You didn't even read it, did you? You just disregarded it because it doesn't fit your world view. You are pathetic, scum of the earth. People present you with scientifically backed evidence showing how the world really is and you disregard it because it is brought to your attention by a group of people you find inferior to you.
That whole post is essentially everyone taking it seriously are admitting to being worthless little weeby shits. It is so glorious when they put themselves like that!
Well the mayos were going to do their usual and turn London into a crime-infested shithole complete with rioting, so they had to throw the white ape a banana to keep the beast sedated.
Robinson wasn't told what specific parts of his activity at the court had been potentially prejudicial to a jury - meaning nobody to this day knows exactly what he did wrong.
The absolute state of British justice after thousands of years of wearing poofy wigs
Tbh the definition of contempt of court is pretty much "whatever pisses the judge off". Also even in America it's like the one reason you can be held in jail without a jury trial.
You forgot to mention that in the case of contempt in the US at least the judge acts as the judge, the jury, and the witness to the crime. Seems loopy to me that they don't have to recuse themselves.
He'll probably still get done for contempt of court and we'll see angry people and some light rioting as people are treating this as if he was found innocent rather than the case just being retried.
Robinson wasn't told what specific parts of his activity at the court had been potentially prejudicial to a jury - meaning nobody to this day knows exactly what he did wrong.
He got sentenced to contempt while on a suspended sentence for the exact same thing. Everyone knows it's a fuck around which is why the second judge sentenced him five hours after the alleged crime. That didn't obey criminal procedures so that's why he gets a new trial.
He's actually more fucked because the judges have suggested he should face a greater penalty.
Yet nobody knows what exactly he did wrong according to the article, which makes the suggestion of a greater penalty even more rediculous. That and the fact he was arrested charged, tried and sentenced in a 5 hour period to start with...
They don't know exactly, but given he stood on the steps of a courthouse broadcasting about evil muslim paedophile gangs and potentially caused a mistrial, we can make a pretty fucking good guess.
It seems as though the criminal justice system took a pretty good guess as well, since it managed to rush an arrest, trial and pass a lengthy (by English standards) sentence in less time required to take a flight from Heathrow, and nobody has yet been able to tell him exactly what action was prejudicial to the integrity of the trial, because according to the article, nobody actually knows for sure (thought it might have been his filming of the steps of the court!!).
Which is why there was an appeal which was successful, and now they'll do it properly and convict him all over again. That doesn't mean it's not incredibly fucking obvious why he was found in contempt of court, especially since it was the exact same reason he was convicted of it the first time as well.
incredibly fucking obvious why he was found in contempt of court
For filming the steps of the court? I love the British legal system: old men in drag, wigs and gowns, who's steps and spoken words are not to be recorded except by writing or jaunty watercolors.
Jesus christ, why are so many americans incapable of understanding that other countries have different laws to them? In the UK, and a bunch of other countries as well, there are laws against there being any prejudicial reporting of a trial in progress, because it can then be argued that it stopped the defendants from receiving a fair trial. If this does happen then it's a mistrial and the charges are thrown out.
So he wasn't 'filming the steps of a court', he was doing his solid best to get a bunch of people charged with paedophilia set free all so he could play the martyr to a bunch of alt-right twats in the US and hoover up that sweet sweet patreon money. And surprise surprise, it's worked a treat.
I'm not American, but from one of these funny European countries where our liberty isn't decided by an ill tempered old queen in a curly wig and Santa's robes, or even by a jury for that matter!
he was doing his solid best to get a bunch of people charged with paedophilia set free
It doesn't sound like even with all the heavy handed theatrics and costumes, that the system is very robust in that case.
he wasn't 'filming the steps of a court'
That is exactly what the article cites him as doing in several places.
who are clearly very easily distracted and prejudiced it would seem.
Well that's a stupid conclusion. It's a slam dunk conviction. Prejudicial reporting isn't allowed, he did it very deliberately and did it while on suspended sentence for the exact same crime. If you want to argue the toss about whether there should be a law for contempt of court feel free, but he absolutely broke that law.
That is exactly what the article cites him as doing in several places.
I'm going to give your legal opinion all the consideration it deserves.
