Jump to content

Maybe Storming The Capitol Wasn't Such A Good Idea


Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

making connections with the public, there was a constant drumbeat of "you can be shot at any moment". 

Same thing was stressed to us in US Army basic training before being shipped to Vietnam in 1967. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Some folks take great pride in their ignorance and go out of their way to flaunt it, even to exaggerate it. They like to show it off like they are wearing a lair of the latest Air Jordans. I don't get

You are talking about folks that were taking selfies, some with their company IDs hanging from their necks. Burner phones to cover their tracks?  I'm surprised they didn't order delivered pizzas

We've had some bad experiences with pardoning nazis attempting a coup here in Germany. I'd strongly advice against such measures.

Posted Images

5 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

 As enemy combatant radical Trumplamists they should rightfully serve their time in Gitmo. Where we keep those whom could potentially radicalize other inmates at regular prisons.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Astoundingly good people.

It makes me wonder what kind of people would possibly object to their actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mark K said:

 As enemy combatant radical Trumplamists they should rightfully serve their time in Gitmo. Where we keep those whom could potentially radicalize other inmates at regular prisons.  

14th amendment solution? Removing the franchise is an option.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

14th amendment solution? Removing the franchise is an option.

Firing squad at dawn works for me..... They could even request that their own weapons be used against them... If they actually function properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mrleft8 said:

Firing squad at dawn works for me..... They could even request that their own weapons be used against them... If they actually function properly.

Bear spray and flag poles at ten paces.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

‘Front of the pack’: Off-duty Pa. officer charged at police during the Capitol riots, FBI says

By taking part in the riots at the U.S. Capitol, Pennsylvania officer Joseph W. Fischer did not just break the laws he was tasked with enforcing, the FBI says — he was allegedly at “the front of the pack pushing against the police.”

“Charge!” yells the person taking a video that Fischer posted Jan. 7, according to the FBI, the day after Trump supporters stormed the building in Washington and halted the democratic process. The recorder “had a physical encounter with at least one police officer,” the agency said.

Now Fischer, a patrolman with the North Cornwall Township Police, is charged with obstructing law enforcement during “civil disorder,” accused of aiding the insurrection that left one police officer dead and many others wounded. More than a dozen off-duty members of law enforcement are suspected of participating in the Jan. 6 riots, raising uncomfortable questions for chiefs and departments around the country. But the allegations against Fischer stand out for how directly they pit him against members of his own profession.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Before far-right UCLA student stormed Capitol, he faced furor over incendiary tweets

In March 2020, UCLA student Matthew Richard went on Twitter and called for the university to investigate and expel fellow undergrad Christian Secor. He posted a thread with 21 recent tweets from the account of Secor, who founded America First Bruins, a far-right student group.

“Anyone else cop the Hitler sneakers?” one tweet read. “Can ICE just cough on illegals or something?” read another.

Outrage followed. Students complained to administrators. More than 30,000 people liked a Twitter post by one student who asked, “Ya’ll think UCLA can expel someone for xenophobia and wishing death upon undocumented ppl during a pandemic?”

Secor was arrested Tuesday and charged with federal crimes for his alleged role in the U.S. Capitol riot. But long before he was identified as having sat in the chair Vice President Mike Pence had vacated, the 22-year-old had stirred up tensions over free speech at UCLA.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/17/2021 at 6:44 PM, AJ Oliver said:

Looking at the bigger picture . .  a prof from College Park weighs in 

Thesis - the German elites in the 1930's and today's Right Wing GOPPRS made similar Faustian Bargains  . . 

@Grog   What do you think ?? 

https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/178983

Image result for faustian bargain

Flattered by your ongoing interest on my opinion on such grave matters, so thanks for that.

That said, I think the 1930's german elites and what you like to label "Right Wing" whatevers do not have that much in common.

If anything, both fractions might have thought they had a tame useful idiot on the leash. But they did not.

And frankly, I do take offense in any comparison of the orange clown to the worst dictator in recent history. Your "Reich Wing" stick is offensive to me personally and very likely would be offensive and insulting to any number of people actually affected by Hitler, his party or regime and most importantly the Holocaust and World War II. These are and have been serious issues to a great number of people, victims and descendants of those who commited these crimes alike.

Trivializing and ridiculing these crimes by trademarking the orange clown and his elk "Reich Wing" is wrong and idiotic. Stop it.

If you want to educate yourself about the German elites and their stance to AH, here is a more recent work you might want to read: »Nazis and Nobility« by Stephan Malinowski (Oxford University Press, 2020).

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

So Bitch McConnell talked about the criminal and civil liability the EPWSNBN could face after he voted to acquit.  From you actual legal beagles.......  What are the chances trump faces any charges over the Jan 6th insurrection?  And what would be the actual charges?  "Incitement" is really hard to prove.  What about accessory to murder?  Or conspiracy?  Sedition?  Treason?  Bad Haircut?  

I still say the single charge the House brought against him of incitement was obvious on it's face but terribly difficult to make the case.  I think it would have been almost as hard to make the case to a jury as it was to 43 senators who already had their minds made up.  As I've heard @MR.CLEAN or someone say here before..... It's not what you know, but what you can prove.  I think proving the vote tampering in GA with the call to the SoS of GA was an easier slam dunk.  I also think holding him accountable for the COVID deaths through his willful misinformation and actions were easier to make a case and prove than what the House did.  They presented a brilliant case, no arguments from me.  But it wasn't enough to make the case to the public, which was all they had left when it was clear that the Senate was not going to convict.  But I digress......

