51
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
sceletera
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 06:54 am
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:

Quote:
Can you figure out why the AR-15 is more like an M-16 than other rifles when they share the same repair manual?

Sharing the same repair manual has nothing to do with the fact that one is semiautomatic, and one is not. So how is the AR-15 any more like a select-fire M-16 than other semiautomatic rifles? You're dancing around this question. So far, all you've offered is an appeal to a manual, and you know what that's worth, right?

So, in your own words, how is an AR-15 any more like a select-fire M-16 than any other semiautomatic rifle?


I am not dancing around anything. I pointed out that the courts have heard your argument and already rejected it. Your repeating an argument that has already been legally rejected doesn't make it valid. It only proves you have no legal argument so you are the one that has to dance around.
sceletera
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 06:56 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

You look particularly goofy when you falsely accuse experts of not knowing what they are talking about.

Says the guy that claims doctors can't tell anything about the wounds they treat.

This is now like shooting fish in a barrel with an AR-15 that was used to hunt deer in Indiana where you claimed they were banned.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 08:11 am
Quote:
"We are in a state of chaos. In the city in which I live, I hear and see examples of chaos almost every day. Little children are victims of senseless gun violence..."

Two years ago, 11-year-old Milwaukee schoolgirl Sandra Parks wrote these words in an award-winning essay about the murders in her city.

On Monday night, aged 13, she was shot by a stray bullet fired into her home.

Her frantic family called 911, but Sandra died at the scene.

The girl's mother, Bernice Parks, told police she had gone to bed early while her children watched TV. She woke to the sound of gunshots shortly before 20:00, and found her daughter bleeding on the floor.

"She said, 'Momma, I'm shot. Call the police,'" Ms Parks told TV station WITI. "I looked at her. She didn't cry. She wasn't hollering. She was just so peaceful... She didn't deserve to leave this world like that."

Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett described the situation as "insanity", telling reporters: "Tragically, her death was caused by someone who just decided they were going to shoot bullets into her house, and she's dead. A 13-year-old, on Thanksgiving week, on a school night, in her bedroom, and she died."

Mr Barrett speculated that the shooter may have wanted to "settle a score, express anger, try to scare someone", saying on Tuesday: "All we know is that a 13-year-old died last night in her bedroom."

Midwestern paper the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reports that one suspect, Isaac D. Barnes, has been charged with homicide and a second man, Untrell Oden, faces two counts for allegedly helping to safeguard two guns.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46314065

Now the usual suspects will justify murdering a kid in her own home.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 08:53 am
@sceletera,
Quote:
I am not dancing around anything . . .

So rather than tell me in your own words why the AR-15 is more like an M-16 than other semiautomatic rifles--other than your ridiculous assertion that they both share the same repair manual--you opt to be a mindless yes-man for a legal authority whose argument is as empty as yours.

So we'll try again. In your own words, how is the AR-15 any more like a select fire M-16 than other semiautomatic rifles?
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 03:45 pm
@sceletera,
sceletera wrote:
You argue the doctors are wrong because they are talking about the wounds from a specific weapon then you argue they don't know what weapons produce what sort of wounds. It seems you want to claim doctors know something at the same time they don't know something.
The fact these doctors choose to talk about a specific caliber does not change the fact that they don't know what they are talking about.

sceletera wrote:
You are not making a logical argument, you are throwing out contradictory statements and hoping no one notices.
My statements are logical and not contradictory at all.

sceletera wrote:
And you claim to have a high IQ? The internet is such an interesting space because people that lie about their intelligence quickly show that they are lying.
Mine's 170. How many points do I have over you?

sceletera wrote:
No you don't.

sceletera wrote:
You falsely claim homosexuality is a mental disorder.
No. I was pointing out what was listed in the barbaric standards that you referred to. I was criticizing those standards, not endorsing them.

