Now the written law enforcement "complaint affidavit" is long on evidence that she was there and in the building and completely lacking in any evidence that she committed any violent act. They show several pictures of Simone (and her partner) but do not show any violent actions. The closest they come is suggesting any violence was that a Capitol police officer was pushed or fell down and landed somewhere near them. Ahem.Louie Gohmert flew to Miami yesterday to greet J6 defendant Simone Gold as she was being released from custody after serving her sentence. He presented her with a US flag that flew over the Capitol. pic.twitter.com/fpoBKNA6Hs
— Ron Filipkowski πΊπ¦ (@RonFilipkowski) September 10, 2022
Oddly and in spite of no allegations of actual violence, they charged her with "violent entry". As it is with most of these charges there is sort of an idea that the "crowd" as a whole was violent, therefore just being part of that crowd makes you violent. That is unAmerican and completely against everything our judicial system stands for... but this was dissent against Democrats. Can't have that.
She agreed to spend 60 days in jail and go in a year probation for basically walking in and out of the Capitol building. The more we know about these "violent" acts (which most are not even violent by any real standards) the more we understand what a complete hyperpartisan hoax these prosecutions are. This is nothing more than the Party who won an election using law enforcement to throw Americans in jail for supporting their opponent and protesting the results. This is third world dictator stuff that would make Vladimir Putin blush.
She agreed to spend 60 days in jail and go in a year probation for basically walking in and out of the Capitol building. The more we know about these "violent" acts (which most are not even violent by any real standards) the more we understand what a complete hyperpartisan hoax these prosecutions are. This is nothing more than the Party who won an election using law enforcement to throw Americans in jail for supporting their opponent and protesting the results. This is third world dictator stuff that would make Vladimir Putin blush.
47 comments:
Regarding Ch's thread article:
You can say all that till you are blue in the face, but Americans will never forget what we saw that day:
VIOLENT trespassing entry of the Capitol Building while fighting Capitol Police amid shouts of "stop the counting" and "get Nancy Pelosi" and "hang Mike Pence."
...basically walking in and out of the Capitol building...
Not what we saw that day.
Your problem Reverend...
Is you apparently cannot separate what one person did with what another person did. While there were "violent" people there that day...
There is zero proof that Simone Gold committed any acts of violence.
Your unwillingness to allow that distinction and demand that she go to jail just or "being there" is what makes you a fascist!
And now in a dwindling minority who still want to punish everyone who was there for the actions of a few. Do you jump and and down and scream while you piss yourself off over the fact that more and more people are disagreeing with you?
How upset does that make you?
Must be losing sleep, huh?
Many, many, many Americans say,
"If I had been there that day, I would never have behaved like that. I would never have participated in that."
But Trump watched with glee for hours the storming of the Capitol and the violent breaking through of police lines while he refused the frantic pleas of his advisers and his family to call it off.
So who bears the greatest guilt of all?
Well Reverend...
A Majority (almost 2/3) believe that the Justice department is doing the wrong thing in prosecuting non-violent participants.
America allows for non-violent protest.
At least we used to.
Apparently you now believe that only protesting for liberal causes is okay. Blow up a city block. Burn a few cars. Overrun a police station. Seriously injure a few police! All in the name of BLM! Perfectly acceptable.
Kamala Harris will set up a fund to bail you out!
You protest against a Democrat..
Well the Reverend preaches that those political dissenters should be prosecuted for their beliefs and thrown in jail!
FIre and brimstone! You can hear the anger in his thunderous voice as he demands that any dissent against Joe Biden be stopped in its tracks!
Just like every political fascist group ever assembled!
And we can all look forward to this:
January 6 Committee Plans New Round of Hearings
Wall Street Journal:
“Members of the House committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, storming of the Capitol are returning to work to plan a new round of televised hearings expected later this month, hoping to recapture the public’s attention after Congress’s August break.
“One focus of the hearings is likely to be the concerns among cabinet officials about then-President Donald Trump’s actions during and after the riot by his supporters, including any discussions about possibly using the Constitution’s 25th Amendment to try to remove him from power. Under the amendment, a majority of the cabinet, with the vice president, can temporarily unseat the president if they find him unable to discharge his duties.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/jan-6-panel-to-restart-hearings-as-house-returns-to-work-11662814801?st=tcs8jlxxry7zdcj&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
I am glad for you Reverend...
