This is what happens when someone was simply at the Capital on Jan 6th. This person did not enter the building and even the prosecutors and Judge admit he engaged in no violent or destructive behavior?
- the courts continued his case five times, dragging it out for over a year;
- the court-ordered strict pretrial supervision for over a year;
- his court-ordered ankle monitor that he now has to wear as part of a three-month in-home confinement sentence;
- he received a three-year probation sentence and 60 hours of community service;
- the judge imposed the maximum fine of $5,000 and $500 restitution to the Capitol, despite the judge’s acknowledgment that he did not engage in destructive behavior or vandalism at the Capitol.
You can read more about this story here at Legal Insurrection. It includes a video of the interview. But basically this was a guy (Brandon Straka) there who was recording the events as they happened and was arrested by authorities for no other reason that there was a video that proved he was there. Of course, the video didn't show him either in the building or being violent or destructive whatsoever, but that did not matter to the prosecutors.
What makes this situation even more outrageous that his video shows that he was on the east side of the building, whereas most of the actual violence and such were on the west side of the building. While he recorded people entering the building, you can hear him say that people were being waved in. There seems to be a point where a police officer loses his shield and then gets it back. But there doesn't appear to be any evidence that this officer was assaulted, much less assaulted by Straka himself. At one point he got within ten feet of the door and was videotaping others entering. But there is no evidence given that he entered the building himself.
Prosecutors seem to be mostly concerned with what they felt were statements made during the video which they believe (but cannot prove) were associated to him. Their statement of complaint is also heavy on Twitter statements made before and after the riot (protected free speech) and light on actual evidence of any real tangible actions or behavior associated with the criminal statutes involved. They charge him with being on Capital "grounds" rather than specifically in the building.
So with all due respect to Mitch McConnell and others who refuse to look at this situation with any degree of nuance, there are plenty of American citizens who are being prosecuted and punished for behavior that does not include violence, destruction, or any of the "insurrection" type behavior that seems to be just labeled on anyone who was there.
But for me, the part that makes this so orwellian and fascist (if I am being honest about the semantics) is that these prosecutors and judges were simply allowed to keep non-violent protesters on strict pre-trial restrictions (or even jailed in some cases). Moreover the accused were not provided their constitutional right to a "speedy" trial as the prosecutors and Judges were allowed to just keep these restrictions indefinitely. What this fascist behavior does is allow the prosecutors to pressure these people to take a plea (in this case 3 months in house arrest, three years probation, 60 hours of community service, and $5500 in fines) because these people have no resources to fight it and just want it to end.
Meanwhile, we have destructive and violent antifa rioters who have been arrested multiple times, bailed out by GoFundMe accounts started and supported by people like Kamala Harris, and never prosecuted. We literally have people who attacked police officers and burned and looted buildings are free with no consequences, while a guy who took a video of protesters is prosecuted. If someone can explain this to me without tossing politics into the mix, I would love to hear it.
63 comments:
Mark Levin is ten times crazier than you!
But I will check it
He pleaded guilty.
The judge followed the law.
The violent antifa rioters were not trying to overturn the election.
Mark Levin
Straka is one of many people in this situation. I have a feeling we will look back on the treatment of these folks as a very dark chapter in our history.
Is as credible as George Wallace in 68
You have jumped on the crazy train.
Mark Levin, a star of conservative talk radio who joined Fox in November 2017, has taken a markedly different tack. The host of a weekly show, Levin singularly lobs insults at his colleagues — mostly Fox’s news reporters and anchors, but also recently a fellow opinion host — in a manner that has created negative headlines and headaches in the process.
“It definitely goes against one of the core Fox philosophies,” said a Fox News veteran who spoke on the condition of anonymity to speak candidly.
Levin’s willingness to dump on his own colleagues has burnished his reputation as a sort of rogue independent who balks at the governing rules of the corporate media ecosystem — and a wild card who could end up playing a big role in the future of the conservative movement.
You are the person becoming more
Orwellian and fascist every day. I am being honest about the semantics.
Even if I quit saying Insurrection, your intent is to support the slow motion coup.
If he said "get on the grounds" of The Capital of the United States of America with intent to disrupt the election process, which is a crime, it is not protect by the first amendment.
He openly promoted a new civil war.
Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the extremist group Oath Keepers, faces charges of seditious conspiracy.
The sentencing to probation Monday of one such pro-Trump social media influencer charged in the Jan. 6 Capitol riots, Brandon Straka, helps explain why.
Straka, 44, is a former New York City hairstylist who promoted himself as a gay former liberal in a #WalkAway social media campaign that encouraged voters to leave the Democratic Party. Rhodes faces a prison sentence of up to 20 years if he is convicted, but Straka on Monday received three months’ home detention, three years’ probation and a $5,000 fine for misdemeanor disorderly conduct.
Pro-Trump social media influencer and speaker at Jan. 5 rally pleads guilty to disorderly conduct in Capitol riot
Like Rhodes, recently indicted along with 10 Oath Keepers members and alleged affiliates of conspiring to use violence to try to stop Joe Biden’s certification as president, Straka claimed to have hundreds of thousands of social media followers before Jan. 6, 2021. Neither of the two men actually entered the Capitol building or committed violence or property damage, but as Rhodes is charged with doing, Straka admitted in plea papers to urging angry Trump supporters in public speeches and statements to prepare for battle ahead of the attack.
