Jump to content

Who was it that kept saying....

CardinalBacker

By CardinalBacker
in Political Forum

 Share

Recommended Posts

CardinalBacker

CardinalBacker

Posted
Posted

... that 1/6 wasn't a big deal because nobody had even been charged for sedition?

This is the hidden content, please

 

First conviction for seditious conspiracy.  I guess this guy was trying to stop the transfer of power at the exact same time and place that the rest of Trump's fanboys were just touring the capitol as guests of the capitol police.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bobcat1

Bobcat1

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Were these guys armed with flagpoles or umbrellas, I forget.

Poor suckers are taking the fall for this and only fools that believe this was an actual insurrection and attempted overthrow of the government are buying it.

They're coming...Trump is next!

What do you define it as?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LumRaiderFan

LumRaiderFan

Posted
Posted
19 minutes ago, Bobcat1 said:

What do you define it as?

Idiots being idiots.  Charge them with the appropriate crime.

Why would anyone 100% intent on taking Congress over and overturning the election not come in armed ready for resistance?

It took them almost two years to come up with this and why anyone would have any confidence in this DOJ is beyond me.

They had to have a win for the upcoming election.  If Trump was out of the picture this never would have taken place.

Not to worry, if things don't change we'll see the real deal and it won't look anything like this cluster we saw on Jan 6.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
CardinalBacker

CardinalBacker

Posted
  • Author
Posted
20 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Idiots being idiots.  Charge them with the appropriate crime.

Why would anyone 100% intent on taking Congress over and overturning the election not come in armed ready for resistance?

It took them almost two years to come up with this and why anyone would have any confidence in this DOJ is beyond me.

They had to have a win for the upcoming election.  If Trump was out of the picture this never would have taken place.

Not to worry, if things don't change we'll see the real deal and it won't look anything like this cluster we saw on Jan 6.

 

It's not what the state says they intended to do... it's what the defendants themselves admit that they wanted to do.  The fact that they sucked at it doesn't get them a pass.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Unwoke

Unwoke

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

... that 1/6 wasn't a big deal because nobody had even been charged for sedition?

This is the hidden content, please

 

First conviction for seditious conspiracy.  I guess this guy was trying to stop the transfer of power at the exact same time and place that the rest of Trump's fanboys were just touring the capitol as guests of the capitol police.  

🍊🍊🍊
 

800,000 plus people gathered to protest the fraudulent election an this is what the J6 Unselect Committee came up came up with?😂😂😂

Boy….what an Insurrection!😂😂😂

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tvc184

tvc184

Posted
Posted
19 hours ago, CardinalBacker said:

... that 1/6 wasn't a big deal because nobody had even been charged for sedition?

This is the hidden content, please

 

First conviction for seditious conspiracy.  I guess this guy was trying to stop the transfer of power at the exact same time and place that the rest of Trump's fanboys were just touring the capitol as guests of the capitol police.  

Sedition by definition is words or conduct inciting peoplem against the government. Any public protest against any law could be considered sedition but protests are protected speech. Laws at times however have their own definitions of words or phrases which may be contrary to the common dictionary definitions. A quick example is the word “premises” means buildings and land but in certain Texas laws it only means inside of a building. You could be on the grassy area at a school but not be on their premises. By definition? Yes.  By law?  No.

So what is sedition (Seditious Conspiracy) under the US Code (basically the federal government penal code)? 

It can be as little as 2 people (required for conspiracy) hindering or delaying a government function or seizing property by force that they have no right to…. such as trying to take over federal properties.

So now we know that out of hundreds of thousands of people protesting, at least 2 tried to take over a building or hinder a vote.

 That’s your big deal?

It is rarely used but under Texas law, if you participate in a riot then you can be charged with the highest crime committed at the riot. So thousands of people could gather for what started as a peaceful protest but turned violent. The law says that if you retired from the protest which is now violent, you are okay. If you stayed and took part in the riot, you for example could be charged with arson even though you didn’t participate in an arson. So because an assembly of people is there to protest and a majority is there to do it peacefully, it can turn into a crime to simply be there. In fact just being there can result in 6 months in jail.

