American Politics 4.0 - Orangeyou Glad He’s Back?

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

He changed his name from Mangiapane.

So does Mangione loosely translate to Eat Rich?

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Yamer

So does Mangione loosely translate to Eat Rich?

Kind of, actually.

[SportsJunky]

Originally Posted by Looch City

Plot twist: his motives were actually initiated by billionaires connected to his family that had some beef with that CEO.

Plot twist: hired by CEO's ex-wife.

[Paulie Walnuts]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1866244824921465121

[FlamesAddiction]

Apparently he recommended the Unabomber's manifesto.



This was the whole review:

“Clearly written by a mathematics prodigy. Reads like a series of lemmas on the question of 21st century quality of life,” the review reads.

“It’s easy to quickly and thoughtless write this off as the manifesto of a lunatic, in order to avoid facing some of the uncomfortable problems it identifies. But it’s simply impossible to ignore how prescient many of his predictions about modern society turned out,” the review continues.

“He was a violent individual — rightfully imprisoned — who maimed innocent people. While these actions tend to be characterized as those of a crazy luddite, however, they are more accurately seen as those of an extreme political revolutionary,” the review by an account under Mangione’s name continues.

[Paulie Walnuts]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1866212659424645304

If you click the link you can see the thread. He called them parasites and it had to be done.

[Two Fivenagame]

The McDonald's where Luigi was identified is getting review bombed on yelp. Some of the reviews are quite funny.

https://m.yelp.com/biz/mcdonalds-alt...q=mcdonald%27s

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://twitter.com/user/status/1866212659424645304

If you click the link you can see the thread. He called them parasites and it had to be done.

Only if you are some sort of masochist who still has a Xitter account. For everyone else there's Unrollnow.


https://unrollnow.com/status/1866212659424645304

[edslunch]

As much as i think Trump's 51st state shtick is idiotic, I could see him making a serious play for Alberta. It has stuff he wants and is ripe for economic exploitation on a large scale. There is hard and soft support for joining the US here already. He could play on Danielle Smith's vanity like a concert violinist, and so many people would lose their minds that he's paying attention to us...Us!... making sweeping promises to make Alberta great again, holding rallies here, etc. And sadly he could make a decent-sounding pitch.

Trifling objections like crown and indigenous land claims can be dealt with through economic coercion. Foreign interference - so what? What does he have to lose? He has no boundaries and only another 10-15 years max on this earth.

Watch for it....

[Paulie Walnuts]

https://archive.is/2024.12.09-230659...s-consequences

His manifesto.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://archive.is/2024.12.09-230659...s-consequences

His manifesto.

Man....I gotta get on ye ol' Manifesto.

It'll have Blackjack and hookers!! Or perhaps not.

[Wormius]

The crazy thing is, those companies are pissing off people with nothing to lose. I am surprised more terminally ill aren’t going out kamikaze style.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Apparently he's a somewhat right wing Musk enjoying Rogan listener type? Not a fan of Jordan Peterson though, so that's one basis for an insanity defense he can't lean on.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://archive.is/2024.12.09-230659...s-consequences

His manifesto.

This is worth the read to get a sense of his worldview. Will be tough for him to argue “Not Guilty” now though (in the literal sense). I’m sure some other legal beagles might come up with rationalization based on his manifesto which is articulated and well laid out as to his reasoning.

I have thought that something like this might happen to those in power of limiting gun law restrictions.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://archive.is/2024.12.09-230659...s-consequences

His manifesto.

Where’s this from? I haven’t seen this anywhere else. Not trying to be rude.

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Scroopy Noopers

Where’s this from? I haven’t seen this anywhere else. Not trying to be rude.

Hmm it was posted online. Maybe I got duped ?

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

You can't shoot people dead on the sidewalk in the middle of the day and not be guilty.

How can he not be guilty?

OJ Simpson comes to mind. A jury that wants to say "#### you" to the sytem can plausibly claim "the bar of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt" was not cleared, and then acquit him.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Paulie Walnuts

https://twitter.com/user/status/1866244824921465121

Do you think this guy eats at McDonald's? I mean, if this guy is found guilty, imma be writing love letters to him in prison.

[wittynickname]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

You can't shoot people dead on the sidewalk in the middle of the day and not be guilty.

How can he not be guilty?

Jury nullification, per wikipedia:

Jury nullification, also known in the United Kingdom as jury equity,[1][2] or a perverse verdict,[3][4] is when the jury in a criminal trial gives a verdict of not guilty even though they think a defendant has broken the law. The jury's reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust,[5][6] that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant's case,[7] that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant.[8] Such verdicts are possible because a jury has an absolute right to return any verdict it chooses.[9] Nullification is not an official part of criminal procedure but is the logical consequence of two rules governing the systems in which it exists:

1. Jurors cannot be punished for passing an incorrect verdict.[10]
2. In many jurisdictions, a defendant who is acquitted cannot be tried a second time for the same offense.[11]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification


The jury could simply decide he doesn't deserve to be punished even though he committed the crime. It's within their right as jurors to buck the system.

[Itse]

That guy seems like someone who is very much looking forward to getting to speak his mind in court.