“Straka stoked the passions of his followers, frequently telling the ‘Patriots’ that it was time to ‘rise up’ as part of a ‘civil war,’ ” and that they “could not allow” a Biden transition, Assistant U.S. Attorney Brittany L. Reed wrote.
“We are in a civil war,” Straka told 600,000 followers on Twitter on Dec. 2, 2020, using rhetoric that echoed Rhodes, addressing Trump supporters online and in Washington at a Jan. 5, 2021, “Stop the Steal” rally at Freedom Plaza by urging them to “fight back” and referring to “revolution.”
He was not just a peaceful man talking videos...
Scott, do you really want a new civil war against me and millions of white people?
You should sit back and relax, instead to letting anger consume you.
Well Roger....
Proof positive that you have no answer to this. If someone at a BLM riot had been held under arrest restrictions for over a year, not provided a speedy trial, and prosecutors were looking for even more than they got (including the right to monitor their electronic and cell phone communications)....
You would be livid.
Especially if the BLM protester in question engaged in zero violent or destructive behavior.
The reality is you have no intellectual ability to distinguish between people who actually assaulted police, or destroyed property... and those who just were there.
You literally prove this every time you make a dumb statement like "they engaged in insurrection" or they were "trying to overturn an election."
This guy was there with a video camera. He did not assault anyone. He did not enter the capital building. He did not destroy anything. He is literally being punished for attending the protest and being around people who ended up rioting.
Our criminal justice system "used to" protect one person for being prosecuted for something that someone else did, unless you could prove that they were an "accessory" to those actions. But with the Jan 6th situation, 250 years of American Justice was simply "tossed out the window" as these prosecutors and judges for the first time in American history are punishing innocent people over the actions of others.
The fact that you believe that just "being there" was a crime is what makes you a fascist.
Prosecutors seem to be mostly concerned with what they felt were statements made during the video which they believe (but cannot prove)????????
You might be a good bookkeeper but a terrible lawyer.
“We are in a civil war,” Straka told 600,000 followers on Twitter on Dec. 2, 2020, using rhetoric that echoed Rhodes, addressing Trump supporters online and in Washington at a Jan. 5, 2021, “Stop the Steal” rally at Freedom Plaza by urging them to “fight back” and referring to “revolution.”
He went there to incite violence by the
600,000 followers.
Inciting violence is a crime Scott.
I'm not insulting you. My opinion is that you have become a fascist.
Straka attended the 2021 United States Capitol attack and spoke to crowds on January 5 where he referred to the audience as "patriots" and referred repeatedly to a "revolution." He also told the attendees to "fight back" and added, "We are sending a message to the Democrats, we are not going away, you've got a problem!"[17][18]
The next day, he urged protestors to take away a police officer's shield, shouting "Take it away from him" and "Take it! Take it!" Later, as others tried to charge through the entrance to the Capitol, he shouted, "Go! Go!"[18]
On January 8, Facebook closed the #WalkAway page, which had more than half a million followers at the time. The page was replaced with a message from Facebook saying the page had violated its terms of use.[5] The shutdown came in the wake of the Capitol attack, when Facebook and other social media platforms increased their enforcement of terms of service that ban the incitement of violence.[19] Facebook said the page violated a policy on content that was, "hateful, threatening, or obscene".[20]
On January 25, Straka was arrested in Nebraska by the FBI for "impeding law enforcement officers during civil disorder" and unlawful entry into a restricted building, as well as disorderly conduct in relation to his role in the violent disturbance.[18][21] He pleaded guilty to a lesser misdemeanor charge in October 2021, which could be punishable by up to six months in prison, and agreed to provide private social media and other evidence to investigators.[22] Prosecutors postponed Straka's December 2021 sentencing for thirty days to evaluate evidence he had provided.[23]
Reactions
David A. Love of CNN condemned the campaign as "pure propaganda [and] a psychological operation."[24] The website Hamilton 68, which tracks Russia's interference on U.S. elections, reported that #WalkAway was "connected to Kremlin-linked Russian bots to manipulate voters into thinking the movement was more popular and active that it actually was."[10]
Abby Ohlheiser of The Washington Post claimed that "[t]here’s little actual evidence to suggest that #WalkAway represents a mass conversion of millions – or even thousands – of Democrats" and contrasted the broad appeal of true viral videos with the "Conservative Internet viral" nature of the WalkAway video.[25] ThinkProgress characterized the campaign as "a grifting operation," noting efforts by the organizers to sell dinner packages priced in the hundreds of dollars to march attendees.[26]
Slate journalist Mark Joseph Stern accused Straka of presenting royalty-free stock images from Shutterstock and claiming they were of people who had left the Democratic Party,[27] though Straka has denied that any such material originated from the WalkAway campaign. Fact-checking website Snopes stated that it could not determine whether this use of stock images had originated from campaign organizers.[28]
The reason why they dropped the felony charges because
Inciting a riot is a misdemeanor offense.
he received a three-year probation sentence and 60 hours of community service;
A misdemeanor charge.
You think that is excessive????