It doesn't sound like even with all the heavy handed theatrics and costumes, that the system is very robust in that case.
And while there he broadcast to thousands of people about an ongoing trial calling the defendants an evil muslim paedophile grooming gang. Call me crazy, but I think that might, just might, be the bit that the judge considered prejudicial reporting.
Was the jury watching his livestream instead of the court proceedings?
It was put on to social media so yes, it had the potential to. Also, you get that a law against prejudicial reporting is just going to be a blanket ban, right? You can work that out? They're not going to go 'this is against the law, except ooh, you did it at 3pm so I guess it's ok.'
If I call the defendants rapist muslims probably belonging to some sort of organized gang that grooms children for sex, am I now setting those lovely parts of the multicultural melting pot of the UK free?
Oh, so the rule of law in the UK is not applied equally? This guy (who I'd not heard of till he got the speediest of quick trials and sentences) must be very important that he gets special treatment whereas I get none for say suggesting that the judge involved is a ridiculous wig wearing queen, and the disgusting creatures he stands in judgment over are probably muslims, and probably part of a gang that grooms children for sex.
Oh, so the rule of law in the UK is not applied equally?
Yes, exactly. To 'report' something people have to view the report. Tommy Robinson has hundreds of thousands of credulous idiots following him. In contrast when you make a comment, me, maybe two other people read it, think 'idiot' and go about their day. You're safe from breaking the law due to your complete lack of consequence.
You're safe from breaking the law due to your complete lack of consequence.
I'm safe from breaking the law because your silly laws don't apply to me in any way or form. I can report to any number of people whatever I like about the proceedings of a court case there without any threat of 5 hour justice.
I know I know, I'm just a little busy plotting all sorts of other anarchistic activities beyond completely derailing your delightful criminal justice system... you know, stuff like not having a TV license, purchasing spoons without photo ID, sporting decent dental work, driving on the right, not feeling fucking carpet under my feet when I step out of the shower... not getting stabbed or doused in acid by 'youths' when I step out to get some groceries... possessing the relative certainty that the kebabs down the street from me probably aren't grooming children for sex. That sort of crazy shit.
Dude, people know what he did wrong, he filmed it. His previous judge was very clear he was not to again try to film defendants, mention their religion or their names, etc at another 'restricted trial'. The judge at the most recent contempt case didn't explicitly list the behaviors he was finding in contempt. Which was wrong, but is not the same as saying what he did is a mystery.
The dumbest thing is that the rules are to keep a defense attorney from being able to say the men didn't get a fair trial if they get convicted. I mean, do you want justice for the girls or do you want to stir shit? I think we know what the answer is.
He tried to interfere with a trial while it was ongoing. There you go. Spoiler alert. He knows exactly what he did. He just doesn't want to go to jail for it.
And yet the state is prepared to take a year of his life lol
And you've got faggots here in this very thread defending this just because they don't like this wankers politics - and they're mostly American to boot which is just delicious irony, because for all their constant reeing about 'Drumph', this is actually how you end up with the dystopic future they went their beds about in fear: When the government can jail you without even having to provide a bloody reason.
It is. It's never been anything other than conservative. They employed Gavin McInnes and Lauren Southern. The Proud Boys are a Rebel Media project. The Rebel is far-right.
It is. It's never been anything other than conservative. They employed Gavin McInnes and Lauren Southern. The Proud Boys are a Rebel Media project. The Rebel is far-right.
TIL that anything left of the CBC (everything) is now far right. Seriously its just a smear trying to equate them with Nazis. Fuck right off.
No, it's accurate. The Rebel advocates for the conservative position 100% of the time. They're like the right-wing Guardian. "Far-right" is a loaded term but it's accurate to say that they're definitely definitely not on the left or in the center.
for those keeping track at home, lauren southern is literally an ethnonationalist, but to the rightoid mind it's still a "smear" to call her employer "far-right"
So you linked to a thread with no video, which means you didn't even look, and you linked to the fact that whites commit less crimes? Oh noez, shes a real Nazi!
no no, you didnt understand, i admitted was wrong to call her "far-right." i agree with you that being a crypto-fascist who wants a white ethnostate is a perfectly mainstream conservative position. youre entirely correct.