And this was listed in those standards:
Code:(F64) Gender identity disorders
(F64.0) Transsexualism
(F64.1) Dual-role transvestism
(F64.2) Gender identity disorder of childhood

sceletera wrote:
You falsely claimed Obama had issued an executive order when it was only executive action.
Sophistry.

sceletera wrote:
You falsely argued that simply having a mental disorder would prevent someone from having a gun when other criteria also had to be met.
That's one. Paltry compared to the number of errors that you made. Not to mention that I was correct on the main point, which was that Obama was trying to take guns from people who clearly were not dangerous in any way.

sceletera wrote:
A diversion followed by a lie.
Nope. No diversion and no lie.

sceletera wrote:
You attempt to divert from your untruths by claiming I have made some and you pointed them out.
No such untruths. And no such diversion.

sceletera wrote:
Please point out the errors on my part you have found.
I felt it would be childish of me to keep a running tally of all the times you were wrong, so I didn't. I knew that's what you were attempting to do with me, but I figured I'd be the adult in the conversation.

I'll go look up a few of your errors, but am not going to take the time to exhaustively dig up every single one of them.

Here's an instance of me finding one of your errors:
http://able2know.org/topic/131081-70#post-6603681

It should also be noted that the main point of contention was whether Obama's executive order broadly included people who are not in any way dangerous and should not be deprived of guns. The fact that it covered phobias and anorexia proved me correct on this main point of contention even though I was wrong on a supporting point.

Here's another instance of me pointing out an error of yours:
https://able2know.org/topic/131081-75#post-6607205

Here's another instance of me pointing out one of your errors (the top part, not the part where I commented on your trivia):
https://able2know.org/topic/131081-81#post-6609326

Here's another instance of me pointing out an error of yours:
https://able2know.org/topic/131081-82#post-6609444

Here's another instance of me pointing out an error of yours (it's a longish post -- I'm referring to the stare decisis comment):
https://able2know.org/topic/131081-84#post-6610411

OK. I've searched enough. That's five of your errors I found. I'm sure there are a lot more, but I think the point is made.

sceletera wrote:
Here is a link to untruth number 6 of yours I referenced.
https://able2know.org/topic/131081-69#post-6602583
Don't be silly. That's the single error of mine that you found.

sceletera wrote:
I will await your links to any 2 errors of mine you have pointed out that are clearly errors.
Pick any two of the five that I linked above.

sceletera wrote:
The lie in your sentence was when you wrote I only found one error of yours.
You may not like it when I tell the truth, but that doesn't make the truth become a lie.

sceletera wrote:
But you seem to have a pattern.
https://able2know.org/topic/131081-70#post-6603671
You stated this:
oralloy wrote:
However, when I'm confronted with an individual who:

a) has never shown me to be wrong,

b) is trying to claim that I am wrong without even making an argument against anything that I say,

c) is making an untrue claim about how I'm always wrong and there are many examples of me being wrong, and

d) cannot point out a single instance of me being wrong,

of course in that situation I point out their inability to point out anything that I'm wrong about.

It is a perfectly reasonable response to such a dishonorable person and tactic.
It seems even if someone has:

a) shown you to be wrong

b) made an argument that clearly supports how you are wrong

c) isn't claiming you are always wrong but only pointing out you have been wrong on more than one occassion

d) can point to more than a single instance of you being

you still respond to them the same way you would as someone who didn't do those things.
You haven't done those things. You've found only one single error on a minor point.

sceletera wrote:
That can hardly be called a reasonable response.
It is reasonable for me to adhere to the facts when someone denies reality.

sceletera wrote:
I would call it a reflex reaction where you refuse to admit you are ever wrong. Hardly a sign of the intelligence you claim to have.
I've always admitted it when someone pointed out that I was wrong about something.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 03:49 pm
@sceletera,
sceletera wrote:
That doesn't ban the AR-15. An AR-15 with a caliber larger than .243 is still usable. I see you are once again, like you did months ago, confusing a subset with the entire set.
The doctors were clearly referring to AR-15s chambered for the .223 alone. It is unlikely that these doctors had any idea that it was even possible for the AR-15 to have different calibers.

