Jump to content

Maybe Storming The Capitol Wasn't Such A Good Idea


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 4.1k
  • 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

Posted Images

1 hour ago, Fakenews said:

Yeah - he's two for two right there.

Choose a career that is fundamentally futile and then join a crowd of fascist losers trying to overthrow the government.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, hobie1616 said:

Robert Gieswein is a good man, according to family and friends, who describe him as gentle and compassionate. His mother says he has “an amazing work ethic.” His younger sister calls him “the most inspiring person in my life.” He bought clothes and shoes for the residents of a nursing home where he worked as a nurse’s aide. The 24-year-old had no criminal history when he traveled to Washington, D.C., in January and, according to the U.S. government, joined a violent siege of the U.S. Capitol.

It's always the same story when some violent thug gets busted.

"He was always such a nice guy, give you the shirt off his back etc. etc."

Just once before I die I want someone to say "He was always a nasty asshole. Everyone knew it would come to this one day".

Link to post
Share on other sites

c'mon y'all, I get that borderline hysterics can get the blood up a little, but these trumptards weren't ever going to overthrow shit, and they knew it. 

they were just there to take a shit on the place and display their lack of respect. they pushed those boundaries because they had a hunch they could, that hunch was correct.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, 3to1 said:

c'mon y'all, I get that borderline hysterics can get the blood up a little, but these trumptards weren't ever going to overthrow shit, and they knew it. 

Shitstain whipped up a crowd of 15,000, ordered the DC Guard held back and sent that crowd down Pennsylvania Ave. That crowd could have killed Pelosi, ‘Stopped The Steal’ and Shitstain could have declared marshal law.

Were they idiots? Yes. Could they have succeeded? Yes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

It's always the same story when some violent thug gets busted.

"He was always such a nice guy, give you the shirt off his back etc. etc."

Just once before I die I want someone to say "He was always a nasty asshole. Everyone knew it would come to this one day".

I've seen that twice... One was a kid that I watched growing up (Much younger than I) that my parents tried to "help out"..... Got my mother's car stripped, and a bunch of tools stolen from my father.

The kid was literally taught how to pick pockets at the town fair by his father. A bad apple rotten from the core.

 Got busted for murdering a beautiful young girl visiting her grandparents for the summer, and murdering 2 other teen aged kids and their mother a week later getting caught burglarizing their home.

 (The first girl, he buried in a shallow grave that wasn't detected until after the other murders.)

The second was a notorious town drunk, and wife beater, who raped and murdered his 15 y/o daughter one day, and dumped her body in a brook.... Apparently he'd been raping her since she was 7 or so.

 No one was surprised when the cops busted him, the only thing people would say was, "Why didn't the mother take the daughter and run years before? Why didn't the cops put him away before?"

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

Shitstain whipped up a crowd of 15,000, ordered the DC Guard held back and sent that crowd down Pennsylvania Ave. That crowd could have killed Pelosi, ‘Stopped The Steal’ and Shitstain could have declared marshal law.

Were they idiots? Yes. Could they have succeeded? Yes.

your argument is solid, but I can't really get there myself. too many 'firewalls' to overcome and breach.

hell, it's the united states of america, some deluded morons with goatees and pot bellies are going to alter it's course?

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

 

Looks like a pretty typical tourist crowd in any public venue.

Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

your argument is solid, but I can't really get there myself. too many 'firewalls' to overcome and breach.

hell, it's the united states of america, some deluded morons with goatees and pot bellies are going to alter it's course?

Unfortunately, yes... we know that it's fully possible because it's happened. Trump and his butt-buddies were following a fairly standard playbook.

Appoint judges willing to skew justice in your favor.

Appoint generals who will fight for you, personally, not the country.

Round up a mob of jackasses eager to break shit and hurt people, aim them at the legitimate gov't.

From there, a bunch of ways to succeed: the mob kills Pence & Pelosi and induces Congress to declare Trump the President. That's the offical act denoting the President and would take a big fight to undo. Or the mob causes enough hate & havoc that Trump declares martial law, invokes the Insurrection Act, etc etc, orders his tame generals and judges to bust Democrat heads until the smoke clears and he's still President.

Etc etc.

Firewalls? Kind of like the way there are firewalls to prevent a President from appointing a goddam Russian agent as National Security Advisor. How well did that work? When a major political party has literally thrown all law and the rest of the country under the bus for the sake of their own power, there are no more functioning checks and balances. The system is only as safe & secure as the people who operate it!

- DSK

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Unfortunately, yes... we know that it's fully possible because it's happened. Trump and his butt-buddies were following a fairly standard playbook.

Appoint judges willing to skew justice in your favor.

Appoint generals who will fight for you, personally, not the country.

Round up a mob of jackasses eager to break shit and hurt people, aim them at the legitimate gov't.

From there, a bunch of ways to succeed: the mob kills Pence & Pelosi and induces Congress to declare Trump the President. That's the offical act denoting the President and would take a big fight to undo. Or the mob causes enough hate & havoc that Trump declares martial law, invokes the Insurrection Act, etc etc, orders his tame generals and judges to bust Democrat heads until the smoke clears and he's still President.

Etc etc.

Firewalls? Kind of like the way there are firewalls to prevent a President from appointing a goddam Russian agent as National Security Advisor. How well did that work? When a major political party has literally thrown all law and the rest of the country under the bus for the sake of their own power, there are no more functioning checks and balances. The system is only as safe & secure as the people who operate it!

- DSK

so what you're saying is there's not enough available resistance throughout the country and from all it's various institutions to resist some fascist authoritarians who's dictator fuckfest went according to plan? and for how long would that shit stand if it did succeed?

obviously I see your point, but things would suddenly get very messy and many would break protocol to put the bastards down. I can't see it simply being tolerated. if that means war, then maybe that means war.

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

It's always the same story when some violent thug gets busted.

"He was always such a nice guy, give you the shirt off his back etc. etc."

Just once before I die I want someone to say "He was always a nasty asshole. Everyone knew it would come to this one day".

I know some people who are pushing me to write into my will that my gravestone should read something similar.

 

Fuckers.....

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ease the sheet. said:

I know some people who are pushing me to write into my will that my gravestone should read something similar.

 

Fuckers.....

Just have it read

FUCKERS

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, 3to1 said:

so what you're saying is there's not enough available resistance throughout the country and from all it's various institutions to resist some fascist authoritarians who's dictator fuckfest went according to plan? and for how long would that shit stand if it did succeed?

obviously I see your point, but things would suddenly get very messy and many would break protocol to put the bastards down. I can't see it simply being tolerated. if that means war, then maybe that means war.

Open civil war? Probably yes, if Trump's half-wit last-minute plan has achieved any of it's goals, and gotten him declared President by Congress or some other credible authority.

Could he and his pinheads be driven out of office? Probably yes, especially in the long run. They're too goddam dumb to succeed at governing, but it doesn't take brainpower to burn the house down.

The Republican lust for unchecked power could still destroy the USA.

- DSK

 

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

Open civil war? Probably yes, if Trump's half-wit last-minute plan has achieved any of it's goals, and gotten him declared President by Congress or some other credible authority.

Could he and his pinheads be driven out of office? Probably yes, especially in the long run. They're too goddam dumb to succeed at governing, but it doesn't take brainpower to burn the house down.

The Republican lust for unchecked power could still destroy the USA.