Anywho.... when are these civil and criminal charges coming.  If the orange shitbag walks away from this with nary a scrape......  we have failed as a democracy to be able to hold anyone accountable for their gross misconduct.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

I think proving the vote tampering in GA with the call to the SoS of GA was an easier slam dunk. 

You didn't pay attention, 45 GOP Sens had already said impeachment after leaving office was Unconstitutional, regardless of the charge.  They just would not have convicted on a different charge.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cal20sailor said:

You didn't pay attention, 45 GOP Sens had already said impeachment after leaving office was Unconstitutional, regardless of the charge.  They just would not have convicted on a different charge.  

And you also didn't pay attention.  I was well aware of what 45 senators said.  The trial was for the public, not for those 43 cunts who ended up not voting to convict.  And having more charges on the impeachment bill would make it easier for civil and criminal courts to take it up after the inevitable senate acquittal.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Burning Man said:

And you also didn't pay attention.  I was well aware of what 45 senators said.  The trial was for the public, not for those 43 cunts who ended up not voting to convict.  And having more charges on the impeachment bill would make it easier for civil and criminal courts to take it up after the inevitable senate acquittal.  

Guess I don't understand what a slam dunk is.  

In the court of public opinion, I think watching the 13-minute video the House Team put together was pretty damn compelling. Much more so than listening to Trump on the phone breaking the law for the trillionth time.  Trump changed the country as when he opened his mouth, we expected him to lie.  Watching rioters busting into the Capitol Building and the resulting carnage was more effective...again, if you just wanted to paint Trump as bad/culpable/etc.  He'll never get indicted for anything related to 6 January.  Civil suits, you bet.  Criminal charges likely finance-related from NY.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Grog said:

And frankly, I do take offense in any comparison of the orange clown to the worst dictator in recent history. Your "Reich Wing" stick is offensive to me personally and very likely would be offensive and insulting to any number of people actually affected by Hitler, his party or regime and most importantly the Holocaust and World War II. These are and have been serious issues to a great number of people, victims and descendants of those who commited these crimes alike.

Trivializing and ridiculing these crimes by trademarking the orange clown and his elk "Reich Wing" is wrong and idiotic. Stop it.

Thanks for your blunt response, and for being civil. 

But we disagree: Really, it is not just me by any means who sees the Drumphist Reich as a forerunner of fascism. There is an entire literature on the subject. 

If you maintain that Hitler (the Austrian, not German!) was unique you are saying that such a monster cannot occur again. I hope you are right, but I fear not. 

We just had the Brown Shirts storming our capitol - the US Reich in action. 

So please listen to Prof Stanley (below) - perhaps he can change your mind. 

https://www.pbs.org/wnet/amanpour-and-company/video/how-fascism-works-a-warning-for-the-u-s/

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

How many of them will try to save their own asses by naming names of those who were involved, but not yet identified?

Investigators signal some Capitol riot suspects could be charged with conspiring to overthrow U.S. government

I said at the time they should offer than one month off their sentences for every valid name they provide.

It would save a huge amount of investigation - all those patriots looking at decades inside will start babbling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Burning Man said:

And you also didn't pay attention.  I was well aware of what 45 senators said.  The trial was for the public, not for those 43 cunts who ended up not voting to convict.  And having more charges on the impeachment bill would make it easier for civil and criminal courts to take it up after the inevitable senate acquittal.  

The majority of the republican public are just like those 43 senators you mentioned.  They are convinced the election was stolen and no amount of "fake" evidence will change their mind.  Trump flags are still flying, Trump signs are still proudly displayed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

I said at the time they should offer than one month off their sentences for every valid name they provide.

It would save a huge amount of investigation - all those patriots looking at decades inside will start babbling.

From the bits and pieces I'm seeing, there's a lot of talking going on.  Not only is the FBI REALLY good a getting people to talk but these cosplaytriots were quite chatty on their cell phones making the conspiracy charges easier to bring.  Mix in the family members that are providing information and the quote I saw about the FBI having "hundreds" of suspects seems pretty reasonable.  Just from public sources, I've put together almost 400 people that were at the Capitol (which means they went through at least 1 barrier) or inside.  With access to facial recognition, cell phone data, social media and informants, there should be a lot of MAGAts sleeping badly. The bad new is the NEXT one will be harder to trace. Even earthworms can learn.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/20/2021 at 9:24 AM, hobie1616 said:

This guy's life ran off of the rails.  Facebook was the engineer.

His pastors tried to steer him away from social media rage. He stormed the Capitol anyway.

Two pastors and a manager at his church in Kentucky. Putting your feet up on Nancy's desk doesn't make those people go away, nor does it make people like the TeamR Georgia election officials go away. All those people are among the reasons that the nincomcoup never had any chance of overturning the election results, and it's a long list of reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Burning Man said:

So Bitch McConnell talked about the criminal and civil liability the EPWSNBN could face after he voted to acquit.  From you actual legal beagles.......  What are the chances trump faces any charges over the Jan 6th insurrection?  And what would be the actual charges?  "Incitement" is really hard to prove.  What about accessory to murder?  Or conspiracy?  Sedition?  Treason?  Bad Haircut?  

