Qanon shaman...likely to get a new trial considering the government withheld video evidence from the defense....

[Marener]

Then then apply it to people just standing NEAR the door and in the way of it, or too close to it.

That is civil disobedience, and they should be arrested, charged, and then go right back out there and do it again. That was the MLK method.


4+ years for trespassing dressed up as bullshit charges? You Doth protest too much.

Go on. Who was it applied to for standing near the entrance? Seems like you just don’t want the law to apply to people you agree with because you want them to have zero repercussions. Abortion protestors don’t give a damn about the law because they think that God is instructing them to break it. It’s actually not unlike Trump’s mob who think that Trump (their god) instructed them to storm the Capitol.

Who got 4+ years for trespassing?

 

[martybegan]

LOL

You are clearly ignorant of what the evidence even is. What do you think the evidence against them is...?

Trumped up bullshit?

Witch hunting agitprop?

Made up malarkey?

The Fed government is prosecuting people for political reasons, end of story.

 

[AZrailwhale]

He was charged for entering the Capitol with a mob which caused Congress to recess. Video proves he's guilty as charged. More video of him inside the Capitol, especially video after Congress had to recess, is only further incriminating evidence. You should know incriminating evidence is not exculpatory without me having to point it out to ya. In fact, it's the polar opposite of exculpatory evidence.

And now prosecutors are fending off Tucker's claims in court. Which of course, you'll just fold the judge into your conspiracy nonsense whe the judge rules in favor of the prosecution.

Prosecutors say Tucker Carlson omitted key Jan. 6 footage of ‘QAnon Shaman’

Federal prosecutors said footage that Fox News host Tucker Carlson aired last week of the “QAnon Shaman” during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol lacks context, according to newly filed …

thehill.com

​

Federal prosecutors said footage that Fox News host Tucker Carlson aired last week of the “QAnon Shaman” during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol lacks context, according to newly filed court documents.​

​

The Justice Department said the footage aired by Carlson, which showed rioter Jacob Chansley, who is better known in the media as the “QAnon Shaman,” walking in the Capitol unimpeded by a group of officers who followed him, only spanned four minutes out of about an hour he spent in the building.​

​

“The televised footage lacks the context of what occurred before and after the footage. Chansley entered the building as part of a violent crowd,” prosecutors said.​

Then they shouldn't have hidden it but allowed it to be used so that they could provide the "context". I would say that without the hidden footage, their case lacks "context".

 

[martybegan]

Go on. Who was it applied to for standing near the entrance? Seems like you just don’t want the law to apply to people you agree with because you want them to have zero repercussions. Abortion protestors don’t give a damn about the law because they think that God is instructing them to break it. It’s actually not unlike Trump’s mob who think that Trump (their god) instructed them to storm the Capitol.

Who got 4+ years for trespassing?

What about the guy defending his son from the clinic escort being acquitted of breaking the federal access law?

11 years for potential civil disobedience? Federal Charges?

DOJ ramps up charges against pro-life activists: 4 last year, 26 this year

 

[Marener]

What about the guy defending his son from the clinic escort being acquitted of breaking the federal access law?

11 years for potential civil disobedience? Federal Charges?

DOJ ramps up charges against pro-life activists: 4 last year, 26 this year

What about it? He was acquitted because the evidence didn’t prove he was guilty.

Who got 11 years?

Blocking clinic access isn’t protesting.

 

[martybegan]

What about it? He was acquitted because the evidence didn’t prove he was guilty.

Who got 11 years?

Blocking clinic access isn’t protesting.

11 years is what they face, and it seems "blocking" is being applied rather loosely.

It is protesting, if peaceful it's called civil disobedience.

Would you have been happy if Rosa Parks faced 11 years for sitting in the wrong seat on a bus?

 

[Moonglow]

How's that new trial coming along?

 

[Faun]

Trumped up bullshit?

Witch hunting agitprop?

Made up malarkey?

The Fed government is prosecuting people for political reasons, end of story.

All false. See that? I was right. You don't know what the evidence is so now you're just making shit up.

What a shame.

No, lyin' con, the evidence is recordings made by the accused of them planning on committing violence to keep Trump in office. Those idiots actually held online meetings where they planned it out.

Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes found guilty of seditious conspiracy

Jury convicts leader of rightwing group which supported Trump’s attempt to overturn 2020 election

www.theguardian.com

 

[martybegan]

All false. See that? I was right. You don't know what the evidence is so now you're just making shit up.

What a shame.

No, lyin' con, the evidence is recordings made by the accused of them planning on committing violence to keep Trump in office. Those idiots actually held online meetings where they planned it out.

Oath Keepers founder Stewart Rhodes found guilty of seditious conspiracy

Jury convicts leader of rightwing group which supported Trump’s attempt to overturn 2020 election

www.theguardian.com

All that evidence from the deep state, defending the deep state. So believable.

The Guardian? That Communist Rag? LOLOLOLOLOL

 

[Faun]

Then they shouldn't have hidden it but allowed it to be used so that they could provide the "context". I would say that without the hidden footage, their case lacks "context".

The case BuffaloHead pled guilty to??

 

[Faun]

All that evidence from the deep state, defending the deep state. So believable.

The Guardian? That Communist Rag? LOLOLOLOLOL

LOL

What a shame you have no teal defense of them getting on, on recordings of themselves, plotting to overthrow the presidential election.

You're such a joke.

 

[Marener]

11 years is what they face, and it seems "blocking" is being applied rather loosely.

It is protesting, if peaceful it's called civil disobedience.

Would you have been happy if Rosa Parks faced 11 years for sitting in the wrong seat on a bus?