Didn't he get into trouble for violating a reporting restriction? I haven't followed this at all, but if that's what happened and he was held in contempt of court then this just sounds like SOP, aside from the judge arresting him too soon I suppose.
nah, he was reporting outside the courthouse and the judge said he was violating the ban, so he said ok he'd take down the livestream, then the judge had him arrested, they told his lawyer they were releasing him so not to bother driving over, then they tried him without his lawyer and found him guilty in like 2 hours, then sentenced him to something absurd and jailed him, then moved him to a majority muslim prison where he was obviously in danger of being murdered
the appeals judge said there were serious problems with his arrest, his trial, his sentence and his incarceration and that those problems were more than just procedural, and found essentially that the judge who had him jailed had violated proper procedure because they just didn't like Tommy
Hahaha, you fucking moron. You actually believe that, don't you? You think stuff like 'then moved him to a majority muslim prison where he was obviously in danger of being murdered' is something that actually happened, you complete knobhead. Go back to snorting oxycontin and molesting your cousin and stop worrying about the UK, a country you will never be within a thousand miles of.
yes, i'm sure you will convince alot of people with that reasoned and detailed rebuttal
the judge said he was improperly treated after being incarcerated, take it up with him if you don't agree. i'm reporting the fact of his statement to someone here who said they hadn't heard it.
What jails are majority Muslim? Also I'm like 90% sure judges don't get to pick what jail you go to. How does this conspiracy work? Judges are separate from the elected government. How did they trick him into breaking the exact law he was serving a suspended sentence for? Why did he plead guilty?
The appeals judges said you skipped one procedural step, which they blasted Tommy's lawyers for because they knew it was being skipped and just waited so they could appeal, and said that you handed down a summary judgement in difficult circumstances which was understandable but we don't think you should.
Then they said he should have another trial and by the way if you're looking for reasons to send him to jail, here's a bunch of reasons we think you should think about doing it for a long time.
He's in legal terms, mega fucked and you should probably practice your reading comprehension.
The appeals judges said you skipped one procedural step
that's not accurate. read the judgement. there are over 2 dozen problems with the proceedings listed and the appeals court specifically says that they were more than procedural problems, using that very word. It was also pointed out that "fairness was sacrificed on the altar of celerity" and also that there was no need to be in such a hurry with the trial in the first place. Also that Tommy was unfairly denied access to a dentist, visitors, letters, etc while incarcerated because the judge mis-handled the type of conviction involved. Additionally, the original judge levied a fine on Tommy that is actually illegal to levy for contempt of court, etc etc.
I could go on and on, but I don't need to because you can just read the ruling yourself. Probably best to do that before you say another word on it. The problems were not just procedural, the original judge was literally inventing law as well as mis-applying law, as well as rushing a trial for no reason so that all those things would go unexamined
you should probably practice your reading comprehension.
hilarious coming from someone talking about something they haven't read at all
In the UK you can't have prejudicial reporting of a trial in progress, it can cause a mistrial. So Robinson stood on the steps of the courthouse and broadcast to tens of thousands about evil muslim grooming gangs, which could've potentially caused a mistrial. He did this while on suspended sentence for contempt of court for doing the exact same thing.
If the guy was serious about exposing Asian grooming gangs he’d a waited until the trial finished like all other journalists/reporters. He is an idiot that could have jeopardised a full trial. I don’t agree with the way the justice system expedited the contempt of court that day and took their sweet time to deal with the appeal. They’ve actually helped the guy gain more support.
This kind of reminds me of the Steubenville Rape Case, when many people where shocked and enraged that the hacker who released student personal info (names, addresses, SS info; including someone who wasn't even at the party but was pegged guilty because of this) and was charged with a crime that had a higher penalty that the rapists got.
But now i am seeing overlap of the people mad with Steubenville, who are tickled Robinson was arrested. He did something less invasive involving rape on a magnitudes larger scale.
Where is the discrepancy in consistency with this sort of topic?
Where is the discrepancy in consistency with this sort of topic?