I still say the single charge the House brought against him of incitement was obvious on it's face but terribly difficult to make the case.  I think it would have been almost as hard to make the case to a jury as it was to 43 senators who already had their minds made up.  As I've heard @MR.CLEAN or someone say here before..... It's not what you know, but what you can prove.  I think proving the vote tampering in GA with the call to the SoS of GA was an easier slam dunk.  I also think holding him accountable for the COVID deaths through his willful misinformation and actions were easier to make a case and prove than what the House did.  They presented a brilliant case, no arguments from me.  But it wasn't enough to make the case to the public, which was all they had left when it was clear that the Senate was not going to convict.  But I digress......

Anywho.... when are these civil and criminal charges coming.  If the orange shitbag walks away from this with nary a scrape......  we have failed as a democracy to be able to hold anyone accountable for their gross misconduct.  

It's being reported that he's openly worried about civil suits, since the standard of proof is preponderance of evidence.  Regardless of the charges and suits, he's already told us what his strategy is;  use every appeal and defy every request and order he can get away with to try to run the clock out.  Just look at his IRS tax fraud case that's been going on for years. He's a short term thinker so, in his mind, if he can keep the balls in the air he's "winning" regardless of who they fall on in the end. He's counting on the tradition of not indicting or convicting former presidents and hoping for another toady in the White House in time to pardon him if necessary. That said, the chances of civil suits and judgements is, I think, pretty good but collecting will be damn near impossible. Criminal charges will be harder to make stick because of deference to the executive and his mafia word salad mode of speech, trying to make a case on his transcript will make everyone's head hurt.  If convicted, the appeals will probably run to the end of his life.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, learningJ24 said:

If convicted, the appeals will probably run to the end of his life.

With his secret visit to Walter Reed (stroke, diabetes, emergency boner pill refill?), morbidly obese, indications of early onset of dementia and his hovering of junk food, it may not be that far off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, hobie1616 said:

With his secret visit to Walter Reed (stroke, diabetes, emergency boner pill refill?), morbidly obese, indications of early onset of dementia and his hovering of junk food, it may not be that far off.

His obit might read a bit like this one:  https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/arts/design/20hartford.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, hasher said:

His obit might read a bit like this one:  https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/arts/design/20hartford.html

I like the comment about him running a minor naval vessel aground because he confused feet and fathoms on the chart.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Pro-Trump Florida doctor charged with hate crime in alleged attack on Hispanic man on Inauguration Day: ‘This is my America’

From fervently posting on Facebook to setting up Halloween displays falsely accusing the Biden family of running a crime empire, Jennifer Susan Wright was known around her South Florida community for her fanatical support of former president Donald Trump. On Jan. 20, the same day Trump left the White House, police say the doctor took her frustrations out on a Hispanic man in a Publix parking lot.

The man was loading his groceries into his car on Inauguration Day outside the Hialeah, Fla., grocery store when Wright, who is White, allegedly stormed up to him, vandalized his car, spewed racist slurs and assaulted him.

“This is not going to be Biden’s America, this is my America,” said Wright, an anesthesiologist at Mount Sinai Medical Center in Miami Beach, according to an arrest report obtained over the weekend by the Miami Herald. “We should have burned it all.”

Wright, 58, was arrested Friday and charged with tampering with a victim, criminal mischief and battery with prejudice, which is classified as a hate crime, according to arrest records.

Wright could not be reached for comment late Sunday. It was not clear in court records whether she has an attorney.

Before the alleged attack in the Hialeah parking lot, police said the man, who has not been identified, was standing in front of Wright while in line to pay for his groceries. When he noticed Wright was standing close to him, the man asked her in Spanish to remain socially distant, according to the Herald.

Wright ignored the man, prompting him to repeat the request in English. Wright then allegedly “mumbled bad words” in response, the newspaper reported.

Once in the parking lot, Wright allegedly walked up to the man and stood within one foot of his face. The man asked her to step back, police said, which enraged her even more.

The arrest report said Wright called him a slur for Hispanic people. She also allegedly said, “We should have gotten rid of you when we could.”

Then the doctor used her keys to scratch and “stab the victim’s vehicle while saying he needed to go back to his country,” the Herald reported. When the man took out his phone and attempted to call the police, Wright allegedly punched him. When the phone dropped to the ground, Wright stomped on it and kicked the man, police said.

After the alleged assault, Wright drove away in her Jeep Wrangler. On Friday, one month later, she was arrested outside her home in Miami Springs, Fla.

On social media, the doctor has shared false claims that Trump won the election and untrue allegations that Dominion Voting System machines changed ballot counts. She also posted images of herself wearing a “Make America Great Again” hat at a Trump rally and a post that said, “IT’S OKAY TO BE WHITE.”

In the weeks leading up to Halloween, Wright placed a mannequin that resembled a masked-up Joe Biden on a chair in her front yard with a sign that said, “Expose the Biden crime family.” According to the Herald, neighbors flocked to Wright’s yard and took pictures with the display, which included the Chinese flag and chairs spaced out to seemingly to mock Biden’s guidance to social distance.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bridhb said:

The majority of the republican public are just like those 43 senators you mentioned.  They are convinced the election was stolen and no amount of "fake" evidence will change their mind.  Trump flags are still flying, Trump signs are still proudly displayed.

