January 6th, 2021
- Thread starter Jimdamick
- Start date
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
BREAKING: Chilling new details on Lonnie Coffman, the man arrested for bringing explosives & guns to the Capitol. Police found a note containing list of "bad guys" (incl'g a judge) & "good guys," & contact info for right-wing pundits Mark Levin & Hannity and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Tex)
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
The FBI has issued a bulletin WARNING of attacks like this on CAPITOLS in ALL 50 states from Jan. 16 to Jan 20.
TacoMac
Well-Known Member
So did New York Signature Bank.
As of this moment, the only people financing Donald Trump is the American tax payer.
That ends in 8 days.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
Sherrod Brown
stated on January 8, 2021 in an interview with Ohio reporters:
Summer “protesters outside the White House were met with tear gas, rubber bullets, a full militarized response. While ... rioters were able to breach the Capitol.
BLM group met more heavily armed force than Capitol mob
In remarks to Ohio reporters, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said there was a big difference in police response between wha
Regarding protesters objecting to police brutality visited upon Black communities, Trump said: “Left-wing mobs have torn down statues of our founders, desecrated our memorials and carried out a campaign of violence and anarchy,” Trump said. “Whether it is the mob on the street, or the cancel culture in the boardroom, the goal is the same: to silence dissent, to scare you out of speaking the truth and to bully Americans into abandoning their values.” He turned loose his dogs with a vengeance
Regarding a mob of armed white men breaking into and sacking the Capitol Building with deadly force and the intent to overturn an election: "We love you, go home now, go in peace". He interfered with efforts to send in help to the beleaguered officers in the Capitol Building, one of whom was beaten to death. One congressional republican rep even told the mob where to find her colleagues. Most Republicans have either said nothing or voiced support for Trump and his mob.
To say that Republicans are same as Democrats is naive. It's also a common propaganda tactic to gaslight their illegal actions. So, go ahead and lie to us but it doesn't work.
printer
Well-Known Member
Graham?
Brown says Graham yelled at officer for not doing 'enough' to protect senators
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) says that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) "screamed" at an officer for not doing "enough" to protect senators as the U.S. Capitol was being breached last week.
Brown shared the detail during an interview with MSNBC's Ari Melber on Monday.
“I heard when the 75 senators were confined in a room with about 75 staff people, Lindsey Graham with his mask off started screaming at one of the officers — I think it was one of the captains — saying, ‘How come you didn’t protect us? It’s doing your job,' ” Brown said of the account.
"He was screaming at an officer,” Brown added later. “He had his mask off screaming at this officer from 5 feet away — I was maybe 10 feet on the other side — that the officer, the police, didn't do enough to protect us."
A spokesperson for Graham's office told The Hill that he was familiar with Graham "letting the sergeant-at-arms know his thoughts" but wasn't aware of other comments. Brown's office did not provide any additional information.
Brown knocked Graham and other GOP senators in the interview, during which he was asked if he felt Republicans were afraid of political backlash from some of President Trump’s supporters.
“This is the same Lindsey Graham that for five years — or for four years, he didn’t do it in the beginning — defended and argued for and encouraged and aided and abetted this president and all of his followers," the Democratic senator said.
thehill.com
Brown says Graham yelled at officer for not doing 'enough' to protect senators
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) says that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) "screamed" at an officer for not doing "enough" to protect senators as the U.S. Capitol was being breached last week.
Brown shared the detail during an interview with MSNBC's Ari Melber on Monday.
“I heard when the 75 senators were confined in a room with about 75 staff people, Lindsey Graham with his mask off started screaming at one of the officers — I think it was one of the captains — saying, ‘How come you didn’t protect us? It’s doing your job,' ” Brown said of the account.
"He was screaming at an officer,” Brown added later. “He had his mask off screaming at this officer from 5 feet away — I was maybe 10 feet on the other side — that the officer, the police, didn't do enough to protect us."
A spokesperson for Graham's office told The Hill that he was familiar with Graham "letting the sergeant-at-arms know his thoughts" but wasn't aware of other comments. Brown's office did not provide any additional information.
Brown knocked Graham and other GOP senators in the interview, during which he was asked if he felt Republicans were afraid of political backlash from some of President Trump’s supporters.