They were told he was a Bad Person by the media. It's really as simple as that. That's enough for most people who don't instinctively distrust the news media. It could work in the other direction, too. If they had insisted he was a brave activist bringing justice, I'm sure the same people would love Tommy. And we do have cases of non-"far right" citizens doing the same thing he did and not receiving any consequences. Of course, the case I'm thinking of, the person happened to a Sikh... hmm... 🤔
122 comments
1 SnapshillBot 2018-08-01
You didn't even read it, did you? You just disregarded it because it doesn't fit your world view. You are pathetic, scum of the earth. People present you with scientifically backed evidence showing how the world really is and you disregard it because it is brought to your attention by a group of people you find inferior to you.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 marnchamquatre 2018-08-01
Ty snappy
1 BussyShillBot 2018-08-01
That whole post is essentially everyone taking it seriously are admitting to being worthless little weeby shits. It is so glorious when they put themselves like that!
Outlines:
I am a bot for posting Outline.com links. github / Contact for info or issues
1 Starship_Litterbox_C 2018-08-01
Well the mayos were going to do their usual and turn London into a crime-infested shithole complete with rioting, so they had to throw the white ape a banana to keep the beast sedated.
1 subpoutine 2018-08-01
miggers gonna mig
1 EvanHarper 2018-08-01
i wanna be sedated
1 multiplesifl 2018-08-01
Nothin' to do, nowhere to go, oh!
1 a_thumb_in_my_bum 2018-08-01
Oi!
1 NoahHaders 2018-08-01
You got a loicense for that conviction?
1 swickerdance 2018-08-01
Fookin 'ell m8, ois-abow'a ge' ih', oi sweh
1 Imgur_Lurker 2018-08-01
The absolute state of British justice after thousands of years of wearing poofy wigs
1 Themackingjesus 2018-08-01
He’s white and that’s wrong.
1 ihavebigBob 2018-08-01
FTFY
1 wayback000 2018-08-01
Doing gods work
1 richmomz 2018-08-01
Deus vult
1 watermark02 2018-08-01
Tbh the definition of contempt of court is pretty much "whatever pisses the judge off". Also even in America it's like the one reason you can be held in jail without a jury trial.
1 EvanHarper 2018-08-01
no no, Tommy Robinson is a martyr
1 ISIS-Got-Nothing 2018-08-01
Patron saint of excess chromosomes
1 EvanHarper 2018-08-01
isn't that alfie evans
1 General_Insomnia 2018-08-01
You forgot to mention that in the case of contempt in the US at least the judge acts as the judge, the jury, and the witness to the crime. Seems loopy to me that they don't have to recuse themselves.
1 AlveolarPressure 2018-08-01
Well that and Gitmo
1 Stenwalden 2018-08-01
So its pretty much the equivalent of a forum moderator cry screaming "FUCK YOU! YOU ARE WRONG! FUCK YOU!" and giving you a temp ban?
1 lurker093287h 2018-08-01
This explains it fairly briefly
1 Suidoken69 2018-08-01
He'll probably still get done for contempt of court and we'll see angry people and some light rioting as people are treating this as if he was found innocent rather than the case just being retried.
1 SpotNL 2018-08-01
Yeah, this drama is a slow cooker.He essentially got marinated today to give it a lot more flavor later.
1 zenicaone 2018-08-01
I mean how can he be - he a good boy - dindu nuffin - judge was right.
1 GadolBoobies 2018-08-01
Lennomf is finished!
1 shitINtheCANDYdish 2018-08-01
Funny...does the BBC normally name the Jew?
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
lol
1 Hemingwavy 2018-08-01
He got sentenced to contempt while on a suspended sentence for the exact same thing. Everyone knows it's a fuck around which is why the second judge sentenced him five hours after the alleged crime. That didn't obey criminal procedures so that's why he gets a new trial.
He's actually more fucked because the judges have suggested he should face a greater penalty.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
Yet nobody knows what exactly he did wrong according to the article, which makes the suggestion of a greater penalty even more rediculous. That and the fact he was arrested charged, tried and sentenced in a 5 hour period to start with...
