Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don’t know the definitive definition. I’ll just go with what GuyNTexas said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuyNTexas
Wow .... you obviously need an education regarding what assault entails .... any unwanted physical contact can legally consitute assault. It doesn’t require a Chuck Norris style roundhouse kick to the face, or a body slam. Fact is, physical contact isn’t even required .... a statement, or motion, or a gesture suggesting the intent to assault can indeed be assault.
As for the “pardon me mam” .... totally irrelevant .... one could say “pardon me mam” as they push someone off a cliff.
Assault. At Common Law, an intentional act by one person that creates an apprehension in another of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. An assault is carried out by a threat of bodily harm coupled with an apparent, present ability to cause the harm.
The intern went to grab the mic, as instructed, to give to another press correspondent, Acosta pulled it away, moved her arm with his, and kept on with questions after his turn was up.
As I've said before, assault is a harsh word and in my POV, it is not what occurred. Acosta was grandstanding, opened his questioning with a challenge, which is not a question and that behavior is not acceptable.
those who hate trump are going say she brutally attack him over the mic and he was defending himself to inches of death,
those who hate acostia going say he attack her while she was doing her job in recovering her property.
but the deal is, the arm has nothing to do with anything, he started out say he was challenger the president and basically he was saying you are wrong and stupid, without asking a question, he was trying to start a fight, so trump reply like any king would " off with his head"
you got two a holes in the same room trying to be top dog, acostia only job is to kick the pres in the face every chance he can
No, those who hate Trump aren't going to say she brutally attacked him. People who dislike Trump and are also claiming the intern assaulted Acosta are doing so because someone decided what Acosta did was assaulted the intern and even posted the definition of assault. If we are to go down that rabbit hole, which is stupid mind you, then given the definitions of assault, the intern assaulted Acosta. Had the genders been reversed, you would have heard more of that. Do *I* believe there was assault in this exchange? Hell no, but as I said, if we're going to stoop to stupidity in this thread then this it what it goes to. Intern made the first move and it was an "aggressive" move to grab the microphone out of his hand. See how that works?
He didn't start out saying he was "challenging" the president, although if you want to parse it down to semantics, every reporter's questions at a press conference is a challenge to the president and the administration.
His statement was:
I wanted to challenge you on one of the statements that you made in the tail end of the campaign in the midterms that …
He was then interrupted. As he finished his initial statement, it was clear that he was challenging or questioning the use of the word "invasion."
So his complete sentence if uninterrupted would have been:
I wanted to challenge you on one of the statements that you made in the tail end of the campaign in the midterms that this caravan was an invasion. As you know Mr President the caravan was not an invasion. It’s a group of migrants moving up from Central America towards the border with the U.S.
He's questioning the use of the word "invasion." How is this a bad thing? All Trump had to do was say:
"Jim, I disagree with you. I think that many immigrants marching is an invasion. We'll have to agree to disagree on that. Next."
She reached for the mic...he moved it away
She reached for the mic again...he moved it away
She reached for the mic a third time, he put his hand on her arm and pushed her arm down
She then waited for a bit, then she reached for the mic and took it from him
Not one of those times did she grab him or place her hand on him.
I believe from what I've read and heard some say, the mic, in this example, is an extension of the person.
Location: 23.7 million to 162 million miles North of Venus
23,561 posts, read 12,525,568 times
Reputation: 10475
Quote:
Originally Posted by photogal9
I believe from what I've read and heard some say, the mic, in this example, is an extension of the person.
Again, a slippery slope IMO.
That way of thinking is a slippery slope.
If the mic had belonged to Acosta, his own personal property, then yeah it might be considered assault if she tried to take his property. It wasn't his property and him just holding it does not make it his property.
That way of thinking is a slippery slope.
If the mic had belonged to Acosta, his own personal property, then yeah it might be considered assault if she tried to take his property. It wasn't his property and him just holding it does not make it his property.
Wrong:
Quote:
The law defines assault and battery as an unwanted touching that is done in a rude or angry manner. It can be as simple as shoving someone, blocking their way, spitting on them, grabbing someone's arm, throwing something (liquid or otherwise) at them, or even grabbing something out of their hand.
He has every right to be disgusted by the behavior of not just the press, but by the entire “establishment”, and I applaud him for not laying down and taking it.
Remember when Trump suggested he and his staff might have been wiretapped during the campaign? Oh my, the fake new labeled him a conspiracy nut, and a lunatic, and an outrageous liar. Well, now we know the truth ... he was INDEED wiretapped, based on a totally fabricated “dossier” paid for by democrats who used that fake document to secure a FISA warrant to do just that, while also lying to the court.
The Russia Collusion investigation? Another contrived fraud, exposed by FBI officials whose text messages talk about their “backup plan” should Trump actually win the election. (Talk about election tampering) These are the very same bad actors that covered up the REAL RUSSIAN COLLUSION that involved Clinton and Obama and the Uranium One deal that sold 30% of United States Uranium to the Russians.
Then we have the very same bad actors at the FBI who refused to legitimately investigate Clinton for the “mishandling” of classified documents, no doubt operating at the behest of then Attorney General who privately met with Bill Clinton, while his wife and Secretary of State was under investigation. The same players who lead the witch hunt against Trump, covering up the crimes of the actual Witch, Clinton, who for all intent and purpose looks to have been running an espionage operation out of the State Department, with her private server the drop location, and the Clinton Foundation, the payola receiving spot.
We have a gaggle of traitors, conspiring to destroy this President, and in so doing, subvert the will of the people who elected him.
This level of criminal conduct by high level officials has never before been exposed ... but has apparently been going along for quite a long time. Yet, the leftist lemmings consider Trump’s abrasive remarks the big problem?
If you stole my wallet, and I tried to take it back, that is not "assault".
But fine, if you want to go down that road, you can charge the intern with assualt as long as Acosta gets charged with theft of government property..M'kay?
Except it is not Trump's office, he only occupies it for his term... The office belongs to Americans and unless there is actually threat to him or the other people, on what grounds does he have for deciding who is allowed access? The microphone didn't belong to Trump.
He shouldn't be conducting behavior like he is...
Try going to your boss and tell him you won't allow other people to sit in the company chair. There is a thread on the work and employment subsection... Op got laughed out of the thread
If you stole my wallet, and I tried to take it back, that is not "assault".
But fine, if you want to go down that road, you can charge the intern with assualt as long as Acosta gets charged with theft of government property..M'kay?
It's you people are who are going down that road. I don't for a minute believe she assaulted him but Acosta did not assault her either so just stop with this nonsense. Or read up through the thread to see where this thread is going. No one really believes she assaulted Acosta but no rational person can believe he assaulted her either and that's where the problem lies.
As to your wallet scenario, of course it's not assault at the point, it's self defense because *I* would have made the first move. Standing in front of you and grabbing your wallet is assault (I grabbed something off your body" and theft, because the wallet belongs to you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