That of course was from Wikipedia. Looking for Brandon Straka, I was redirected to that as part of an article on the WalkAway phenomenon.
Especially if the BLM protester in question engaged in zero violent or destructive behavior.
I would say that now that the precedent has been set, the next time there is even a peep out of BLM and/or antifa, we lock them up with no charges, no trial, no nothing for not less than 10 years.
In solitary.
No human contact, and with the light of only a single candle to illuminate each day.
Let's see how long it takes them to go mad.
You can read more about this story here at Legal Insurrection.
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!! The biggest pile of horse manure you have ever posted, Lil Schitty......Stop trying to rationalize that 1-6 was legitimate political discourse.....even fucking Jowls admits it was an insurrection and trump lost....why can't a simpleton moronic slurper like you come to the same conclusion unless you are brain damaged!!!!!!!!
You think that is excessive????
Absolutely. He didn't 'incite' anything alky. That 'charge' is purely subjective.
The prosecutor(s) and judge have TDS on a level that's competitive with yours alky.
Two of my co-workers attended the Jan 6 rally.
They did not enter the Capitol; in fact, they never went anywhere near it. But according to alky logic they need to be arrested and their lives ruined. Simply for supporting Donald Trump.
How totalitary-ingly fascist of you.
Well Reverend...
You cannot arrest someone for claiming a protest is a revolution or engaging in other terms that are protected free speech. You CERTAINLY CANNOT ARREST SOMEONE for having a website.
In fact, NONE OF THAT social media stuff (prior or after) would likely be admissible if they tried him in court for actions on that day.
Again... if an Antifa person with a website devoted to racism and police brutality was arrested and held under restriction for over a year because he was vocal on social media and vocal during a protest
But did not involve himself in any violence or destruction.
You would have a heart attack!
On second thought, we need to start shooting the BLM/antifa scumbags to death.
I mean, if the left can do that to Ashli Babbitt, the right should be able to do that at their discretion for any reason, with any BLM/antifa rioter.
Fuck the trial nonsense. Just slaughter the cocksuckers.
Once again, the precedent has been set.
From LI -
He went on to say that the prosecution’s initial recommendation was severe surveillance measures as a condition of the three-year probation, which would have allowed for surveilling of his phone, computer, bank accounts, social media accounts, and email accounts for the entire probationary period. This was ultimately not included in the final sentencing, but it begs the question of why it was brought to the table at all.
You want a hot civil war? This is how you get a hot civil war.
The funny thing Rat...
Is that everything the Reverend was posting that supposedly justified his arrest was basically free speech... just speech that the Reverend disagrees with.
I mean seriously... what does a website about walk away have to do with criminal charges??? Yet, that is what these people are talking about.
It's one thing to be banned on social media for un-woke non-liberal believe. But it is pure evil fascism to actually use it as justification for arresting someone...
Maybe it's time I simply "ban" Roger from posting here because his views are just stupid? Perhaps I simply "ban" the Reverend for providing cut and paste of views that are alternative to my own?
After all... not only do these two children think Twitter has the right to ban political speech, they believe it is some sort of "duty" to do so.
Of course without Roger and the Reverend to beat up on, what would we be left with?
You CERTAINLY CANNOT ARREST SOMEONE for having a website.
Really????? If the person is threatening bodily harm to a senator......he certainly can be taken in...
Information gathered and posted by a network of online sleuths led to the arrests Tuesday of two men charged separately with storming the U.S. Capitol last year, the FBI said in court filings.
One of the men — Matthew Jason Beddingfield, 21, of North Carolina — also is charged with attacking police officers with a flagpole during the riot in Washington on Jan. 6, 2021.
Beddingfield and Eric Gerwatowski, 31, of New Hyde Park, New York, were arrested in their respective home states Tuesday after their cases were unsealed.
advertisement
The FBI has cited information compiled by online sleuths in many of the more than 730 riot-related cases filed in federal court so far. In a court filing, the FBI says one of the leads that it received from “previously unaffiliated private citizens" helped investigators identify Beddingfield as a rioter.
Btw Reverend...
If the State could have proved what they originally charged this guy with, then why didn't they just take him to trial as soon as they could! If they had proof then a conviction would have allowed them to get a much more severe sentence.
Why (if the had the evidence) did they delay the trial 5 times, keep him on restrictions for a year, and then eventually allow a plea down to much lower charges?
The truth is that the State simply didn't have the proof. The reason we have a bill of rights it to protect people from this sort of thing. They should have been forced (by any reasonable judge) to put up or shut up. If they couldn't bring him to trial that very first time, then this person should be completely 100% free till his trial. Hell, we have people accused of real felonies that are allowed to be free on bail while they await trial.
Americans ARE after all innocent until proven guilty. This person was punished as a guilty person for over year when he had not been convicted of anything.
The fact that you are okay with this as a man of god and an American?
Is why liberals are losing right now and will continue to lose.
Real Americans are fed up.
Is that everything the Reverend was posting that supposedly justified his arrest was basically free speech... just speech that the Reverend disagrees with.
That's the left's entire basis for ALL political discourse they disagree with.
Silence, censor, cancel, destroy.
Silence, censor, cancel, destroy.
Lather, rinse repeat.
Deep down I think the left understands that their ideology, worldview, whatever the fuck you want to call it, is wrong, and almost always corrupt.