“This is the same Lindsey Graham that for five years — or for four years, he didn’t do it in the beginning — defended and argued for and encouraged and aided and abetted this president and all of his followers," the Democratic senator said.
Brown says Graham yelled at officer for not doing ‘enough’ to protect senators
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) says that Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) “screamed” at an officer for not doing “enough” to protect senators as the U.S. Capitol was being breached…
thehill.com
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Yer lawyer called...
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Arrest Warrants Should Issue for Trump, Don Jr., Rudy & Others for the Jan. 6 US Capitol Riot
Donald Trump and others encouraged, instigated and incited the riot at the US Capitol on January 6. Worse yet, Trump made sure there were no executive branch law enforcement resources deployed to protect those in the Capitol building (given that the US Capitol Police are an agency controlled by Congress, not the executive branch). Trump, Don Jr., Rudy Giuliani and others incited the crowd to march on and, in a very real sense, attack, the US Capitol, putting EVERYONE in the building - janitorial staff, administrative staff, members of Congress and even Vice President Pence - at imminent risk of serious injury or worse.
There generally are three ways to initiate a criminal case: a probable cause arrest, an arrest warrant and/or a grand jury indictment. Here's an explanation of the difference among the three and why an arrest warrant is the best approach at this moment in time for Trump and the others.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Arrest Warrants Should Issue for Trump, Don Jr., Rudy & Others for the Jan. 6 US Capitol Riot
Donald Trump and others encouraged, instigated and incited the riot at the US Capitol on January 6. Worse yet, Trump made sure there were no executive branch law enforcement resources deployed to protect those in the Capitol building (given that the US Capitol Police are an agency controlled by Congress, not the executive branch). Trump, Don Jr., Rudy Giuliani and others incited the crowd to march on and, in a very real sense, attack, the US Capitol, putting EVERYONE in the building - janitorial staff, administrative staff, members of Congress and even Vice President Pence - at imminent risk of serious injury or worse.
There generally are three ways to initiate a criminal case: a probable cause arrest, an arrest warrant and/or a grand jury indictment. Here's an explanation of the difference among the three and why an arrest warrant is the best approach at this moment in time for Trump and the others.
Jimdamick
Well-Known Member
MickFoster
Well-Known Member
That's too nice..........prison for all of them.
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
LOL
www.rawstory.com
House GOP leader fears Trump supporters may assassinate Republicans who vote to impeach: report
Republicans are increasingly worried they may be in danger for not following the demands of violent Trump supporters seeking to overturn the results of the 2020 election."There is particular fear among Republicans in Trump-heavy districts who voted against the GOP's doomed bid to overturn the...
www.rawstory.com
hanimmal
Well-Known Member
After reading the above story about the quack doctor, this stood out to me:
https://www.rollitup.org/t/january-6th-2021.1041453/post-16068391
Abruptly ending a presidential protest hours early (if about a dozen other speakers left to talk after Trump was done) is one way to cause a wandering flash mob to cover the tracks of the domestic terrorists attacking the capital (since Trump did direct them to it, and that he would be there with them) is what that sounds like to me.
https://www.rollitup.org/t/january-6th-2021.1041453/post-16068391
Abruptly ending a presidential protest hours early (if about a dozen other speakers left to talk after Trump was done) is one way to cause a wandering flash mob to cover the tracks of the domestic terrorists attacking the capital (since Trump did direct them to it, and that he would be there with them) is what that sounds like to me.
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
House Democrats Move To Punish GOP Colleagues For Helping Incite Capitol Attack
Rep. Mo Brooks and others could face consequences for going along with Trump’s attempt to overturn the election results.
www.forbes.com
printer
Well-Known Member
Alternate take
Why Trump can't be prosecuted
Many analysts have suggested that President Trump ought to be criminally prosecuted for his part in the deadly events of January 6. It won’t happen. Courts, convicting defendants of murder, have declared that one who endangers others “for his diversion merely” manifests a “depraved mind, regardless of human life.” That may be Trump. But he would, as the saying goes, get off on a technicality.
As a moral matter, I believe there is little doubt that Trump is guilty. He is to blame for five deaths, including that of a police officer. He inflamed the mob that attacked the Capitol, and then made no effort to stop them when he was the only one they would have listened to. The violence was the culmination of a campaign of deliberate lies and conspiracy theories about a stolen election, promoting hysteria that was likely sooner or later to get somebody killed. His presidency has been a gift to America’s enemies. Impeachment is amply warranted. But criminal prosecution is different.
