The conservative Supreme Court justices shifted between a series of positions during Tuesday’s oral arguments, seemingly probing for a way to at least narrow an obstruction charge that the government has used against over 300 Jan. 6 rioters.
But her e-mails…never fails to amuse. McConnell is another whose obituary I look forward to reading.
If the rioters were black they’d all be dead.
“Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?” Gorsuch asked incredulously, clearly alluding to Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY).
Surveillance footage of a guy pulling a fire alarm:
I suppose it’s too much to ask these Justices to conduct themselves like Americans rather than Republicans. America will have to get its head around having its top court sympathetic with and accommodating of folks that tried to overthrow the joint. But…that is the way it is.
What part of “any official proceeding” don’t the justices understand? I guess if you have been bought and paid for by the Federalist Society, you stay bought and paid for.
I tried listening to these fucks and it was no easier at all. I used to enjoy Scalia stuttering every time the subject touched on homosexuality.
Only religious fundamentalists would so obviously seek to make these types of arguments. Defying logic by any means. Leading the lawyers on their side of the argument, and introducing avenues to re-argue at a later date.
It is naked. They are the church and state in one. God help us all, and by force if required.
“Would pulling a fire alarm before a vote qualify for 20 years in federal prison?” Gorsuch asked
Zing!
“What happened on January 6 was very, very serious, and I’m not equating this with that,” Alito said, before citing Monday’s pro-Gaza protest on the Golden Gate bridge
Gotcha! Ooh, those fox pundits really pwned the libs this time! I mean, that’s what I just read an article about, right?
Anybody remember the “misuse” of military helicopters during the George Floyd protests? Nary a single helicopter was “misused” during the Jan. 6th Insurrection.
Yes, if the Insurrectionsists were black, brown or magenta, they would have been lethally assaulted.
Until it ain’t. There is a long ass game in play here.
The most influential voting bloc in the country has been tax free since conception, fueled a civil war, and explicitly approved of apartheid.
Their Moses is second in line to the throne today.
Can they thread the needle so their ruling only applies to white Republicans? Stay tuned.
Conservatives today: “Conservative [Justices] in particular seemed concerned that if the statute applied to Jan. 6 then it could be weaponized against a range of other political protests.” - the NYT.
Conservatives yesterday: “If something like this happened in Arkansas on a bridge there, let’s just say that there would be a lot of wet criminals that would have been tossed overboard, not by law enforcement, but by the people whose road they are blocking,” Senator Tom Cotton said.
I don’t care what anyone says. Marjorie Taylor Greene looks GREAT in pumps!
Conservatives consider January 6 to be a routine political protest? I think when you break windows and doors, spear people with flag polls, or beat policemen with clubs, I think it is more than a political protest.
“Guy”. Heh.
“What happened on January 6 was very, very serious, and I’m not equating this with that,” Alito said, before citing Monday’s pro-Gaza protest on the Golden Gate bridge and stringing together a hypothetical where a similar protest blocks members of Congress from getting to a vote.
Uno ) it’s the f ® iends and dos )
I seriously question the mental fitness of some of these justices.
When the statute refers to “otherwise” obstructing… that plainly means “other than destroying documents”.
Obstructing official proceedings…someone please explain how a roadway or bridge is an “official proceeding”.
The strain to equate must be giving them hemorrhoids.
If the obstruction charge does not apply to the select Jan 6 defendants, then when would it ever?
Yet another moment for the right-wing zealots on the court to try to unravel and wreck the country. They will find another way dig in and do it until it finally gets done.
They’ll invalidate all the powers the agencies use to manage things, or make the laws for these obvious seditionists unworkable, or maybe even screw up the elections if there’s even the flimsiest logical fallacy to do so. Just like the SCOTUS did in 2000.
I don’t trust them. Not to defend the rule of law if it goes against Trump or the GOP. They routinely do things like ignore religion getting shoved into the public sphere, or letting gerrymandering go completely unchecked, thus making most votes in the whole country worthless in solid-red or solid-blue districts. They are - objectively terrible people.
You forgot the pooping and the peeing in the Rotunda even though there were public restrooms.
