commando Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 11 minutes ago, TGHusker said: Trump could be charged with 2 very serious crimes. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/01/11/trumps-new-criminal-problem-457298 i hope trump at least get's handed a bill to pay for damages to the capitol building. not sure if he has any charities left to plunder to pay that bill but he still has plenty of marks willing to send money to him Link to comment
TGHusker Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 10 minutes ago, commando said: i hope trump at least get's handed a bill to pay for damages to the capitol building. not sure if he has any charities left to plunder to pay that bill but he still has plenty of marks willing to send money to him They (fed govt) needs to confiscate his save the vote legal fund that he funded my milking his drinkers to pay for all of his 'election fraud' activity. I'm sure it also funded the event on Jan 6th. Link to comment
Ulty Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 25 minutes ago, commando said: i hope trump at least get's handed a bill to pay for damages to the capitol building. not sure if he has any charities left to plunder to pay that bill but he still has plenty of marks willing to send money to him I don't see that happening. Paying such a bill would be an admission of responsibility, and Trump never admits responsibility for anything. Also, Trump never pays any of his bills anyway. 1 Link to comment
Scarlet Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 https://documented.net/2021/01/republican-attorneys-general-dark-money-group-organized-protest-preceding-capitol-mob-attack/ Link to comment
TGHusker Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 This is why Trump is 100% responsible for the riot. Add Rudy, Don Jr, a few senators to list of instigators. 'Trump said I could': One possible legal defense for accused rioters (chron.com) Quote 'Trump said I could': One possible legal defense for accused rioters Federal agents spent the weekend arresting people around the nation who were allegedly part of the mob that stormed the Capitol on Wednesday after President Donald Trump urged a crowd to "fight like hell" to overturn the election results. But many of those charged with crimes for their alleged roles in the riot can thus plausibly raise what is known as the "public authority" defense - arguing, essentially, that Trump gave them permission to do what they did. Here's how it works. Suppose the chief of police in a town told you that you could ignore a "no parking" sign and park in an otherwise forbidden place. Suppose also that you relied on his word and parked in that place. Then, later, suppose a police officer handed you a parking ticket. You'd have a defense. Specifically, you could point your finger at the authority figure who invited you to commit the illegal act. The spotlight then turns to the authority figure: Did the chief of police have the authority to waive the parking restriction? If not, was it reasonable for you to believe that he did? Did you have reason to know that you shouldn't park there, even if he told you that you should? Each day, more evidence emerges that Trump and other elected officials instigated this riot. The rioters were lured to Washington with Trump's promise that the day would "be wild." At the rally, Rudy Giuliani - Trump's lawyer and close adviser - called for "trial by combat." Rep. Mo Brooks, R-Ala., told the crowd to "take names and kick a$$." Trump told the crowd, "When you catch somebody in a fraud, you're allowed to go by very different rules." Journalists on the scene reported that the rioters were primed and ready for "action," and many believed they should kill Vice President Pence. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) gave the crowd the sign of a power fist on his way into the Capitol for the joint session of Congress that the riot disrupted. After repeatedly telling his supporters to take action, Trump said, "We're going to walk down Pennsylvania Avenue, and we're going to the Capitol. We going to try to give our Republicans, the weak ones . . . the kind of pride and boldness that they need to take back our country." When the crowd arrived at the Capitol, the guards opened the door and let them in. Trump went back to the White House and watched the coverage. He was reportedly elated. That the rioters genuinely believed they were acting at the direction of the appropriate authority figures explains their mood as they posted selfies and bragged about what they were doing on social media. If you think of yourself as a soldier doing the bidding of the commander in chief, you don't try to hide your actions. You assume you will be held up as a hero by the nation. The public authority defense is commonly used and well-known to defense lawyers. In the defining case, United States v. Tallmadge, a federally licensed gun dealer informed the defendant that his circumstances fit into an exception to the prohibition against felons owning firearms. The defendant relied on the dealer's word and purchased the firearm. The court found that licensed firearm dealers are federal agents for gathering and dispensing information about the purchase of firearms. It was reasonable, therefore, for the defendant to rely on the dealer's word. The defendant was thus found not guilty. Link to comment
