So when is he getting a personal call from Yam Tits, telling him he didn’t a great job and is a true Murikan? Possibly offering a pardon and job too?
VANCE is a shit name
This Vance has spent the last decade trying to de-Trumpify the Republican Party:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Vance_(politician)
This guy is J.D. Vance’s cousin and volunteered to fight in Ukraine, was really upset with J.D. about Ukraine:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nate_Vance
During his three years in Ukraine, Nate Vance fought in some of the war’s fiercest battles. According to reports, he saw frontline combat in major engagements including the battles of Kupiansk, Bakhmut, Avdiivka, and Pokrovsk – hotspots in eastern Ukraine that experienced intense and sustained fighting.[16][17]
Vance remained in Ukraine until early 2025. He was formally discharged from Ukrainian service in January 2025.[18]
Well our current VANCE killed the dog at one house for no fucking reason
There is some level of divine irony in the fact that the vice president went from “JD who?” to now “Oh same as that killer guy” in common parlance. That smoke-eyed, infant-faced, nazi sofa-molester can’t catch a break and I’m here for it.
I do so love this comment - thank you! LOL
I sometimes visit the successor site of the_donald to see them erase their memories in real-time. They were 1000% sure it was a Dem black person yesterday. They even had insider info from police connections. Today it’s crickets and false flag.
(There’s always, always, without fail, accusations of false flags. From CIA, from FBI, from antifa, from George Soros, from Bill Gates. How do you even talk to people like this?)
You don’t it will only tighten the brainwashing screws even tighter
Alex Jones sets a lot of that up too. It’s really disturbing. He’ll talk about how there’s going to be a false flag shooting preemptively any time there is a big protest or similar planned. It’s almost like he’s outright calling for it to happen, giving permission to some psycho with a gun because they know he’ll cover for them.
Oh I don’t doubt Alex Jones is still at it. I don’t follow closely at all to the conservative-sphere but they all absolutely incite stochastic terrorism.
And they all are quick to discard previous and current beliefs as if they never happened. It’s kind of crazy how efficient they all are at converging on the same new belief when the previous one becomes too indefensible.
What site is that? Truth social?
Pm’ed you the site. I don’t want to draw more attention to it. I suspect the posting is highly curated anyway. It’s more of a bubble than r/conservative.
I got it, thanks. But yeah that place sounds terrible. Don’t think I need to visit there.
There is no way Trump will pardon him
Other famous predictions I’ve made include:
-
There is no way Trump will get elected
-
There is no way Trump will get elected again
As President, Trump can only pardon people for federal crimes, not state.
If he wants to pardon people for Minnesota state crimes, he has to run to be governor of Minnesota, win, and he still can’t do pardons single-handedly then:
https://mn.gov/crc/about-us/board-pardons.jsp
The Minnesota Board of Pardons (Board), which consists of the Governor, the Minnesota Attorney General, and the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court, may grant a pardon or commutation to individuals who meet basic eligibility requirements set forth in state law. To receive a pardon or commutation, the Governor and at least one other Board member must vote in favor of clemency.
See, the mistake you’re making is thinking Trump gives a fuck about the law.
The mistake you’re making is thinking Minnesotans will let this man walk free because the Pretender in Chief says so.
We’ll stick this asshole with the 28th Virginia battle flag and they can come and try to collect him.
Interesting times ahead.
More frightening, I think. I worry most for the children and young adults in the US.
Why do you need an entire council to pardon a local menace, but you only need one high-functioning sociopath to release a nation-wide criminal?
Because a lot of states, Minnesota included, have more sensible processes and rules than the federal government.
There’s no law saying Trump can’t run for governor of all 50 states simultaneously. Oh, wait, there is? Well there’s no law saying Trump can’t break the law
There’s no rule that says a dog can’t play basketball!
And democrat leaders are like “Don’t worry everyone, the rule-book CLEARLY states that a dog can’t play basketball, if he even tries it will be a violation of our sacred institution” As the dog is dunking in the background and scoring points.
and biting the other team while his fans cheer
Can’t even imagine how quickly everything would go to shit if he actually pardoned him (state charges anyway so can’t happen). Instant green light to a third of the country that they “can” just kill democrats.
-
Man you remember when Michael Reinoehl shot a white nationalist in self defense and was gun downed in a hail of bullets the second LEOs got site of him.
Pepperidge Farms remembers.
I remember reading about that. Quite a lot of fuckery, though I’m also not surprised. Despite Portland being very blue, the surrounding rural area is deep red with right-wing nutjobs. Up there with Michigan-crazy right-wing militia. So odds are good police knew the guy from Saturday nights…
Kid gloves for white nationalists, jackboots for the rest of us
The reasoning is implicit, but obvious.