- DSK

 

IF Trump had been able to get the EV vote tossed, maybe by calling the insurrection act, the House would have installed him.

totally legal. 
 

The house could then have impeached, again, but the Senate would not convict. 
 

Milley said he would follow the legally installed President, so he would have had military backing. 
 

The above is why I advocate a Connie change. Majority vote for the one direct-elected national office.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a lot of stars would need to align for the shits to be able to succeed and then settle in. it's possible, but it would be fucking incredible.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 3to1 said:

a lot of stars would need to align for the shits to be able to succeed and then settle in. it's possible, but it would be fucking incredible.

All we needed was a competent fascist in charge. Fortunately we had TFG

Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

All we needed was a competent fascist in charge. Fortunately we had TFG

gotta' say that's another argument I personally don't really buy (granted, Turd had some real unqualified idjits in key positions, himself being the glaring example).

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

It's always the same story when some violent thug gets busted.

"He was always such a nice guy, give you the shirt off his back etc. etc."

Just once before I die I want someone to say "He was always a nasty asshole. Everyone knew it would come to this one day".

Just keep hanging out here, and your wish will be granted eventually.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, hobie1616 said:

If I may, fuck 'em and the horsies they rode in on.

What were the Capitol rioters thinking on Jan. 6?

Robert Gieswein is a good man, according to family and friends, who describe him as gentle and compassionate. His mother says he has “an amazing work ethic.” His younger sister calls him “the most inspiring person in my life.” He bought clothes and shoes for the residents of a nursing home where he worked as a nurse’s aide. The 24-year-old had no criminal history when he traveled to Washington, D.C., in January and, according to the U.S. government, joined a violent siege of the U.S. Capitol.

Gieswein appears to be affiliated with the radical militia group the Three Percenters, the FBI says, and the leader of a “private paramilitary training group” called the Woodland Wild Dogs. On Jan. 6, he donned goggles, a camouflage shirt, an army-style helmet and a military-style vest reinforced with an armored plate and a black pouch emblazoned with “MY MOM THINKS I’M SPECIAL.” Then, wielding a baseball bat and a noxious spray, he stormed the U.S. Capitol, attacked a federal officer and helped halt the certification of the 2020 presidential election, the government claims.

Gieswein has pleaded not guilty to six criminal counts, including assaulting an officer and destruction of government property. Now he wants to be let out of jail, subject to very strict conditions, while he awaits trial — because the man he really is, according to his lawyer, is not the man the government says he was on that day.

“If what the government says is true, then Mr. Gieswein committed assault on January 6,” federal public defender Ann Mason Rigby said July 1 during a hearing on his detention. “The question before the court is: Is he incorrigibly violent? Is that a characteristic that cannot be controlled? And that’s why you have to look at his history.”

That’s what the U.S. District Court in D.C. is doing with at least 535 people who were somehow involved in the breach of the Capitol; there are hundreds of ongoing investigations beyond that, according to FBI Director Christopher A. Wray.

Were these people acting on their most deeply held convictions, or were they somehow not themselves on Jan. 6?

Six months of evidence, court filings and motion hearings have created a composite sketch of the people arrested — in all their treachery or bone-headedness — and of the country many said they were fighting for.

Some defendants seemed bent on bloodshed and were charged with felonies including conspiracy. One group dressed in combat attire, used walkie-talkies, adopted code names such as “Gator 1” and “Gator 6” and, once inside the Capitol, appeared to be searching for legislators, according to the government. One militiaman wore a patch on his vest that read “I don’t believe in anything. I’m just here for the violence,” according to an affidavit from an FBI agent.

Many defendants are charged with misdemeanors, such as disorderly conduct; their legal defense rests on the distinction between causing the chaos and merely being swept up in it.

Lawyers blame Donald Trump, the media, naivete, trauma, unemployment, the pandemic, Washington elites, their clients’ childhoods and the singular nature of the event itself. The first sacking of the Capitol in 209 years — this time by Americans, not invading foreigners — has prompted extraordinary attempts to explain the actions of participants.

“Mr. Gieswein did not go to any great lengths on January 6,” Rigby wrote last month, arguing for his release. “He simply got in his car, drove to the District, joined an enormous crowd, walked up to the Capitol, and encountered what most agree was a very light, unprepared, and possibly surprised police presence at the Capitol facing the same crowd, many of them riled up by the Commander-in-Chief, and all of them undoubtedly riled up by each other.”

The insurrection itself, in other words, has been deployed as a defense. The mob mentality made them do it.

“I got caught up in the moment,” said Josiah Colt, the Idaho man who was photographed hanging off the Senate balcony in a helmet and kneepads and sitting in the chair reserved for the vice president. (Last week he agreed to plead guilty to felony obstruction of Congress.)

A “momentary lack of restraint” is how an attorney for Thomas Websterdescribes his tackling a police officer outside the Capitol. (Webster has pleaded not guilty to seven counts, including assaulting an officer with a dangerous weapon.)

“Never mistake the man for the moment,” said attorney Patrick Nelson Leduc, arguing Monday for a lenient sentence for his client Paul Hodgkins, who pleaded guilty to obstructing an official proceeding.

If you believe many of the defense arguments made during the past half year, you might conclude that what happened Jan. 6 was a brief eruption of collective madness, and that responsibility for the event is spread so thin that true culpability doesn’t exist.

The Capitol breach cases, as the Department of Justice calls them, look black and white, but the defendants are being portrayed in shades of gray.

One of Gieswein’s friends wrote to the court about the Woodland Wild Dogs, the purported “paramilitary training force” that Gieswein leads in his hometown, not far from Colorado Springs. The friend described it as a group of buddies with a shared interest in camping, shooting and outdoor survival — not in overthrowing the government.

“I considered the idea of naming us as a bit silly,” the friend admitted.

“I have never seen Bobby threaten violence, let alone commit violence against another person,” another friend wrote in his own declaration.

In a February interview, another character witness told the FBI: “Bobby has been going through a lot in his life recently.”

Many of the Jan. 6 defendants had been going through a lot. This is both a sad truth and a crucial part of their legal strategy. The pandemic triggered job losses, and losses of direction and security. Searching for order and meaning, they immersed themselves in politics, conspiracy, Trump’s rhetoric and right-wing media. One attorney has cited “Trumpitis” and “Foxmania.” Lawyers have mounted what you might call an externalized-insanity argument: The defendants were hearing voices saying the presidential election would be stolen by sinister forces unless they intervened. It was a delusion, but the voices were real. And one of them belonged to the president of the United States.

Anthony Antonio lost his job because of the pandemic, moved in with friends who watched Fox News constantly and says he came to Washington because Trump commanded him. (Antonio, charged with five counts including obstruction of law enforcement during civil disorder, has yet to enter a plea.)

“The reason he was there is because he was a dumb--- and believed what he heard on Fox News,” Antonio’s attorney, Joseph Hurley, said in an interview in May.

Folly and sadness abound in these cases. When a Pennsylvania man was arrested last month on charges of stealing government property amid the chaos, among his possessions were literature titled “Step by Step To Create Hometown Militia” and a model of the U.S. Capitol made of Legos.

Eric Munchel, who was photographed leaping through the Senate gallery carrying zip-tie handcuffs, was there to protect his mother, according to his attorney. Inside the Capitol, Munchel attempted to limit her movements, and he was recorded yelling things like: “What’s your goal here, Mom? . . . Wait, Mom. Mom! . . . Mom, where are you going? Mom, focus, don’t lose me.” (Munchel and his mother pleaded not guilty last month to eight counts, including conspiracy to obstruct Congress.)