commando Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 omg...this might just be a sick rumor...but.....i just read that 1 of the people who died from a heart attack at the riot.....accidently tasered his own balls just before his heart attack. if that is true....karma has a sick sense of humor. 1 Link to comment
TGHusker Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 The riot was planned, it was organized, it was published far and wide. Trump and his team made sure it would happen. They are now planning to riot on Jan 20th as well. All in the hope of stopping the inauguration. A couple of quotes from the article are below https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/capitol-siege-was-planned-online-trump-supporters-are-planning-the-next-one/ Quote Concerns about more violent incidents appear to be well founded. Calls for widespread protests on the days leading up to the inauguration of President-elect Joe Biden have been rampant online for weeks. These demonstrations are scheduled to culminate with what organizers have dubbed a “Million Militia March” on Jan. 20 as Biden and Vice President-elect Kamala Harris are to be sworn in on the same Capitol grounds that rioters overran on Wednesday. “We all knew that tens of thousands of extremists would converge on DC Wednesday, so there’s no excuse for the resourcing failure,” said Brian Harrell, a former Trump administration Department of Homeland Security assistant secretary for infrastructure protection, now chief security officer for AVANGRID, an energy company. “Law enforcement was ill prepared for an event the entire country knew was coming, and one that [the president] has been signaling for weeks… It’s shocking.” These renewed calls to action have bristled with violent talk and vows to bring guns to Washington in defiance of the city’s strict weapons laws. A new analysis of such posts by Alethea Group, an organization combating disinformation that draws its name from the Greek word for “truth,” found abundant evidence of threatening plans on a range of platforms large and small. The aggressive and often hateful chatter has appeared on both mainstream sites such as Twitter and Facebook and niche, conservative sites such as TheDonald.win and Parler. The specified locations include the U.S. Capitol and the Mall in Washington, the Utah Capitol in Salt Lake City, and locations in Pittsburgh and Columbus, Ohio. Some events, including an “Armed March on All State Capitals,” include localized events in all 50 states. “REFUSE TO BE SILENCED,” said one online post cited by Alethea Group, calling for an “ARMED MARCH ON CAPITOL HILL & ALL STATE CAPITOLS” for Jan. 17, the last Sunday of Trump’s polarizing presidency. Another post called for action at “DC & All State Capitols” and was signed by “common folk who are tired of being tread upon” declares: “We were warned!” Quote Warnings even came from private citizens, including activists normally wary of the police. One activist, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of backlash from the far-right groups, said she spent her Christmas neck-deep in far-right death threats, wading through online forums that detailed plans to smuggle guns into the District, kidnap Democrat lawmakers and violently attack District of Columbia police and racial justice activists. What she read disturbed her so deeply that she decided to violate one of the cardinal rules of the District activist groups she has protested among since the summer: Call the police. She called the FBI’s tip line on Monday, Dec. 28 and told the woman on the other end of the phone about detailed threats and plans she had seen shared on forums including Parler, Telegram and threads on the website TheDonald. All proved to be major staging grounds for Wednesday’s attack. “It was a very difficult decision for me to call the FBI, but who else can you tell? They’re explicitly discussing committing federal crimes – attacking the Capitol, attacking the police, attacking us,” said the activist. “I told them, ‘Look, they’re planning to kill members of Congress and they’re openly discussing bringing guns over state lines.’ I thought if that didn’t get their attention nothing would.” The FBI did not respond to a request for comment Saturday. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted January 11, 2021 Author Share Posted January 11, 2021 They were just there to peacefully protest... 1 Link to comment
Born N Bled Red Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 The 14th amendment of the United States prevents anyone who participated in an insurrection from ever holding office. - This was identified within the articles of impeachment filed today in the House of Representatives. Are the Democrats missing a step here? Should they hold an official vote to condemn last Wednesday's attack and officially label it an insurrection within the US government? If they did, how would that impact Cruz, Hawley and the Q women in congress? To me this sounds like a logical step. Link to comment
Recommended Posts