1 Brodo00095 2018-08-01
reeeeediculous
1 dramasexual 2018-08-01
They know what we did wrong, they just need to present it properly to the court and etc.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
They don't know exactly, but given he stood on the steps of a courthouse broadcasting about evil muslim paedophile gangs and potentially caused a mistrial, we can make a pretty fucking good guess.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
Pretty good guesses aren't what the criminal justice system should really be using to take a year or so from a person's liberty.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
We can make a pretty good guess, we are not the criminal justice system. Jesus wept.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
It seems as though the criminal justice system took a pretty good guess as well, since it managed to rush an arrest, trial and pass a lengthy (by English standards) sentence in less time required to take a flight from Heathrow, and nobody has yet been able to tell him exactly what action was prejudicial to the integrity of the trial, because according to the article, nobody actually knows for sure (thought it might have been his filming of the steps of the court!!).
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Which is why there was an appeal which was successful, and now they'll do it properly and convict him all over again. That doesn't mean it's not incredibly fucking obvious why he was found in contempt of court, especially since it was the exact same reason he was convicted of it the first time as well.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
For filming the steps of the court? I love the British legal system: old men in drag, wigs and gowns, who's steps and spoken words are not to be recorded except by writing or jaunty watercolors.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Jesus christ, why are so many americans incapable of understanding that other countries have different laws to them? In the UK, and a bunch of other countries as well, there are laws against there being any prejudicial reporting of a trial in progress, because it can then be argued that it stopped the defendants from receiving a fair trial. If this does happen then it's a mistrial and the charges are thrown out.
So he wasn't 'filming the steps of a court', he was doing his solid best to get a bunch of people charged with paedophilia set free all so he could play the martyr to a bunch of alt-right twats in the US and hoover up that sweet sweet patreon money. And surprise surprise, it's worked a treat.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
I'm not American, but from one of these funny European countries where our liberty isn't decided by an ill tempered old queen in a curly wig and Santa's robes, or even by a jury for that matter!
It doesn't sound like even with all the heavy handed theatrics and costumes, that the system is very robust in that case.
That is exactly what the article cites him as doing in several places.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Well that's a stupid conclusion. It's a slam dunk conviction. Prejudicial reporting isn't allowed, he did it very deliberately and did it while on suspended sentence for the exact same crime. If you want to argue the toss about whether there should be a law for contempt of court feel free, but he absolutely broke that law.
I'm going to give your legal opinion all the consideration it deserves.
And while there he broadcast to thousands of people about an ongoing trial calling the defendants an evil muslim paedophile grooming gang. Call me crazy, but I think that might, just might, be the bit that the judge considered prejudicial reporting.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
Was the jury watching his livestream instead of the court proceedings?
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
It was put on to social media so yes, it had the potential to. Also, you get that a law against prejudicial reporting is just going to be a blanket ban, right? You can work that out? They're not going to go 'this is against the law, except ooh, you did it at 3pm so I guess it's ok.'
Literally nobody cares who you are, so no.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
Oh, so the rule of law in the UK is not applied equally? This guy (who I'd not heard of till he got the speediest of quick trials and sentences) must be very important that he gets special treatment whereas I get none for say suggesting that the judge involved is a ridiculous wig wearing queen, and the disgusting creatures he stands in judgment over are probably muslims, and probably part of a gang that grooms children for sex.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Yes, exactly. To 'report' something people have to view the report. Tommy Robinson has hundreds of thousands of credulous idiots following him. In contrast when you make a comment, me, maybe two other people read it, think 'idiot' and go about their day. You're safe from breaking the law due to your complete lack of consequence.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
I'm safe from breaking the law because your silly laws don't apply to me in any way or form. I can report to any number of people whatever I like about the proceedings of a court case there without any threat of 5 hour justice.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Feel free mate.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
I think I just started, guv.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Underwhelming tbh.
1 meatpuppet79 2018-08-01
I know I know, I'm just a little busy plotting all sorts of other anarchistic activities beyond completely derailing your delightful criminal justice system... you know, stuff like not having a TV license, purchasing spoons without photo ID, sporting decent dental work, driving on the right, not feeling fucking carpet under my feet when I step out of the shower... not getting stabbed or doused in acid by 'youths' when I step out to get some groceries... possessing the relative certainty that the kebabs down the street from me probably aren't grooming children for sex. That sort of crazy shit.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Oh wow, I thought we were done replying. You still here huh?
