Rape charges dropped in case: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pub...c2387b041c

Quote:Quote:

In court on Friday, prosecutors said they will drop the sex assault case against Jose Montano, 17. On Thursday evening, they told a lawyer for Henry Sanchez Milian, 18, that they would also drop his sex assault case, according the lawyer, Andrew Jezic.

The judge ordered Montano released from custody on Friday.

Defense lawyers for both defendants have said the sex acts were consensual and that text messages and school surveillance videos did not substantiate the girl’s claims she had been pushed from a hallway into a bathroom at Rockville High School on March 16 where the suspects took turns assaulting her in a stall as she tried to break free.

Prosecutors declined to comment before the hearing about the decision in the case that rocked the suburban community near Washington, D.C. But they had signaled in an early court proceeding that they were having challenges corroborating events the girl described to Montgomery County Police detectives and that led to the arrests of Sanchez Milian and Montano.

*********

On March 16, they had been called to the school after the 14-year-old girl told a staff member she’d been raped. The detectives spoke to the girl, who according to their affidavits, told them she knew Montano, and they had been talking in a school hallway that morning.

She said he asked to have sex and when she refused, pushed her into a boys’ bathroom and pulled her into a stall, according to the police affidavits. Sanchez Milian then entered the stall, according to girl’s account in the affidavit, and both raped her as she cried out and told them to stop.

Montano “denied having any sexual contact with [the victim]. Montano stated they went into the bathroom to tell jokes,” detectives wrote after talking with him.

They also spoke with Sanchez Milian who “initially stated nothing happened,” the police affidavits state, “then changed his statement multiple times and admitted having sex with the victim with his friend Montano.”

Faced with the choice of filing charges, or not arresting the suspects as an investigation continued, the police brought charges. Hours later, the two teens were locked in the Montgomery County Detention Center.


Prosecutors took over the case and as they reviewed text messages, found there may have been an agreement between Montano and the girl that they would have sex. They also looked into whether Montano and Sanchez Milian — in text messages — had plotted to turn the planned encounter into a rape.

At a court hearing March 30 over setting bond, Assistant State’s Attorney Mary Herdman told a judge evidence was being discovered daily — some of it bolstering the accusations and some not. At that point of the investigation, though, she said text messages between the suspects showed they had at a minimum planned to commit a crime.

Quote: (05-05-2017 10:13 AM)Menace Wrote:  

Rape charges dropped in case: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pub...c2387b041c

Quote:Quote:

In court on Friday, prosecutors said they will drop the sex assault case against Jose Montano, 17. On Thursday evening, they told a lawyer for Henry Sanchez Milian, 18, that they would also drop his sex assault case, according the lawyer, Andrew Jezic.

The judge ordered Montano released from custody on Friday.

Defense lawyers for both defendants have said the sex acts were consensual and that text messages and school surveillance videos did not substantiate the girl’s claims she had been pushed from a hallway into a bathroom at Rockville High School on March 16 where the suspects took turns assaulting her in a stall as she tried to break free.

Prosecutors declined to comment before the hearing about the decision in the case that rocked the suburban community near Washington, D.C. But they had signaled in an early court proceeding that they were having challenges corroborating events the girl described to Montgomery County Police detectives and that led to the arrests of Sanchez Milian and Montano.

*********

On March 16, they had been called to the school after the 14-year-old girl told a staff member she’d been raped. The detectives spoke to the girl, who according to their affidavits, told them she knew Montano, and they had been talking in a school hallway that morning.

She said he asked to have sex and when she refused, pushed her into a boys’ bathroom and pulled her into a stall, according to the police affidavits. Sanchez Milian then entered the stall, according to girl’s account in the affidavit, and both raped her as she cried out and told them to stop.

Montano “denied having any sexual contact with [the victim]. Montano stated they went into the bathroom to tell jokes,” detectives wrote after talking with him.

They also spoke with Sanchez Milian who “initially stated nothing happened,” the police affidavits state, “then changed his statement multiple times and admitted having sex with the victim with his friend Montano.”

Faced with the choice of filing charges, or not arresting the suspects as an investigation continued, the police brought charges. Hours later, the two teens were locked in the Montgomery County Detention Center.


Prosecutors took over the case and as they reviewed text messages, found there may have been an agreement between Montano and the girl that they would have sex. They also looked into whether Montano and Sanchez Milian — in text messages — had plotted to turn the planned encounter into a rape.