But even if they had meant other rifle calibers as well, their statements would still be nonsense, as any round fired from an AR-15 is no more deadly than if it had been fired from any other rifle.

sceletera wrote:
Your claim that the AR-15 is banned when specific caliber can not be used is either a lie or evidence your IQ is not nearly as high as you claim it is. Pick your lie. It has to be one or the other.
No it doesn't. It is very clear that the doctors were talking about the .223 alone.

sceletera wrote:
But the AR-15 is just fine for deer hunting:
https://gunnewsdaily.com/best-ar-15-for-deer-hunting/
True. But that has nothing to do with the untrue claims made by those doctors.

sceletera wrote:
You forgot to add that doctors can't tell what caliber was used by the wounds. (sarcasm intended)
I pointed out the doctors' ignorance elsewhere in my posts.

sceletera wrote:
Of course, that is why the military still uses the M-1. It's the same rifle as the M-16. (sarcasm again intended)
Not the same rifle. But if each rifle fires the same round from the same length barrel (with the same twist rate), the round will perform the same.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 03:53 pm
@sceletera,
sceletera wrote:
I pointed out that the courts have heard your argument and already rejected it.
Are you still going on about this irrelevant trivia?!? Sheesh!

sceletera wrote:
Your repeating an argument that has already been legally rejected doesn't make it valid.
His argument does not need to be made valid, since it is already valid on its own merits.

sceletera wrote:
It only proves you have no legal argument
His presentation of a legal argument is evidence that he has a legal argument.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 03:54 pm
@sceletera,
sceletera wrote:
Says the guy that claims doctors can't tell anything about the wounds they treat.
I've never said anything even remotely like that.
0 Replies
 
sceletera
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 05:18 pm
@Glennn,
Ridiculous assertion? It's a simple fact.

History of the M16 is that Armalite developed the AR-15. It was tested by the US military and adopted as the M16 in the early 1960s. The AR-15 is more like an M-16 than other rifles because the AR-15 IS the M-16.

Let me repeat this for you, the M-16 is one version of the AR-15. It is not available to the general public but it IS an AR-15.

Now perhaps you can tell us how a sparrow is more like a bird than a mouse is.
sceletera
 
  3  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 06:55 pm
@oralloy,
Quote:
The fact these doctors choose to talk about a specific caliber does not change the fact that they don't know what they are talking about.
Do you think the military doesn't know anything about the .223 round? They say the same thing as the doctors about the kind of wound created by that .223 round. The military actually kept pictures of wounds created by the M16 classified until the 1980s

Quote:
Mine's 170. How many points do I have over you?
Are you really going to make that claim? Your logic and English skills certainly don't point to it. Are you some kind of spatial genius? I doubt it because the requires a certain logic that you don't seem to have.


I'm glad you linked to the post about you claiming your fear of spiders would prevent you owning a gun under those standards
Here's a spider:
https://media1.giphy.com/media/ilYH0gWXsP4nm/100.webp?cid=3640f6095bf8904858716c505903d31c

Quote:
sceletera wrote:
You falsely claim homosexuality is a mental disorder.
No. I was pointing out what was listed in the barbaric standards that you referred to.

Homosexuality is NOT listed as a mental disorder under the WHO medical classifications.
http://apps.who.int/classifications/icd10/browse/2016/en#/F65.6
You seem to make factually untrue statements in a lot of your posts and then you repeat them.
You will notice you ignored the homosexuality part of my statement and only went to kinky sex which isn't a mental disorder but a behavioral disorder. Something that is clear from headings in each category.
For someone with such a high IQ your reading comprehension seems to have some failings.

Quote:
sceletera wrote:
You falsely claimed Obama had issued an executive order when it was only executive action.
Sophistry.

Perhaps with your high IQ, you are unfamiliar with the meaning of sophistry.

You stated this:
Quote:
Not untrue. The regulation was put into place because an executive order instructed that it be put into place.

Referring to the regulation and ignoring the executive order is sophistry.

Your statement is false. There was no executive order instructing the regulation be put in place. The sophistry seems to be your claim that there is no factual untruth in your statement.

Here's another spider:
https://media1.giphy.com/media/ilYH0gWXsP4nm/100.webp?cid=3640f6095bf8904858716c505903d31c

Quote:
Not to mention that I was correct on the main point, which was that Obama was trying to take guns from people who clearly were not dangerous in any way.
That is your opinion. There is certainly room for debate on whether you were correct since so many of the underlying assumptions you made turn out to be factually untrue.