1 [deleted] 2018-08-01
[removed]
1 parameciidae 2018-08-01
Dude, people know what he did wrong, he filmed it. His previous judge was very clear he was not to again try to film defendants, mention their religion or their names, etc at another 'restricted trial'. The judge at the most recent contempt case didn't explicitly list the behaviors he was finding in contempt. Which was wrong, but is not the same as saying what he did is a mystery.
1 KittehDragoon 2018-08-01
Don't piss off the Judge is a principle as old as the legal system.
1 parameciidae 2018-08-01
The dumbest thing is that the rules are to keep a defense attorney from being able to say the men didn't get a fair trial if they get convicted. I mean, do you want justice for the girls or do you want to stir shit? I think we know what the answer is.
1 Hemingwavy 2018-08-01
He tried to interfere with a trial while it was ongoing. There you go. Spoiler alert. He knows exactly what he did. He just doesn't want to go to jail for it.
1 VidiotGamer 2018-08-01
And you've got faggots here in this very thread defending this just because they don't like this wankers politics - and they're mostly American to boot which is just delicious irony, because for all their constant reeing about 'Drumph', this is actually how you end up with the dystopic future they went their beds about in fear: When the government can jail you without even having to provide a bloody reason.
1 marmott-e 2018-08-01
where is the drama? I am sick of people linking to news articles when you could link to reddit!this post for example.
1 73696D756C6174696F6E 2018-08-01
Imagine being this ashamed of being Swedish
1 watermark02 2018-08-01
Imagine actually thinking that any of the users in that thread are European.
1 cuteman 2018-08-01
Imagine if you could actually prove what you just said.
1 HOTTER-THAN-YOU 2018-08-01
Imagine being this retarded
1 Velxon 2018-08-01
You overestimate how much Americans care about Europe.
1 wayback000 2018-08-01
It's almost as if it's a white nation and we have kindred cultural affection for white nations or something
1 Velxon 2018-08-01
When Britain was invading South Africa we studied the Constitution.
When Germany was invading Poland we trained the mass lynch technique
When Switzerland did jack shit we shot up more schools.
And now that Europe is burning you come to us for help?
1 zhanx 2018-08-01
I want to give your history teacher a facial after that history lesson.
1 Velxon 2018-08-01
Same 😩
1 DistortedLines 2018-08-01
But they do lol, just look at the t_d threads about refugees
1 parameciidae 2018-08-01
right? how has this person managed to miss all the fucking reeeeing about no-go zones and rape gangs on reddit?
1 Velxon 2018-08-01
Yeah. u/velxon is a retard
1 DoctorFahrenheit 2018-08-01
DRUMPF!
1 Methmo 2018-08-01
lol I think /r/europe is more extreme than t_d
Start a thread on gypsies and you'll see what I mean.
1 ALoudMouthBaby 2018-08-01
Its here in the thread where all the resident SJWs are getting upset over this.
1 SpotNL 2018-08-01
Could you link that?
1 DistortedLines 2018-08-01
It's literally just rightoids celebrating, the fuck are you even on about lol
1 multiplesifl 2018-08-01
He just wanted to say SJWs. Gets his dick half hard.
1 kisses_joy 2018-08-01
ITT
1 wolfbetter 2018-08-01
It's loicence
1 MooseHeckler 2018-08-01
Oi you got a loicense?
1 King_Drumpf 2018-08-01
"We don't know what exact crime he did, but let's try to imprison him anyway."
1 watermark02 2018-08-01
I don't really care about the law, and my reaction to this issue rests solely on my personal feelings towards the figure in question.
1 Zeriell 2018-08-01
Well, you're in good company. That's basically 99.9% of people when it comes to law, even, apparently, people who practice it.
1 Chicup 2018-08-01
Lol, Rebel Media is "far right" now.
1 JadedFeature 2018-08-01
It is. Because where the incel money is. You can mine them easily by preaching doom and gloom. It's a sad state.
1 Chicup 2018-08-01
You've seen r/politics right?
1 Rivea_ 2018-08-01
Orange man bad.
I fear for my children's lives.