The guy he killed was a moron but Michael Reinoehl was a menace to society
I kinda expected a dude who dressed as a cop to murder multiple people to have a better plan than “run and hide in the woods.” I was totally expecting a long, drawn out manhunt. Glad it’s over and people can sleep peacefully though
Every last one of these insane fucks thinks themselves some kind of chosen, picked-by-god leader of the apocalypse main-character in the stupidest fairy-tale they never grew out of. They aren’t just narcissistic, that implies some level of brain-power. This is a whole other level of self-absorption that turns off conscious thought.
I’m not even being hyperbolic, fundamentalist Christian doctrine is meant to strip of you thinking, of rationalization. You can be a very smart person and not have conscious thought about critical aspects of life or the world around you. Thinking isn’t the same as being able to drive cars, go to work, plan murders, etc. You can do all that stuff without having a mental dialogue or monolog that lets you reason out ideas in your head. You only get that inner-dialogue if you’ve grown up in an environment that allows for it, by training you to question and figure things out on your own.
Religion doesn’t let you figure things out on your own. You exist as this shape moving through life just waiting to die so Jesus can wrap you up in his arms and rock you to sleep like a lil’ baby or something. It’s a death cult. There is no value towards life of anyone. I was raised in that environment but never quite got the same incentive for heaven because it never made sense and seemed like eternal bliss would be a boring nightmare you could never wake up from.
Minnesota has a lot of woods to run off and hide in.
How much of that is within walking distance of the vehicle he abandoned though?
Grew up a stones throw away. Bluntly, not much. It’s a fairly dense suburban area. The closest densely wooded area is just the two county parks, one about 3 miles East and the other about 2.5 miles south. Neither is very big though. For a larger area there’s a nature preserve about 15 miles west, but that’s still pretty limited.
True wilderness is about 60 miles north.
Now Sibley county, where he was found, is quite rural but not wild at all, similar distance to wilderness.
walking distance
How much time?
It’s been a few hours but idk how far he was found from there. I imagine we’ll have more detail tomorrow, so speculating seems silly.
There’s supposed to be a press conference this evening in a few minutes.
it was meant more tongue in cheek
He might have but was interrupted in the middle of the second murder.
He wasn’t going to stop with two. Had a list of ~70 people he wanted dead for either being Democrats or providing medical care to women. Thr guy’s plan didn’t involve getting away; just a lot more dead people.
Why did he assume he could get away with about seventy people, like maybe over a VERY drawn out period but that’s a list comparable to some of the most accomplished serial killers operating for decades. At most you could maybe get away with five or so and that’s moving from one target to another killing at night with no stopping.
Thank the gods these motherfuckers have the reasoning abilities of a ham sandwich.
I kinda expected a dude who dressed as a cop to murder multiple people to have a better plan than “run and hide in the woods.
It’s almost like he isn’t very good at thinking things through.
People who do wild shit like this generally don’t have a plan for afterwards.
Trump considering a pardon in 3…2…1…
If they get him on state charges, only the Minnesota Board of Pardons can do that. Which consists of the Governor Tim Walz (D), Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court (appointee of Walz), and Minnesota Attorney General (D)
trump doesn’t get to pardon state charges, so have fun with that.
Who’s going to stop him? There has been a lack of that lately.
I would normally post the “That’s not how this works. that’s not how any of this works” meme in response to this…
But the rule of law is over. We’re still masquerading as if the music hasn’t stopped. It’s not clear to me what law, even means. So like sure, maybe he will. It’s absurd even in principle, but here we are dancing in the absurd.
If a government isn’t bound by laws, them laws have no meaning.
Yep, same. I am continuously baffled at people who are surprised when the regime does something wildly illegal and outside of their jurisdiction. The question is no longer “who’s going to let them”. The question has become “who’s going to stop them”, and the answer thus far, in the context of any part of our officialdom, is “absolutely fucking nobody”.
There is a concept of “rule of law” vs “rule by law”.
You are confused about “law” because what you are seeing now is the latter.
This is what kings did ~250 years ago in Europe. But then they started getting their heads cut off and quickly realized they had to change their approach. Some did, some died.
Many people on Lemmy will tell us “bring out the guillotines”. I would love that. But I don’t think it’s that simple anymore. We have consolidated wealth and power in such a way that even rolling heads will not solve it.
The state prisons of MN? They would be holding him and have no reason to release him on Trumps orders since they don’t work for him.
Best I can imagine is that the Feds charge him with murder, Trump pardons him for the federal charges, the state charges him with murder, then the SCOTUS rules that he can’t be charged due to double jeopardy.
I don’t think he can be tried by the state and the feds for the same crime (double jeopardy).
You can absolutely under the current law be tried by both the state and federal government for the same action if that action violates both state and federal law. See the 2019 case Gamble v. United States for the most recent ruling on it, but the idea is that the state and federal government are “separate sovereigns” and so it doesn’t violate the double jeopardy clause.