There are two criminal law doctrines that point toward the wrong he committed. But in order for him to be convicted, they would have to operate in tandem. In his case, they don’t.
“Depraved-heart murder” raises, to the first degree, homicides in which the defendant does not intend the death he causes, but, as one court put it, “engages in conduct which manifests a depraved indifference to the value of human life.” Speeding through crowded streets for the thrill of it is a paradigmatic case.
Trump’s speech does not fit that description, but his behavior once the violence started fits it all too well.
He evidently sent the angry crowd toward the Capitol without any clear idea of what they would do when they got there. His speech was full of lies, but that isn’t a crime. He vaguely told them to “fight like Hell,” but that’s a familiar political metaphor that doesn’t ordinarily connote physical violence. Trump thought that mass mobilization would induce members of Congress to change their positions, but that doesn’t necessarily involve illegality. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has offered the same notion to explain how he expects to enact political nonstarters like “Medicare for All.”
That’s why (as the Justice Department concluded) his speech isn’t punishable as incitement. Under the First Amendment, incitement can be punished only if it intentionally calls for lawbreaking that is likely to occur. Trump did not advocate lawbreaking. What ensued probably surprised him as much as anyone. It would not have happened except for the remarkable, unpredictable failure of the Capitol Police. If the mere knowledge that some lawbreaking would probably happen were enough to punish speech, we would be locking up Black Lives Matter organizers.
Once it was clear that violence was occurring, however, he could not be bothered to stop it, even though he was in contact with the trapped senators. He was on the phone with one of them, cajoling him to slow down the vote counting. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) reports that senior White House aides told him Trump was “delighted” when he saw the rioters forcing their way into the building and “confused about why other people on his team weren’t as excited as he was.” Aides and legislators begged him to tell his supporters to leave the Capitol, either by tweeting or by calling in to Fox News. Vice President Mike Pence and his family were in danger. Trump didn’t seem to care.
But depraved indifference homicide normally requires that the actor actually do something. In such cases, death is caused by “the intentional doing of an uncalled-for act in callous disregard of its likely harmful effects on others.” Trump could not have anticipated that the crowd would surge into the Capitol, and anyway recklessness is not sufficient to punish incitement.
A second legal doctrine holds that, although there is ordinarily no duty to rescue those who are in peril, it’s different if you are the one who placed the victim in danger. If you push someone into the lake, you had best pull them out again, or else you’re a murderer. But even though Trump had a moral obligation to stop the destruction, he didn’t specifically command the mob. So, he committed no crime.
In short, there’s no way to merge depraved heart indifference (present here) with a duty to rescue those you have placed in peril (also present here).
This is not a happy conclusion. Trump embodies the wrongs that both of these doctrines target. He behaved despicably. In a just universe, he would be punished.
On the other hand, criminal law is narrowly limited for good reason. A defendant must be proven to have violated some preexisting, clearly defined prohibition. It is not enough to show that he is nasty. A world in which the state is free to punish those it deems nasty would be frightening. Trump is immune from prosecution because of the very institutions, limiting the abuse of political power, that he has struggled against throughout his presidency.
thehill.com
Why Trump can't be prosecuted
Many analysts have suggested that President Trump ought to be criminally prosecuted for his part in the deadly events of January 6. It won’t happen. Courts, convicting defendants of murder, have declared that one who endangers others “for his diversion merely” manifests a “depraved mind, regardless of human life.” That may be Trump. But he would, as the saying goes, get off on a technicality.
As a moral matter, I believe there is little doubt that Trump is guilty. He is to blame for five deaths, including that of a police officer. He inflamed the mob that attacked the Capitol, and then made no effort to stop them when he was the only one they would have listened to. The violence was the culmination of a campaign of deliberate lies and conspiracy theories about a stolen election, promoting hysteria that was likely sooner or later to get somebody killed. His presidency has been a gift to America’s enemies. Impeachment is amply warranted. But criminal prosecution is different.
There are two criminal law doctrines that point toward the wrong he committed. But in order for him to be convicted, they would have to operate in tandem. In his case, they don’t.