Look at the addiction issue we were discussing. Program, after program after program, providing addicts with what they need to continue their addictions 'safely and cleanly.'
Right.
And while the addict stays addicted, the executive Director of that specific program makes $250,000.00/year, with no quantifiable results.
Great work if you can get it.
All of leftism is basically a variation of exactly this. The ideas suck and are demonstrably false and flat out wrong. So the left's answer is to silence, imprison, or KILL the opposition to the ideas. And dumb fucks like the alky and the pederast play along thinking they're going to get to be part of the small group of elitists named to rule over the idiocracy that results. When in reality, they just get to face the wall after us.
Make no mistake, this is where we are.
Real Americans are fed up.
Indeed. And when this civil war goes 'hot,' the first shot will be fired by a law enforcement office 'just taking orders' at the direction of a tyrannical leftist.
And then it's on like fucking Donkey Kong.
I guess Ch will be FOR this too:
Rand Paul Urges Truckers to ‘Clog Up Cities’
February 12, 2022 at 4:52 pm EST By Taegan Goddard 81 Comments
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) “said he hopes truckers would come to the United States as soon as this weekend to clog up streets in Los Angeles during the Super Bowl or next month to Washington,” the Washington Post reports.
Said Paul: “I’m all for it. Civil disobedience is a time-honored tradition in our country, from slavery to civil rights to you name it. Peaceful protest, clog things up, make people think about the mandates.”
He added: “I hope the truckers do come to America, and I hope they clog up cities.”
Social Media Influencer Brandon Straka Gets Home Confinement, $5K Fine in Jan. 6 Riot Case
BY CHARLOTTE TRATTNER ON 1/24/22
Pro-Trump social media influencer Brandon Straka was sentenced to three months of home detention and three years of probation and was ordered to pay a $5,000 fine due to his role in last year's U.S. Capitol riot.
Prosecutors said Straka, the founder of the "WalkAway" campaign, used his personal Twitter account to encourage people to storm the Capitol, the Associated Press reported. U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich called Straka's use of social media "deeply disturbing."
Straka was an invited speaker at a January 5, 2021, "Stop the Steal" rally in Washington D.C., according to the city's WUSA-9. In connection to his speech, Straka allegedly posted messages online to his followers saying, "We're not going to be peaceful much longer."
In footage captured during the January 6 riot, Straka can be heard in one video yelling, "Go, go, go," and, "Take it, take it," as rioters attempted to grab a shield from a police officer, according to the AP. He also tweeted, "Patriots at the Capitol—HOLD. THE. LINE!!!!"
"Even if he didn't personally engage in violence or property destruction during the riot, Straka encouraged and celebrated the violence of that day," Assistant U.S. Attorney Brittany Reed wrote in a court filing quoted by the AP.
Straka pleaded guilty in October to one count of disorderly conduct, which carries a maximum penalty of six months imprisonment, the AP added.
Prosecutors had recommended four months of home detention, according to Business Insider. Straka was not accused of entering the Capitol.
Straka told the judge that he and his followers do not condone violence and that his movement is about love, saying, "It's not who they are, and it's not who I am, which is why they love our movement," the AP reported.
However, WUSA-9 reported that Friedrich was skeptical about Straka's statements.
"He wants me to believe he was there completely oblivious to what was going on around him, that he was just a peaceful protester, and it's very hard to believe that based on his conduct and his statements," Friedrich was quoted by WUSA-9.
Straka's attorney, Bilal Essayli, said prosecutors were attacking Straka's First Amendment rights to political speech, the AP reported. However, the judge said Straka wasn't being prosecuted for his political beliefs.
"None of the criminal conduct to which Mr. Straka has admitted is covered by the First Amendment," Friedrich was quoted by the AP.
BEARS REPEATING:
"None of the criminal conduct to which Mr. Straka has admitted is covered by the First Amendment," Friedrich was quoted by the AP.
Well Reverend...
I didn't see you getting too riled up while my old city and my new city were both being ravaged by political violence from the left. Billions of dollars worth of damages and you applauded it all!
Well, you pretended that you were against the "violence" and kept falling for the mostly peaceful protest scam... but you were one of those who demanded rioters were being kidnapped and ultimately you saw the people committing the violence as the good guys and the victims.
You saw the cops and people trying to stop the violence as the bad guys!
I remember how when the eastern European trucker ran over a bunch of protesters who were shutting down traffic you and Roger fell for the idea that he was a White Supremacist who hit them on purpose. You completely supported those who were blocking traffic and blamed the people who were just trying drive.
So in that concept... I would think that you would be all for Trucker stopping traffic as a means for political protest and you would believe that anyone trying to stop them as horrible people who are using violence to unsurp honest political protest.
Wouldn't it be ironic if they ended up in Los Angeles tomorrow and clogged up all the routes to the Super Bowl. Then our buddy Roger here would have spent $13,000 in vain, because he wouldn't be able to get to the game.
BEARS REPEATING:
"None of the criminal conduct to which Mr. Straka has admitted is covered by the First Amendment," Friedrich was quoted by the AP.
LOL!!!
Well then Reverend! THEY REALLY DROPPED THE BALL!!
Didn't they?