At a court hearing March 30 over setting bond, Assistant State’s Attorney Mary Herdman told a judge evidence was being discovered daily — some of it bolstering the accusations and some not. At that point of the investigation, though, she said text messages between the suspects showed they had at a minimum planned to commit a crime.

Was coming in here to post this.

All indications are that it is yet another case of a "regret rape" after getting banged out by two Hispanic dudes.

^^^
Another one of those situations that the mainstream media will want to bury as quickly as possible, because it has two liberal bugaboos- illegal immigration and false rape accusations- on opposing sides.

Fine - cannot say that I am surprised given how often women lie about it.

Still - interesting that they let those bozos go while the likes of Mike Tyson get years in jail for less substantial evidence.

Not enough evidence to convict them, huh? Great, then get them out of the country by the end of the day.

I'm not one bit surprised. If anyone has any questions, feel free to P.M. me. We'll see what Cucker's reaction, or lack thereof, is.

Glad the girl wasn't raped.

Send the two of them back anyway.

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:04 AM)Merenguero Wrote:  

I'm not one bit surprised. If anyone has any questions, feel free to P.M. me. We'll see what Cucker's reaction, or lack thereof, is.

Tucker Carlson did nothing wrong in that interview.

Damn, you can almost set your watch to this rape hysteria. 1)Slutty female behavior 2)Regret 3)False Accusation 4)Public Outcry/Conviction by Public 5)actual investigation proves accusation to be bullshit.

It is almost as if the vast(damn near all) majority of men don't want to hurt or rape women, but that cannot be the case........right?

Quote: (05-05-2017 10:55 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Fine - cannot say that I am surprised given how often women lie about it.

Still - interesting that they let those bozos go while the likes of Mike Tyson get years in jail for less substantial evidence.

Mike Tyson was prosecuted in a much tougher and more conservative jurisdiction. Also, he didn't have sexual messages and/or naked pictures on his phone from the alleged victim.

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:42 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

5)actual investigation proves accusation to be bullshit.

In my opinion, that's the only thing that matters. America, for now, has a superior system of investigation that can reveal bullshit, despite massive political pressure against proving it bullshit.

From there, we can ask whether the increased presence of illegal immigrants threatens this system. If yes, they all need to get out.

This is why I'm interested in Merenguero's explanation of what Tucker Carlson did wrong. He's using the lived experience of two illegal immigrants to challenge Tucker Carlson (if not the entire system of conservative media), which demands explanation.

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:44 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:42 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

5)actual investigation proves accusation to be bullshit.

In my opinion, that's the only thing that matters. America, for now, has a superior system of investigation that can reveal bullshit, despite massive political pressure against proving it bullshit.

From there, we can ask whether the increased presence of illegal immigrants threatens this system. If yes, they all need to get out.

This is why I'm interested in Merenguero's explanation of what Tucker Carlson did wrong. He's using the lived experience of two illegal immigrants to challenge Tucker Carlson (if not the entire system of conservative media), which demands explanation.

Here's your explanation. You're apparently dying to read it, since you've brought it up in multiple posts.

Just off of the top of my head:
1. He wore a pink shirt during the interview.
2. He very obviously didn't research jack fucking shit about Maryland law prior to conducting the interview. I anticipate a follow-up question citing a specific example of his extreme ignorance, so here goes. It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such. If you dispute that he had no fucking clue about the consent law, go back and watch the interview. If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing, I don't know what to tell you.
3. In my opinion, this was by far his most serious offense. He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:58 AM)Merenguero Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 10:55 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Fine - cannot say that I am surprised given how often women lie about it.

Still - interesting that they let those bozos go while the likes of Mike Tyson get years in jail for less substantial evidence.

Mike Tyson was prosecuted in a much tougher and more conservative jurisdiction. Also, he didn't have sexual messages and/or naked pictures on his phone from the alleged victim.

Yeah - all he got was scores of evidence pointing to his innocence, inconsistencies with her statements and a fucking previous false rape allegation that the girl made - she accused her previous white boyfriend of rape too - credible victim indeed.

Nothing to see here....

And still some MGTOWs claim that text messages, audio or video recordings won't save you. They will and they have.

Quote: (05-05-2017 01:03 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:58 AM)Merenguero Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 10:55 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

Fine - cannot say that I am surprised given how often women lie about it.

