Yesterday, without any fanfare or protests, a Florida jury acquitted Noor Salman, the widow of Pulse nightclub terrorist Omar Mateen, for charges of being an accomplice in the attack.
31-year-old Mrs. Salman was found not guilty of all charges relating to her providing material support to a foreign terrorist organization and obstruction of justice. On June 11, 2016, her radical Islamic husband attacked the club killing 49 people.
Where’s the outrage from the left over the acquittal of the Noor Salman, widow of the radical Islamic, gay-slaughtering, terrorist, Omar Mateen? Where’s the Rainbow Mafia that showed up in front of Vice President Mike Pence’s D.C. home after Trump’s inauguration, to taunt and humiliate Mike Pence and his family in front of their new neighbors over his views on gay marriage?
WERK for Peace and DisruptJ20 planned the “Queer Dance Party at Mike Pence’s House” to speak out against what they consider are Pence’s anti-LGBT views.
“We are here tonight to send a clear message to Daddy Pence that we will not tolerate bigotry and hate in our country,” said one organizer, Firas Nasr, as he rallied the dancers, according to CNN.
Here’s a video of the organized event in front of Mike Pence’s D.C. home, for anyone who may have already forgotten how the Gay Mafia comes together to bully and humiliate anyone who may not hold the same views as them:
These are the streets outside Mike Pence's house in D.C., shut down by activists throwing a Queer Dance Party tonight. Pure jubilance. pic.twitter.com/GrJAgvSZBh
— Jack Smith IV (@JackSmithIV) January 19, 2017
What happens when a protected class of citizen, (in this case, a radical Muslim man) shows up in a public space, murders 49 people, and injures 58? Does the left come together to organize a march against radical Islam in D.C.? Do they come together to organize a massive march against guns in D.C., or do they simply let this one go, because organizing a march against radical Islam would blow up (pun intended) the narrative of one of their victim classes?
After the jury found Mrs. Salman not guilty the jury foreman released the following statement:
According to the Orlando Sentinel – The foreman of the Noor Salman jury contacted the Orlando Sentinel with a statement about what the three days of deliberations were like for the 12 people who acquitted the widow of the Pulse shooter, Omar Mateen. Jurors listened to eight days of testimony and found Salman, 31, not guilty of aiding and abetting Mateen’s providing of material support to a foreign terror organization and of obstruction of justice. The court has kept the names of jurors secret, and went as far as having them meet at a separate location away from the courthouse every day of the trial so U.S. marshals could drive them to the courthouse. The foreman asked to remain anonymous.
Below is a portion of his statement:
These past few days have been very difficult. We listened carefully to opening arguments, testimonies from both prosecution and defense witnesses, viewed many exhibits and heard closing statements. We received many pages of documentation from the court outlining very specific instructions related to the charges and how we should apply the law. We used these detailed instructions, our courtroom notes, and all evidence presented by both sides in our deliberations.
Having said that, I want to make several things very clear. A verdict of not guilty did NOT mean that we thought Noor Salman was unaware of what Omar Mateen was planning to do. On the contrary we were convinced she did know. She may not have known what day, or what location, but she knew. However, we were not tasked with deciding if she was aware of a potential attack. The charges were aiding and abetting and obstruction of justice. I felt the both the prosecution and the defense did an excellent job presenting their case. I wish that the FBI had recorded their interviews with Ms. Salman as there were several significant inconsistencies with the written summaries of her statements. The bottom line is that, based on the letter of the law, and the detailed instructions provided by the court, we were presented with no option but to return a verdict of not guilty.”