Patrick Stedman, a self-proclaimed dating guru from New Jersey, was flagged to the FBI by former classmates who saw him bragging publicly about participating in the first wave of rioters to breach the building, according to an affidavit. After being charged with disorderly conduct and obstruction of government procedure, Stedman continued to share his wisdom on Twitter.

“The essence of the masculine spirit is the impulse toward oblivion,” he tweeted shortly before his indictment was filed (he has pleaded not guilty). Days later, he posted: “Women will fall in love with any man so long as he’s in the arena.”

Personal baggage has been submitted as evidence. Douglas Jensen — the Iowa man who wore a “Q” shirt and stalked Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman up a flight of stairs — is “the product of a dysfunctional childhood” spent mostly in foster care, according to his lawyer. Jensen, saddled with stress, the lawyer said, became a “true believer” in QAnon, an extremist ideology that the FBI has deemed a domestic terrorism threat.

“Maybe it was midlife crisis, the pandemic, or perhaps the message just seemed to elevate him from his ordinary life to an exalted status with an honorable goal,” his lawyer wrote last month in a petition to release Jensen from jail as he awaits trial for disrupting government business and obstructing an officer during a civil disorder. (He has pleaded not guilty.)

“In any event,” the lawyer continued, “he fell victim to this barrage of Internet sourced info and came to the Capitol, at the direction of the President of the United States, to demonstrate that he was a ‘true patriot.’ ”

A sense of victimhood still burns in some defendants, who have offered a litany of grievances while caught in the gears of the legal system.

“It’s not fair,” yelled Richard Barnett — who famously propped a foot on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office — referring to his detention during a March 4 hearing. “Everybody else who did things much worse are already home.”

In trying to secure his release, Barnett’s attorney described him as a retired firefighter “beloved” in his community in western Arkansas. On Jan. 6, he was “swept inside with a mass wave of people.” The attorney accused government prosecutors of concocting a “cocktail of mischaracterization of truth and invention of fact” about his client and urged the court to “resist the temptation to consume its cocktail.” (Barnett has pleaded not guilty to seven counts, including obstructing an official proceeding.)

Other lawyers have argued that their defendants are the ones who were served cocktails of misinformation. Albert Watkins, who represents multiple Jan. 6 defendants, likened them to the followers of Jim Jones, the 1970s cult leader who persuaded his followers to commit suicide by drinking grape punch spiked with cyanide.

Watkins tried the unique tactic of calling his clients “f---ing retarded” in the press. On television, the crowd that overtook the Capitol looked like a powerful, unruly mob, but participants arrived at this historic desecration burdened with “overwhelming hardships and vulnerabilities,” as Watkins said about Jacob Chansley, the so-called “QAnon Shaman,” during a recent hearing. (Chansley has pleaded not guilty to six counts, including obstructing an official proceeding.)

Jan. 6 was a product of the nation’s “divisiveness, intolerance, untruths, misrepresentations, and mischaracterizations through an unrelenting multi-year propaganda odyssey,” Watkins wrote last month in defense of Chansley, who was photographed on the dais of the U.S. Senate bare-chested and sporting a horned headdress of animal pelts. Now in jail awaiting trial, Chansley “struggles to cling on to and salvage his mental health,” Watkins wrote, and continues “to reconcile his role in his current lot in life” — as if the Capitol breach was something that happened to Chansley, and not the other way around.

The fear of mistreatment persists. One defense attorney referred to the Jan. 6 investigation and prosecutions as “the largest political witch hunt in Department of Justice (DOJ) history.” At least two defendants have requested that their trials be relocated out of the District, citing bias against Trump and his supporters.

“The evidence in this case is emotionally political in every respect,” wrote an attorney for Jenny Cudd, who argued that her “stormed the Capitol” boast on Facebook Live only meant that she wandered around and took selfies. The “jury who would hear the facts in Washington D.C. is the most politically prejudiced jury in the entire country” against Trump. (Cudd pleaded not guilty to five counts, including obstructing an official proceeding.)

Thomas Caldwell, who pleaded not guilty to a conspiracy charge, wants his case heard in the Western District of Virginia, where he’s from, because D.C. residents “not only despise Caldwell’s politics — they despise many things that traditional America stands for,” wrote his attorney, David W. Fischer, earlier this month, arguing for a change of venue. The people living in the nation’s capital, he contended, “are repulsed by rural America’s traditional values, patriotism, religion, gun ownership, and perceived lack of education.”

His client, who is accused of coordinating with other Oath Keepers, posted video on Facebook from inside the Capitol, according to material obtained by the FBI. “Us storming the castle,” Caldwell wrote in a message, adding: “I am such an instigator!”

Caldwell, as Fischer noted in court filings, is not a “hillbilly” but a retired naval intelligence officer who once held a top-secret clearance. Nevertheless, Fischer put the quest for justice in a specific cultural context: “The ‘Two Americas’ couldn’t be more different and largely despise and distrust one another.”

It's a lot to absorb, psychologically and legally. The FBI is still tracking down participants and digging through their life stories. D.C. judges are handling multiple hearings per day; at least 11 were on the court's calendar on Monday alone. Defendants languish in jail as their families suffer. Attorneys are deluged with video and photo evidence produced by their own clients and gathered by the government. Amid the echoes and static of remote hearings, players are debating the differences between a principal actor and an aider or abettor, if a "momentary lapse in judgment" could last multiple hours, and whether a weapon meets the legal definition of "dangerous" if it didn't cause serious harm.

The question at the core of this massive effort is what to do with the people who led normal lives until Jan. 6, when a vortex of forces compelled them to engage in criminal behavior.

“These are weighty issues. All the judges are consumed by these issues,” said U.S. District Judge Emmett G. Sullivan during a motion hearing for Gieswein earlier this month. Many of the defendants“come to court with unblemished records — they never paid a fine over 50 bucks,” he added.

“The event’s unprecedented,” said Mary McCord, a former acting assistant U.S. attorney for national security who worked on a security review of Jan. 6 earlier this year. “Anytime you take an individual U.S. attorney’s office that is solely responsible for anything massive on this scale, it’s an all-hands-on-deck situation.”

McCord expects an acceleration of plea bargains, which have already begun. And placing blame on Trump or other forces won’t hold up in court, according to Aitan Goelman, a former federal prosecutor now in private practice.

“The really interesting aspect of this is the difference between moral responsibility and criminal legal culpability,” Goelman says. “I don’t think there’s any lawful authority that would agree that because the president was telling me to go, that’s a defense.” Trump has dismissed accusations that he is responsible for any criminal behavior, noting that his speech that day included the word “peacefully” (though it ended with “fight like hell”).

Some defendants have accepted responsibility and emerged from the legal process with a different view of both themselves and Jan. 6.

The day after the breach, Anna Morgan-Lloyd described it as “the most exciting day of my life.”

Last month, she pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of demonstrating inside the Capitol. “I just want to apologize,” Morgan-Lloyd told a judge, becoming the first defendant to be sentenced: $500 in restitution and 40 hours of community service. She said her goals were peaceful and that she was “ashamed” by the “savage display of violence that day.” At the suggestion of her attorney, she submitted repentant writing to the court, including book and movie reports on “Schindler’s List” and the legal memoir “Just Mercy.”