You and the other 2% of the country that is still paying attention to the Jan 6th hearings have something to look forward to rather than reading every day about how your side is destroying the country.
How bad does that make you feel?
Must really suck to know how bad your side is at actually running the country!
Does it keep you up at night? The sweats! Bad dreams?
What gives!
Roger complained this morning that there were no "comments" on the thread.
Of course had it not been for the moderation there would have been about 20. All from Roger. All of them cut and pastes. None of them having to do with any of our recent threads.
Thunder and brimstone?
No, I hear the thunder of the rioters that day, and the anger of the defeated President who wanted to shut down the magnetometers so he could send more of them armed as they went marching to the Capitol at his command.
_____
In Ch's rightwing dictionary,
"a treasonous rightwing attempt to overthrow the proven results of a fair national election" merely becomes "dissent against Joe Biden."
"a treasonous rightwing attempt to overthrow the proven results of a fair national election" merely becomes "dissent against Joe Biden."
And the evidence of that rightwind attempt...
Is our Biden law enforcement hunting down someone who was simply protesting and didn't harm a fly!
And calling her violent and sending her to jail.
When our DOJ cannot be honest anymore.
And people like you applaud them for their dishonestly!
Who is the real danger to our free society?
I suspect you know the answer...
But will hide behind more gaslighting and rhetoric!'
Reverend...
I dare you to read the criminal complaint affidavit regarding her. I dare you to find the part in there that even suggests "she" was personally violent in any manner, shape or form.
Of course that would mean you would have to confront facts.
Rather... you will just repeat the same rhetoric that makes you feel better.
Why do you hate conservatives so much?
Is that part of what you preached to your flock of 6 people?
I believe the woman pled guilty and said she wished she had not entered the building.
I dare...no, invite... you and all your readers to read the entire Wikipedia article regarding Dr. Simone Gold.
Why do you hate the simple truth so much, Ch?
And my flock never consisted merely of six people.
Why do you feel you have to lie so inveterately, Ch? It weakens all your arguments.
I believe the woman pled guilty and said she wished she had not entered the building.
So apparently entering the building....
Is an excuse for the United States Government to lie and say she was violent and sentence her to jail time?
Glad you believe as much, Reverend.
Do you have any idea how expensive it is for these average people to take on a Government that will not hesitate to jail people and hold them without bail for suggestions of crimes that are misdemeanors?
And the Reverend admits...
That he would not bother to read the actual complaint against her.
Why didn't you bother to print my short excerpt from the Wikipedia article regarding Simone Gold, Ch?
Your readers would surely have liked to have seen that for themselves.
Do you have any idea how expensive it is for these average people to take on a Government that will not hesitate to jail people and hold them without bail for suggestions of crimes that are misdemeanors?
the Biden "justice" department has bankrupted even millionaires.
and then thrown them in jail
while ignoring strong evidence against top democrats and their families
and it keeps getting worse
Banana Republic
no equal justice
corrupt FBI
democracy in peril
1984
I just read the affadavit. Pay attention to its CONCLUSION.
She was correct to plead guilty and state that she regretted entering the building.
You do realize Reverend...
That "every single plea agreement" "requires" the person to say they were guilty and that they regretted their actions.
Every single one. That is part of the idea of a plea. That you admit your guilt even if you "really do not" believe it.
And why... can you explain to us...
That someone should read "wikipedia" when they can actually read the official document themselves?
Oh wait... I forget.
Some of you cannot actually read something and draw a conclusion. You must first let someone else read it, then make sure that someone else agrees with you politically... then you accept what THEY SAY so you do not have to think for yourself.
So obvious...
Me... would never ever ever ever for any reason accept what Wikipedia states when I can draw my own conclusion.
But that is because unlike you... I have confidence in my own ability to draw conclusions and do research. It's my job!
The only thing you got out of reading that entire thing...
Was that they made a plea agreement and admitted their guilt.
Suppose if you asked her today to be honest that she would regret using her constitutional rights to peacefully protest? I doubt it. Her only regret of entering the building (which most people did not even know was a crime) was likely due to how the...