Still - interesting that they let those bozos go while the likes of Mike Tyson get years in jail for less substantial evidence.

Mike Tyson was prosecuted in a much tougher and more conservative jurisdiction. Also, he didn't have sexual messages and/or naked pictures on his phone from the alleged victim.

Yeah - all he got was scores of evidence pointing to his innocence, inconsistencies with her statements and a fucking previous false rape allegation that the girl made - she accused her previous white boyfriend of rape too - credible victim indeed.

Nothing to see here....

And still some MGTOWs claim that text messages, audio or video recordings won't save you. They will and they have.

It's a different era. If the Rockville case had happened in the early 90's when the Tyson case happened, those guys might have gone to trial and been found guilty. Likewise, if the Tyson case had happened today, he may have had pictures and/or messages on his phone and may very well have walked. There are obviously both upsides and downsides to technology.

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:44 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:42 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

5)actual investigation proves accusation to be bullshit.

In my opinion, that's the only thing that matters. America, for now, has a superior system of investigation that can reveal bullshit, despite massive political pressure against proving it bullshit.

From there, we can ask whether the increased presence of illegal immigrants threatens this system. If yes, they all need to get out.

This is why I'm interested in Merenguero's explanation of what Tucker Carlson did wrong. He's using the lived experience of two illegal immigrants to challenge Tucker Carlson (if not the entire system of conservative media), which demands explanation.

Here's your explanation. You're apparently dying to read it, since you've brought it up in multiple posts.

Just off of the top of my head:
1. He wore a pink shirt during the interview.
2. He very obviously didn't research jack fucking shit about Maryland law prior to conducting the interview. I anticipate a follow-up question citing a specific example of his extreme ignorance, so here goes. It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such. If you dispute that he had no fucking clue about the consent law, go back and watch the interview. If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing, I don't know what to tell you.
3. In my opinion, this was by far his most serious offense. He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

What do you expect from TC? The guy is a clown who attempts to win arguments by talking over people while flashing a shit-eating grin.

Pornography charge indicates that they taped it (as Zel mentioned). The presence of an illegal immigrant in the story does not automatically increase the credibility of women. If anything, it probably decreases their credibility, since they don't want people to think they'd voluntarily commit sexual acts with them.

Quote: (05-05-2017 01:53 PM)Roosh Wrote:  

Pornography charge indicates that they taped it (as Zel mentioned). The presence of an illegal immigrant in the story does not automatically increase the credibility of women. If anything, it probably decreases their credibility, since they don't want people to think they'd voluntarily commit sexual acts with them.

The pornography charge could also mean that the alleged victim sent him naked pictures. Either way, it helped their case. Prior to today, I didn't even hear anything about the pornography part, just text messages. I saw them walking even without that detail.

Quote: (05-05-2017 01:53 PM)ChrisGaines Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:44 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:42 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

5)actual investigation proves accusation to be bullshit.

In my opinion, that's the only thing that matters. America, for now, has a superior system of investigation that can reveal bullshit, despite massive political pressure against proving it bullshit.

From there, we can ask whether the increased presence of illegal immigrants threatens this system. If yes, they all need to get out.

This is why I'm interested in Merenguero's explanation of what Tucker Carlson did wrong. He's using the lived experience of two illegal immigrants to challenge Tucker Carlson (if not the entire system of conservative media), which demands explanation.

Here's your explanation. You're apparently dying to read it, since you've brought it up in multiple posts.

Just off of the top of my head:
1. He wore a pink shirt during the interview.
2. He very obviously didn't research jack fucking shit about Maryland law prior to conducting the interview. I anticipate a follow-up question citing a specific example of his extreme ignorance, so here goes. It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such. If you dispute that he had no fucking clue about the consent law, go back and watch the interview. If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing, I don't know what to tell you.
3. In my opinion, this was by far his most serious offense. He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

What do you expect from TC? The guy is a clown who attempts to win arguments by talking over people while flashing a shit-eating grin.

He's apparently loved by the forum. He needs to try to provoke me to commit an ethical violation sometime. I'm not as nice as David.

Quote: (05-05-2017 01:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 01:53 PM)ChrisGaines Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:44 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 11:42 AM)Atlanta Man Wrote:  

5)actual investigation proves accusation to be bullshit.

In my opinion, that's the only thing that matters. America, for now, has a superior system of investigation that can reveal bullshit, despite massive political pressure against proving it bullshit.