“I’ve lived a sheltered life and truly haven’t experienced life the way many have,” wrote Morgan-Lloyd, who worked for a medical device maker in Indiana. “At first it didn’t dawn on me, but later I realized that if every person like me, who wasn’t violent, was removed from that crowd, the ones who were violent may have lost the nerve to do what they did.”

Before Hodgkins was sentenced Monday to eight months in prison for obstructing an official proceeding, he read a repentant statement in Courtroom 21 of the U.S. District Court of D.C.

“I allowed myself to put passion before my principles,” said Hodgkins, a Tampa resident who is training to be a mechanic. “This resulted in me violating the law for the first time in my life,” which “has weighed heavily on my conscience.”

After half a year in D.C. Jail, Jensen — the Iowa man in the "Q" shirt who followed Officer Goodman — now recognizes that he was "deceived" by "a pack of lies," according to his attorney.

“He came to DC to support the president; he did not foresee the destruction of his family,” his attorney wrote in June.

Last week, Jensen dialed in to a hearing on his potential release. For almost an hour, U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly explained the calculations behind his decision, saying that Jensen’s conduct on Jan. 6 falls “somewhere in the middle of the spectrum” of other defendants’ behavior. Jensen entered the Capitol, but through a window that was already smashed. He had a pocket knife, but didn’t brandish it. He disobeyed Goodman’s orders but didn’t fight him. He told officers to arrest Vice President Mike Pence, but there’s no evidence that he goaded other rioters, damaged property or preplanned any actions.

In fact, according to video he took, Jensen seemed to think he was at the White House, not the Capitol.

“I do consider what happened that day to be an equivalent to an attempt to steal one of the crown jewels of our country: the peaceful transfer of power,” Judge Kelly said. Jensen’s actions were “serious,” but “I don’t think the standard of ‘danger’ is met here. Mr. Jensen didn’t topple barricades, fight with anyone, plan or coordinate.” Plus, “he didn’t even know where he was.”

Kelly ordered Jensen to be released last Wednesday, pending trial, into a different kind of incarceration: house arrest back in Iowa, where he will trade his passport, cellphone, any weapons and all access to the Internet for an ankle monitor and court-appointed surveillance by his wife of 20 years, April, who planned to drive the 16 hours to pick him up in Washington.

Any personal plea agreements they might negotiate on the long trip home will not be part of the record.

So criminals aren't criminals?...sigh.

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

JFC, are you pussies still talking about nothing.

based on your political ideology, logic would dictate you should barely be capable of wiping your ass effectively. but anyway..

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@SloopJonB  wrote,   Just once before I die I want someone to say "He was always a nasty asshole. Everyone knew it would come to this one day".  

You must have missed the Rumsfeld threads . .

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 3to1 said:

a lot of stars would need to align for the shits to be able to succeed and then settle in. it's possible, but it would be fucking incredible.

That's what people said prior to 2016.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well things are gonna get interesting........

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jul/21/capitol-attack-committee-chair-bennie-thompson

 

Bennie Thompson tells Guardian he will pursue wide-ranging inquiry to uncover root causes of January 6 attack

Hugo Lowell in Washington

Wed 21 Jul 2021 07.00 BST

Congressman Bennie Thompson, the chairman of the new House select committee to scrutinize the Capitol attack, says he will investigate Donald Trump as part of his inquiry into the events of 6 January – a day he sees as the greatest test to the United States since the civil war.

 

In an interview with the Guardian, Thompson said that he is also prepared to depose members of Congress and senior Trump administration officials who might have participated in the insurrection that left five dead and nearly 140 injured.

“Absolutely,” Thompson said of his intent to pursue a wide-ranging inquiry against the former president and some of his most prominent allies on Capitol Hill. “Nothing is off limits.”

The aggressive move to place Trump in the crosshairs of the select committee underscores Thompson’s determination to uncover the root causes of 6 January, even after Senate Republicans, fearing political damage, blocked the creation of a 9/11-style commission.

The move comes at the same time as many Republicans have been seeking to downplay the attack on the Capitol – in which five people died – or, in the case of Trump himself, cast its protagonists in a more positive light.

But there is no doubt in Thompson’s mind of the seriousness of the event. Addressing some of the key questions at the heart of the select committee’s investigation into the attacl, Thompson characterized the inquiry as an undertaking to safeguard the peaceful transition of power and the future of American democracy.

“The issues of January 6 are one of the most salient challenges we have as a nation, to make sure that this democracy does not fall prey to people who don’t really identify with democracy,” Thompson said.

The central thrust of the investigation will focus on the facts and circumstances surrounding the Capitol attack, Thompson said, and the first hearing scheduled for 27 July will feature current and former US Capitol police and DC Metro police officers.

But in pursuing a broad mandate to also examine the root causes of the insurrection, Thompson reiterated that he remains prepared to issue subpoenas to compel testimony from an array of Trump officials connected to the attack should they refuse to appear voluntarily.

Trump and McCarthy among top witnesses

Thompson indicated that Trump and the House minority leader, Kevin McCarthy, are among the top witnesses for his investigation, in large part because McCarthy was on the phone with the former president as the riot unfolded.

McCarthy called Trump in a panic as rioters breached the Capitol and begged him to call off his supporters, only for Trump to chastise the top Republican in the House for not doing more to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election.

“There will not be a reluctance on the part of the committee to pursue it,” Thompson said of McCarthy’s call. “The committee will want to know if there is a record of what was said.”

The exchange between McCarthy and Trump is of singular importance, since it provides a rare window into what Trump, sequestered in the West Wing, was privately thinking and saying as the Capitol was invaded.

But Thompson went further, and said that he expects anyone – whether a sitting member of Congress or former White House official – who may have spoken to Trump on 6 January to become the subject of the select committee’s investigation.

That prospect took on added significance on Monday, after McCarthy named House judiciary committee chairman Jim Jordan as one of his picks for the panel. Jordan has previously suggested he may have also spoken to Trump as the assault took place.

“If somebody spoke to the president on January 6, I think it would be important for our committee to know what was said. I can’t imagine you talk about anything else to the president on January 6,” Thompson said.

He also warned Republicans against attempting to stymie the committee’s investigation, saying that it had no deadline to furnish a report and as a result, would be immune to delay tactics previously deployed during the first Trump impeachment inquiry.

“Notwithstanding elections next year, we will not stop until our investigation is complete,” Thompson said.

Subpoenas to be enforced in court

Against that backdrop, Thompson said he expects to demand testimony from senior Trump administration officials who were in the Oval Office as the riot unfolded, from the then White House chief of staff, Mark Meadows, to Trump’s daughter Ivanka.

If Trump administration officials refuse to appear before the committee, citing executive privilege, Thompson said he would issue subpoenas and launch lawsuits to enforce his congressional oversight authority.

“We will pursue it in court,” he said.

Thompson added that he expects the select committee and senior House investigators to meet with the attorney general, Merrick Garland, and expressed optimism for conducting his investigation in close coordination with the justice department.

He was adamant that his investigation would not overlap with existing criminal probes opened by the justice department and the US attorney for the District of Columbia. Still, he said he hoped the DoJ would cooperate with his inquiry.

“We don’t want to get in the way of indictments,” Thompson said. “But I think there could be some sharing of information that could be germane to our investigation, just like other committees have negotiated in the past.”