Government punished her for her beliefs.
Readers can read Wiki and the affadavit and draw their own conclusions.
Anyone who was there and pretends they did not see that the Capitol was being violently entered would have to be lying. For her to say that it was peaceful where she was standing to read her speech does not contradict the simple fact that she took part in an illegal entry.
So Reverend...
It is your argument that the fact that some other people were not being peaceful... makes her violent just for being in the vicinity of it?
It's okay. It's completely unamerican, unfair, unconstitutional, and unethical to make that argument.
But that is how fascism works.
What happened to the "mostly peaceful protest" concept?
In those old Antifa Riots... the fact that some were peaceful made the entire riot a peaceful protest.
And you are right.
People can read the complaints and draw a conclusion.
Lazy people who cannot think for themselves can go to Wikipedia and read someone else's take on it.
But they don't need us to cut and paste it here. If one wants to draw their own conclusion they can go read the complaint on their own.
I do guess... if you are not only so lazy as to rely on someone else's opinion... but also too lazy to actually go to Wikipedia on your own...
and need it to be cut and pasted here.
Then I am not really interested in that lazy of an opinion.
Ch, let me give you an excellent piece of legal advice:
If you ever want to participate in a "peaceful protest," I suggest you do not try to do so by joining a group who are illegally breaking in to one of our most sacred federal buildings with the expressed purpose of illegaly stopping a government official from performing his constitutionally mandated duty of certifying a legally conducted election.
But if you do insist on doing that, I suggest you hire one of the very best criminal lawyers you can afford, to defend you for having participated in an attempted coup.
so going into a building...
is violence?
Got it, Reverend!
Let me give some real actual advice.
Just riot over a liberal cause. break the law all you want. Bomb a pro-life group. Take over a police station. Attack a police officer. Blow up a private business. "Parade" in front of a USSC Justices house.
Break the law all you want in the name of a liberal cause.
Kamala Harris and gang will even pay your bail for you.
Now that is "real" tangible historically proven advice.
Btw...
You forgot about all of those Kavanaugh protesters who committed the same technical crime when they broke into the Capital complex Senate office area.
None of the needed an attorney for breaking the same law.
They just needed to be liberal.
Ch SAID:
Btw...
You forgot about all of those Kavanaugh protesters who committed the same technical crime when they broke into the Capital complex Senate office area.
None of the needed an attorney for breaking the same law.
They just needed to be liberal.
__________
Au contraire. They were arrested.
FOX NEWS: Thousands of liberal protesters, fired up by Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren, marched up Capitol Hill on Thursday to protest Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court and put pressure on the handful of undecided senators who will determine whether Kavanaugh gets confirmed in the coming days.
By Thursday afternoon, Capitol Police began arresting hundreds of protesters inside the Hart Senate Office Building who raised their fists and loudly started chanting “Kavanaugh has got to go.” Arrests were made after protesters began sitting down in the building's atrium, refusing to cooperate with law enforcement.
In all, some 302 protesters were arrested and charged with unlawfully demonstrating in Senate office buildings Thursday, police said.
_____
Pretty serious, and no destruction of property is mentioned.
Following a mob that is violently overcoming police and physically breaking into a federal building with the expressed purpose of overthrowing an election is illegal, Ch.
It doesn't quite go down as a "peaceful protest."
Nor does bombing a pro-life group, taking over a police station, attacking a police officer, or blowing up a private business.
All those are illegal, prosecutable actions.
As for demonstrating in front of a USSC Justice's house, that becames a bit more problematic, as is evident here:
"A 1950 statute prohibits picketing or parading in front of a courthouse or judge’s home with the intent to obstruct justice or influence a judge.
"Legal experts generally agree that targeted, stationary protests outside of a judge’s home are prohibited under this federal law,
but whether recent demonstrations related to abortion are considered illegal would be up to a court’s interpretation."
https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/may/13/it-legal-protest-outside-justices-homes-law-sugges/
___________
Free speech issues arise there, Ch.
But free speech definitely does not include breaking into the Capitol Building in an attempt to stop the verification of a constitutionally conducted election.
A little context would be good, Reverend...