Fair point.  The bitch needs more heat applied......

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, hasher said:

His obit might read a bit like this one:  https://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/20/arts/design/20hartford.html

Just change the names and a bit of an edit and it's all done

"who inherited a fortune and lost most of it chasing his dreams as an entrepreneur"

"could seldom stay focused, a tendency that irritated his associates, who might be summoned from a continent away only to be told that he had no time to see them"

"When it came to his marriages, though, he chose each time a beautiful young woman of no fame or fortune; continued having well-documented affairs regardless"

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bill E Goat said:

Just change the names and a bit of an edit and it's all done

"who inherited a fortune and lost most of it chasing his dreams as an entrepreneur"

"could seldom stay focused, a tendency that irritated his associates, who might be summoned from a continent away only to be told that he had no time to see them"

"When it came to his marriages, though, he chose each time a beautiful young woman of no fame or fortune; continued having well-documented affairs regardless"

People say the attention span remains short in anarchy.  I dispute that idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Bill E Goat said:

Just change the names and a bit of an edit and it's all done

"who inherited a fortune and lost most of it chasing his dreams as an entrepreneur"

"could seldom stay focused, a tendency that irritated his associates, who might be summoned from a continent away only to be told that he had no time to see them"

"When it came to his marriages, though, he chose each time a beautiful young woman of no fame or fortune; continued having well-documented affairs regardless"

Except that Hartford was a decent man, reasonably cultured, didn't lie as a business tactic and was welcomed into the larger society.    He at least went broke paying his bills.

Link to post
Share on other sites

do the feds have felony death law like some state do ?

where any death in a felony is first degree MURDER

as breaking and entering is a felony  and one cop died  and the chic got shot dead

so everyone involved from the glass breakers to the last one in is guilty

and anyone who aided abetted or other wise involved even if they did not enter the building is an accessory

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/22/2021 at 1:53 AM, SloopJonB said:

I said at the time they should offer than one month off their sentences for every valid name they provide.

It would save a huge amount of investigation - all those patriots looking at decades inside will start babbling.

Why would you think they aren't making offers? The investigations are just getting started...

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, frenchie said:
On 2/22/2021 at 1:53 AM, SloopJonB said:

I said at the time they should offer than one month off their sentences for every valid name they provide.

It would save a huge amount of investigation - all those patriots looking at decades inside will start babbling.

Why would you think they aren't making offers? The investigations are just getting started...

I would imagine there have been deals floated.  And, they are being careful to encourage the right people to name names.  This is not their first rodeo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I would imagine there have been deals floated.  And, they are being careful to encourage the right people to name names.  This is not their first rodeo.

LOL, Me thinks the FBI has some "techniques" to coax the info out of the sub 100 IQ crowd.  Saw yesterday that they are soppenoing the cell records of some of the critters.  Heads are gonna rool if that shit goes public hopefully.  Can you indite a sitting congress critter??  

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, shaggy said:

LOL, Me thinks the FBI has some "techniques" to coax the info out of the sub 100 IQ crowd.  Saw yesterday that they are soppenoing the cell records of some of the critters.  Heads are gonna rool if that shit goes public hopefully.  Can you indite a sitting congress critter??  

When did Snaggy take over Shaggy's account?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Pedagogical Tom said:

When did Snaggy take over Shaggy's account?

LOL...  Spell check is wonky...  I am better than that.  Appoliogioies........

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, frenchie said:

Why would you think they aren't making offers? The investigations are just getting started...

Simple - I wouldn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, shaggy said:

LOL...  Spell check is wonky...  I am better than that.  Appoliogioies........

Hah! I didn't think that even Snaggy could come up with that spelling of subpoenaing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Justice Department is facing a tougher climb trying to keep Capitol rioters locked up

The apparent calculus prosecutors are using to determine whether they ask for jail time came to a head twice in court Tuesday, as they argued for the detention of a member of the pro-Trump extremist group the Proud Boys who carried an axe handle wrapped in a flag, and for an alleged conspirator among the paramilitary group the Oath Keepers who was suited up in armor at the riot and had said she was leading a group in response to the President's and others' signals. 

Federal judges have landed all over the map in their decisions to keep alleged Capitol rioters detained, with many judges rejecting the Justice Department's initial requests to keep defendants in jail pending trial, and several appeals ongoing.

As the cases unfurl and count into the hundreds, the Justice Department is developing some patterns outside the obvious arguments for keeping a defendant in jail before trial. For defendants that could go either way based on their charges and criminal history alone, prosecutors have tried to push threats related to weapons they may have carried and actions they took after January 6 in making the cases for detention.

_______________

Doug Jensen of Iowa, who was caught on video chasing a Capitol Police officer near the entry to the Senate, will stay in jail, Judge Timothy Kelly decided at a hearing on Tuesday. Kelly said there was no indication Jenson's "interest in revolution" had gone away following the insurrection. Kelly also pointed to Jensen's previous criminal convictions, including a domestic assault charge.  Kelly's decision overturned a ruling by a lower court judge in Iowa to release him. Jensen's attorneys hadn't fought for his release once his case moved to DC and he was indicted. He has pleaded not guilty.

n the other case -- of Texas winery owner Christopher Grider, who allegedly told his wife to "get rid of his Trump things" after the riot -- Judge Kentaji Brown Jackson decided he should be released. Grider's defense attorneys had argued he had been a "passive bystander" in the insurrection. He has pleaded not guilty. Still, Jackson condemned his actions. 

