Rand Paul assaulted at Kentucky home (UPDATE: 6 broken ribs)

Pure speculation: With what we now know, a likely scenario is that this guy had planned this political attack for quite a while, and the lawn/leaves excuse was pre-planned. In other words, he knew Rand would eventually be out there mowing, and he could attack him at that time and use his planned alibi. Probably wanted to do it right before important Senate votes, like the ones coming up, to take Rand out for a while.

It is weird the media aggressively tried to discount the political motivation despite significant evidence and only mentioned that the guy was a registered Democrat. No mention of his social media in almost any mainstream coverage. It is also weird that the media just accepted the defense lawyer's explanation of events. The job of a lawyer is to get the best deal for the client. The guy is obviously guilty but federal charges can carry 20 years in prison.

There is no chance that who posts on Ron Paul Forums and who broke the ribs of Barbara Boxer would have the political motivation immediately discarded by the media.
 
It is weird the media aggressively tried to discount the political motivation despite significant evidence and only mentioned that the guy was a registered Democrat. No mention of his social media in almost any mainstream coverage. It is also weird that the media just accepted the defense lawyer's explanation of events. The job of a lawyer is to get the best deal for the client. The guy is obviously guilty but federal charges can carry 20 years in prison.

There is no chance that who posts on Ron Paul Forums and who broke the ribs of Barbara Boxer would have the political motivation immediately discarded by the media.

Which blow holes in the false theory of anyone that says that the media maybe down plays it to prevent copy cats.

Pure speculation: With what we now know, a likely scenario is that this guy had planned this political attack for quite a while, and the lawn/leaves excuse was pre-planned. In other words, he knew Rand would eventually be out there mowing, and he could attack him at that time and use his planned alibi. Probably wanted to do it right before important Senate votes, like the ones coming up, to take Rand out for a while.

Planned or psyched himself up into a frenzy and saw Rand mowing - took action. Either obvious to anyone with reason. Just when I think the media cannot lower themselves anymore than that they already have they surprise me.
 
"Can you imagine living next door to that guy?" said one congressional colleague who has regularly tangled with Paul over policy. "I'm pulling for the neighbor."

http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/09/politics/rand-paul-injury-mystery/index.html


Which congressional colleague?

The quote right before that one:

"He's a deep believer in his own thoughts," Skaggs said. "And he believes his own thoughts are right -- and they are right 100% of the time."

I'm arguing with somebody on the internet right now, and they are claiming that taxation is not theft. They are also saying a lot of things like what Skaggs said right there, about me..

Thing is they can't put together a coherent argument, I even laid it out for them.. I was all, "Ok, if you believe that taxation is not theft, then you have to make an argument. You have to say, "The definition of theft is ______, and taxation is ______ and taxation is not theft because _____." Now fill in the blanks and let me know why you don't think taxation is theft.

The only argument they tried to make it was that it has to be illegal for it to be theft. But I don't accept that bullshit, I'm like, "look, if you were on a desert island and there was no government, and somebody took your coconuts, that would be theft.. legality and government is not required for theft to take place."

I've gone in circles with this person and they still keep saying that taxation is not theft, yet refuse to even make a statement trying to disprove it, and keep saying things like what Skaggs said. It's called ignoring reality.
 
Last edited:
"Can you imagine living next door to that guy?" said one congressional colleague who has regularly tangled with Paul over policy. "I'm pulling for the neighbor."
http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/09/politics/rand-paul-injury-mystery/index.html
Which congressional colleague?

The author of the CNN article and the so called "colleague" that said this, if this person even exists are two real pieces of shit.

I have been saying this since 2007 coming here that something must be done about the media. If you want to gain any ground, mass grassroots activism and protests must be directed against the scumbag media.
 
Last edited:


The judge said Assault 4th Degree Domestic Violence.

A neighbor attacking a neighbor is not domestic violence in any context I've ever heard of. Domestic violence is reserved for spouse, family or someone you otherwise live with. Wouldn't the judge know this?


https://ag.ky.gov/family/victims/Pages/domestic.aspx

Kentucky AG Office said:
The respondent or abuser must be your spouse, ex-spouse, parent, child, stepchild, grandparent, grandchild, brother, sister, son/daughter-in-law, spouse's parent, spouse's grandparent, spouse’s brother, spouse's sister, members of an unmarried couple (and children of this couple), or individuals formerly or currently living together.
 