It's funny how you think your opinion is fact and if you simply state your opinion it proves the facts presented by others are wrong.

Quote:
You haven't done those things. You've found only one single error on a minor point.

Actually, I have shown you to be wrong on several occasions with specific explanations of why and links to sources showing you wrong.

Quote:
I've always admitted it when someone pointed out that I was wrong about something.

Let's see if you admit that homosexuality is not listed as a disorder.
sceletera
 
  2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 07:07 pm
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

No it doesn't. It is very clear that the doctors were talking about the .223 alone.

Provide the quote and we can examine how clear it is. Until then you are making another claim without evidence.

Quote:
sceletera wrote:
But the AR-15 is just fine for deer hunting:
https://gunnewsdaily.com/best-ar-15-for-deer-hunting/
True. But that has nothing to do with the untrue claims made by those doctors.
But it clearly has everything to do with your false claim that Indiana had banned the AR-15 for use in deer hunting. I notice you avoided that. Is that because:
oralloy wrote:
I've always admitted it when someone pointed out that I was wrong about something.


Quote:

sceletera wrote:
Of course, that is why the military still uses the M-1. It's the same rifle as the M-16. (sarcasm again intended)
Not the same rifle. But if each rifle fires the same round from the same length barrel (with the same twist rate), the round will perform the same.
The military switched to the M-16 because it is more deadly than the M-1. There own tests showed that to be the case.
sceletera
 
  4  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 07:09 pm
@oralloy,
I always find great humor when you make the argument that DC can ban handguns any time they want to.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 09:27 pm
@sceletera,
I have not said anything even remotely like that.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 09:29 pm
@sceletera,
sceletera wrote:
Do you think the military doesn't know anything about the .223 round? They say the same thing as the doctors about the kind of wound created by that .223 round.
That is incorrect. The military does not pretend that the .223 is anything more than a light rifle round.

That makes at least six things that you are wrong about, since you apparently want to keep track.

sceletera wrote:
Are you really going to make that claim?
Nothing wrong with posting the truth.

sceletera wrote:
Your logic and English skills certainly don't point to it.
Yes they do.

sceletera wrote:
Are you some kind of spatial genius?
Probably, among many other things.

sceletera wrote:
I doubt it because the requires a certain logic that you don't seem to have.
My logic is just fine.

sceletera wrote:
Here's a spider:
Luckily your picture doesn't display. You really don't react very well when people post facts. Posting offensive pictures is poor behavior.

sceletera wrote:
Homosexuality is NOT listed as a mental disorder under the WHO medical classifications.
Transgenderism is.

sceletera wrote:
You seem to make factually untrue statements in a lot of your posts and then you repeat them.
No I don't.

sceletera wrote:
You will notice you ignored the homosexuality part of my statement and only went to kinky sex
I did nothing of the sort.

sceletera wrote:
which isn't a mental disorder but a behavioral disorder.
Sophistry.

sceletera wrote:
For someone with such a high IQ your reading comprehension seems to have some failings.
No it doesn't.

sceletera wrote:
Perhaps with your high IQ, you are unfamiliar with the meaning of sophistry.
1. unsound or misleading but clever, plausible, and subtle argument or reasoning
http://www.yourdictionary.com/sophistry

sceletera wrote:
Your statement is false. There was no executive order instructing the regulation be put in place.
Sophistry.

sceletera wrote:
The sophistry seems to be your claim that there is no factual untruth in your statement.
The sophistry is that you are pretending that there is any sort of difference between an executive order and whatever you are claiming this thing was.

sceletera wrote:
That is your opinion.
No, "that anorexia and claustrophobia do not justify depriving someone of guns" is a fact.

sceletera wrote:
There is certainly room for debate on whether you were correct since so many of the underlying assumptions you made turn out to be factually untrue.
None of my underlying assumptions are untrue. Anorexia and claustrophobia do not justify taking someone's guns away from them.

sceletera wrote:
It's funny how you think your opinion is fact and if you simply state your opinion it proves the facts presented by others are wrong.
Your untrue statements are not even remotely factual. I prove them wrong by presenting actual facts. Your dislike of these facts does not make them opinions.