My therapist says I should take a break from Twitter.
Upvotes please.
1 shitINtheCANDYdish 2018-08-01
FTFY
1 muck4doo 2018-08-01
Were you a cheese maker?
1 VioletBroregarde 2018-08-01
It is. It's never been anything other than conservative. They employed Gavin McInnes and Lauren Southern. The Proud Boys are a Rebel Media project. The Rebel is far-right.
1 TherapyFortheRapy 2018-08-01
You get that 'conservative' and 'far right' are two very different things, right?
This is like calling Joe Biden a communist.
1 DerpHerp 2018-08-01
and rebel media is not conservative, its far-right
1 [deleted] 2018-08-01
[removed]
1 ymmottt 2018-08-01
Far right does not like juice. ((Rebel media)).
1 Hemingwavy 2018-08-01
But he is right? Otherwise why did I support commie Joe for 8 years?
1 VidiotGamer 2018-08-01
No, they don't get it. For Reddit brocialists, everyone to the right of Che Guevara is literally Hitler.
1 Chicup 2018-08-01
TIL that anything left of the CBC (everything) is now far right. Seriously its just a smear trying to equate them with Nazis. Fuck right off.
1 VioletBroregarde 2018-08-01
No, it's accurate. The Rebel advocates for the conservative position 100% of the time. They're like the right-wing Guardian. "Far-right" is a loaded term but it's accurate to say that they're definitely definitely not on the left or in the center.
1 FLATEARTHISPYSOP 2018-08-01
So is everything not left or in the center far right to you?
1 westofthetracks 2018-08-01
for those keeping track at home, lauren southern is literally an ethnonationalist, but to the rightoid mind it's still a "smear" to call her employer "far-right"
1 Chicup 2018-08-01
You seem like the type who reads Vice unironically.
1 westofthetracks 2018-08-01
ah yes, "ethnonationalists are far-right," that absurd claim peddled only by outrage rags like vice
1 Chicup 2018-08-01
So slow me the proof baby. She doesn't like Islam but that's just logic.
1 westofthetracks 2018-08-01
no youre right, totally normal conservative fam, not into white ethnostates at all
1 Chicup 2018-08-01
So you linked to a thread with no video, which means you didn't even look, and you linked to the fact that whites commit less crimes? Oh noez, shes a real Nazi!
1 westofthetracks 2018-08-01
no no, you didnt understand, i admitted was wrong to call her "far-right." i agree with you that being a crypto-fascist who wants a white ethnostate is a perfectly mainstream conservative position. youre entirely correct.
1 normie_girl 2018-08-01
nice one
1 HOTTER-THAN-YOU 2018-08-01
*noice wan
1 AnalAssassin6969 2018-08-01
OI BRUV, YA GOT A LOICENCE FUR THAT ACCENT?
1 soylent_absinthe 2018-08-01
"Merits" in 2018 including saying mean words and making your dog give a Nazi salute.
That's unique, all right.
1 jsh1138 2018-08-01
this ought to bother everyone, if they can do it to him they can do it to you
1 snallygaster 2018-08-01
Didn't he get into trouble for violating a reporting restriction? I haven't followed this at all, but if that's what happened and he was held in contempt of court then this just sounds like SOP, aside from the judge arresting him too soon I suppose.
1 jsh1138 2018-08-01
nah, he was reporting outside the courthouse and the judge said he was violating the ban, so he said ok he'd take down the livestream, then the judge had him arrested, they told his lawyer they were releasing him so not to bother driving over, then they tried him without his lawyer and found him guilty in like 2 hours, then sentenced him to something absurd and jailed him, then moved him to a majority muslim prison where he was obviously in danger of being murdered
the appeals judge said there were serious problems with his arrest, his trial, his sentence and his incarceration and that those problems were more than just procedural, and found essentially that the judge who had him jailed had violated proper procedure because they just didn't like Tommy
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Holy shit you're dumb.
1 jsh1138 2018-08-01
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/01/former-edl-leader-tommy-robinson-freed-judges-quash-contempt/
all i'm doing is reporting the facts
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
Hahaha, you fucking moron. You actually believe that, don't you? You think stuff like 'then moved him to a majority muslim prison where he was obviously in danger of being murdered' is something that actually happened, you complete knobhead. Go back to snorting oxycontin and molesting your cousin and stop worrying about the UK, a country you will never be within a thousand miles of.
