Correct, because they are state charges. Presidents can only pardon federal crimes.

They can, because hexbear. They’re Russian apologists.

Ohhhh, I get hexbear now.

Wow, what an amazingly terrible worldview.

“I told you I was going to rob you if you tried to defend yourself, it’s your fault.”

Imagine not helping your Allies when they’ve been invaded, unprovoked, and are fighting for everything.

/c/theydidthemath

Why would 24/7 be full time? Lol

Hm, how does California get away with banning it then? Or is that next on the chopping block?

I’m sorry, what now?

Best comment I’ve read on lemmy yet.

Again, you’re injecting - she is never quoted as saying such in the fucking article you thick twat.

Your clearly don’t understand the point I am making here. It’s like I’m talking to a 4 year old.

Free speech is protected. Threats against someone are not. Given the article, on what basis would charges be made against one of the people sending these gross emails?

I’ll spell it out for you, again. NONE. The DA doesn’t say she received threats in the article. The article only quotes nasty emails, that are void of threats.

What’s the use case for this? I’m drawing a blank

Who should be believed? What are you on about?

I’m not sure how to make this any more clear - the article does not provide anything about threats being made or an ongoing investigation.

So my original question was, based on the linked article, what would these dumb racist fucks be charged with?

Since you seem to admit the article does not provide evidence of threats of bodily injury or harm being made, and no ongoing investigation thereto, it seems only reasonable to conclude at this time based on the evidence in the article there is not a charge that can be made against these dumb pieces of shit.

That’s my only point. That’s it. Are we on the same page yet?

Again, no evidence of any of that from the article. You keep injecting things without any evidence.

Carry on!

I’m not downplaying anything lmao. You’re reading so hard into my comments trying to find something that isn’t there.

I was questioning what people would be charged for, because the quotes in the article are not chargeable.

I’ll say it again because you clearly are having a tough time comprehending - if threats were made, those people should be charged with a crime.

Out of an abundance of caution?

The article doesn’t provide any such threat being made. I’m not saying there weren’t threats made, I’m saying I don’t know, because the article doesn’t provide that information.

Why are you being a cunt? Does the article list any threats or does it not? Can you read?

I’m not defending these assclowns. I don’t support racist idiots. I’m just pointing out that there aren’t any threats being made in the article, and the US has strong free speech laws - you’re allowed to call people racist names if you want to, it’s a protected right to do so. If any of these dumb fucks threatened the DA, then yes that is a punishable offense.

I agree if there were threats made. The article doesn’t cite any such threat.

Charge them with what? It’s not illegal to be an ignorant piece of shit.

Ordinarily I would agree with you. But a parent killing their kids? Nah, fuck that. Your justice might be the imprisonment. I hope she catches more than few hot beat downs.