sceletera wrote:
Actually, I have shown you to be wrong on several occasions with specific explanations of why and links to sources showing you wrong.
No you haven't.

sceletera wrote:
Let's see if you admit that homosexuality is not listed as a disorder.
It isn't. But transgenderism is.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Fri 23 Nov, 2018 09:32 pm
@sceletera,
sceletera wrote:
Provide the quote and we can examine how clear it is.
I wasn't remembering one specific quote, but this 60 Minutes piece is a good representation of the sort of hysterical nonsense that I'm remembering:
http://cbsnews.com/news/ar-15-used-mass-shootings-weapon-of-choice-60-minutes

Aside: While getting that link, I also found this one, which doesn't include any hysterical nonsense about AR-15 rounds, but is noteworthy in that it calls for people's civil rights to be violated for no reason:
http://annals.org/aim/fullarticle/2709820/reducing-firearm-injuries-deaths-united-states-position-paper-from-american

sceletera wrote:
Until then you are making another claim without evidence.
You cannot point to a single claim that I have made without having evidence to back it up.

sceletera wrote:
But it clearly has everything to do with your false claim that Indiana had banned the AR-15 for use in deer hunting.
Sophistry. The doctors were clearly referring to the .223 alone.

sceletera wrote:
I notice you avoided that. Is that because:
oralloy wrote:
I've always admitted it when someone pointed out that I was wrong about something.
It's because the doctors were clearly referring to the .223 alone.

sceletera wrote:
The military switched to the M-16 because it is more deadly than the M-1. There own tests showed that to be the case.
Feel free to provide a cite to back that up.

Not that it matters. The same round will perform equally from an M-1 or M-16. The only thing that might make the M-16 deadlier is the large magazine that is attached to it.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 24 Nov, 2018 09:29 am
@sceletera,
Quote:
The AR-15 is more like an M-16 than other rifles because the AR-15 IS the M-16.

You're pretending to not understand the question. You are being asked to justify your belief that a semiautomatic AR-15 should be banned because it is like an M-16. The M-16 is a select-fire rifle, while an AR-15 is not a select-fire rifle. So go ahead and articulate your justification for believing that they are one and the same.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2018 09:42 am
@sceletera,
Quote:
You seem to imply that owning a gun does allow you to craft Constitutional policy. Certainly doctors have as much right as gun owners do. Shouldn't both sides be entitled to state their opinions?

You are not interested in their opinion on guns as gun owners, you are interested their opinion as Doctors and what Doctors think the answer is the gun violence and or our Constitutional Rights.

Quote:
Your statement is patently false and not supported by any study.

There are still far to many people who die each year due to problems in the medical field. Until they can get their own house in order, they have no place dictating my Constitutional Rights.

Quote:
First of all, if you want to compare doctors to guns then you are clearly stating "guns kill people" since you are clearly stating that doctors kill people. Are you conceding that the argument that people kill people not guns is a false argument but it is actually guns that do kill people?

I'm only using the language of the anti-gun groups. They are the ones who think the guns are evil and cause the issues, not the people who actually do the shooting.

Quote:
What you are actually doing in comparing doctors to guns is comparing persons to an instance. Either you should be comparing the instances of guns to the instances of medical interactions or you should be comparing those that could possibly make a medical mistake to those that own a gun.

If you are concerned with the comparison between Dr's and guns, then get the gun groups to stop blaming the guns and instead blame the people who did the shooting.
I don't want to give the impression I don't trust Doctors, my grandfather was a surgeon in Chicago and my sister is a nurse in Az. Medical, military and police professionals all run in my family. I'm the blacksheep who got into working with computers.

Quote:
What you are actually doing in comparing doctors to guns is comparing persons to an instance. Either you should be comparing the instances of guns to the instances of medical interactions or you should be comparing those that could possibly make a medical mistake to those that own a gun.