In practice doing so is unusual and DoJ guidelines discourage federal prosecutors from pursuing cases that are prosecuted by the states, but there is no law preventing them from doing so.
Ahh, thanks for the citation! That’s interesting. I thought I’d heard otherwise in some case where there was debate over whether the federal or state government would try the case recently. Maybe it was just to avoid going at the same time then and who would go first.
Doesn’t mean he won’t try. You’ve got to remember- trump is very stupid.
Given the number of times “Trump will pardon him” is posted on lemmy for state crimes, so are most lemmykins.
It’s rhetorical at this point. “trump will pardon him” is more or less an indictment that he & his party approve of these sort of crimes.
I guess a better remark would be “If trump were allowed, he’d pardon them. He’ll still try, probably.”
Just like he couldn’t send Venezuelan green card holders to a prison in El Salvador with no due process, right?
That’s very different There’s literally no mechanism that exists for him to pardon somebody accused of a state crime.
Trump can’t break the laws of physics because he broke other laws.
Good thing he can’t touch state charges.
I’m glad he was taken alive
Let him rot in a cell rather than becoming a martyr
At least, until the Tangerine Toddler makes noises about pardoning him…
Murder charges with life in prison would be sent out by the State, not pardonable by the president
What a crazy world you live in.
Now vigilante murder is bad when the victim is “one of us,” but when it was “one of them,” it was all cheers and applause.
This kind of comment is a hallmark of a 2-dimensional mind, a linear thinking system that doesn’t look at outcomes, people, lives or anything other than what group you belong to and how accepted you are in that group.
I can rip your logic to shreds if you want to dance. If you really, truly, actually think you have a point and moral, ethical framework to make some kind of argument, I can dismantle it and make you very frustrated. Just say the word and I’ll make you painfully aware that you’re not just ill-informed, but a victim of media you choose to consume and as a result are incapable of juggling more than one idea in your head at a time and this is why you’re miserable.
Sure, let’s go. But if your argument is as strong as you seem to think it is, you shouldn’t need to wrap it in this condescension and chest-thumping. I’m always open for an debate - but if the tone stays at “let me enlighten your dumb little mind,” I’ll check out rather quick. I’m here to discuss ideas, not trade insults.
Now, I’ll be the first to admit my original comment was intentionally provocative but I stand by the underlying point: I oppose vigilante violence across the board, regardless of who the target is. And if someone cheered for Luigi’s killing but condemns this one, I think that’s morally inconsistent. That’s what I was calling out - a double standard that, to me atleast, reeks of tribalism more than principle.
I don’t have an argument, I a response to whatever your argument is, so that’s where i will get clarity. Warning though, this takes actual reading so if you bemoan reading more than a paragraph this won’t be fun for either of us. I say that ahead of time because the vast majority of internet discussions about contentious topics are ending with “I ain’t reading all that” or “just put it in the bag” and other short-attention span, brain rot from every side of every political spectrum, which is why people don’t talk anymore and why divisions are widening.
So to make sure I have your stance right: You see a lot of people “cheering” for Luigi Mangione, and no sympathy towards his victim, and you now see another killer getting mass condemnation and sympathy for his victims, and you see inconsistency in how people are treating these incidents because of which side of the political spectrum the individuals seem to represent, is that correct?
is that correct?
Mostly yeah.
It’s not unclear to me why people feel differently toward the victims - what I’m pointing out is the inconsistency in how people react to vigilante violence itself. I’m not asking anyone to mourn a murdered healthcare CEO - though I do question the celebration of it. And likewise, I feel sympathy for the recently murdered politicians.
What I’m criticizing is the double standard in how the shooters are treated.
And it’s not really about political leanings specifically, even if there’s overlap. It’s more about the broader “us vs. them” mentality - where people’s moral judgment flips depending on which side they perceive someone to be on.
Okay this went a totally different direction than how you made it sound at outset, which you presented like an “our guy versus your guy” argument and why you’re reaping downvotes and people willing to challenge you.
what I’m pointing out is the inconsistency in how people react to vigilante violence itself
So then is this what your actual problem is, that there is any celebration of vigilantism at all?
I have a tendency to present my views in a provocative way, so I don’t exactly fault people for misreading me or my intentions.
that there is any celebration of vigilantism at all?
Pretty much, yeah. I think violence should, for the most part, only ever be a response to immediate violence - not a tool for political or ideological expression. I believe in due process, reason, and honest discourse as the means to influence those we oppose - not bullets, or even fists. So when people cheer for acts of vigilante violence, even against those they despise, I see that as both morally bankrupt and strategically self-defeating. It undermines the claim to the moral high ground and reinforces the very hostility many claim to oppose. We should hold ourselves to the same standards as we do others.
Only one side uses the term “one of us” like they’re on a football team
I bet you think what’s happening in Israel is bad
yeah, yeah, everyone admires you, Mr. Shitdontstank.