“Depraved-heart murder” raises, to the first degree, homicides in which the defendant does not intend the death he causes, but, as one court put it, “engages in conduct which manifests a depraved indifference to the value of human life.” Speeding through crowded streets for the thrill of it is a paradigmatic case.
Trump’s speech does not fit that description, but his behavior once the violence started fits it all too well.
He evidently sent the angry crowd toward the Capitol without any clear idea of what they would do when they got there. His speech was full of lies, but that isn’t a crime. He vaguely told them to “fight like Hell,” but that’s a familiar political metaphor that doesn’t ordinarily connote physical violence. Trump thought that mass mobilization would induce members of Congress to change their positions, but that doesn’t necessarily involve illegality. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has offered the same notion to explain how he expects to enact political nonstarters like “Medicare for All.”
That’s why (as the Justice Department concluded) his speech isn’t punishable as incitement. Under the First Amendment, incitement can be punished only if it intentionally calls for lawbreaking that is likely to occur. Trump did not advocate lawbreaking. What ensued probably surprised him as much as anyone. It would not have happened except for the remarkable, unpredictable failure of the Capitol Police. If the mere knowledge that some lawbreaking would probably happen were enough to punish speech, we would be locking up Black Lives Matter organizers.
Once it was clear that violence was occurring, however, he could not be bothered to stop it, even though he was in contact with the trapped senators. He was on the phone with one of them, cajoling him to slow down the vote counting. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) reports that senior White House aides told him Trump was “delighted” when he saw the rioters forcing their way into the building and “confused about why other people on his team weren’t as excited as he was.” Aides and legislators begged him to tell his supporters to leave the Capitol, either by tweeting or by calling in to Fox News. Vice President Mike Pence and his family were in danger. Trump didn’t seem to care.
But depraved indifference homicide normally requires that the actor actually do something. In such cases, death is caused by “the intentional doing of an uncalled-for act in callous disregard of its likely harmful effects on others.” Trump could not have anticipated that the crowd would surge into the Capitol, and anyway recklessness is not sufficient to punish incitement.
A second legal doctrine holds that, although there is ordinarily no duty to rescue those who are in peril, it’s different if you are the one who placed the victim in danger. If you push someone into the lake, you had best pull them out again, or else you’re a murderer. But even though Trump had a moral obligation to stop the destruction, he didn’t specifically command the mob. So, he committed no crime.
In short, there’s no way to merge depraved heart indifference (present here) with a duty to rescue those you have placed in peril (also present here).
This is not a happy conclusion. Trump embodies the wrongs that both of these doctrines target. He behaved despicably. In a just universe, he would be punished.
On the other hand, criminal law is narrowly limited for good reason. A defendant must be proven to have violated some preexisting, clearly defined prohibition. It is not enough to show that he is nasty. A world in which the state is free to punish those it deems nasty would be frightening. Trump is immune from prosecution because of the very institutions, limiting the abuse of political power, that he has struggled against throughout his presidency.
Why Trump can’t be prosecuted
If the mere knowledge that some lawbreaking would probably happen were enough to punish speech, we would be locking up Black Lives Matter organizers.
thehill.com
Herb & Suds
Well-Known Member
While I agreeFuck Republicans
They are a fucking bain on Society
Really, they are
I've been watching them all my fucking life
They fucking suck
A simple sad, fucking fact
My wife reminds me "todays Republicans" because at one point both our families were
captainmorgan
Well-Known Member
Get your popcorn ready.
www.rawstory.com
FBI assembling ‘strike force’ to go after hundreds of Trump rioters accused of sedition and attacking cops
During a press conference this Tuesday, Acting U.S. Attorney Micheal Sherwin said that the "scope and scale" of the current and upcoming investigations into the violent storming of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters is unprecedented "not only in FBI history but probably DOJ history.""The...
www.rawstory.com
Herb & Suds
Well-Known Member
I don't care so much on criminalityAlternate take
Why Trump can't be prosecuted
Many analysts have suggested that President Trump ought to be criminally prosecuted for his part in the deadly events of January 6. It won’t happen. Courts, convicting defendants of murder, have declared that one who endangers others “for his diversion merely” manifests a “depraved mind, regardless of human life.” That may be Trump. But he would, as the saying goes, get off on a technicality.