"If there is a more serious offense against who we are as a society and the rules that are at the core of our democratic process, then I don't know what it is," Jackson said at a hearing Monday. Jackson noted it was the "closest call" on detention she'd had among the cases, after the Justice Department did not offer any new argument and failed to meet the legal threshold to keep Grider in jail that other DC federal judges were requiring.  Her decision overturned a ruling by a lower court judge in Texas to keep him detained.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, hobie1616 said:

The Justice Department is facing a tougher climb trying to keep Capitol rioters locked up

The apparent calculus prosecutors are using to determine whether they ask for jail time came to a head twice in court Tuesday, as they argued for the detention of a member of the pro-Trump extremist group the Proud Boys who carried an axe handle wrapped in a flag, and for an alleged conspirator among the paramilitary group the Oath Keepers who was suited up in armor at the riot and had said she was leading a group in response to the President's and others' signals. 

Federal judges have landed all over the map in their decisions to keep alleged Capitol rioters detained, with many judges rejecting the Justice Department's initial requests to keep defendants in jail pending trial, and several appeals ongoing.

As the cases unfurl and count into the hundreds, the Justice Department is developing some patterns outside the obvious arguments for keeping a defendant in jail before trial. For defendants that could go either way based on their charges and criminal history alone, prosecutors have tried to push threats related to weapons they may have carried and actions they took after January 6 in making the cases for detention.

_______________

Doug Jensen of Iowa, who was caught on video chasing a Capitol Police officer near the entry to the Senate, will stay in jail, Judge Timothy Kelly decided at a hearing on Tuesday. Kelly said there was no indication Jenson's "interest in revolution" had gone away following the insurrection. Kelly also pointed to Jensen's previous criminal convictions, including a domestic assault charge.  Kelly's decision overturned a ruling by a lower court judge in Iowa to release him. Jensen's attorneys hadn't fought for his release once his case moved to DC and he was indicted. He has pleaded not guilty.

n the other case -- of Texas winery owner Christopher Grider, who allegedly told his wife to "get rid of his Trump things" after the riot -- Judge Kentaji Brown Jackson decided he should be released. Grider's defense attorneys had argued he had been a "passive bystander" in the insurrection. He has pleaded not guilty. Still, Jackson condemned his actions. 

"If there is a more serious offense against who we are as a society and the rules that are at the core of our democratic process, then I don't know what it is," Jackson said at a hearing Monday. Jackson noted it was the "closest call" on detention she'd had among the cases, after the Justice Department did not offer any new argument and failed to meet the legal threshold to keep Grider in jail that other DC federal judges were requiring.  Her decision overturned a ruling by a lower court judge in Texas to keep him detained.

 

The question about locking folks up before they are convicted remains controversial.  People in jail often plead guilty just to get out.  That seems unconscionable to me.

The Feds will often conduct a trial, receive a guilty verdict and then schedule the sentencing hearing down the road allowing the convict to go home.  The theory is, you can run but you can't hide.  And that is overwhelmingly the case.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hasher said:

The question about locking folks up before they are convicted remains controversial.  People in jail often plead guilty just to get out.  That seems unconscionable to me.

The Feds will often conduct a trial, receive a guilty verdict and then schedule the sentencing hearing down the road allowing the convict to go home.  There theory is, you can run but you can't hide.  And that is overwhelmingly the case.

This.   

As guilty as I see some charged people to be, I always keep in the back of mind the American ideal that it should be incredibly hard for the government to take our freedom away.  They should have to jump through hoops to do it.  Guilty people going free, even after a trial, is a byproduct of this.  Going to jail before conviction needs to be an outrageous exception.  I think we are seeing such exceptions in regard to this episode, but those should be very few. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, benwynn said:

This.   

As guilty as I see some charged people to be, I always keep in the back of mind the American ideal that it should be incredibly hard for the government to take our freedom away.  They should have to jump through hoops to do it.  Guilty people going free, even after a trial, is a byproduct of this.  Going to jail before conviction needs to be an outrageous exception.  I think we are seeing such exceptions in regard to this episode, but those should be very few. 

But shouldn't the standard be "danger to society" and 'flight risk" rather than ability to pay? It strikes me that this is highlighting some basic inequalities in the system when those that have demonstrated the capacity to be involved in violent insurrection walk while minor offenders stay in. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

But shouldn't the standard be "danger to society" and 'flight risk" rather than ability to pay? It strikes me that this is highlighting some basic inequalities in the system when those that have demonstrated the capacity to be involved in violent insurrection walk while minor offenders stay in. 

Definitely.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, benwynn said:
11 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

But shouldn't the standard be "danger to society" and 'flight risk" rather than ability to pay? It strikes me that this is highlighting some basic inequalities in the system when those that have demonstrated the capacity to be involved in violent insurrection walk while minor offenders stay in. 

Definitely.

Agreed.

Anyone who was violent/combative with law enforcement should certainly qualify.  Not that I am advocating a meek and compliant citizenry.  But, when you wield a flag pole (ironically holding a "Blue Lives Matter" flag) as a weapon against.....well, Blue Lives, you certainly qualify for being a "danger to society", IMHO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

Agreed.