They had him dead to rights for incitement and let him off on a misdemeanor, huh? What sort of prosecutor would do such a thing? Either one who is "lying" about things or one that is totally incompetent.
Btw... I already read the official complaint against Straka prior to posting this story. The official complaint is apparently missing quite a bit of what this prosecutor is stating... well at least half of what he is saying.
There was nothing in the complaint about his twitter or website prior to the riot other than the fact he was part of the "walk away" movement (former liberal turned good guy).
The statements he made "after" the riots was both encouraging to the idea of the riot and disappointment that it didn't stop the vote counting. But saying something "after" the fact is not criminal. You cannot be charged with accessory or incitement for demanding after the fact that you were in favor of something.
Otherwise Pelosi and every member of the squad would be in prison for encouraging and supporting BLM and Antifa Riots that caused billions in damages and injured hundreds of police officers. Kamala Harris would be a felon for starting a fund to pay the bail for people who were arrested.
But I guess that encouragement is only a crime when conservatives do it, not liberals, huh Reverend?
Btw Reverend...
The key to fascism is to have people like you and Roger who simply believe EVERYTHING you are told by your LEADERS!
It cannot exist if people think and fact check things for themselves.
and no, Reverend... reading quotes from the prosecutor from a liberal journalist is not fact checking. It's being a Zombie who just follows what he is told!
Did you listen to the interview?
Or would listening to both sides literally kill you?
I didn't see you getting too riled up while my old city and my new city were both being ravaged by political violence from the left. Billions of dollars worth of damages and you applauded it all! LIE NO.1.
Well, you pretended that you were against the "violence" and kept falling for the mostly peaceful protest scam... but you were one of those who demanded rioters were being kidnapped and ultimately you saw the people committing the violence as the good guys and the victims. LIE NO. 2.
You saw the cops and people trying to stop the violence as the bad guys! LIE NO. 3.
I remember how when the eastern European trucker ran over a bunch of protesters who were shutting down traffic you and Roger fell for the idea that he was a White Supremacist who hit them on purpose. You completely supported those who were blocking traffic and blamed the people who were just trying drive. LIE NO. 4.
So in that concept... I would think that you would be all for Trucker stopping traffic as a means for political protest and you would believe that anyone trying to stop them as horrible people who are using violence to unsurp honest political protest. NOPE.
OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC IS A PROSECUTABLE CRIME.
You always say I said this and that but never actually quote me.
Even though I cited the law, he is still thinking of blocking me.
He incident violence.
He broke the law and he was not protected by the first time.
“We are in a civil war,” Straka told 600,000 followers on Twitter on Dec. 2, 2020, using rhetoric that echoed Rhodes, addressing Trump supporters online and in Washington at a Jan. 5, 2021, “Stop the Steal” rally at Freedom Plaza by urging them to “fight back” and referring to “revolution.”
It's not unusual for the prosecution to reduce the charges as new evidence appears.
But you really believe that the Department of Justice is just a Democratic support.
I never believes EVERYTHING I am told by your LEADERS. I'm skeptical of every politician... you are the zombie
You are never skeptical of Trump.
Okay Reverend...
If what I am saying is a lie, all you have to do is agree with a simple statement.
Every single BLM and Antifa rioter should have been prosecuted to the same extent that the Capital rioters have been.
If you cannot agree with that statement....
Then everything I stated is true and you are just providing more lies.
I have often listened to Mark Levin's rantings, and for you to suggest he is committed to fairly presenting opposing viewpoints is laughable.
You are never skeptical of Trump.
I couldn't care less about Trump and haven't since he stopped being President. If he runs again, then I will care.
What you really mean to say, Roger. Is that I am not obsessed with Trump and the 1001 different allegations of evils and wrongdoing to the point of a mental illness, like you are. To that I agree 100%!
I couldn't care less!
The courts have been doing well.
They have temporary reversed Jim Crow 21st century.
And in my comments I never mentioned Trump
— A federal judge has temporarily blocked several Texas counties from pursuing criminal charges against public officials who encourage voters to use mail ballots in next month's primary election.
Encouraging people to vote by mail is a crime!
Every single BLM and Antifa rioter should have been prosecuted to the same extent that the Capital rioters have been.
If you cannot agree with that statement....
Then everything I stated is true and you are just providing more lies.
_____________
I can agree with the statement, but they did not do what they did in as public a way as what the Capitol rioters did. With all the videos taken by both rioters and others at the Capitol, there is far more evidence against numerous individuals that the Capitol Building rioters were committing a federal crime on federal property and striking at one of the very most fundamental foundations of our democracy, a legitimate election.
Scott doesn't care anymore.
He can't grasp the differences.
Since you believe in free enterprise, you should condemn him
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) “said he hopes truckers would come to the United States as soon as this weekend to clog up streets in Los Angeles during the Super Bowl or next month to Washington,” the Washington Post reports.
Said Paul: “I’m all for it. Civil disobedience is a time-honored tradition in our country, from slavery to civil rights to you name it. Peaceful protest, clog things up, make people think about the mandates.”
He added: “I hope the truckers do come to America, and I hope they clog up cities.”
____________
That will cause inflation and bankruptcy for smaller businesses.
