Grand jury indicts mccloskeys Intelwars Mccloskey home protest Mccloskey indicted Mccloskey protest Mccloskeys St. louis protesters not charged St. louis protests

Grand jury indicts McCloskeys with gun exhibiting charges, adds charge of tampering with evidence

A grand jury indicted a St. Louis couple on charges of exhibiting guns, and added one charge each of tampering with evidence.

The indictment was announced Tuesday.

The McCloskeys became material for memes nationally when they waved their guns in June at Black Lives Matter protesters who had trespassed into a private neighborhood on their way to protest at the mayor’s home. The McCloskeys said that they feared for their lives and they reacted by protecting their property with their weapons.

The charges of tampering with evidence relate to a gun that their lawyer turned over to investigators. It was inoperable at the time they handed it over, but prosecutors had it re-assembled to be operable.

The McCloskey’s attorney, Joel Schwartz, said that the indictment was not a surprise and that he was confident they would be exonerated of the charges.

“Once all the facts are out, it will be clear the McCloskeys committed no crime whatsoever,” Schwartz said.

“Frankly because the grand jury is not an adversarial process and defense counsel are not allowed in there and I have no idea what was stated to the grand jury and what law was given to the grand jury,” he added.

Nine protesters were charged with trespassing over the incident, but local officials refused to prosecute them.

‘Exercising our Second Amendment rights’

Mark McCloskey expressed frustration and anger over what he saw as selective enforcement of the law.

“Every single human being who as in front of my house was a criminal trespasser. They broke down our gate, they trespassed on our property. Not a single one of those people are now charged with anything,” he said. “We’re charged with felonies that could cost us four years of our lives and our law licenses.”

He went on to warn voters against supporting Joe Biden and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.) in the presidential election.

“What you are witnessing here is just an opportunity for the government, the leftist, democrat government of the City of St. Louis to persecute us for doing no more than exercising our Second Amendment rights,” McCloskey concluded.

Here’s a local news video about the McCloskeys’ reaction:

Raw interview: McCloskeys go off about gun charges after pointing weapons at protesters

First Amendment George floyd riots Greeting cards guns Intelwars Mccloskeys protester St. Louis watch

McCloskeys make greeting cards from photo of them guarding home with guns — and hilariously give one to foul-mouthed protester

Mark and Patricia McCloskey appear to have a knack for one-upping leftists.

First, they stand in front of their St. Louis home holding guns, making a left-wing mob think twice about pulling any funny stuff after it broke into their gated neighborhood amid the George Floyd rioting in June.

A month later, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner filed charges against the McCloskeys for unlawful use of a weapon/flourishing, saying the couple waved their weapons in a “threatening manner” at “peaceful, unarmed protesters.”

Despite the charges hanging over their heads, the enterprising couple apparently had greeting cards made from one of the many images of them warding off the mob — and then Mark McCloskey graciously stuck it to a foul-mouthed protester who confronted the couple on video after they emerged from a print shop with the cards.

What are the details?

“Abolish the suburbs! You are terrorists!” the leftist woman hollers at the McCloskeys as they walk to their vehicle.

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @314khalea

“Do you think pointing guns at protesters is nice?” the woman continues to yell. “It’s fun? You think you’re cool?”

“F*** you and your guns!” she adds as they enter their SUV. “F** you!”

With that, Mark McCloskey exits the vehicle and approaches the camera — and he’s not holding a gun; he’s holding one of the cards they created and hands it over: “Here, have a souvenir.”

Image source: Twitter video screenshot via @314khalea

The woman speaking on video isn’t impressed: “F*** both y’all!” The McCloskeys begin to back out of their parking space, and that’s where the clip ends.

Content warning: Language:

How are folks reacting?

As you might expect, more than a few Twitter commenters are backing up the McCloskeys all the way and enjoyed their greeting card idea:

  • “GOOD. They have absolutely EVERY RIGHT to defend their home and property against violent rioters,” one person wrote. “Because that’s what they WERE.”
  • “Love it. F*** you marxists,” another commenter said. “You’re not going to win.”
  • “Do you know if they have a website where I can buy one of their cards?” another person asked.
  • “And to think they used to be Democrats, until a bunch of worthless, terrorist traitors decided to take up space on their property,” another commenter wrote. “You idiots are destroying your own party, because you are too ignorant to know any better. Thanks for the extra @realDonaldTrump votes. #Trump2020.”