Anyone who was violent/combative with law enforcement should certainly qualify.  Not that I am advocating a meek and compliant citizenry.  But, when you wield a flag pole (ironically holding a "Blue Lives Matter" flag) as a weapon against.....well, Blue Lives, you certainly qualify for being a "danger to society", IMHO.

That you wielded a flag pole at all is determined at the trial, not before it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, benwynn said:

That you wielded a flag pole at all is determined at the trial, not before it.

No, if there is evidence that you were armed, even with a flagpole, hockystick, ballbat or pitchfork, that can be, and should be, brought up at the bail hearing.  Would you want evidence of being armed BANNED at a bail hearing?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, learningJ24 said:

No, if there is evidence that you were armed, even with a flagpole, hockystick, ballbat or pitchfork, that can be, and should be, brought up at the bail hearing.  Would you want evidence of being armed BANNED at a bail hearing?

The Dog Standard. Presumption of innocence and without a conviction, nothing happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of flag poles...

Retired N.Y.P.D. Officer Who Guarded City Hall Charged in Capitol Riot

Thomas Webster turned himself in on charges that he assaulted a Washington police officer with a flagpole during the Jan. 6 attack on Congress.

A retired New York police officer who once was part of the security detail at City Hall was charged on Tuesday with assaulting a police officer with a metal flagpole during the pro-Trump riot at the Capitol on Jan. 6.

The former officer, Thomas Webster, served in a New York Police Department unit that provided security for the mayor, Gracie Mansion and City Hall, according to a law enforcement official. He retired from the force in 2011.

Mr. Webster, 54, a former Marine, surrendered to the F.B.I. on Monday and was charged with six counts relating to the attack on an officer from the Metropolitan Police Department in Washington, D.C., and his participation in the violent attempt to stop Congress from certifying the presidential election results.

A federal prosecutor said there were videos of Mr. Webster attacking the Washington officer, first with a metal flagpole that earlier had flown a Marine Corps flag, and then with his bare hands. According to court documents, after the officer wrestled the flagpole away from Mr. Webster, the former Marine tackled the officer, pinned him to the ground, straddled him and attempted to rip off his face shield and gas mask — an attack that left the officer unable to breathe.

“These videos shock the conscience,” the prosecutor, Benjamin A. Gianforti, said. He said Mr. Webster had shown an utter lack of compassion and had pursued the officer he attacked “like a junkyard dog.” The government did not immediately identify the officer.

Ultimately, the judge said that the “undercurrent of political hostility” that appeared to have led a person with a previously exemplary life to act in a violent manner had not dissipated, and Mr. Webster could still be considered a threat to public safety. He ordered him held without bail pending another hearing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hasher said:

The question about locking folks up before they are convicted remains controversial.  People in jail often plead guilty just to get out.  That seems unconscionable to me.

Seems pretty simple to me.

Were they there?

If yes then they go directly to jail.

Sort out the details and determine how long they remain there later.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, learningJ24 said:

No, if there is evidence that you were armed, even with a flagpole, hockystick, ballbat or pitchfork, that can be, and should be, brought up at the bail hearing.  Would you want evidence of being armed BANNED at a bail hearing?

I'm not an attorney, so I'm making assumptions...

I didn't think that evidence in regard to guilt or innocence was determined at a bail hearing.  I thought it involved whether the person was a flight risk or a danger to the public.  I suppose assault on an officer with a flag pole could be construed as one posing a danger to the public.  But one having no other history of criminal behavior, claiming to be acting under the direction of the President, sounds like a reasonable argument to be released on bail or on recognizance.  Edited to add: Or a reasonable argument that there was a mistake in identity.

This is not a comfortable argument to make.   I was disgusted at some of the video, with a gut reaction that many of these people should be taken out into the street and fucking shot that day.  But then I remembered our justice system, and the values behind it.  That someone beating an office with a flag pole could look very much like someone else who never went past the fence.  And how trials are supposed to sort that shit out, as painfully lengthy and procedural the process can be.  

My opinion of what should be done about that person allegedly seen in the video, does not count.  It's not easy for me, but that's the way it is.

“If you don't stick to your values when they're being tested, they're not values: they're hobbies.”  - Jon Stewart

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, another 505 sailor said:

The Dog Standard. Presumption of innocence and without a conviction, nothing happened.

I thought I made it clear in post #1351 that sometimes guilty people go free.   You'll need to expound on how this infers that "nothing happened".  Because that is not what I meant.  At all.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Seems pretty simple to me.

Were they there?

If yes then they go directly to jail.

Sort out the details and determine how long they remain there later.

Someone looking very much like you was there.   Someone says you where there.

You know you weren't. 

Should you go directly to jail?

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, benwynn said:

I'm not an attorney, so I'm making assumptions...

I didn't think that evidence in regard to guilt or innocence was determined at a bail hearing.  I thought it involved whether the person was a flight risk or a danger to the public.  I suppose assault on an officer with a flag pole could be construed as one posing a danger to the public.  But one having no other history of criminal behavior, claiming to be acting under the direction of the President, sounds like a reasonable argument to be released on bail or on recognizance. 

