There are consequences for breaking the law.
shareShe didn't break the law, genius.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/05/31/did-kathy-griffin-break-law-her-photo-decapitated-trump/356840001/
Title 18 U.S. code 871, you retard.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/871
Still wasn't a direct threat and broke no law. Thanks for proving you're illiterate. But most of us already knew that.
shareAre we supposed to feel sorry?
shareThey want us to forget she threatened president Trump with violence since she cried and said "He broke me."
shareThat press conference was so disgusting. First she half-heartedly apologizes and then she takes it back and just continues with the same crap.
shareNever threatened him, genius. Do you ever actually understand anything?
shareShe crossed a line. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
shareQuestioned? I question her ability to competently answer a question. There should be consequences to pushing the envelope that far even if no real intention was there to harm the President. I wonder what her reaction would have been if somebody had pulled the same stunt with a fake severed head of Hillary?
shareThat would've been just as stupid, but still wouldn't have broken any laws.
shareQuite right. It was stupid and tasteless, and I'm glad she's had to deal with backlash, because she deserved it.
She's not exactly known for being tasteful, but this really went over the line. However, she wasn't threatening Trump's life, nor advocating that anyone else threatens his life. Therefore, no law was broken.
Not according to dust-speck brain above. But then, it rarely gets anything right.
shareGood. More "consequences" need to be dished out to idiots who take shit too far. Lose jobs, get investigated, lose sponsors etc. It's the only way to deter this nonsense.
I also think that what this dizzy bitch did was way worse than what Madonna actually said. She said "Yes, I have thought an awful lot about blowing up the White House. But I know that this won't change anything."
That deserved some backlash as well. But it wasn't an actual threat. That was just her bloviating.
KG didn't make an actual verbal threat. But it was threatening nonetheless. If a brown skinned Muslim decked out in full regalia had been the one in the picture holding the "head", would that make it more of a threat than white American KG holding it?
She should have owned it and refused to apologize. Gwar has never apologized for decapitating every single President and major presidential candidate on stage for 30 years.
shareSo, what was the "intent" for holding up a bloody severed head of the POTUS? was it a bad joke? a birthday wish? or just wishing someone would chop his head off? some look at it as free speech, but I don't see anything in the constitution about what she did as free speech, some look at it as breaking the law, an argument can be made that it is breaking the law under Title 18 U.S. code 871, she's been questioned by the secret service and will continue to be questioned, the grand jury could very well charge her with threatening the president, it all depends how Title 18 U.S. code 871 is interpreted by the prosecution, in any event, she is really a dumb shit, what did she think would happen when she showed that photo to the world? she lost most everything that she worked so hard for, whether she broke the law or not, her career is toast.
sharebut not all is lost, I hear they are hiring at McDonald's in Bakersfield Ca.
share[deleted]