U.S. citizen and
>> a legal permanent resident. She was brought to the United States when she
>> was very young and two of her brothers were born in the U.S. According to
>> one brother, her entire family thought she was a citizen.
>> [...]
>>
>> That her family claimed that they didn't know she was not a citizen, is
>> not an excuse, this is just another liberal attempt to subvert the law.
>
> Apparently the woman did know that she was not a citizen
Exactly.
You, being stupid, don't know that Rosa Maria Ortega was a registered
Republican, either.
>
> I agree, eight years seems a bit much for this sort of situation, but there
> is no way this woman (sixth grade education or not) can use ignorance of
> the law as an excuse.
What part of *your* sentence, "Apparently the woman did know that she was
not a citizen," do you fail to understand? Even assuming Ortega *knew*
that citizenship is required for voting eligibility, and that is *not*
established, if she didn't know she wasn't a citizen - and you have
acknowledged that she more than likely did not know - then *this*
particular ignorance of the law *DOES* provide an excuse, or legal defense.
There are two elements here in which ignorance of the law can be an excuse:
* possible lack of awareness of citizenship being required for eligibility
* lack of awareness of one's own citizenship
The first, while not established, is eminently plausible; the second you
have already *stipulated*.
I never cease to be amazed at your stupidity and total inability to think
clearly. I seriously question your mental competence.
Ed Buck BAGGED & TAGGED Gavin Newsom
Nov 11, 2019, 10:05:02 PM11/11/19
to
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/01/09/17/8321528-6573905-image-
a-6_1547055571738.jpg
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/01/09/17/8321230-6573905-image-
m-12_1547055672514.jpg
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A black member of Congress on Wednesday
called it “incomprehensible” that after the overdose deaths of
two African American men at the apartment of wealthy and
influential Los Angeles area gay activist Edward Buck, a third
man nearly died there before authorities arrested Buck.
The men died in 2017 and early 2019 but Buck skirted charges
until prosecutors announced his arrest late Tuesday after the
latest overdose victim escaped Buck’s West Hollywood home
despite what officials called efforts by Buck to prevent him
from leaving.
“It’s incomprehensible to me that it took a third black gay man
to be attacked and almost die to finally dissolve the
unconscionable apathy that has allowed Ed Buck, a racist sexual
predator, to roam free,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Karen Bass,
whose district lies just south of West Hollywood. “Everyone knew
that he preyed on young black men. … The inaction in response
had a message was loud and clear: Black gay lives obviously
didn’t matter.”
In court documents, authorities said Buck used his position of
power to manipulate male victims into participating in sexual
fetishes that involved injecting them with methamphetamine,
adding that he “has no regard for human life.”
Buck was charged with operating a drug house, furnishing
methamphetamine and with battery causing serious bodily injury.
He was awaiting arraignment. Messages to his attorney, Seymour
Amster, were not immediately returned.
Buck, 65, has donated tens of thousands of dollars to California
candidates, including Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, and is well
known in LGBTQ political circles.
Buck remained in custody Wednesday and prosecutors argued in
court documents that he should be held on $4 million bail
because he is a “violent, dangerous sexual predator” who offered
drugs, money and shelter to mainly addicted and homeless men in
exchange for participating in sexual fetishes. One fetish
involved administering dangerous doses of drugs, the documents
said.
Buck came under investigation in January after 55-year-old
Timothy Dean was found dead of an accidental methamphetamine
overdose in his apartment. In July 2017, Gemmel Moore, 26, also
died from a methamphetamine overdose at Buck’s home.
Both men were black. Buck, who is white, was not charged and
critics later questioned if wealth, race or political ties
influenced the investigation.
Moore’s mother, LaTisha Nixon, “is relieved that Ed Buck is no
longer on the streets and free to continue harming black men,”
her lawyer, Hussain Turk, said Wednesday.
“She is also disappointed that the county’s criminal charges
against Ed Buck do not include charges for homicide,” Turk said.
The investigation into the deaths continues, county district
attorney’s spokesman Greg Risling said.
Buck’s attorney, Amster, had said Dean came to Buck’s home under
the influence and did not ingest any drugs while there.
But prosecutors in court documents blamed Buck’s actions for the
two deaths and alleged he personally gave a dangerous dose of
methamphetamine to an unnamed man who survived an overdose
earlier this month.