This is not a comfortable argument to make.   I was disgusted at some of the video, with a gut reaction that many of these people should be taken out into the street and fucking shot that day.  But then I remembered our justice system, and the values behind it.  That someone beating an office with a flag pole could look very much like someone else who never went past the fence.  And how trials are supposed to sort that shit out, as painfully lengthy and procedural the process can be.  

My opinion of what should be done about that person allegedly seen in the video, does not count.  It's not easy for me, but that's the way it is.

“If you don't stick to your values when they're being tested, they're not values: they're hobbies.”  - Jon Stewart

I didn't even stay in a Holiday Inn so I think we're discussing from the same level.  What I'm basing the observations on is reading some of the charging documents that FBI agents are swearing to about the individuals.  Usually, there's discussion of other evidence (social media, camera and cell phone location data) showing that the individual went through barriers before the incident described. I think that we would both agree that the person who's truck contained incendiary devices, arms and ammunition should be detained even though it's a first charge, we'll have to disagree on the flagpoles as there is ample depiction of them being used as weapons. There anecdotal evidence that using flagpoles as weapons was recommended and discussed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, benwynn said:

Someone looking very much like you was there.   Someone says you where there.

You know you weren't. 

Should you go directly to jail?

I think the standards for charging people are just a tad tighter than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bus Driver said:

Anyone have any idea why Speaker Pelosi wants the makeup of the commission to be 7-4?

Mitch McConnell: Nancy Pelosi's plan for investigating the Capitol attack is a 'bizarre partisan concept'

Moscow Mitch says he does not want to investigate anything other than why the Capitol security was breached. Wonder if he's got somebody in mind that he is shielding

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:
10 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

Anyone have any idea why Speaker Pelosi wants the makeup of the commission to be 7-4?

Mitch McConnell: Nancy Pelosi's plan for investigating the Capitol attack is a 'bizarre partisan concept'

Moscow Mitch says he does not want to investigate anything other than why the Capitol security was breached. Wonder if he's got somebody in mind that he is shielding

- DSK

I have no doubt there are some folks on the Hill nervous about what will come out. 

Especially after Merrick Garland pledged  to “pursue these leads wherever they take us.” and “We begin with the people on the ground and we work our way up to those who were involved and further involved.”

I am just wondering why the Commission proposal being put forth by Speaker Pelosi isn't 50/50.  The 9/11 Commission, on which she says she is basing this, was just that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I have no doubt there are some folks on the Hill nervous about what will come out. 

Especially after Merrick Garland pledged  to “pursue these leads wherever they take us.” and “We begin with the people on the ground and we work our way up to those who were involved and further involved.”

I am just wondering why the Commission proposal being put forth by Speaker Pelosi isn't 50/50.  The 9/11 Commission, on which she says she is basing this, was just that.

Agreed. Not good optics.

- DSK

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I have no doubt there are some folks on the Hill nervous about what will come out. 

Especially after Merrick Garland pledged  to “pursue these leads wherever they take us.” and “We begin with the people on the ground and we work our way up to those who were involved and further involved.”

I am just wondering why the Commission proposal being put forth by Speaker Pelosi isn't 50/50.  The 9/11 Commission, on which she says she is basing this, was just that.

What happened is plain to see.  Those slow creaking wheels of justice can be extremely harsh when they grind the bones underneath them.

We need criminal justice reform, even these "patriots" might begin to understand why BLM also relates to their own views.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

I have no doubt there are some folks on the Hill nervous about what will come out. 

Especially after Merrick Garland pledged  to “pursue these leads wherever they take us.” and “We begin with the people on the ground and we work our way up to those who were involved and further involved.”

I am just wondering why the Commission proposal being put forth by Speaker Pelosi isn't 50/50.  The 9/11 Commission, on which she says she is basing this, was just that.

I would think to prevent the Commission from devolving into a Benghazi like circus.  When the ranking minority members of the House are election denying Trumpaloos, who do you think would wind up on the Committee?  Also, the minority demanded equal subpoena power which, based upon past performance, could be used punitively. If you have minority House members STILL denying that Trump supporters invaded the Capitol, how many do you want on the Commission?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hahahahahahahahahaha!

A Capitol rioter texted his ex during the insurrection to call her a ‘moron,’ feds say. She turned him in.

Standing on the Capitol steps on Jan. 6, Richard Michetti allegedly took a break from the rioting to argue with his ex-girlfriend over text message. After sending photos and videos of the mob and boasting how he had avoided tear gas, Michetti parroted Donald Trump’s false claims of election fraud.

“If you can’t see the election was stolen you’re a moron,” Michetti wrote in a text to the woman, according to court documents.

The next day, the woman he had insulted promptly told the FBI that her ex was at the Capitol, handing over to law enforcement the string of texts, photos and videos he had sent to her.

The ex-girlfriend, who is not named in a 10-page statement of facts, told the FBI that Michetti had texted her on Jan. 5 that he was taking a train to Washington from his home in the Philadelphia suburbs. Michetti told her he was going to D.C. because he believed the election had been stolen — a false claim relentlessly echoed by Trump following President Biden’s win.

“It’s going down here,” he texted his ex at 2:06 p.m., court documents show. “We stormed the building they held us back with spray and teargas and paintballs.”

Around 4:30 p.m., after Trump finally called for rioters to “go home” hours into the insurrection, Michetti, who sent the woman two videos from inside the Capitol, called his ex a “moron.”