Thompson said that although no date has been set for a meeting with the attorney general, it will involve the 6 January select committee’s members and senior staff. The senior staff may be named as soon as this week, according to a source familiar with the matter.

To emphasize his seriousness, Thompson said the select committee would draw on legal counsel and investigative staff from existing House panels as well as the US intelligence community – including the NSA, CIA and FBI.

Thompson also said he expects the National Archives, the agency now in possession of records from the Trump White House, to make materials available for his investigation. “That should not be an issue,” he said, though he left open the possibility of subpoenas in the event of noncompliance.

And he vowed to refer criminal charges should Trump White House records, covering the period from the November election through 6 January, be missing or destroyed – a persistent worry among Democrats as Trump grew increasingly unhinged in the final weeks of the administration.

“That violates the law,” Thompson said. “I don’t see any hesitation on our part to pursue that. If the respect for the rule of law is not adhered to, that’s even more reason for this select committee to exist.”

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tampa man, 20, admits intending to block Congress with Oath Keepers in new Capitol riot guilty plea

Source: Washington Post

Tampa man, 20, admits intending to block Congress with Oath Keepers in new Capitol riot guilty plea 

A Tampa man pleaded guilty Tuesday to joining a “stack formation” of Oath Keepers members and associates who allegedly breached the Capitol on Jan. 6, becoming the latest to cooperate with prosecutors and the first among the formation to specify that he intended to hinder Congress that day using intimidation and coercion. 

U.S. District Judge Amit P. Mehta of Washington accepted the plea after Berry acknowledged that he coordinated plans and discussed the need to bring firearms for Jan. 6 in the nation’s capital with Oath Keepers members.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/tampa-man-20-admits-intending-to-block-congress-with-oath-keepers-in-new-capitol-riot-guilty-plea/2021/07/20/74bf6320-e980-11eb-8950-d73b3e93ff7f_story.html 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/18/2021 at 5:42 PM, quod umbra said:
On 7/18/2021 at 5:13 PM, Jules said:

Of course it could just be things such as safety laws that allowed for the proliferation of the intellectually incapacitated.

Really?
Okay then, if someone opens fire at other people are they sane or insane?
Think long and hard about your answer.

Please explain how you took what I wrote and arrived at your response. 
And think long and hard about your answer.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jules said:

Please explain how you took what I wrote and arrived at your response. 
And think long and hard about your answer.

He's a victim of the safety laws you referred to.

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

 

 

I really don't understand why the police didn't start shooting those asshole.

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

Who wants to start a Civil War?

Oh....................... About 40% of the "citizens" of the USA...... But they want their part to be called "America" and the rest is "Liberal BLM land".

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Mrleft8 said:

I really don't understand why the police didn't start shooting those asshole.

i think there were a lot of sympathizers among the police, at least until they started getting the shit beat out of them.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Mrleft8 said:

I really don't understand why the police didn't start shooting those asshole.

Probably short on ammo.

If you start shooting into a crowd like that you definitely don't want to run our.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

News to warm your heart.

 

Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former personal attorney, said he thought Jared Kushner had already flipped on his father-in-law as the criminal investigation into Trump's business empire intensifies. 

Cohen did not offer any evidence but said he thought that was the case because of how little Kushner had been mentioned. 

Cohen tweeted on Wednesday that Kushner's name had been absent from "all the controversy, indictments and arrests" related to the investigation. He speculated that this was because Kushner was already cooperating with prosecutors. 

"Interesting how @jaredkushner (#SecretaryOfEverything) name appears to be absent from all the controversy, indictments and arrests," Cohen tweeted. "Is he next to fall or a cooperating witness? Knowing what a snake he is, I bet the latter!" 


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.businessinsider.com/michael-cohen-thinks-kushner-has-already-flipped-on-donald-trump-2021-7%3famp 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please put Kushner in jail just for the smug look. And he solved the Middle East problems by reading twenty four (count 'em 24) books on the subject. Fuck him.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2021 at 2:13 PM, hobie1616 said:

If I may, fuck 'em and the horsies they rode in on.

What were the Capitol rioters thinking on Jan. 6?

Robert Gieswein is a good man, according to family and friends, who describe him as gentle and compassionate. His mother says he has “an amazing work ethic.” His younger sister calls him “the most inspiring person in my life.” He bought clothes and shoes for the residents of a nursing home where he worked as a nurse’s aide. The 24-year-old had no criminal history when he traveled to Washington, D.C., in January and, according to the U.S. government, joined a violent siege of the U.S. Capitol.

Gieswein appears to be affiliated with the radical militia group the Three Percenters, the FBI says, and the leader of a “private paramilitary training group” called the Woodland Wild Dogs. On Jan. 6, he donned goggles, a camouflage shirt, an army-style helmet and a military-style vest reinforced with an armored plate and a black pouch emblazoned with “MY MOM THINKS I’M SPECIAL.” Then, wielding a baseball bat and a noxious spray, he stormed the U.S. Capitol, attacked a federal officer and helped halt the certification of the 2020 presidential election, the government claims.

Gieswein has pleaded not guilty to six criminal counts, including assaulting an officer and destruction of government property. Now he wants to be let out of jail, subject to very strict conditions, while he awaits trial — because the man he really is, according to his lawyer, is not the man the government says he was on that day.

“If what the government says is true, then Mr. Gieswein committed assault on January 6,” federal public defender Ann Mason Rigby said July 1 during a hearing on his detention. “The question before the court is: Is he incorrigibly violent? Is that a characteristic that cannot be controlled? And that’s why you have to look at his history.”

That’s what the U.S. District Court in D.C. is doing with at least 535 people who were somehow involved in the breach of the Capitol; there are hundreds of ongoing investigations beyond that, according to FBI Director Christopher A. Wray.

Were these people acting on their most deeply held convictions, or were they somehow not themselves on Jan. 6?

Six months of evidence, court filings and motion hearings have created a composite sketch of the people arrested — in all their treachery or bone-headedness — and of the country many said they were fighting for.

Some defendants seemed bent on bloodshed and were charged with felonies including conspiracy. One group dressed in combat attire, used walkie-talkies, adopted code names such as “Gator 1” and “Gator 6” and, once inside the Capitol, appeared to be searching for legislators, according to the government. One militiaman wore a patch on his vest that read “I don’t believe in anything. I’m just here for the violence,” according to an affidavit from an FBI agent.

Many defendants are charged with misdemeanors, such as disorderly conduct; their legal defense rests on the distinction between causing the chaos and merely being swept up in it.

Lawyers blame Donald Trump, the media, naivete, trauma, unemployment, the pandemic, Washington elites, their clients’ childhoods and the singular nature of the event itself. The first sacking of the Capitol in 209 years — this time by Americans, not invading foreigners — has prompted extraordinary attempts to explain the actions of participants.

“Mr. Gieswein did not go to any great lengths on January 6,” Rigby wrote last month, arguing for his release. “He simply got in his car, drove to the District, joined an enormous crowd, walked up to the Capitol, and encountered what most agree was a very light, unprepared, and possibly surprised police presence at the Capitol facing the same crowd, many of them riled up by the Commander-in-Chief, and all of them undoubtedly riled up by each other.”

The insurrection itself, in other words, has been deployed as a defense. The mob mentality made them do it.

“I got caught up in the moment,” said Josiah Colt, the Idaho man who was photographed hanging off the Senate balcony in a helmet and kneepads and sitting in the chair reserved for the vice president. (Last week he agreed to plead guilty to felony obstruction of Congress.)