Police will arrest protesters as a means to be able to remove them from the protest. Then in many cases they will "cite" them with what amounts to a ticket. They pay a fine.
Have you ever hired an attorney over a $50 fine?
That is what normally happens if you end up protesting in an area you are not supposed to be protesting at. They take you away, let you go and pay a small token fine.
You don't end up in jail without bond or charged with a crime that warrants jail time.
At least 227 demonstrators were arrested between the start of the nomination hearings on Tuesday and the end of testimony on Friday, according to the U.S. Capitol Police. Most of those charged this week with disorderly conduct, crowding or obstructing paid fines of $35 or $50.
https://www.npr.org/2018/09/08/645497667/the-resistance-at-the-kavanaugh-hearings-more-than-200-arrests#:~:text=The%20Resistance%20At%20The%20Kavanaugh%20Hearings%3A,majority%27s%20impact%20on%20the%20Supreme%20Court.&text=The%20Resistance%20At%20The,on%20the%20Supreme%20Court.&text=At%20The%20Kavanaugh%20Hearings%3A,majority%27s%20impact%20on%20the
Police will arrest protesters as a means to be able to remove them from the protest. Then in many cases they will "cite" them with what amounts to a ticket. They pay a fine.
Have you ever hired an attorney over a $50 fine?
That is what normally happens if you end up protesting in an area you are not supposed to be protesting at. They take you away, let you go and pay a small token fine.
You don't end up in jail without bond or charged with a crime that warrants jail time.
Yep. Just ask AOC. That's exactly what happened to her while she would have you believe she was "arrested" in front of the USSC, invisible handcuffs and all.
Try violently breaking into the Capitol Building in an attempt to interrupt government proceedings there and see if you don't end up in jail, Ch and rrb.
Go ahead and give it a try.
(Knee slapping funny.)
Try violently breaking into the Capitol Building in an attempt to interrupt government proceedings there and see if you don't end up in jail, Ch and rrb.
Well Reverend...
The woman in question did not "violently" break into anything.
The only thing they proved was that she was there. As stated before, the closest thing to violence that was suggested was that a police officer got shoved down somewhere near her.
This person was just at a location she was not supposed to be at.
Not violently entering as you continue to suggest.
Just walking through the doors.
Never touched a police officer.
Didn't destroy or damage anything.
Was simply there protesting.
Jail time Reverend.
Can you explain that WITHOUT LYING abut what the person did?
Can you explain that WITHOUT LYING abut what the person did?
Asking the pederast to not lie is like asking him to not breathe.
I will revise my statement:
Try being among a crowd that is violently pushing past policemen in an attempt to enter the Capitol Building in order to interrupt official government proceedings there and see if you don't end up in jail, Ch and rrb.
Go ahead and give it a try, you two.
(Knee slapping funny.)
______
By the way, I believe I remember reading that Strand and Gold were attempting to push past policemen who were resisting the crowd when one of the policemen fell near where Strand and Gold were standing.
______
And yes, I just went back and looked at the affadavit and it does say that.
And here is how a portion of the affadavit begins:
...STRAND and GOLD (1) did knowingly enter or remain in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, or did knowingly, and with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of Government business or official functions, engage in disorderly or disruptive conduct...with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct of a session of Congress or either House of Congress, or the orderly conduct in that building of any deliberations of either House of Congress.
Specifically, on or about January 6, 2021, STRAND and GOLD traveled to
Washington, D.C., and knowingly and willfully joined a crowd of individuals who forcibly entered the U.S. Capitol and impeded, disrupted, and disturbed the orderly conduct of business by the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate.
Try being among a crowd that is violently pushing past policemen in an attempt to enter the Capitol Building in order to interrupt official government proceedings there and see if you don't end up in jail, Ch and rrb.
So how to you define being "part of a crowd".
There were 60,000 people in the crowd. As few as 50 were probably violent as it pertains to making some sort of an attack or busting down a door or window, etc...
Should all 60,000 go to jail because a few others were violent?
Should everyone on the Capitol grounds go to jail because a few others were violent?
If you were within 100 feet of someone else being violent are you then supposed to go to jail?
How about 50 feet?
25?
What is the cut off?
And where... Reverend...
Is your legal precedent for one person going to jail because of the actions of someone else?
