Dude, who pissed in your cornflakes?
2 Likes
No one committed treason as defined in the US Constitution.
Sedition is hard to prove in court—and obstruction of government proceedings is easier to prove and carries the same penalties.
6 Likes
It means no such thing.
7 Likes
If our narrative is that an insurrection occurred, that our political enemies attempted to overthrow the (newly) elected government, it stands to reason that we need, at a minimum, convictions on sedition to convince non-progressives that an insurrection did in fact occur, otherwise the narrative stays as it is, a big riot.
This is about shaping the electorate before November. At the very least charge them with sedition and let a DC jury do the rest.
1 Like
One more time—and I’ll type slowly so you won’t miss a word of it:
Sedition is extremely difficult to prove in court and such charges rarely, if ever, result in convictions.
Obstruction of a government proceeding is far easier to prove, and convictions for it are far easier to obtain—and it carries the same penalties.
The only people who don’t believe the insurrection was a (temporarily) failed coup are the ones who planned and executed it, and their lumpen followers.
You are, of course, free to keep beating that horse, but it will still be just as dead as Francisco Franco.
8 Likes
Everyone saying Gallego is: own-goaling, talking out of place, Disarray’ing Dems, etc.
Were you on the floor of the House that day? Ruben was.
I am f***ing livid, and my life wasn’t on the line. He’s right. Chop, chop, Garland!!
3 Likes
Because of Emptywheel essay, Cohen and Giuliani’s phone, a DOJ secret investigation “could” be ongoing? Garland on the trail of the plotters?
More likely Democrats fail to, again, use power granted by their voters, and Republicans will get by with crimes, as they always do.
2 Likes
Nailed it. Co-signed.
Well then, Obstruction of a Proceeding shall lead us into the promised land.
All that talk by Progressive of Insurrection, Treason and Sedition will certainly pay off with the convictions on Obstruction. Easy as pie to translate to the lumpen proletariat we’ve spoken to non-stop about this.
And you’re telling me a DC jury wouldn’t convict these traitors on literally ANY charge?
If President Obama thought highly enough of Merrick Garland to nominate him for SCOTUS, that’s good enough for me.
2 Likes
I’m telling you no such thing, and you need to stop putting words in my mouth.
You don’t have a rational grasp on the issue, and you clearly don’t know jackshit about how to get a successful prosecution.
But keep on banging that drum and making yourself look more than a little foolish.
2 Likes
We don’t need a successful prosecution before November, and what happens after will happen. If there are no sedition charges before November then the Narrative of an Insurrection is destroyed and it will suppress a helluva lot of less nuanced Democrats.
Patently false bullshit that only serves to make you look ridiculous.
2 Likes
Ok then, we’ll be rolling in Dem majorities come November.
1 Like
Wait! Franco is dead?
Ahh, you almost got me there. For your next gag you’ll probably tell me Hugo Chavez is dead.
2 Likes
If no one with actual power on that day receives consequences past being publicly shamed by the 1/6 Committee and/or maybe a contempt conviction, the Justice Department is basically saying this was fine. We’re not there yet obviously, but I’m still waiting for any evidence that the DOJ is seriously investigating the Trumpers in the administration or congress for this or much of anything else. I hear constantly from the Trumpers about SDNY and the 1/6 Committee. I never hear about how they’re being ‘harassed’ by the DOJ like that.
3 Likes
You know what is ridiculous? Your imperious position that you somehow know and are absolutely certain you know how this is going to turn out. That justice will be served under Garland. It seems just as likely that it will not be.
3 Likes
You know who else was in jeopardy that day?
100 Senators
433 other Reps
The VP
Staffers and security details (and even family some members) of those listed above
Thousands of Capitol Police and MPD
Sure he was there. And as a Rep and someone who served his country in uniform he should know better than to (at best) resort to cheap theatrics to draw attention to himself and (at worst) betrays either his ignorance or destain for how the DOJ conducts investigations and prosecutions.
To prosecute, you need evidence. And right now the DOJ is prosecuting perpetrators who stormed the Capitol, entertaining Conspiracy enhancements amongst a few and this is vital to any possibility of holding others accountable: for to go higher up in a conspiracy, you must first prove the conspiracy took place and resulted in overt criminal acts.
You don’t go after the kingpin who orchestrated the bank heist without first convicting the goddamned bank robbers first.
Frankly, I find all this Ruben fanboy b.s. both nauseating and rather suspect.
As a regular commenter, I am familiar with quite a few usernames and handles around here. I’m seeing a lot of strangers in this and another thread tonight.
Just say’n
3 Likes
Garland is not responsible for serving justice, court proceedings do that.
Garland is a prosecutor tasked with laying charges against individuals for crimes which have a solid (reasonable) basis upon which a conviction will be returned.
The Attorney General is to conduct their office in a non-partisan manner. The law is to be their guide, not a political agenda, not the midterms, not public outcry or outrage.
I will let Thunder speak for himself. But for my part, I am beyond sick of folks who cannot appreciate, and therefore cannot respect, the careful undertakings of a non-partisan professional.
2 Likes
Whatever the case may be, those who should be behind bars will very likely walk, and you have absolutely no way of knowing otherwise. If that turns out to be the case Garland has failed.
2 Likes