Tidbit: I believe the phrase “being read the riot act”, meaning to really tell someone off or chastise them for acting like idiots, comes from riot laws.  Basically a government official (usually law enforcement) will actually read the law and announce that the assembly is now unlawful and to disperse. 

Does that mean the crowd gathered to take part in felonies?

In other words, if hundreds of thousands of people gather but a handful in the crowd (remember that federal sedition law requires only 2) commit a crime, does that mean the crowd was part of some willing act to commit crimes? Does that mean the  people protesting were doing so illegally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Big girl

Big girl

Posted
Posted
23 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Were these guys armed with flagpoles or umbrellas, I forget.

Poor suckers are taking the fall for this and only fools that believe this was an actual insurrection and attempted overthrow of the government are buying it.

They're coming...Trump is next!

What? Did you watch the TV footage?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Member Statistics

    45,988
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    CougarCrazy124
    Newest Member
    CougarCrazy124
    Joined


  • Posts

    • tvc184
      Supreme Court overturns bump stock ban…

      By tvc184 · Posted

      I can fire 5-6 rounds with a semi auto AR per second. That would empty a 30 round magazine in about 6 seconds. With an approximately (slow) 3 seconds to reload, that is about 180 rounds per minute…. with an over the counter semiautomatic rifle. According to Wikipedia the shooting last for 10 minutes. That is time to fire almost 2,000 in semiautomatic.  Would a true bump stock ban have prevented Vegas?  Would a lawful suppressor (with a $200 tax stamp) have done more selective damage before people started knowing what was happening? Remember that is a legal item.  With a semiautomatic rifle the Miami nightclub shooter killed 49 victims as opposed to 60 in Vegas. I guess 49 is  more acceptable than 60…..
    • navydawg31
      QB Controversy Brewing in Crosby

      By navydawg31 · Posted

      Baytown Lee for a qb I heard… 
    • tvc184
      Supreme Court overturns bump stock ban…

      By tvc184 · Posted

      Shall not be infringed was not even an issue in this case.  The Supreme Court allowed and in fact didn’t even debate the ban on machine guns as being lawful.   The Supreme Court only looked at the law passed by Congress, accepted it as law and looked to see if bump stocks fit the legal definition as passed by Congress and signed by the president.  The easy answer was no, it did not and the ATF was making up their own definition which is unconstitutional.  In another comment you stated that bump stocks serve “no valuable purpose”. I agree but do we throw out the Constitution? We don’t need neo nazis  or klan members rhetoric either but are willing to pick and choose who gets free speech? I support the Supreme Court decision on an item that I don’t want even if you gave me one. I support it because it follows statutory law and the Constitution.  Do you suggest that the Supreme Court ignore the Constitution for political or dislike purposes? 
    • CardinalBacker
      Supreme Court overturns bump stock ban…

      By CardinalBacker · Posted

      How would cracking down on crime prevented have what happened in Vegas?   The law of the land is no automatic weapons. If you get caught with a switch on your Glock, it’s a problem.  But you can legally modify your AR to get the same results? It’s a loophole that shouldn’t be there legally, and gun owners should boycott.    I love my AR. I believe everybody should get one. But there’s a big difference between a 30 round mag that’s fired semi-automatically, with at least the possibility of aiming at particular targets…. And a bump stop equipped AR that quite simply can’t be aimed. When the left argues that an AR serves no purpose, I disagree. But when some 2A nut is arguing that their fully automatic AR (by why of a bumpstock which renders the weapon useless in regards to accurate fire) is legal, I have to disagree, too.   
    • Old Ape
      Will Anahuac lose a district game ?

      By Old Ape · Posted

      It will depend on how many kids move to Crosby this year. Last year they lost 2.

  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...