From there, we can ask whether the increased presence of illegal immigrants threatens this system. If yes, they all need to get out.

This is why I'm interested in Merenguero's explanation of what Tucker Carlson did wrong. He's using the lived experience of two illegal immigrants to challenge Tucker Carlson (if not the entire system of conservative media), which demands explanation.

Here's your explanation. You're apparently dying to read it, since you've brought it up in multiple posts.

Just off of the top of my head:
1. He wore a pink shirt during the interview.
2. He very obviously didn't research jack fucking shit about Maryland law prior to conducting the interview. I anticipate a follow-up question citing a specific example of his extreme ignorance, so here goes. It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such. If you dispute that he had no fucking clue about the consent law, go back and watch the interview. If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing, I don't know what to tell you.
3. In my opinion, this was by far his most serious offense. He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

What do you expect from TC? The guy is a clown who attempts to win arguments by talking over people while flashing a shit-eating grin.

He's apparently loved by the forum. He needs to try to provoke me to commit an ethical violation sometime. I'm not as nice as David.

There does seem to be lots of misplaced love for Tucker Carlson. Very surprising--looks like a significant theme here is how the "mainstream media" is dishonest, biased, "fake news" and all that, but then Tucker Carlson is seen as this beacon of light shining on a hill. Amazing.

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such.

Journalists aren't lawyers. When they're interviewing lawyers, who by definition are supposed to know the law, it's a lawyer's responsibly to correct the journalist. Furthermore, the amount of human suffering that was caused because "Tucker didn't know the law" was negligible.

Quote:Merenguero Wrote:

If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing , I don't know what to tell you.

You're moving the goalposts. You can credibly state that he didn't know the specific law, which I agree with - but don't think is damaging. But you can't possibly know that Tucker and his staff did absolutely no research .

Quote:Merenguero Wrote:

He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

I don't think so. I think George Soros funding Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, and other domestic activist groups is sleazy, petty, and reprehensible. It's well within Soros modus operandi to fund the legal defense of two guilty illegal immigrants. So Tucker was well within his right to imply that Soros was funding the defense, and the lawyer was well-within his right to dodge the question.

A follow up, if you don't mind. I obviously can't read your mind, but I feel like your rage level over Tucker Carlson's behavior is an EIGHT out of TEN. What's your rage level over the way that Rockville, Maryland processes illegal immigrants (as revealed by Tucker's reporting)?

How enraged are you that MS-13 members are placed in American schools? How enraged are you that illegal immigrants of age 21 are placed in schools with 13 and 14 year old girls?

Quote: (05-05-2017 02:13 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such.

Journalists aren't lawyers. When they're interviewing lawyers, who by definition are supposed to know the law, it's a lawyer's responsibly to correct the journalist. Furthermore, the amount of human suffering that was caused because "Tucker didn't know the law" was negligible.

Quote:Merenguero Wrote:

If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing , I don't know what to tell you.

You're moving the goalposts. You can credibly state that he didn't know the specific law, which I agree with - but don't think is damaging. But you can't possibly know that Tucker and his staff did absolutely no research .

Quote:Merenguero Wrote:

He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

I don't think so. I think George Soros funding Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, and other domestic activist groups is sleazy, petty, and reprehensible. It's well within Soros modus operandi to fund the legal defense of two guilty illegal immigrants. So Tucker was well within his right to imply that Soros was funding the defense, and the lawyer was well-within his right to dodge the question.

A follow up, if you don't mind. I obviously can't read your mind, but I feel like your rage level over Tucker Carlson's behavior is an EIGHT out of TEN. What's your rage level over the way that Rockville, Maryland processes illegal immigrants (as revealed by Tucker's reporting)?

How enraged are you that MS-13 members are placed in American schools? How enraged are you that illegal immigrants of age 21 are placed in schools with 13 and 14 year old girls?

Pressuring a lawyer to reveal who is paying for the representation is ridiculous--the lawyer couldn't divulge that information even if he wanted to, and TC should know that--or at least any credible journalist would.

Out of curiosity: since you're repulsed by "George Soros funding Black Lives Matter," how did you feel about Peter Thiel funding lawsuits against Gawker, etc?