Black Lives Matter Eric Schmitt Intelwars Kim gardner Mccloskeys Mccloskeys charged Mccloskeys vs blm Second Amendment

Missouri AG accuses Kim Gardner of ‘political prosecution’ of McCloskeys, files for dismissal of charges

Missouri Attorney General Eric Schmitt
said that he filed to dismiss the charges against a St. Louis couple who used their firearms in order to ward off Black Lives Matter protesters from their property.

Schmitt posted a lengthy response to the charges from his Twitter account on Monday, where he accused St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kim Gardner of having a political motivation for the prosecution.

“St. Louis prosecutor Kim Gardner is engaged in a political prosecution. I entered the case seeking a dismissal,” tweeted Schmitt.

“As AG I have a duty to protect the fundamental rights of all Missourians including the right to keep [and] bear arms in self-defense of one’s person [and] home,” he added.

Gardner announced earlier Monday that Mark and Patricia McCloskey, who are both personal injury attorneys, were charged with felony unlawful use of a weapon.

“It is illegal to wave weapons in a threatening manner,” Gardner
said in a statement, “that is unlawful in the city of St. Louis.”

The McCloskeys became a national story when Black Lives Matter protesters damaged a gate on June 28 and entered onto a private street on their way to the home of the St. Louis mayor. The couple stood outside their home with a handgun and an AR-15 rifle warning the protesters to stay away. Videos of the incident quickly went viral on social media.

Schmitt opined in his Twitter thread that the McCloskeys were justified in their brandishing of firearms to protect themselves and their property.

“The right to defend one’s person, family, home and property has deep roots in Missouri law. Self-defense is the central component of the right to keep & bear arms, which receives the highest protection from the MO Constitution,” he added in a
second tweet.

Schmitt went on to claim that the prosecution of the McCloskeys would undermine the right to self-defense.

“The prosecution sends a powerful message to all Missourians that they exercise their fundamental right to self-defense at their peril. Missourians should not fear exposure to criminal prosecution, even prison time, when they use firearms to defend themselves and their homes,” Schmitt

If the charges are not dismissed and the McCloskeys are found guilty, they could face up to four years in jail and up to a $5,000 fine.

Here’s more about the charges against the McCloskeys:

St. Louis prosecutor to charge couple who went viral defending their home

Castle Doctrine Donald Trump Intelwars Kimberly gardner Mark mccloskey Mccloskeys Mike parson Missouri St. Louis

President Trump will be ‘getting involved’ in McCloskey case as criminal charges loom

Just one day after Mark McCloskey, the St. Louis attorney who went viral for defending his property from an encroaching mob, predicted that he and his wife would be “indicted shortly,” President Donald Trump is reportedly looking into the case.

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson (R) revealed Tuesday that Trump would be “getting involved,” the Washington Post reported.

Missouri Gov. Mike Parson, a Republican. (Jacob Moscovitch/Getty Images)

Parson — who finally offered his own defense of the couple, saying they had “every right to protect their property” — reportedly discussed the matter with Trump during a phone call Tuesday afternoon.

“The president said that he would do everything he could within his powers to help with this situation and he would be taking action to do that,” Parson said.

In an interview with Townhall Media, Trump criticized local St. Louis authorities as a “disgrace” for seeking to punish the McCloskeys. He said:

When you look at St. Louis, where two people, they came out. They were going to be beat up badly if they were lucky. If they were lucky. They were going be beat up badly and the house was going to be totally ransacked and probably burned down like they tried to burn down churches. And these people were standing there, never used it and they were legal, the weapons, and now I understand somebody local, they want to prosecute these people. It’s a disgrace.

After the McCloskeys went viral last month, St. Louis Circuit Attorney Kimberly Gardner claimed the couple had committed a “violent assault,” and she vowed to hold them accountable. Her statement came before an investigation into the matter had been completed, let alone initiated.

On Tuesday, she blasted Trump and Parson for what she claimed was jurisdictional overstep.

“It is unbelievable the Governor of the state of Missouri would seek advice from one of the most divisive leaders in our generation to overpower the discretion of a locally elected prosecutor,” she said in a statement.

St. Louis authorities executed a warrant against the McCloskeys last Friday during which the couple’s firearms were seized. The basis of the warrant was not made clear.

What is clear, law experts say, was the McCloskeys’ right to defend their property — even if it meant using lethal force.

Anders Walker, a constitutional law professor at the St. Louis University School of Law, told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that Missouri’s castle doctrine protects the McCloskeys from criminal liability.

“At any point that you enter the property, they can then, in Missouri, use deadly force to get you off the lawn,” Walker explained. “There’s no right to protest on those streets. The protesters thought they had a right to protest, but as a technical matter, they were not allowed to be there. … It’s essentially a private estate. If anyone was violating the law, it was the protesters.”