And of course
Since the death of George Floyd, the Black man killed by a white Minneapolis police officer in 2020. Some states and local school boards have banned books about race relations, slavery and gender.
They are afraid of Thecoldheartedtruth about our past.
In order to avoid a war in Ukraine Putin demanded that NATO stop its eastward expansion and deny membership to Ukraine, and that NATO roll back troop deployment in countries that had joined after 1997, which would turn back the clock decades on Europe’s security and geopolitical alignment.
President Biden is not going to accept that.
Scott what would you do??
I can agree with the statement, but they did not do what they did in as public a way as what the Capitol rioters did
You either agree or you don't Reverend.
A person who was not engaged in violence or destruction of property should be treated the same whether or not their issue is alleged police brutality or alleged election fraud. Same for someone who is engaged in violence or is engaged in destruction of property.
Our legal system is not designed to pick and choose whose opinions are supported under freedom of speech and whose opinions are not. Once we decide that is how it works, then every new Administration can decide it's open season on those who disagree with them.
But we literally have people who have been "arrested" and then never charged for assaulting police officers in BLM Antifa riots, whereas we have people being charged for little more than "twitter comments" after the fact if their issue is election fraud. Whether semantics you want to use, the laws are crystal clear and don't allow for a difference to be determined by political reasoning.
You attack Federal law enforcement protecting a Federal Building in Portland... the laws have the same penalties (like it or not) than someone attacking a Capital police officer at the Capitol building. There is literally no legal difference (only political).
That is an undeniable fact Reverend.
A federal judge has temporarily blocked several Texas counties from pursuing criminal charges against public officials who encourage voters to use mail ballots in next month's primary election.
Encouraging people to vote by mail is a crime!
This is pretty simple Roger.
If you are an "ELECTION OFFICIAL" then you are part of the objective process of handling votes, counting votes, and doing your job. If you are an "ELECTION OFFICIAL" it is not your job to engage in politics, tell potential voters who to vote for or how to vote.
If they call and inquire about voting by mail, by all means it it their job to explain it. But above and beyond that, if an "ELECTION OFFICIAL" wants to engage in a get out the vote drive or solicit voters or votes - then they can quit that particular job and join a Political organization that does just that.
They have to separate their own personal political views from their jobs. ANY TYPE OF SOLICITATION of anything from that job should be specifically banned and should absolutely be against the law.
Not sure why that is hard to understand....
Unless you believe that we need our election officials to "also" be political operatives and use taxpayer time and resources to do their political biddings?
That law (as it is written) will almost certainly hold up when it gets to the Texas Supreme Court. Not only is it legal - it is common sense.
The crazy Trucker are pleading to reduce the goods and services and double the rate of inflation astronomicaly.
And if this persists for a few months, so be it. If we can’t get all the supplies we need, we’ll make the best of it. Dig into our doomsday closet supplies. Stock up while we still can. Make sure we have enough medication for a few months.
In this Government vs. The People standoff, we will win. Elites have nothing but disdain for the very people they depend on to live—people who work with their hands so the elites don’t have to; who build their homes and buildings; manufacture just about everything they need; repair their electrical, plumbing, and heating systems; install their AC and repair their cars; care for their kids; deliver their food, fuel, building supplies, new ovens, whatever. Teachers, nurses, gas station attendants. The very people the left claims to care about are now domestic terrorists and racists. We’ll survive but the elites will fall apart.
In court??
But encouraging our citizens to choose our leaders is not manipulation.
If they did it for political purposes, they should be fired.
Having our own election workers encouraging the right to vote is not politically motivated.
ANY TYPE OF SOLICITATION of anything from that job should be specifically banned and shxould absolutely be against the law.
But underneath is your distrust of the government of any kind. Except to prosecute the Antifa etc.
Indictments coming to Hillary's 2016 campaign. Mueller wasn't interested. Durham is.
Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) “said he hopes truckers would come to the United States as soon as this weekend to clog up streets in Los Angeles during the Super Bowl or next month to Washington,” the Washington Post reports.
Said Paul: “I’m all for it. Civil disobedience is a time-honored tradition in our country, from slavery to civil rights to you name it. Peaceful protest, clog things up, make people think about the mandates.”
He added: “I hope the truckers do come to America, and I hope they clog up cities.”
Roger...
You always have to keep one thing in mind. By over a two to one margin Americans want more secure election, not elections with looser restrictions to provide higher turnout. You've simply lost that argument.
So yeah, Roger... the same objective people who are supposed to be responsible for objectively counting and securing our elections so that they are 100% trusted...
should not be (under any circumstances) soliciting anything from potential voters. It is not their jobs to make sure more or less people vote. It is their job to simply be completely objective and do nothing more than make sure people are voting properly and that the votes are properly and legally counted.
Not sure where you got the idea that election officials have any rights to use that position for any solicitation purposes at all.
New detail about Russian "false flag" plan prompts U.S. to prepare for worst in Ukraine
BY MARGARET BRENNAN
CBS NEWS FEBRUARY 12, 2022
New granular detail about the planning of a false flag attack in Ukraine by Russia was among the intelligence items discussed in the Situation Room on Thursday night in an emergency meeting, U.S. officials confirmed to CBS News.