On Sept. 11, the man returned and Buck injected him with two
more dangerous doses, refused to help him and “thwarted” his
efforts to get help until the man fled the apartment and called
911 from a gas station, prosecutors alleged.
“His deadly behavior has not stopped,” prosecutors said in the
court documents.
Buck’s “predatory acts and willful disregard for human life must
be stopped before another life is lost,” the documents said.
https://blackamericaweb.com/2019/09/18/how-did-ed-buck-avoid-
arrest-after-two-black-gay-men-died-at-his-home/
TAGS: Barack Obama Homosexual Degenerate Gay Pedophile Democrat
Liberalism Pervert CNN CBS ABC NBC Disney MSNBC Faggots Hillary
Clinton Racist Queer Progressive Antifa Faggots
a-6_1547055571738.jpg
https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/01/09/17/8321230-6573905-image-
m-12_1547055672514.jpg
LOS ANGELES (AP) — A black member of Congress on Wednesday
called it “incomprehensible” that after the overdose deaths of
two African American men at the apartment of wealthy and
influential Los Angeles area gay activist Edward Buck, a third
man nearly died there before authorities arrested Buck.
The men died in 2017 and early 2019 but Buck skirted charges
until prosecutors announced his arrest late Tuesday after the
latest overdose victim escaped Buck’s West Hollywood home
despite what officials called efforts by Buck to prevent him
from leaving.
“It’s incomprehensible to me that it took a third black gay man
to be attacked and almost die to finally dissolve the
unconscionable apathy that has allowed Ed Buck, a racist sexual
predator, to roam free,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Karen Bass,
whose district lies just south of West Hollywood. “Everyone knew
that he preyed on young black men. … The inaction in response
had a message was loud and clear: Black gay lives obviously
didn’t matter.”
In court documents, authorities said Buck used his position of
power to manipulate male victims into participating in sexual
fetishes that involved injecting them with methamphetamine,
adding that he “has no regard for human life.”
Buck was charged with operating a drug house, furnishing
methamphetamine and with battery causing serious bodily injury.
He was awaiting arraignment. Messages to his attorney, Seymour
Amster, were not immediately returned.
Buck, 65, has donated tens of thousands of dollars to California
candidates, including Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom, and is well
known in LGBTQ political circles.
Buck remained in custody Wednesday and prosecutors argued in
court documents that he should be held on $4 million bail
because he is a “violent, dangerous sexual predator” who offered
drugs, money and shelter to mainly addicted and homeless men in
exchange for participating in sexual fetishes. One fetish
involved administering dangerous doses of drugs, the documents
said.
Buck came under investigation in January after 55-year-old
Timothy Dean was found dead of an accidental methamphetamine
overdose in his apartment. In July 2017, Gemmel Moore, 26, also
died from a methamphetamine overdose at Buck’s home.
Both men were black. Buck, who is white, was not charged and
critics later questioned if wealth, race or political ties
influenced the investigation.
Moore’s mother, LaTisha Nixon, “is relieved that Ed Buck is no
longer on the streets and free to continue harming black men,”
her lawyer, Hussain Turk, said Wednesday.
“She is also disappointed that the county’s criminal charges
against Ed Buck do not include charges for homicide,” Turk said.
The investigation into the deaths continues, county district
attorney’s spokesman Greg Risling said.
Buck’s attorney, Amster, had said Dean came to Buck’s home under
the influence and did not ingest any drugs while there.
But prosecutors in court documents blamed Buck’s actions for the
two deaths and alleged he personally gave a dangerous dose of
methamphetamine to an unnamed man who survived an overdose
earlier this month.
On Sept. 11, the man returned and Buck injected him with two
more dangerous doses, refused to help him and “thwarted” his
efforts to get help until the man fled the apartment and called
911 from a gas station, prosecutors alleged.
“His deadly behavior has not stopped,” prosecutors said in the
court documents.
Buck’s “predatory acts and willful disregard for human life must
be stopped before another life is lost,” the documents said.
https://blackamericaweb.com/2019/09/18/how-did-ed-buck-avoid-
arrest-after-two-black-gay-men-died-at-his-home/
TAGS: Barack Obama Homosexual Degenerate Gay Pedophile Democrat
Liberalism Pervert CNN CBS ABC NBC Disney MSNBC Faggots Hillary
Clinton Racist Queer Progressive Antifa Faggots
0 new messages