No, Chansley Was Not Escorted Into the Capitol Building

youre the one that lied when your OP says he was escorted INTO the capital when no one has ever said that,,

and as a mod you should know thats against the rules so when are you going to close this thread??
Try reading the title again, dope:

No, Chansley Was Not Escorted Into the Capitol Building​

 
The Capitol was overrun with rioters. Arresting people and escorting him out would have accomplished nothing except provoking more violence.


Not that you’re going to listen to logic. You’ve already committed to the narrative and are no longer thinking for yourself.
Hmmmmm....so escorting someone out would provoke more violence, but shooting one of them dead wouldn't? :auiqs.jpg:


Your link states they asked the crowd to leave, but never says if it was before, during, or after his guided tour. Keep trying.
 
Hmmmmm....so escorting someone out would provoke more violence, but shooting one of them dead wouldn't? :auiqs.jpg:


Your link states they asked the crowd to leave, but never says if it was before, during, or after his guided tour. Keep trying.
Escorting them out would have been pointless. They’d come right back in. The police had no control over the building.

Shooting someone was a means of last resort as rioters were trying to breach the House Chambers where lawmakers were still being evacuated.

The link says he was asked to leave at 2:16, minutes after he entered and when he first encountered officers.

You should have actually read it
 
Really? Please show him doing a single act of violence.
I didn’t say he committed any violence. I said the people he was with smashed their way into the building.

How the fuck do you think that means he was “invited in”?
 
The very plea he should be granted permission to withdraw. And if he succeeds, his confession can’t be used at trial. Imagine that.

So, aside from his physical presence there (trespass), what evidence do you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he met any other elements?
Good luck with that. He already pleaded guilty and it’s obvious that he did exactly that.

What evidence are you looking for? We all saw the video and we all know what those idiots did.

“…otherwise obstructs, influences, or impedes any official proceeding, or attempts to do so,
shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both.”


Did he obstruct, influence, or impede an official proceeding, or attempt to do so?
 
The premise is that his plea gets withdrawn. Not a matter of luck.

It’s a matter of evidence having been withheld and a matter of the law and how a judge assesses it.

And if it’s withdrawn and a fair plea cannot be secured, there can then be a trial and his plea wouldn’t be admissible evidence at the trial. Just so you know.
And I said good luck with that because I don’t see that happening.
 

Forum List

Back
Top