That detail was just part of what two U.S. officials described as a broad mosaic of information that has been building since the fall and which has led to the Biden administration's planning for the worst-case scenario of a multi-axis, simultaneous attack on Ukraine by the Russian military.
The Washington Post was the first to report, on Friday, that a false flag operation was among the data points in the new intelligence.
National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan told reporters Friday that the U.S. is firmly convinced that Russia is looking hard at the creation of a false-flag operation to justify an invasion, "something that they generate and try to blame on the Ukrainians as a trigger for military action." Sullivan said that any subsequent attack would likely begin with "aerial bombing and missile attacks" ahead of "the onslaught of a massive force."
Russian forces are already positioned to send troops pouring across Ukraine's northern border with Belarus and launch a maritime assault from the Black Sea. Moscow is also capable of sending troops over Ukraine's eastern border.
U.S. officials have said Russia already has intelligence operatives on the ground that could create a pretext for an invasion by assisting in creating a false flag. Last month, U.S. officials said this could involve Russian operatives "trained in urban warfare and in using explosives to carry out acts of sabotage against Russia's own proxy forces."
Weather conditions that freeze the ground would allow heavy Russian military equipment including tanks to advance more easily. But ground troops are not the only option that Russian President Vladimir Putin could use.
U.S. officials do not have evidence that Putin has decided to deploy these assets to launch an invasion but emphasize that he is now capable of making the decision to execute with very little warning. On Friday, Politico was the first to report that the U.S. had intelligence indicating that Russian military leaders had been told to be ready by February 16.
The cumulative picture of Moscow's planning triggered the U.S. on Saturday to pull out U.S. military advisers, withdraw some embassy staff from Kyiv and move staff to a makeshift consular post in Lviv, a city in western Ukraine. Sullivan said Friday that "prudence demands" planning — even though the U.S. does not know exactly what is going to happen.
Privately, U.S. and Western officials say it is entirely possible that this could be an incredibly dangerous and expensive bluff on Putin's part, but they argue that it is the responsibility of their leaders to weigh the risk.
[MY OWN THOUGHTS.]
Three Western officials from allied governments expressed skepticism that Putin would take action as extreme as putting 100,000 soldiers on the march and risk a state-on-state conflict, or be willing to take on the occupation of a country that has resisted Russian aggression for the past eight years. Yet all three acknowledged that intelligence indicates the Russian military is definitely planning for that option.
Camilla Schick contributed reporting.
6:06
An important part of my point is the simple fact that with all those videos, there is far more EVIDENCE of who did what than in the riots that took place in other parts of the country.
The ideal of treating all lawbreakers equally is fine. But an overwhelming amount of video EVIDENCE exists against specific individuals who committed acts of violence and destruction at the Capitol Building.
Speaking no double standard.
Sleepy Joe Biden effeffdd it up like you have been saying..
Declassified U.S. military analyses of the calamitous exit from Afghanistan detail repeated instances of friction between American troops and diplomats before and during the evacuation, concluding that indecisiveness among Biden administration officials in Washington and initial reluctance to shutter the embassy in Kabul sowed chaos and put the overall mission at “increased risk.”
Two “after action” reports were prepared by officials assigned to U.S. Central Command in September, about three weeks after the final planeload of military personnel departed Hamid Karzai International Airport.
The assessments appear to affirm separate accounts of senior U.S. commanders frustrated by what they characterized as sloppy, misguided management of the withdrawal.
As The Washington Post first reported Tuesday, military leaders who coordinated the evacuation fault officials in the White House and the State Department whom, they say, failed to respect the Taliban’s swift advance last year and resisted pleas from the military to prepare for an evacuation weeks before Kabul’s fall.
The declassified after-action analyses are contained within an official report detailing the military’s investigation of an Aug. 26 suicide bombing outside the airport’s Abbey Gate that killed an estimated 170 Afghans and 13 U.S. service members. The report, obtained by The Washington Post through a Freedom of Information Act request, comprises dozens of witness interviews, findings of fact, and other official government records. Spanning 2,000 pages, it presents the most extensive, unvarnished account to date of the United States’ 17-day race to end its longest war.
[Documents reveal U.S. military’s frustration with White House, diplomats over Afghanistan evacuation]
The existence of the after-action reports contradicts claims made Friday by White House press secretary Jen Psaki, who has joined President Biden and other administration officials in seeking to downplay the significance of U.S. commanders’ remarks.
“I think it’s important for people to understand that there was no after-action report,” Psaki told reporters in the White House briefing room.
A National Security Council official, speaking on the condition of anonymity because the matter remains highly sensitive, said Saturday that Psaki’s statement from the podium referred to a forthcoming, more extensive review of the war’s endgame.
The Washington Post...not fake news said
In their witness statements to Army officials investigating the airport bombing, Vasely and other officers described the delayed evacuation as fateful.
U.S. troops would have been “much better prepared to conduct a more orderly” evacuation, Vasely told the investigators, “if policymakers had paid attention to the indicators of what was happening on the ground.”
The evacuation order was declared after the central government in Kabul collapsed on Aug. 15 as the Taliban completed a months-long rise, seizing numerous provincial capitals and eventually encircling Kabul, where a skeleton force of about 600 U.S. troops remained to provide security for the diplomats. The crisis triggered the deployment of more than 5,000 additional U.S. troops, some of whom had been staged in the region. Over the next two weeks, more than 124,000 people were flown to safety.
