Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What you leave out is that the feds has little if any hard evidence of their crime. Ex: Multiple witnesses, or Surveillance video footage. Something they could put forward as absolute proof like they had for January 6th.In recent weeks, prosecutors have approved deals in at least half a dozen federal felony cases arising from clashes between protesters and law enforcement in Oregon last summer. The arrangements — known as deferred resolution agreements — will leave the defendants with a clean criminal record if they stay out of trouble for a period of time and complete a modest amount of community service, according to defense attorneys and court records.[/B]
You are so full of shit. They had all the evidence they needed and had the perpetrators in jail.What you leave out is that the feds has little if any hard evidence of their crime. Ex: Multiple witnesses, or Surveillance video footage. Something they could put forward as absolute proof like they had for January 6th.
Witnesses would have to positively identify someone who was part of a crowd of tens of thousands.
They didn't have high resolution video of the actual offense being committed.You are so full of shit. They had all the evidence they needed and had the perpetrators in jail.
It's the difference between being caught on high resolution surveillance video committing the crime, that can be shown to the jury.But OH MY GAWD if it's conservatives protesting, it's an INSURRECTION!
Bunch of fucking Karens. Screw you all, and your two-tiered justice system.
That is so lame. What do you think they did before high resolution video?They didn't have high resolution video of the actual offense being committed.
That's why they offered lenient prosecution, because they didn't have the hard evidence to convince a jury.That is so lame. What do you think they did before high resolution video?
You have no idea about any of it. You just make up a narrative to suit you.That's why they offered lenient prosecution, because they didn't have the hard evidence to convince a jury.
Your problem is that BLM riots happened mostly at night, by people wearing masks, and little if any video of the scene of the crime.
January 6tth happened in broad daylight, in front of thousands of surveillance cameras, by people who like Trump didn't wear facemasks.
An example of the video footage they might have of the crimes. Notice the guy arrested wasn't caught on tape throwing anything.You have no idea about any of it. You just make up a narrative to suit you.
Post the statement from the US Attorney that says there was no evidence. You can't because that was not the problem. Many of those rioters pled to misdemeanors and took probation.
You have no idea what the police saw that was not on the video. Also that was Atlanta, was that a Federal Courthouse? 99.9% likely the guy was released on PR and if anything, pled to a misdemeanor...An example of the video footage they might have of the crimes. Notice the guy arrested wasn't caught on tape throwing anything.
Having video evidence is the point. This was at CNN where video is their business, The police saw it, but had no VIDEO of it.You have no idea what the police saw that was not on the video. Also that was Atlanta, was that a Federal Courthouse?
You said the Federal charges in Portland were dropped for lack of evidence.
Show me.
Bullshit. The cops wear body cams. There are dozens of people with cameras in that crowd, just like every other BLM riot.Having video evidence is the point. This was at CNN where video is their business, The police saw it, but had no VIDEO of it.
It became a he said - she said. Which would not be enough to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.
So the feds has no choice but to use their scant evidence to convince the people to take a favorable deal, instead of take them to trial and likely lose.
Oh sure, the US capitol is the only place with video cameras...January 6th had over 40,000 hours of surveillance video. Covering every area of the Capitol. Add to that the body cam video from the officers, and you have the ability to catch the moment of the crime.
And with it, the ability to seek a tough sentence.
You are a liar.So the feds has no choice but to use their scant evidence to convince the people to take a favorable deal, instead of take them to trial and likely lose.
You strangely figured out why the BLM prosecution were tenuous at best. All the evidence, the videos, the witnesses, were all BLM members. They would not voluntarily either share the video, or give testimony to the police.Bullshit. The cops wear body cams. There are dozens of people with cameras in that crowd, just like every other BLM riot.
You don't need video of a crime to charge a crime. There are hundreds of witnesses.
You are just making up an excuse to fit your narrative, I am waiting for you to back it up with ANY official statement.
Now you're getting it. 4-hour riot. 40,000 hours of video, means there were 10,000 video cameras covering the capitol.Oh sure, the US capitol is the only place with video cameras...
40,000 hours of video for a 4-hour riot...
More BS. There were plenty of people at the protests that were not part of BLM/Antifa. There is CCTV footage and thousands of hours of cell phone footage from people who were there as observers.You strangely figured out why the BLM prosecution were tenuous at best. All the evidence, the videos, the witnesses, were all BLM members. They would not voluntarily either share the video, or give testimony to the police.
The George Floyd case is a case in point in the importance of video
The 9 minutes and 29 seconds of Chauvin kneeling on Floyd's neck was captured by several bystander videos, surveillance video from across the street and video from outside the Cup Foods store. The searing bystander footage that first went viral last May was played for jurors during opening statements.
Re: They were doing the bidding of the democrat party.You are a liar.
The BLM/Antifa rioters were not prosecuted because there was no DESIRE to prosecute them. They were doing the bidding of the democrat party.
The exact opposite applies to the J6 protesters. There is no expense spared to prosecute them, even if they were doing nothing but walking around the Capitol grounds that day.
That is what your party has become, and let me tell you- you will reap what you sew...
And according to you, there were no cameras at the BLM riots except the ones that BLM people had...Now you're getting it. 4-hour riot. 40,000 hours of video, means there were 10,000 video cameras covering the capitol.
10,000 cameras. That's more cameras then there were rioters.
Read the Politico piece. It was Garland's DOJ that dropped the charges.Remember, who was in charge of federal prosecutions. Trump appointed US Attorneys, and a Trump appointed Attorney General.