“This is tyranny,” he texted her later that evening. “They … told us ‘we rigged the election and there’s nuthin you can do about it’ what do you think should be done?”

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What the arrests of Beverly Hills residents say about the US Capitol attack

Beverly Hills has seen more residents arrested for participating in the US Capitol insurrection than any other city in California.

Three of the 14 California residents charged in connection with the pro-Trump riot in Washington on 6 January so far are from the wealthy Los Angeles county enclave: Gina Bisignano, a salon owner, and Simone Gold and John Strand, two rightwing activists who have spread coronavirus misinformation through their roles in America’s Frontline Doctors, an organization that Gold, an emergency room physician, founded.

The prominence of Beverly Hills and the profile of the three residents who have been charged reflects what experts say are broader trends in the backgrounds of the more than 250 people charged so far in connection with the Capitol riot.

More than 90% of the people charged in the riots so far are white, researchers at the Chicago Project on Security and Threats found. About 40% are business owners or have white collar jobs, the researchers found, and compared with previous rightwing extremists, relatively few of them were unemployed.

“There’s been this assumption that the most reactionary folks on the frontlines would be what’s often referred to as white working-class, but that’s of course not what we saw,” said Vanessa Wills, a political philosopher who studies the intersections of race and class. “The people who showed up are disproportionately small business owners.”

The people charged in the attack so far also did not come exclusively from Republican states or conservative enclaves. In fact, a majority lived in counties that Biden won, like Beverly Hills, nestled next to Hollywood in liberal Los Angeles county.

Only 10% of the people charged so far had identifiable ties to rightwing militias or other organized violent groups, the Chicago researchers found. Many more were people who had identified as mainstream Trump supporters.

All three Beverly Hills defendants were already prominent rightwing protest figures before the events at the Capitol.

Bisignano had gone viral in December for shouting homophobic slurs at an anti-lockdown protest outside the home of Los Angeles’ public health director, according to TMZ, which called her “coronavirus lockdown Karen.”

“You’re a new world order Satanist,” Bisignano told a person filming her at the protest, according to the TMZ video. “You’re a Nazi and you’re brainwashed.”

“Is there something wrong with not wanting a lockdown?” she asked. “Is there something wrong with wanting freedom?”

Gold, who has been labeled a “toxic purveyor of misinformation” for her public stances questioning the safety of the coronavirus vaccine and touting hydroxychloroquine as a cure for the virus, was part of an anti-lockdown demonstration with other doctors on the steps of the supreme court in July. Video of the doctors spreading misinformation about Covid-19 was repeatedly shared by Trump and by Donald Trump Jr, and ultimately viewed more than 14m times, despite takedowns by multiple social media platforms, the Washington Post reported.

Strand, the communications director for America’s Frontline doctors, was also one of the main organizers of the frequent pro-Trump rallies in Beverly Hills before and after the election, the Los Angeles Times reported.

“The election is not over,” Strand said at a protest in mid-November after Trump had lost the election, according to footage posted on YouTube. “Yes, we have a chance to win the election.”

All three Beverly Hills defendants had spoken out publicly about their participation in the Capitol riot before they were arrested, including in newspapers interviews and on social media.

“I’m like, I didn’t know we were storming the Capitol. I should have dressed different,” Bisignano told the Beverly Hills Courier before her arrest, noting that she had worn Chanel boots as well as a Louis Vuitton sweater to the riot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

A Capitol rioter texted his ex during the insurrection to call her a ‘moron,’ feds say. She turned him in.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/02/25/capitol-richard-michetti-girlfriend-moron/

Really, who can you trust if you can't trust an ex you just called a moron? This is a cold, cruel world.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

I would think to prevent the Commission from devolving into a Benghazi like circus.  When the ranking minority members of the House are election denying Trumpaloos, who do you think would wind up on the Committee?  Also, the minority demanded equal subpoena power which, based upon past performance, could be used punitively. If you have minority House members STILL denying that Trump supporters invaded the Capitol, how many do you want on the Commission?

Absolutely, the R's would put people on the commission like Matt Gaetz, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Hawley...it would be a total fuckup, on purpose. The Dems could maybe get around that by demanding proof of brain activity before accepting a member.

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Ishmael said:
3 hours ago, learningJ24 said:

I would think to prevent the Commission from devolving into a Benghazi like circus.  When the ranking minority members of the House are election denying Trumpaloos, who do you think would wind up on the Committee?  Also, the minority demanded equal subpoena power which, based upon past performance, could be used punitively. If you have minority House members STILL denying that Trump supporters invaded the Capitol, how many do you want on the Commission?

Absolutely, the R's would put people on the commission like Matt Gaetz, Jim Jordan, Cruz, Hawley...it would be a total fuckup, on purpose. The Dems could maybe get around that by demanding proof of brain activity before accepting a member.

They can still install those four morons.  And, the GOP will scream from the rooftops about the partisan nature of the 7-4 makeup.

Why give them ammo?  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bus Driver said:

They can still install those four morons.  And, the GOP will scream from the rooftops about the partisan nature of the 7-4 makeup.

Why give them ammo?  

I would give them one chance at real bipartisanship, and if they did load up the commission with raving shitheads like Nunes and Gaetz, tell them to fuck off and do it solo.

Link to post
Share on other sites