The after-action report prepared by Vasely’s headquarters says the decision to delay closing the embassy left commanders about 12 hours to empty out the embassy with State Department collaboration. It recommends that future crisis planning “should include a discussion on building consensus” while readying an evacuation operation “with triggers for action that should be taken to avoid strategic surprise.”
The report also states that U.S. troops struggled in the bombing’s aftermath. There was a “severe failure” in patient administration and tracking, the report says, including one instance when a set of human remains and a patient in critical care were misidentified, resulting in the wrong name being reported to more senior commanders.
“The discrepancy was discovered prior to [family] notification,” the report says.
The second after-action analysis included in the Abbey Gate report focuses heavily on the actions of U.S. Marines at the airport. It concludes that after Afghanistan’s government collapsed, there was “insufficient airlift” in the region needed to rapidly boost the number of U.S. forces at the airport.
“While considered in the planning phase, the scope and scale of the desperation population was not fully appreciated,” the report states, referring to the tens of thousands of civilians who converged on Kabul’s airport seeking a way out of Afghanistan.
The State Department at times sent messages to potential evacuees that “conflicted with gate conditions and realtime capabilities” at the airfield, military officials wrote in the second after-action report. It warns that the Defense and State departments must have personnel at all levels “plan, cooperate and endeavor to stick to the plan” to successfully carry out future evacuations.
I knew it was fucked up but
...
They almost miss informed their families
The big lie undermines our faith in our Constitutional rights to choose our leaders.
Historically speaking it's the most dangerous President in history.
Did James just make his case for War for oil? (Prior thread)
Looks like it.
Oil.Price March 31, 2021 $61.32
Today Oil Price. $92.49
PUTIN moved troops to move oil price.
Roger, this is damaging, this from the sitting President on 2022 elections
"Oh, yeah, I think it could easily be illegitimate," Biden said,"
Cite: CNN
"
Lock her up and lethal injection.
Trump suggests Clinton campaign staffers should be put to death — and demands 'reparations'
John Wright
February 12, 2022
Former president Donald Trump issued a statement Saturday suggesting that unnamed members of Hillary Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign staff should be put to death.
"The latest pleading from Special Counsel Robert Durham provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia," Trump said in the statement from his Save America PAC. "This is a scandal far greater in scope and magnitude than Watergate and those who were involved in and knew about this spying operation should be subject to criminal prosecution. In a stronger period of time in our country, this crime would have been punishable by death. In addition, reparations should be paid to those in our country who have been damaged by this."
Trump was responding to allegations put forth by Durham in a court filing this week.
"Lawyers for the Clinton campaign paid a technology company to 'infiltrate' servers belonging to Trump Tower, and later the White House, in order to establish an 'inference' and "narrative' to bring to government agencies linking Donald Trump to Russia, a filing from Special Counsel John Durham says," Fox News reported Saturday. "Durham filed a motion on Feb. 11 focused on potential conflicts of interest related to the representation of former Clinton campaign lawyer Michael Sussman, who has been charged with making a false statement to a federal agent. Sussman has pleaded not guilty."
Six years later he is still fixated on her.
Makes sense.
SIMON: Well, tell us how. What are Russian aims as regards to Ukraine in your judgment?
YILMAZ: The real target is not Ukraine, but Moscow wants to force Western countries to finally sit down for negotiations on issues of European security because since 1991, this is the first time the West has engaged seriously with Russia to discuss European security things in a way to the strategy that they're pursuing. And Moscow wants arrangements to be made on several issues, but these are European security matters, including halting the development of intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Europe and limiting military exercises in close proximity to Russian borders because if you go back a little bit, in October 2018, the Trump administration decided to withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which was signed by Reagan and Gorbachev. And that treaty prohibited both parties from possessing, producing or, you know, flight testing intermediate-range nuclear forces. Now we don't have that agreement.
So in other words, Moscow, they understand that Ukraine will not enter NATO, and that's not the issue. In fact, the issue is if NATO enters Ukraine in the form of American missiles or missile defense elements. That's without any international regulations that limits missile deployments in Europe.
SIMON: Let me ask you this finally. At some point, does Vladimir Putin have to use military force if his threats to use military force are going to be taken seriously? I mean, if every time there's a troop deployment people sense it's a bluff, won't they begin to dismiss it?
YILMAZ: I think there are more options. I think Moscow sees this as a long process. And we might be moving from stage one to stage two, and there might be a stage three, but they're not necessarily a full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Of course, the recent claims are obviously important, and military analysts work on certain scenarios based on the intelligence they receive, which is natural, which is normal. However, I would say the ongoing process still shows that Moscow pursues a cost-efficient policy when it comes to hard power using geopolitics. And full-scale invasion of Ukraine does not fit into Moscow's cost-benefit calculus. I mean, it's irrational, and it's just - we might be moving from stage one to stage two. So it's not a matter of days or weeks. We might see further stages of a long process and negotiations and some military maneuvers.
SIMON: Harun Yilmaz, academic editor with Routledge, whose research focuses on Ukraine in Central Asia, thank you so much for being with us.
I hope he's right, but fear he may not be.
Post a Comment