A “momentary lack of restraint” is how an attorney for Thomas Websterdescribes his tackling a police officer outside the Capitol. (Webster has pleaded not guilty to seven counts, including assaulting an officer with a dangerous weapon.)

“Never mistake the man for the moment,” said attorney Patrick Nelson Leduc, arguing Monday for a lenient sentence for his client Paul Hodgkins, who pleaded guilty to obstructing an official proceeding.

If you believe many of the defense arguments made during the past half year, you might conclude that what happened Jan. 6 was a brief eruption of collective madness, and that responsibility for the event is spread so thin that true culpability doesn’t exist.

The Capitol breach cases, as the Department of Justice calls them, look black and white, but the defendants are being portrayed in shades of gray.

One of Gieswein’s friends wrote to the court about the Woodland Wild Dogs, the purported “paramilitary training force” that Gieswein leads in his hometown, not far from Colorado Springs. The friend described it as a group of buddies with a shared interest in camping, shooting and outdoor survival — not in overthrowing the government.

“I considered the idea of naming us as a bit silly,” the friend admitted.

“I have never seen Bobby threaten violence, let alone commit violence against another person,” another friend wrote in his own declaration.

In a February interview, another character witness told the FBI: “Bobby has been going through a lot in his life recently.”

Many of the Jan. 6 defendants had been going through a lot. This is both a sad truth and a crucial part of their legal strategy. The pandemic triggered job losses, and losses of direction and security. Searching for order and meaning, they immersed themselves in politics, conspiracy, Trump’s rhetoric and right-wing media. One attorney has cited “Trumpitis” and “Foxmania.” Lawyers have mounted what you might call an externalized-insanity argument: The defendants were hearing voices saying the presidential election would be stolen by sinister forces unless they intervened. It was a delusion, but the voices were real. And one of them belonged to the president of the United States.

Anthony Antonio lost his job because of the pandemic, moved in with friends who watched Fox News constantly and says he came to Washington because Trump commanded him. (Antonio, charged with five counts including obstruction of law enforcement during civil disorder, has yet to enter a plea.)

“The reason he was there is because he was a dumb--- and believed what he heard on Fox News,” Antonio’s attorney, Joseph Hurley, said in an interview in May.

Folly and sadness abound in these cases. When a Pennsylvania man was arrested last month on charges of stealing government property amid the chaos, among his possessions were literature titled “Step by Step To Create Hometown Militia” and a model of the U.S. Capitol made of Legos.

Eric Munchel, who was photographed leaping through the Senate gallery carrying zip-tie handcuffs, was there to protect his mother, according to his attorney. Inside the Capitol, Munchel attempted to limit her movements, and he was recorded yelling things like: “What’s your goal here, Mom? . . . Wait, Mom. Mom! . . . Mom, where are you going? Mom, focus, don’t lose me.” (Munchel and his mother pleaded not guilty last month to eight counts, including conspiracy to obstruct Congress.)

Patrick Stedman, a self-proclaimed dating guru from New Jersey, was flagged to the FBI by former classmates who saw him bragging publicly about participating in the first wave of rioters to breach the building, according to an affidavit. After being charged with disorderly conduct and obstruction of government procedure, Stedman continued to share his wisdom on Twitter.

“The essence of the masculine spirit is the impulse toward oblivion,” he tweeted shortly before his indictment was filed (he has pleaded not guilty). Days later, he posted: “Women will fall in love with any man so long as he’s in the arena.”

Personal baggage has been submitted as evidence. Douglas Jensen — the Iowa man who wore a “Q” shirt and stalked Capitol Police officer Eugene Goodman up a flight of stairs — is “the product of a dysfunctional childhood” spent mostly in foster care, according to his lawyer. Jensen, saddled with stress, the lawyer said, became a “true believer” in QAnon, an extremist ideology that the FBI has deemed a domestic terrorism threat.

“Maybe it was midlife crisis, the pandemic, or perhaps the message just seemed to elevate him from his ordinary life to an exalted status with an honorable goal,” his lawyer wrote last month in a petition to release Jensen from jail as he awaits trial for disrupting government business and obstructing an officer during a civil disorder. (He has pleaded not guilty.)

“In any event,” the lawyer continued, “he fell victim to this barrage of Internet sourced info and came to the Capitol, at the direction of the President of the United States, to demonstrate that he was a ‘true patriot.’ ”

A sense of victimhood still burns in some defendants, who have offered a litany of grievances while caught in the gears of the legal system.

“It’s not fair,” yelled Richard Barnett — who famously propped a foot on a desk in Nancy Pelosi’s office — referring to his detention during a March 4 hearing. “Everybody else who did things much worse are already home.”

In trying to secure his release, Barnett’s attorney described him as a retired firefighter “beloved” in his community in western Arkansas. On Jan. 6, he was “swept inside with a mass wave of people.” The attorney accused government prosecutors of concocting a “cocktail of mischaracterization of truth and invention of fact” about his client and urged the court to “resist the temptation to consume its cocktail.” (Barnett has pleaded not guilty to seven counts, including obstructing an official proceeding.)

Other lawyers have argued that their defendants are the ones who were served cocktails of misinformation. Albert Watkins, who represents multiple Jan. 6 defendants, likened them to the followers of Jim Jones, the 1970s cult leader who persuaded his followers to commit suicide by drinking grape punch spiked with cyanide.

Watkins tried the unique tactic of calling his clients “f---ing retarded” in the press. On television, the crowd that overtook the Capitol looked like a powerful, unruly mob, but participants arrived at this historic desecration burdened with “overwhelming hardships and vulnerabilities,” as Watkins said about Jacob Chansley, the so-called “QAnon Shaman,” during a recent hearing. (Chansley has pleaded not guilty to six counts, including obstructing an official proceeding.)

Jan. 6 was a product of the nation’s “divisiveness, intolerance, untruths, misrepresentations, and mischaracterizations through an unrelenting multi-year propaganda odyssey,” Watkins wrote last month in defense of Chansley, who was photographed on the dais of the U.S. Senate bare-chested and sporting a horned headdress of animal pelts. Now in jail awaiting trial, Chansley “struggles to cling on to and salvage his mental health,” Watkins wrote, and continues “to reconcile his role in his current lot in life” — as if the Capitol breach was something that happened to Chansley, and not the other way around.

The fear of mistreatment persists. One defense attorney referred to the Jan. 6 investigation and prosecutions as “the largest political witch hunt in Department of Justice (DOJ) history.” At least two defendants have requested that their trials be relocated out of the District, citing bias against Trump and his supporters.

“The evidence in this case is emotionally political in every respect,” wrote an attorney for Jenny Cudd, who argued that her “stormed the Capitol” boast on Facebook Live only meant that she wandered around and took selfies. The “jury who would hear the facts in Washington D.C. is the most politically prejudiced jury in the entire country” against Trump. (Cudd pleaded not guilty to five counts, including obstructing an official proceeding.)

Thomas Caldwell, who pleaded not guilty to a conspiracy charge, wants his case heard in the Western District of Virginia, where he’s from, because D.C. residents “not only despise Caldwell’s politics — they despise many things that traditional America stands for,” wrote his attorney, David W. Fischer, earlier this month, arguing for a change of venue. The people living in the nation’s capital, he contended, “are repulsed by rural America’s traditional values, patriotism, religion, gun ownership, and perceived lack of education.”