Last edited:
Daily Caller is reporting that federal charges are expected:

Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul has been told to expect federal charges against his socialist neighbor who attacked the Republican senator last week, Fox News’ Shepard Smith reported on Thursday.

That prosecutors are expected to bring federal charges in the attack indicates that they may believe it was politically motivated, Smith reported. Previous media reports that the attack was over a long-standing dispute are inaccurate, Paul’s office has said.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/11/09/r...-assault-may-have-been-politically-motivated/
 
Daily Caller is reporting that federal charges are expected
If the shoe were on the other foot then there would be. I know me being a conservative libertarian in Las Vegas and if if my neighbor was Harry Reid and he didn't fall off a treadmill but I jumped him I would be facing 20 years in the FEDERAL pound you in the ass prison. So as they say in the land of the free if the glove fits.
 
I would like to hear an explanation of that myself, what is his argument going to be? Justifiable Homicide? Over a trivial yard dispute?(that is what his lawyer claims was the motive)
The left media spin is its just a few bruised ribs over a pile of leaves, by the way the McRib is back, and whats the big deal anyways why is Rand Paul such a bad neighbor. That guy wouldn't of been driven to do what he did if Rand Paul wasn't such a prick.
 
The left media spin is its just a few bruised ribs over a pile of leaves, by the way the McRib is back, and whats the big deal anyways why is Rand Paul such a bad neighbor. That guy wouldn't of been driven to do what he did if Rand Paul wasn't such a prick.

That won't fly in a court room, and even then there is NO doubt that he did it, just how is he going to claim not guilty of some kind of assault?
 
Last edited:
That won't fly in a court room, and even then their is NO doubt that he did it, just how is he going to claim not guilty of some kind of assault?
This is where they will try to claim that he didn't do it or that he didn't use excessive force or intend to use deadly force because he didn't use a weapon. This is how bad our justice system is, even when there is obvious criminal intent some people are above the law. These are the types of people you can't let get away with this kind of shit because it will inspire people to go farther and further. If they let him get away with this it will only fuel the culture war they are pushing to break up the republic.
 
This is where they will try to claim that he didn't do it or that he didn't use excessive force or intend to use deadly force because he didn't use a weapon. This is how bad our justice system is, even when there is obvious criminal intent some people are above the law. These are the types of people you can't let get away with this kind of $#@! because it will inspire people to go farther and further. If they let him get away with this it will only fuel the culture war they are pushing to break up the republic.

That is the key question, are they going to let him go just to bring on civil war?
Due to the nature and extent of Rand's injuries and the freak's medical knowledge none of the arguments you listed should stand a chance, and even with those arguments he should be attempting to plead guilty to a lesser charge, but instead he is pleading not guilty to the first charge that is woefully too light.
 
That is the key question, are they going to let him go just to bring on civil war?
Due to the nature and extent of Rand's injuries and the freak's medical knowledge none of the arguments you listed should stand a chance, and even with those arguments he should be attempting to plead guilty to a lesser charge, but instead he is pleading not guilty to the first charge that is woefully too light.
I'm cynical, I think they wanna let him out and then sick one of their crazies on him and claim its a Rand Paul supporter exacting political revenge. I think they want to put Marshal law under effect so they can put their foreign policy into motion, and it will happen so fast you and I won't get to talk about it. NO matter how much people get blood thirsty and want to go to war the people will feel guilty and it will fester and destroy our civilization. People still feel guilty and feel bad and think that we should of never dropped the bomb on Japan.
 
The left media spin is its just a few bruised ribs over a pile of leaves, by the way the McRib is back, and whats the big deal anyways why is Rand Paul such a bad neighbor. That guy wouldn't of been driven to do what he did if Rand Paul wasn't such a prick.

Precisely

That won't fly in a court room, and even then there is NO doubt that he did it, just how is he going to claim not guilty of some kind of assault?

The court room doesn't really matter. The (politically) important things are decided in the press room.
 
The court room doesn't really matter. The (politically) important things are decided in the press room.

Not in a clear cut case like this, what would normally happen under these circumstances is the following:

1 he pleads guilty to the first inadequate charge
2 his sentence is suspended or he is immediately given parole
3 he becomes a liberal martyr and a celebrity, he maybe even runs against Rand for office

If they let him get away with a not guilty plea they are up to something special like nickers suggested, if they are not then he and his lawyer are truly stupid and will lose the opportunity to plead guilty to a lesser charge and suffer total defeat in the trial.
 
13 pages and not one mention of how an unnamed witness saw a second assailant on Senator Paul......
 
Back
Top