As a moral matter, I believe there is little doubt that Trump is guilty. He is to blame for five deaths, including that of a police officer. He inflamed the mob that attacked the Capitol, and then made no effort to stop them when he was the only one they would have listened to. The violence was the culmination of a campaign of deliberate lies and conspiracy theories about a stolen election, promoting hysteria that was likely sooner or later to get somebody killed. His presidency has been a gift to America’s enemies. Impeachment is amply warranted. But criminal prosecution is different.
There are two criminal law doctrines that point toward the wrong he committed. But in order for him to be convicted, they would have to operate in tandem. In his case, they don’t.
“Depraved-heart murder” raises, to the first degree, homicides in which the defendant does not intend the death he causes, but, as one court put it, “engages in conduct which manifests a depraved indifference to the value of human life.” Speeding through crowded streets for the thrill of it is a paradigmatic case.
Trump’s speech does not fit that description, but his behavior once the violence started fits it all too well.
He evidently sent the angry crowd toward the Capitol without any clear idea of what they would do when they got there. His speech was full of lies, but that isn’t a crime. He vaguely told them to “fight like Hell,” but that’s a familiar political metaphor that doesn’t ordinarily connote physical violence. Trump thought that mass mobilization would induce members of Congress to change their positions, but that doesn’t necessarily involve illegality. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) has offered the same notion to explain how he expects to enact political nonstarters like “Medicare for All.”
That’s why (as the Justice Department concluded) his speech isn’t punishable as incitement. Under the First Amendment, incitement can be punished only if it intentionally calls for lawbreaking that is likely to occur. Trump did not advocate lawbreaking. What ensued probably surprised him as much as anyone. It would not have happened except for the remarkable, unpredictable failure of the Capitol Police. If the mere knowledge that some lawbreaking would probably happen were enough to punish speech, we would be locking up Black Lives Matter organizers.
Once it was clear that violence was occurring, however, he could not be bothered to stop it, even though he was in contact with the trapped senators. He was on the phone with one of them, cajoling him to slow down the vote counting. Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) reports that senior White House aides told him Trump was “delighted” when he saw the rioters forcing their way into the building and “confused about why other people on his team weren’t as excited as he was.” Aides and legislators begged him to tell his supporters to leave the Capitol, either by tweeting or by calling in to Fox News. Vice President Mike Pence and his family were in danger. Trump didn’t seem to care.
But depraved indifference homicide normally requires that the actor actually do something. In such cases, death is caused by “the intentional doing of an uncalled-for act in callous disregard of its likely harmful effects on others.” Trump could not have anticipated that the crowd would surge into the Capitol, and anyway recklessness is not sufficient to punish incitement.
A second legal doctrine holds that, although there is ordinarily no duty to rescue those who are in peril, it’s different if you are the one who placed the victim in danger. If you push someone into the lake, you had best pull them out again, or else you’re a murderer. But even though Trump had a moral obligation to stop the destruction, he didn’t specifically command the mob. So, he committed no crime.
In short, there’s no way to merge depraved heart indifference (present here) with a duty to rescue those you have placed in peril (also present here).
This is not a happy conclusion. Trump embodies the wrongs that both of these doctrines target. He behaved despicably. In a just universe, he would be punished.
On the other hand, criminal law is narrowly limited for good reason. A defendant must be proven to have violated some preexisting, clearly defined prohibition. It is not enough to show that he is nasty. A world in which the state is free to punish those it deems nasty would be frightening. Trump is immune from prosecution because of the very institutions, limiting the abuse of political power, that he has struggled against throughout his presidency.
Why Trump can’t be prosecuted
If the mere knowledge that some lawbreaking would probably happen were enough to punish speech, we would be locking up Black Lives Matter organizers.
His brand is toast
He will be discarded by all major corporations as he should be
His base isn't the target of real money in this country
As long as the entire family goes down in flames and I live long enough to watch it
It was a great life
I'm looking forward to a digital meltdown as long as we can hold on one more week
H G Griffin
Well-Known Member
I see all these articles about worries about upcoming primaries as well as a lot of other selfish concerns affecting how they vote. I haven't seen anyone mentioning the Oath of Office they swore influencing their actions.
Fucking pathetic cowards, every one.