We could compare the instances of guns, but you wouldn't like the #'s. There are more guns in the US than there are people. It is estimated that there are over 300 million guns in the US, if those guns are owned by only 75 million people, I think there are more gun owners than the studies show. Most people I know who own guns wouldn't answer those types of questions. If 75 million people own 300 million guns, and there are about 11k murders per year, then it sounds like guns are not as deadly as you make them out to be. We won't even get into "instances" or contacts with guns because we can't really count how often people handle their guns. We do know that there are gun ranges all over the US that are open 7 days a week and if you have ever been to a gun range on the weekend, they are packed. How many gun usage instances at a gun range do you think there are on an average weekend? Hundreds, thousands, hundreds of thousands if you look at an entire year, you are looking at the millions.


Quote:
Now we have looked at the numbers.

We have looked at the numbers and they don't favor what the anti-gun people want to do. On the low side, we have 75 million legal gun owners who own about 300 million firearms. 60k total gun deaths per year, a majority of which are suicide, leaving about 12k murders. The question is, who commits a majority of those murders and where do they take place? How about the inner cities, where a majority of those who are shot are not shot by legal gun owners, so limiting legal owners Constitutional Rights will do nothing to prevent those who are doing a majority of the killing from future killings.

Quote:
But just for the sake of being ridiculous let's make a conclusion as baseless as yours. Your misuse of numbers is more deadly to people than doctors are.

The ridiculous thing is thinking doctors should be allowed to pass judgement on our Constitutional Rights based on their ability to fix a bullet wound.

Quote:
(Although there is a possibility I could be correct, since you are using your numbers to support giving more opportunity for people to use guns to kill people.)

Talk about a line of bullshit. I'm for allowing people the right to self-defense with the weapon of their choice. Your anti-Constitutional rhetoric is far more dangerous than anything I have said. Self-defense isn't about attacking, it's about preventing an attack on me and the ones I love.



0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Thu 13 Dec, 2018 01:38 am
Quote:
This year, 113 people have been killed or injured in school shootings in the United States.

That's the sobering finding of a project to count the annual toll of gun attacks in schools.

At the beginning of 2018, Education Week, a journal covering education in the US, began to track school shootings - and has since recorded 23 incidents where there were deaths or injuries.

With many parts of the US having about 180 school days per year, it means, on average, a shooting once every eight school days.

Another database recording school shootings says 2018 has had the highest number of incidents ever recorded, in figures going back to 1970.

That database, from the US Center for Homeland Defense and Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema), uses a different way of identifying gun incidents in school, and says this year there have been 94.


https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46507514
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Fri 14 Dec, 2018 03:31 am
Parkland’s David Hogg sends ‘thoughts and prayers' to the NRA's 'PR team’ after accused Russian agent pleads guilty
BY MORGAN GSTALTER, December 13, 2018

Parkland, Fla., school shooting survivor David Hogg offered "thoughts and prayers" to the public relations team at the National Rifle Association (NRA) on Thursday after a Russian woman with ties to the group pleaded guilty in federal court to acting as an unregistered foreign agent.

Maria Butina, 30, was arrested and charged earlier this year, originally pleading not guilty to accusations that she sought to infiltrate and influence American political organizations, including the NRA.

Hogg survived the Feb. 14 school shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, which killed 17 people.

He and his classmates have since become outspoken critics of the NRA in the battle for gun-law reform.

Hogg has mocked the NRA and spokeswoman Dana Loesch on Twitter over news reports on Butina.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) said Butina traveled to attend a "Gun Rights Organization convention," later identified as a NRA convention, in 2015. Butina also allegedly invited powerful NRA members to Moscow.

The NRA has not made a public statement about Butina since her arrest. The Hill has reached out for comment regarding her guilty plea.

Butina admitted in a District Court for the District of Columbia on Thursday that she conspired with and acted under the direction of a Russian government official to establish unofficial lines of communications with people able to influence U.S. politics leading up to the 2016 presidential election.

The court documents list an American as her co-conspirator, identified by her attorneys as Paul Erickson, a GOP political operative with whom Butina had a romantic relationship.

She faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000. 

farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Fri 14 Dec, 2018 03:35 am
@Olivier5,
Its always good to have some outside professional help when your club's mission is to infiltrate and remold the political process
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/14/2021 at 12:19:55