Quote: (05-05-2017 02:16 PM)ChrisGaines Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 02:13 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 12:59 PM)Merenguero Wrote:  

It is clearly written in the code, that a fourteen or fifteen year old is able to consent to sex as long as the person with whom she is having sex is not a full four years or more older than her. He didn't realize that the law was written as such.

Journalists aren't lawyers. When they're interviewing lawyers, who by definition are supposed to know the law, it's a lawyer's responsibly to correct the journalist. Furthermore, the amount of human suffering that was caused because "Tucker didn't know the law" was negligible.

Quote:Merenguero Wrote:

If you don't think it's a serious offense that a guy on national television did not in any way research the topic he is discussing , I don't know what to tell you.

You're moving the goalposts. You can credibly state that he didn't know the specific law, which I agree with - but don't think is damaging. But you can't possibly know that Tucker and his staff did absolutely no research .

Quote:Merenguero Wrote:

He kept pressing David to tell him who was paying him for this particular client's services. We have a duty of confidentiality and are prohibited from discussing those matters. This guy continuing to press a lawyer in the hope that he commits a serious ethical violation during the interview is sleezy, petty, unprofessional, and unacceptable.

I don't think so. I think George Soros funding Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA, and other domestic activist groups is sleazy, petty, and reprehensible. It's well within Soros modus operandi to fund the legal defense of two guilty illegal immigrants. So Tucker was well within his right to imply that Soros was funding the defense, and the lawyer was well-within his right to dodge the question.

A follow up, if you don't mind. I obviously can't read your mind, but I feel like your rage level over Tucker Carlson's behavior is an EIGHT out of TEN. What's your rage level over the way that Rockville, Maryland processes illegal immigrants (as revealed by Tucker's reporting)?

How enraged are you that MS-13 members are placed in American schools? How enraged are you that illegal immigrants of age 21 are placed in schools with 13 and 14 year old girls?

Pressuring a lawyer to reveal who is paying for the representation is ridiculous--the lawyer couldn't divulge that information even if he wanted to, and TC should know that--or at least any credible journalist would.

Out of curiosity: since you're repulsed by "George Soros funding Black Lives Matter" and the legal defense of two "guilty" (interesting, as charges were dropped...) illegal immigrants how did you feel about Peter Thiel funding lawsuits against Gawker, etc?

Quote: (05-05-2017 02:16 PM)ChrisGaines Wrote:  

Pressuring a lawyer to reveal who is paying for the representation is ridiculous--the lawyer couldn't divulge that information even if he wanted to, and TC should know that--or at least any credible journalist would.

It's a ridiculous behavior that causes absolutely zero harm. If you're seriously enraged by behaviors that cause zero harm, you exhaust your emotional energy when viewing behaviors that cause massive harm.

Quote:TrollBait Wrote:

Out of curiosity: since you're repulsed by "George Soros funding Black Lives Matter," how did you feel about Peter Thiel funding lawsuits against Gawker, etc?

When tabloids claim that the Loch Ness monster raped Chelsea Clinton, it's fairly harmless. But it doesn't lend to their credibility as a news source.

Quote: (05-05-2017 02:29 PM)MMX2010 Wrote:  

Quote: (05-05-2017 02:16 PM)ChrisGaines Wrote:  

Pressuring a lawyer to reveal who is paying for the representation is ridiculous--the lawyer couldn't divulge that information even if he wanted to, and TC should know that--or at least any credible journalist would.

It's a ridiculous behavior that causes absolutely zero harm. If you're seriously enraged by behaviors that cause zero harm, you exhaust your emotional energy when viewing behaviors that cause massive harm.

Quote:TrollBait Wrote:

Out of curiosity: since you're repulsed by "George Soros funding Black Lives Matter," how did you feel about Peter Thiel funding lawsuits against Gawker, etc?

You didn't answer my question. You were enraged by George Soros potentially funding the lawsuit in this matter--are you similarly outraged by Peter Thiel funding lawsuits against media companies? George Soros supposedly funding this lawsuit presumably causes you absolute zero harm unless you are the target of the lawsuit (you aren't).

I would not characterize my feelings as "enraged" by Tucker Carlson--I tend to ignore him. However, it's unacceptable that he attempted to goad an attorney into violating an ethical obligation. It makes him look like even more of a hack.

In the future, discussions would be better advanced through reasoned viewpoints rather than the knee-jerk reaction of posting a troll meme. There should be a Roosh V drinking game--troll memes and calling someone a "cuck" means finish your drink.