The National  Memo Logo

Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.

Monday, December 09, 2019 {{ new Date().getDay() }}

Mark and Patricia McCloskey

Screenshot from Mark McCloskey's Twitter

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

The infamous St. Louis couple that made headlines last summer after brandishing guns at Black Lives Matter (BLM) protesters must now surrender their guns. Needless to say, they are not pleased with the order.

According to KMOV, Mark and Patricia McCloskey pleaded guilty to a number of charges in connection with their altercation with protesters. Patricia McCloskey entered a guilty plea for misdemeanor harassment and was fined a total of $2,000. Mark McCloskey entered a guilty plea for a misdemeanor fourth-degree assault charge. The two also had to agree to surrender the weapons used during their exchange with protesters.

But despite the guilty pleas and their agreement to turn over their weapons, Mark McCloskey has made it clear that he does not regret his actions. From the steps of the courthouse in St. Louis, Mo., he said, "I'd do it again," later adding, "Any time the mob approaches me, I'll do what I can to put them in imminent threat of physical injury because that's what kept them from destroying my house and my family."

As reports began circulating about their case again, McCloskey also took to Twitter with his reaction. "A year ago, the mob came to my door to attack my family— I backed them down," he tweeted. "The mob came for me, the media attacked me & prosecutors tried to punish me for defending my family They dropped all charges, except for a claim I instilled 'imminent fear' in the mob I'd do it again."

Special prosecutor Richard Callahan also weighed in and admitted that he believes the couple's consequences are reasonable.

"But I think that their conduct was a little unreasonable in the end," Callahan said. "I don't think people should view this case as some type of betrayal or assault on the Second Amendment. We still have the Second Amendment rights. It's just that the Second Amendment does not permit unreasonable conduct."

Start your day with National Memo Newsletter

Know first.

The opinions that matter. Delivered to your inbox every morning

Attorney General Merrick Garland

The coming weeks will be the most consequential of Merrick Garland's life — not just for the attorney general himself but for our country. Garland will have to decide, presumably with the support of President Joe Biden, how to address the looming authoritarian threat of former President Donald J. Trump and his insurrectionary gang. His first fateful choice will be how to deal with Stephen K. Bannon, the fascism-friendly, criminally pardoned former Trump senior adviser who has defied a subpoena from the House Select Committee investigating the events of Jan. 6.

That panel has issued a contempt citation of Bannon, which will reach the floor for approval by the full House early next week. When that resolution passes, as it assuredly will, Speaker Nancy Pelosi will ask the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia to open a prosecution of Bannon, which could ultimately cost him a year behind bars and a fine of $100,000. (Trump won't be able to deliver a pardon, as he did last January to save Bannon from prison for defrauding gullible Trumpists in a "build the wall" scheme.)

Keep reading... Show less

By Lisa Richwine and Bhargav Acharya

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - A union that represents about 60,000 behind-the-scenes workers in film and television reached a tentative deal with producers on Saturday, averting a strike that threatened to cause widespread disruption in Hollywood, negotiators said.

Keep reading... Show less
x
{{ post.roar_specific_data.api_data.analytics }}