His client, who is accused of coordinating with other Oath Keepers, posted video on Facebook from inside the Capitol, according to material obtained by the FBI. “Us storming the castle,” Caldwell wrote in a message, adding: “I am such an instigator!”

Caldwell, as Fischer noted in court filings, is not a “hillbilly” but a retired naval intelligence officer who once held a top-secret clearance. Nevertheless, Fischer put the quest for justice in a specific cultural context: “The ‘Two Americas’ couldn’t be more different and largely despise and distrust one another.”

It's a lot to absorb, psychologically and legally. The FBI is still tracking down participants and digging through their life stories. D.C. judges are handling multiple hearings per day; at least 11 were on the court's calendar on Monday alone. Defendants languish in jail as their families suffer. Attorneys are deluged with video and photo evidence produced by their own clients and gathered by the government. Amid the echoes and static of remote hearings, players are debating the differences between a principal actor and an aider or abettor, if a "momentary lapse in judgment" could last multiple hours, and whether a weapon meets the legal definition of "dangerous" if it didn't cause serious harm.

The question at the core of this massive effort is what to do with the people who led normal lives until Jan. 6, when a vortex of forces compelled them to engage in criminal behavior.

“These are weighty issues. All the judges are consumed by these issues,” said U.S. District Judge Emmett G. Sullivan during a motion hearing for Gieswein earlier this month. Many of the defendants“come to court with unblemished records — they never paid a fine over 50 bucks,” he added.

“The event’s unprecedented,” said Mary McCord, a former acting assistant U.S. attorney for national security who worked on a security review of Jan. 6 earlier this year. “Anytime you take an individual U.S. attorney’s office that is solely responsible for anything massive on this scale, it’s an all-hands-on-deck situation.”

McCord expects an acceleration of plea bargains, which have already begun. And placing blame on Trump or other forces won’t hold up in court, according to Aitan Goelman, a former federal prosecutor now in private practice.

“The really interesting aspect of this is the difference between moral responsibility and criminal legal culpability,” Goelman says. “I don’t think there’s any lawful authority that would agree that because the president was telling me to go, that’s a defense.” Trump has dismissed accusations that he is responsible for any criminal behavior, noting that his speech that day included the word “peacefully” (though it ended with “fight like hell”).

Some defendants have accepted responsibility and emerged from the legal process with a different view of both themselves and Jan. 6.

The day after the breach, Anna Morgan-Lloyd described it as “the most exciting day of my life.”

Last month, she pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of demonstrating inside the Capitol. “I just want to apologize,” Morgan-Lloyd told a judge, becoming the first defendant to be sentenced: $500 in restitution and 40 hours of community service. She said her goals were peaceful and that she was “ashamed” by the “savage display of violence that day.” At the suggestion of her attorney, she submitted repentant writing to the court, including book and movie reports on “Schindler’s List” and the legal memoir “Just Mercy.”

“I’ve lived a sheltered life and truly haven’t experienced life the way many have,” wrote Morgan-Lloyd, who worked for a medical device maker in Indiana. “At first it didn’t dawn on me, but later I realized that if every person like me, who wasn’t violent, was removed from that crowd, the ones who were violent may have lost the nerve to do what they did.”

Before Hodgkins was sentenced Monday to eight months in prison for obstructing an official proceeding, he read a repentant statement in Courtroom 21 of the U.S. District Court of D.C.

“I allowed myself to put passion before my principles,” said Hodgkins, a Tampa resident who is training to be a mechanic. “This resulted in me violating the law for the first time in my life,” which “has weighed heavily on my conscience.”

After half a year in D.C. Jail, Jensen — the Iowa man in the "Q" shirt who followed Officer Goodman — now recognizes that he was "deceived" by "a pack of lies," according to his attorney.

“He came to DC to support the president; he did not foresee the destruction of his family,” his attorney wrote in June.

Last week, Jensen dialed in to a hearing on his potential release. For almost an hour, U.S. District Judge Timothy J. Kelly explained the calculations behind his decision, saying that Jensen’s conduct on Jan. 6 falls “somewhere in the middle of the spectrum” of other defendants’ behavior. Jensen entered the Capitol, but through a window that was already smashed. He had a pocket knife, but didn’t brandish it. He disobeyed Goodman’s orders but didn’t fight him. He told officers to arrest Vice President Mike Pence, but there’s no evidence that he goaded other rioters, damaged property or preplanned any actions.

In fact, according to video he took, Jensen seemed to think he was at the White House, not the Capitol.

“I do consider what happened that day to be an equivalent to an attempt to steal one of the crown jewels of our country: the peaceful transfer of power,” Judge Kelly said. Jensen’s actions were “serious,” but “I don’t think the standard of ‘danger’ is met here. Mr. Jensen didn’t topple barricades, fight with anyone, plan or coordinate.” Plus, “he didn’t even know where he was.”

Kelly ordered Jensen to be released last Wednesday, pending trial, into a different kind of incarceration: house arrest back in Iowa, where he will trade his passport, cellphone, any weapons and all access to the Internet for an ankle monitor and court-appointed surveillance by his wife of 20 years, April, who planned to drive the 16 hours to pick him up in Washington.

Any personal plea agreements they might negotiate on the long trip home will not be part of the record.

Holy White Privilege, Batman!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor baby, I hope he gets help when he gets out of prison.

 

WASHINGTON, July 23 (Reuters) - The participant in the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riots nicknamed the "QAnon Shaman" is negotiating a possible plea deal with prosecutors, after prison psychologists found he suffers from a variety of mental illnesses, his attorney said. 

In an interview, defense lawyer Albert Watkins said that officials at the federal Bureau of Prisons, or BOP, have diagnosed his client Jacob Chansley with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. 

The BOP's findings, which have not yet been made public, suggest Chansley's mental condition deteriorated due to the stress of being held in solitary confinement at a jail in Alexandria, Virginia, Watkins said. 

"As he spent more time in solitary confinement ... the decline in his acuity was noticeable, even to an untrained eye," Watkins said in an interview on Thursday.




Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-qanon-shaman-plea-negotiations-after-mental-health-diagnosis-lawyer-2021-07-23/ 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2021 at 2:01 PM, badlatitude said:

Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former personal attorney, said he thought Jared Kushner had already flipped on his father-in-law as the criminal investigation into Trump's business empire intensifies. 

Mr. Everything may be seeing the light, considering all the legal hot water he's in.  From his 666 building shenanigans to whatever crimes he committed for TFG, he's probably finding cooperation religion much more palatable than having another Orange Julius for breakfast.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, badlatitude said:

Poor baby, I hope he gets help when he gets out of prison.

 

WASHINGTON, July 23 (Reuters) - The participant in the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riots nicknamed the "QAnon Shaman" is negotiating a possible plea deal with prosecutors, after prison psychologists found he suffers from a variety of mental illnesses, his attorney said. 

In an interview, defense lawyer Albert Watkins said that officials at the federal Bureau of Prisons, or BOP, have diagnosed his client Jacob Chansley with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. 

The BOP's findings, which have not yet been made public, suggest Chansley's mental condition deteriorated due to the stress of being held in solitary confinement at a jail in Alexandria, Virginia, Watkins said. 

"As he spent more time in solitary confinement ... the decline in his acuity was noticeable, even to an untrained eye," Watkins said in an interview on Thursday.




Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-qanon-shaman-plea-negotiations-after-mental-health-diagnosis-lawyer-2021-07-23/ 

Who would have seen that coming? The Qanon Shaman is not working with a full deck....

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

Who would have seen that coming? The Qanon Shaman is not working with a full deck....

My guess it is a well rehearsed ploy to keep him out of jail. I hope the judge sees it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, badlatitude said:

Poor baby, I hope he gets help when he gets out of prison.

 

WASHINGTON, July 23 (Reuters) - The participant in the Jan. 6 U.S. Capitol riots nicknamed the "QAnon Shaman" is negotiating a possible plea deal with prosecutors, after prison psychologists found he suffers from a variety of mental illnesses, his attorney said. 

In an interview, defense lawyer Albert Watkins said that officials at the federal Bureau of Prisons, or BOP, have diagnosed his client Jacob Chansley with transient schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression and anxiety. 

The BOP's findings, which have not yet been made public, suggest Chansley's mental condition deteriorated due to the stress of being held in solitary confinement at a jail in Alexandria, Virginia, Watkins said. 

"As he spent more time in solitary confinement ... the decline in his acuity was noticeable, even to an untrained eye," Watkins said in an interview on Thursday.




Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-qanon-shaman-plea-negotiations-after-mental-health-diagnosis-lawyer-2021-07-23/ 

Boy, you take his favorite organic broccoli away from the boy and he just plain falls apart.  He probably missed his personal pillow and teddy bear as well.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2021 at 11:58 PM, Meat Wad said:

JFC, are you pussies still talking about nothing.

It is the essence of their lives safely conducted from the safety of their keyboards.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/20/2021 at 8:58 PM, Meat Wad said:

JFC, are you pussies still talking about nothing.

How's that downplaying bullshit working out for you guys so far? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/22/2021 at 11:45 AM, Sol Rosenberg said:

Give us some more authoritative bullshitting about the unarmed crowd, eh bullshitters. Prolly best to do that before they find out who left the pipe bombs. 
 

 

How do these people get released, bail or no bail?

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

Tom Barrack out on $250M bail. I hope he skips.

Secured by a $5 million bond, that will bring out some very interesting low life if he decides to skip.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

Secured by a $5 million bond, that will bring out some very interesting low life if he decides to skip.

I might have to get into bounty-hunting...

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

It is the essence of their lives safely conducted from the safety of their keyboards.

Says the guy conducting his life safely from the keyboard. I'm sure if BLM had done the exact same thing you would think it was no big deal.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, quod umbra said:

It is the essence of their lives safely conducted from the safety of their keyboards.

Says the Clod, taking Umbrage from the safety of his keyboard.

Irony Alert, Newspaper Image & Photo (Free Trial) | Bigstock

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, bridhb said:

How do these people get released, bail or no bail?

Something about those fellas just lets you take one look at them and know that they aren't a danger to the community. Can't quite put my finger on what it is, but they aren't dangerous.  

 

Right bullshitters? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

Something about those fellas just lets you take one look at them and know that they aren't a danger to the community. Can't quite put my finger on what it is, but they aren't dangerous.  

 

Right bullshitters? 

They are making fucking pipe bombs!  And not the "hold my beer watch this" kind!

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, bridhb said:

They are making fucking pipe bombs!  And not the "hold my beer watch this" kind!

Now now, there's something about those fellas that compels us to not think the worst. They could just believe in old plumbing methods.  After all, it's not like pipe bombs were an issue in DC on 1/6 or anything.  Honest injun, they was just funnin. No threat there at all.  

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

Now now, there's something about those fellas that compels us to not think the worst. They could just believe in old plumbing methods.  After all, it's not like pipe bombs were an issue in DC on 1/6 or anything.  Honest injun, they was just funnin. No threat there at all.  

I agree.  It's not like they were trying to pass a counterfeit 20 dollar bill or something.  And there is that "look" that makes them appear not to be a threat.  Can't put my finger on it either as to what it is.  Damn my memory.

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

And there is that "look" that makes them appear not to be a threat. 

Yeah, yeah . . . now what might that mysterious aspect be . . .   ?? 

Now take BLM . . THOSE  dudes are seriously threatening  . .   

way, way different in some vital respect from the 1/6th tourists . .  

whatever could it be ??? 

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

https://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/us-house-committee-plans-hearing-on-social-media-disinformation-targeting-veterans/2739669/

 

Trying to bullshit our veterans.  Is there any depth to which you won't stoop, bullshitters? 

Vets are woefully easy marks, and certainly not used to questioning pronouncements. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Blue Crab said:
1 hour ago, Sol Rosenberg said:

https://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/us-house-committee-plans-hearing-on-social-media-disinformation-targeting-veterans/2739669/

 

Trying to bullshit our veterans.  Is there any depth to which you won't stoop, bullshitters? 

Vets are woefully easy marks, and certainly not used to questioning pronouncements. 

OTOH veterans -should- be among the best at figuring out what constitutes an illegal order, or a set of orders that are outside any legitimate chain of command

The problem is that people decide the answers they like, based on their prejudices,  and then choose their news accordingly. There is no actual questioning or decision-making involved

- DSK

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

Vets are woefully easy marks, and certainly not used to questioning pronouncements. 

Like WMDs in Iraq?

Yup, sadly many young people bought into that lie.

Some paid the ultimate price. :( 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Secured by a $5 million bond, that will bring out some very interesting low life if he decides to skip.

I'd be shocked of the bondsman didn't keep someone close to him through to the trial, as getting a personal friend of the King out of the UAE would be next to impossible. With a quarter bill on the line there may not only be someone keeping 24/7 surveillance on his carcass but at the nearest airport. Every private jet in the neighborhood will be watched.  

  

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

Vets are woefully easy marks, and certainly not used to questioning pronouncements. 

Every time cannon fodder is sent to war, they are being bullshitted.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mark K said:

I'd be shocked of the bondsman didn't keep someone close to him through to the trial, as getting a personal friend of the King out of the UAE would be next to impossible. With a quarter bill on the line there may not only be someone keeping 24/7 surveillance on his carcass but at the nearest airport. Every private jet in the neighborhood will be watched.  

  

Sounds like the next movie of the week, but this time you can expect the bad guys will win.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Mark K said:

I'd be shocked of the bondsman didn't keep someone close to him through to the trial, as getting a personal friend of the King out of the UAE would be next to impossible. With a quarter bill on the line there may not only be someone keeping 24/7 surveillance on his carcass but at the nearest airport. Every private jet in the neighborhood will be watched.  

  

Why would a guy with that much money need a bondsman?  He probably pulled the $5M out of petty cash.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hobie1616 said:
50 minutes ago, Mark K said:

I'd be shocked of the bondsman didn't keep someone close to him through to the trial, as getting a personal friend of the King out of the UAE would be next to impossible. With a quarter bill on the line there may not only be someone keeping 24/7 surveillance on his carcass but at the nearest airport. Every private jet in the neighborhood will be watched.  

  

Why would a guy with hat much money need a bondsman?  He probably pulled the $5M out of petty cash.

Because he intends to skip and he'd rather give up the $5M than the $250M

- DSK

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

Why would a guy with that much money need a bondsman?  He probably pulled the $5M out of petty cash.

I assumed the $5 mill was the bondsmans fee, as if he could place the full quarter billion in escrow for the court there would be no need for the $5 mil. 

From that I deduced a bondsman is involved.  A now rather jervous and nerky one, I reckon. 

  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites