User Controls
If January 6, 2021 was an insurrection then why?
-
2021-10-06 at 12:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Then why out of 642 individuals who have been arrested and charged (and detained without bail in many cases). has not a single one of them been charged under 18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection, 18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy, or 18 U.S. Code § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government?
If you know anything about how the court system works you charge for the easy to try charge and then expect the defendant to plea bargain...saves taxpayers a lot of money.
Back to law school kid. -
2021-10-06 at 1:11 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson If you know anything about how the court system works you charge for the easy to try charge and then expect the defendant to plea bargain…saves taxpayers a lot of money.
Back to law school kid.
State and municipal prosecutors overcharge to get plea bargains and money (fines). The feds have over a 95% conviction rate. They enjoy this for two reasons mainly. First, historically they have not brought charges until they have an open and shut case. Second they don't overcharge and they only offer deals if you can give them a much bigger fish not because they bit off more than they can chew.
If you knew anything about the USDOJ I would not have to type all this. -
2021-10-06 at 1:37 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker State and municipal prosecutors overcharge to get plea bargains and money (fines). The feds have over a 95% conviction rate. They enjoy this for two reasons mainly. First, historically they have not brought charges until they have an open and shut case. Second they don't overcharge and they only offer deals if you can give them a much bigger fish not because they bit off more than they can chew.
If you knew anything about the USDOJ I would not have to type all this.
None of what you just said counters what I just said
Again prosecutors go for the easy charge, the one a conviction is pretty much guaranteed on...and in this particular incident will cause the least amount of controversy.
...and yes, Federal courts plea bargain just as much as state and municipal ones..IF NOT MORESO.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-10-06 at 1:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson None of what you just said counters what I just said
Read it slowly this time and if helps you can move your lips.
Again prosecutors go for the easy charge, the one a conviction is pretty much guaranteed on…and in this particular incident will cause the least amount of controversy.
State and local prosecutors overcharge knowing they are willing to accept a lesser charge just to get the conviction and the fine under their belt.
Federal prosecutors charge only what they know they can convict and only accept deals if you can give them a much bigger fish.
So once more, if you are arguing that it was an insurrection why are there no defendants charged under U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection, 18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy, or 18 U.S. Code § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government? -
2021-10-06 at 1:45 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Read it slowly this time and if helps you can move your lips.
State and local prosecutors overcharge knowing they are willing to accept a lesser charge just to get the conviction and the fine under their belt.
Federal prosecutors charge only what they know they can convict and only accept deals if you can give them a much bigger fish.
So once more, if you are arguing that it was an insurrection why are there no defendants charged under U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection, 18 U.S. Code § 2384 - Seditious conspiracy, or 18 U.S. Code § 2385 - Advocating overthrow of Government?
Read what I said again slowly...particularly this bit "…and in this particular incident will cause the least amount of controversy". -
2021-10-06 at 1:47 PM UTCI also googled the word for you:
in·sur·rec·tion
a violent uprising against an authority or government.
Was the incident violent - yes
Was it against and authority - yes.
..what are you not understanding about that?The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-10-06 at 1:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson Read what I said again slowly…particularly this bit "…and in this particular incident will cause the least amount of controversy".
So is this your position? 642 people were arrested on January 6th. For the last 10 months the media, democrat members of the house and senate, and countless activists have been stirring up the shit pot calling it an insurrection and by doing so are creating vast amounts of controversy. But the USDOJ in it's infinite wisdom and temperance have decided not to charge a single person out of 642 under U.S. Code § 2383 - (Rebellion or insurrection), 18 U.S. Code § 2384 - (Seditious conspiracy), or 18 U.S. Code § 2385 - (Advocating overthrow of Government) simply to avoid controversy.
I am not asking you to outline your position. It's simple yes or no question. -
2021-10-06 at 4:04 PM UTC
-
2021-10-06 at 4:11 PM UTC
-
2021-10-06 at 4:16 PM UTC
-
2021-10-06 at 4:19 PM UTC
-
2021-10-06 at 4:24 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker Saying yes would affirm not explain your position. Saying no would explain nothing.
lrn2engrish
My position was already explained, any further communication on the same subject would only affirm that which has already be given.
Your corrupted interpretation of what I explained isn't relevant to my clear explanation...and so an answer either way from me is redundant.
lernCompreeehenshon -
2021-10-07 at 5:36 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson My position was already explained, any further communication on the same subject would only affirm that which has already be given.
Your corrupted interpretation of what I explained isn't relevant to my clear explanation…and so an answer either way from me is redundant.
lernCompreeehenshon
Thanks for another W -
2021-10-19 at 3:32 PM UTCMore footage of capital police just letting people in.
-
2021-10-19 at 3:36 PM UTC
-
2021-10-19 at 5:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by the man who put it in my hood doesn't change the fact that you can be charged for trespassing at any time in any building doesn't matter if you had permission or not.
I think they have to ask you to leave before they can charge you with trespassing...in a "public accessible" facility. -
2021-10-19 at 5:42 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson I think they have to ask you to leave before they can charge you with trespassing…in a "public accessible" facility.
You can not be trespassed from public property unless you have committed a crime or are creating a disturbance which pre ents others from uusing the public space and have been asked to leave by a swarn officer of the law. Key word here is public space which does not included commercial property.
Go ahead and argue if you want. -
2021-10-19 at 8:45 PM UTC
Originally posted by Speedy Parker You can not be trespassed from public property unless you have committed a crime or are creating a disturbance which pre ents others from uusing the public space and have been asked to leave by a swarn officer of the law. Key word here is public space which does not included commercial property.
Go ahead and argue if you want.
"Public accessible" again you didn't read.
Walmart for example...a publicly accessible building but privately owned. Before you can be charged with Trespass they have to ask you to leave and you have to have refused. -
2021-10-19 at 8:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson
"Public accessible" again you didn't read.
Walmart for example…a publicly accessible building but privately owned. Before you can be charged with Trespass they have to ask you to leave and you have to have refused.
Plublicly accessible includes commercial and public property. I wish I could say I was sorry you are so upset that you failed to distinguish between the two regarding trespass law. But I would never lie to you Sally.
Oh wait, maybe you think public property isn't publicly accessible. -
2021-10-20 at 12:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by Jiggaboo_Johnson I think they have to ask you to leave before they can charge you with trespassing…in a "public accessible" facility.
Easements to access public land.
stairs are kind of like foot bridges or Causeways to get from one building or road to another on foot.
but trying to force a locked door while congress is in session was most likely breaking and entering at a felony level being it was a Federal Government property. Though it belongs to the police, the Government had the right to protect themselves from possible terrorist acts.
But that being said, I will flip this away from Trump and his MAGA guys to that of why wasn't there any Security knowing how heated things were for the abridgment of two sitting presidents. One going out and one coming in.
it seems like it was done on purpose. just leave a big open space without security there in the first place. Then they blamed the DC Police for not placing their officers at the site. The City of DC's police. Not the Secret Service Police or requesting National Guard be there in the first place. Its like they baited those fuckheads into going the limit before shooting at them and then requesting help.
give me a break. this was clearly ignored on purpose.