Quoting the statutorily maximum is meaningless. An emotional scare tactic when you know actual sentences will be dramatically lower.

You can invent euphemisms for yourself, but it’s still illegal, and it’s still a problem. We let them stand on the sidewalk and harass people all day long. Isn’t that good enough for them? If they want to fuck around, they get to find out.

Rosa Parks was the victim of discrimination. Abortion protestors aren’t victims.

It seems like you’ve given up your attempt to make this argument in any way related to the Capitol riot.

 

[BackAgain]

Quoting the statutorily maximum is meaningless. An emotional scare tactic when you know actual sentences will be dramatically lower.

You can invent euphemisms for yourself, but it’s still illegal, and it’s still a problem. We let them stand on the sidewalk and harass people all day long. Isn’t that good enough for them? If they want to fuck around, they get to find out.

Rosa Parks was the victim of discrimination. Abortion protestors aren’t victims.

It seems like you’ve given up your attempt to make this argument in any way related to the Capitol riot.

You seem confused about the concept of “argument by analogy.”

 

[Marener]

You seem confused about the concept of “argument by analogy.”

He’s long since given up trying to make this an analogy after ignoring my rebuttal to the faults in the analogy.

 

[martybegan]

LOL

What a shame you have no teal defense of them getting on, on recordings of themselves, plotting to overthrow the presidential election.

You're such a joke

Considering they never could pull it off, and all these trials are hush hush, and use illegal detainment to force people to accept please, I'm surprised I have the information I do have.

As the great Sideshow Bob once said, "What kind of crime is attempted murder? They don't give Nobel Prizes for attempted chemistry!"

 

[martybegan]

Quoting the statutorily maximum is meaningless. An emotional scare tactic when you know actual sentences will be dramatically lower.

You can invent euphemisms for yourself, but it’s still illegal, and it’s still a problem. We let them stand on the sidewalk and harass people all day long. Isn’t that good enough for them? If they want to fuck around, they get to find out.

Rosa Parks was the victim of discrimination. Abortion protestors aren’t victims.

It seems like you’ve given up your attempt to make this argument in any way related to the Capitol riot.

No, it shows how serious Dems take abortion, as this shit was passed during the Clinton era, never really used, then sprung up to give the abortion rights hardliners a show to keep them angry.

Well according to this law, just doing that could be considered blocking access, which is why it is unconstitutional as written.

Aborted fetuses sure are victims, just ones you don't care about. It's amazing how many pro choice idiots will cry over puppies but not fetuses. Some defect in their mental character.

It's all part of the same argument, dippy. Over prosecution of supposed crimes unacceptable to the political left.

 

[Faun]

Considering they never could pull it off, and all these trials are hush hush, and use illegal detainment to force people to accept please, I'm surprised I have the information I do have.

As the great Sideshow Bob once said, "What kind of crime is attempted murder? They don't give Nobel Prizes for attempted chemistry!"

Imbecile, the law they were convicted of is about NOT pulling it off, only planning or inciting it.

Which the evidence shows they did, despite your lackluster bullshit defense of them

 

[martybegan]

Imbecile, the law they were convicted of is about NOT pulling it off, only planning or inciting it.

Which the evidence shows they did, despite your lackluster bullshit defense of them

Planning an inciting something that could never actually happen.

 

[Marener]

No, it shows how serious Dems take abortion, as this shit was passed during the Clinton era, never really used, then sprung up to give the abortion rights hardliners a show to keep them angry.

Well according to this law, just doing that could be considered blocking access, which is why it is unconstitutional as written.

Aborted fetuses sure are victims, just ones you don't care about. It's amazing how many pro choice idiots will cry over puppies but not fetuses. Some defect in their mental character.

It's all part of the same argument, dippy. Over prosecution of supposed crimes unacceptable to the political left.

It was used, under Clinton there were dozens of prosecutions. Fewer in Republican administrations. The amount of violence and obstruction at clinics really tapered off after it was enacted.

The number of illegal actions increased as people were inspired by the repeal of Roe v Wade, so the prosecutions increased.

No, the law does not say people standing on the sidewalk are guilty. The prosecutions you’re mentioning aren’t of people standing on the sidewalk, they’re laying in front of doors. There’s a difference, Marty and you are a liar for suggesting otherwise.

What does over-prosecution mean? Obstructing a door is a the exact crime described in the FACE act.

Storming the Capitol to stop the certification is the exact crime described in 18 USC 1512(c)(2).

These aren’t over prosecutions. They’re actual prosecutions for actual crimes. The only difference is you think your comrades are above the law.

 

[martybegan]

It was used, under Clinton there were dozens of prosecutions. Fewer in Republican administrations. The amount of violence and obstruction at clinics really tapered off after it was enacted.

The number of illegal actions increased as people were inspired by the repeal of Roe v Wade, so the prosecutions increased.

No, the law does not say people standing on the sidewalk are guilty. The prosecutions you’re mentioning aren’t of people standing on the sidewalk, they’re laying in front of doors. There’s a difference, Marty and you are a liar for suggesting otherwise.

What does over-prosecution mean? Obstructing a door is a the exact crime described in the FACE act.

Storming the Capitol to stop the certification is the exact crime described in 18 USC 1512(c)(2).

These aren’t over prosecutions. They’re actual prosecutions for actual crimes. The only difference is you think your comrades are above the law.

So if a couple of peaceful civil disobedience types get swept up, so much the better right?

11 years for laying in front of the door?

It didn't stop the certification.


Political hackery, defended by a political hack. You and Faun should circle jerk each other.