Please give us the many historical examples?
Funny how hatred of Donald Trump and conservatives...
Actually has Liberals arguing openly that one conservative Trump supporter should be held accountable for what someone else did.
because they are bad MAGA people and should have no constitutional rights.
Their President told them as such!
Nearly two years after and the "justice" department is still hiding the full video evidence which could determine what actually happened and who caused what
and who there were actually FBI agents or informants.
We know at least a few were based on court disclosures
Meanwhile the Jan 6th "committee" produced altered and edited "evidence" in a show trial read from teleprompters
without public cross examination or defense witnesses
worse than a banana republic
and Biden's brown shirts are still expanding their circle
I wonder if there are any actual historical precedents for what they are doing ?
awful dark
and now they are fighting any independent oversite
odd
meanwhile Hunter is working on his tan
and collecting for "the big guy" who the FBI can't identify
C'mon man.
So how to you define being "part of a crowd".
No need to define that any more than the affadavit does.
Strand and Gold were simply breaking the law, on their own, as the first part of the affadavit quoted above states.
And, as the last part states, they traveled to Washington, D.C.,
"and knowingly and willfully joined a crowd of individuals who forcibly entered the U.S. Capitol and impeded, disrupted, and disturbed the orderly conduct of business by the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate."
Stop trying to play the clever lawyer.
You aren't.
"and knowingly and willfully joined a crowd of individuals who forcibly entered the U.S. Capitol and impeded, disrupted, and disturbed the orderly conduct of business by the United States House of Representatives and the United States Senate."
Okay...
But that EXACT SAME DEFINITION could be used to describe the Kavanaugh protesters who were arrested, led away, let go, and given $35-$50 citations.
Each of them knowingly entered a Capitol Grounds building (protected by the same laws) and were there to disrupt the Senate Hearing on the Kavanaugh nomination.
The EXACT SAME DEFINITION Reverend.
Why does one warrant "jail time" while the other gets what amounts to a parking ticket?
Give us your explanation without using "rhetoric" to describe actions of "other people" you want to associate with Gold (when she did nothing violent herself).
With regard to the Kavanaugh protesters, tell us the number of windows they broke open, or the number of doors they smashed through, or the number of police they injured or killed, or the number of weapons or objects used as weapons they employed, or the amount of time they actually halted, impeded, interrupted, the business of government.
Reverend...
At this point I am just going to accept that you believe one person should be punished for what other people do...
There is literally no other explanation.
No, Ch, the answer is, of course, that you are, as always, right, and apples are the same as oranges.
Well Reverend...
Two people attend a protest
Both protests have a pretense of preventing a congressional action
(one attempting to block a vote, another to block a count)
Two people enter a restricted building during the protests
Neither person commits any acts of violence or destruction of property
One person walks away with a $50 fine
The other is sentenced to 60 days in jail
The two actions are both apples.
Can easily be compared as the exact same action.
There can literally be no argument.
the only "orange" here is the discrepancy for the individual actions as it pertains to how they are treated by the partisan hacks of the DOJ.
And don't bother bringing up what "other people did" because you are claiming that you do not believe that one person can be charged for what another person does. So nothing anyone else did is relevant.
Gold said she deeply regrets entering the Capitol during the riot on Jan. 6, 2021, and didn’t intend to get involved in an event that was “so destructive to our nation.”
"It's the opposite of who I am," she told the judge.
The judge told her that she was not a "casual bystander."
Why haven't you posted my last reply, Ch?
DisHonest, indecent, untruthful Rev. said...
No, Ch, the answer is, of course, that you are, as always, right, and apples are the same as oranges.
the "pastor" proves he is trans-fruity
must be his strong point
logic and common sense sure aren't
ROFLMFAO !!!
what Reply Reverend.
I asked a specific question.
You never answered it.
You citing the text that Gold WAS FORCED TO SAY AS PART OF HER PLEA as relevant... just proves you have no answer...
and no argument.
Unless you want to answer the questions...
Done with this thread.
You lose!
By default!
I am considering leaving this blog forever. You are a despot like Trump because you claim to have won arguments when you have not. By not allowing my last post here and by saying :"done with this thread" you show that you are despotic.
Post a Comment