1 jsh1138 2018-08-01
yes, i'm sure you will convince alot of people with that reasoned and detailed rebuttal
the judge said he was improperly treated after being incarcerated, take it up with him if you don't agree. i'm reporting the fact of his statement to someone here who said they hadn't heard it.
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
When you're worth something like that we'll let you know. Till then just get used to being called out as the overgrown condom failure that you are.
1 jsh1138 2018-08-01
yawn
1 Hemingwavy 2018-08-01
What jails are majority Muslim? Also I'm like 90% sure judges don't get to pick what jail you go to. How does this conspiracy work? Judges are separate from the elected government. How did they trick him into breaking the exact law he was serving a suspended sentence for? Why did he plead guilty?
The appeals judges said you skipped one procedural step, which they blasted Tommy's lawyers for because they knew it was being skipped and just waited so they could appeal, and said that you handed down a summary judgement in difficult circumstances which was understandable but we don't think you should.
Then they said he should have another trial and by the way if you're looking for reasons to send him to jail, here's a bunch of reasons we think you should think about doing it for a long time.
He's in legal terms, mega fucked and you should probably practice your reading comprehension.
1 jsh1138 2018-08-01
that's not accurate. read the judgement. there are over 2 dozen problems with the proceedings listed and the appeals court specifically says that they were more than procedural problems, using that very word. It was also pointed out that "fairness was sacrificed on the altar of celerity" and also that there was no need to be in such a hurry with the trial in the first place. Also that Tommy was unfairly denied access to a dentist, visitors, letters, etc while incarcerated because the judge mis-handled the type of conviction involved. Additionally, the original judge levied a fine on Tommy that is actually illegal to levy for contempt of court, etc etc.
I could go on and on, but I don't need to because you can just read the ruling yourself. Probably best to do that before you say another word on it. The problems were not just procedural, the original judge was literally inventing law as well as mis-applying law, as well as rushing a trial for no reason so that all those things would go unexamined
hilarious coming from someone talking about something they haven't read at all
1 SamWhite 2018-08-01
In the UK you can't have prejudicial reporting of a trial in progress, it can cause a mistrial. So Robinson stood on the steps of the courthouse and broadcast to tens of thousands about evil muslim grooming gangs, which could've potentially caused a mistrial. He did this while on suspended sentence for contempt of court for doing the exact same thing.
1 CocoNutsOn 2018-08-01
If the guy was serious about exposing Asian grooming gangs he’d a waited until the trial finished like all other journalists/reporters. He is an idiot that could have jeopardised a full trial. I don’t agree with the way the justice system expedited the contempt of court that day and took their sweet time to deal with the appeal. They’ve actually helped the guy gain more support.
1 [deleted] 2018-08-01
[removed]
1 forward_dawn 2018-08-01
Yeah just do what you’re told, citizen.
1 TherapyFortheRapy 2018-08-01
Let's be honest here. Britain is, at best, a country that pretends to know what freedom means.
1 parameciidae 2018-08-01
lmfao
1 poliwrath3 2018-08-01
This kind of reminds me of the Steubenville Rape Case, when many people where shocked and enraged that the hacker who released student personal info (names, addresses, SS info; including someone who wasn't even at the party but was pegged guilty because of this) and was charged with a crime that had a higher penalty that the rapists got.
But now i am seeing overlap of the people mad with Steubenville, who are tickled Robinson was arrested. He did something less invasive involving rape on a magnitudes larger scale.
Where is the discrepancy in consistency with this sort of topic?
1 Zeriell 2018-08-01
They were told he was a Bad Person by the media. It's really as simple as that. That's enough for most people who don't instinctively distrust the news media. It could work in the other direction, too. If they had insisted he was a brave activist bringing justice, I'm sure the same people would love Tommy. And we do have cases of non-"far right" citizens doing the same thing he did and not receiving any consequences. Of course, the case I'm thinking of, the person happened to a Sikh... hmm... 🤔