Wide spread election fraud 2020

[Michchamp]

I guess, at least, we can close the file on THIS asshole. another George Zimmerman.

 

[sggatecl]

I guess, at least, we can close the file on THIS asshole. another George Zimmerman.

 

[Spartanmack]

I forgot that the OK sign is racist. Thanks for the reminder. Also George Zimmerman is Hispanic who dated black women and mentored black kids. Keep trying, you’re bound to get one right eventually.

 

[Thumb]

Definitely not even close to true. I can see that three cops are reasoned with and asked to step aside. I can see that none of them felt the need to draw their weapons or flea the scene. I can see that no one the video other than the cops has a gun. I can also see the the shooter can't possibly see much more than I can see since he's behind a wall blocking his view. I can see plenty of things going on that I am not and never have condoned or defended and I can see an unarmed woman get shot dead and I can see that no one responded with deadly force. I can see the people trying gain entry immediately stop and try to help the injured woman. I can see one tactical officer come up from the stairwell looking toward the area where the shots came from, not toward the mob - like the other cops, it doesn't look like he feels threatened by the mob we can't see. Again, I'm not defending anything that these people are doing, I'm against rioting, period. I just don't think deadly force was the appropriate response at that point in this case. I don't know why that is so unreasonable

So let me get this straight, when Trayvon Martin was killed, you defended Zimmerman, mentioned that he got suspended for fighting, and posed in a selfie with weed, somehow you're okay with that deadly force.

But Ashli bobbit tries to force here way in to an area guarded by police and secret service agents telling her (and everyone else) to stop, even pointing a gun at her, and when she ignores them and tries to jump though a kicked out window, gets shot....but that's not justified.

Out of all the posters on this board, past and present, you by far have the thickest partisan lenses that you view things with. And as bob would say, "it's not even close".

 

[byco42]

I guess, other than the courthouse attack not being justification for anything because it was also criminal activity, if we need to compare both protests and the extremes and find differences, I think the attack on the Capitol probably clears different legal hurdles because it disrupted the US government at the highest level, which clearly directly relates to the language in the Constitution. I would also point to the motivation as a difference between these crime, a historic and uneven lack of police accountability is real, the idea that the election was stolen is a lie. And proportionality matters. There were an estimated 15-24 million protesters involved in just the the George Floyd marches. I don't know how many Stop the Steal protesters there were, and maybe we'll see more soon, but even if I just accept the recent number of 700 injured police, wherever that came from, there were 116 police injured at the Capitol. 116 injuries every 2 hours would take 12 hours to hit 700 injuries. So this Storm the Capitol march was really intense compared to the BLM marches generally speaking. I wonder what the worst BLM-related event was.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_storming_of_the_United_States_Capitol

“It’s sedition of two or more” ...“by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States.”

As you said, the statute is pretty clear and I think in both circumstances.

 

[Gulo Blue]

?It?s sedition of two or more? ...?by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States.?

As you said, the statute is pretty clear and I think in both circumstances.

"or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

 

[Spartanmack]

So let me get this straight, when Trayvon Martin was killed, you defended Zimmerman, mentioned that he got suspended for fighting, and posed in a selfie with weed, somehow you're okay with that deadly force.

But Ashli bobbit tries to force here way in to an area guarded by police and secret service agents telling her (and everyone else) to stop, even pointing a gun at her, and when she ignores them and tries to jump though a kicked out window, gets shot....but that's not justified.

Out of all the posters on this board, past and present, you by far have the thickest partisan lenses that you view things with. And as bob would say, "it's not even close".

I’m not going to bother correcting the record on his background, but you’ve made several mistakes and omissions that speak to Trayvon’s character. As for the incident itself, Trayvon Martin assaulted George Zimmerman, told him he was gonna die and was beating the shit out of him. Yes, I support the right of private citizens to defend their lives with deadly force.

Ashli Babbit was an unarmed protestor who hadn’t harmed anyone and no attempt was made to subdue her by any non lethal means. As I’ve said many times, I don’t the use of lethal force was appropriate at that point. It may well have escalated to that point but from what I saw in that video there were other options available that should have been tried first.

At the risk of being posterized by another sweet meme form sgg, I don’t think the two situations are at all similar, nor are my positions contradictory (you’re drawing a false equivalence).

 

[sggatecl]

At the risk of being posterized by another sweet meme form sgg, I don?t think the two situations are at all similar, nor are my positions contradictory (you?re drawing a false equivalence).

I got your back fam.

 

[Gulo Blue]

I don't know where the cut off is, if I tell my friend to chat up a census worker to delay them because I'm late to meet with them, I don't think that should count as sedition, even though it hinders the execution of a law of the United States. But if delaying the confirmation of a Presidential election doesn't count, the delay part of the law has no meaning.

 

[byco42]

"or by force to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States"
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2384

So there are different ways to be seditious. Your point is not clear to me.

 

[Michchamp]

I don't know where the cut off is, if I tell my friend to chat up a census worker to delay them because I'm late to meet with them, I don't think that should count as sedition, even though it hinders the execution of a law of the United States. But if delaying the confirmation of a Presidential election doesn't count, the delay part of the law has no meaning.

it's wherever the authorities - the real ones, not outgoing presidents like Trump - want it to be.



sedition laws were notoriously used to send Eugene Debs to jail in 1917 for giving speeches urging Americans not to enlist and go fight in WWI, but really because he was getting too popular and wealthy Americans and corporations hated his message.

 

[Gulo Blue]

So there are different ways to be seditious. Your point is not clear to me.

My point is that stopping Congress from performing an action specified in the Constitution is more clearly a fit to the law. I don't know where the cut off is, but the destruction of any government property or the obstruction of any law is obviously not considered to be sedition.


Maybe there has to be forcible contact to the crown of a defenseless player.

 

[byco42]

My point is that stopping Congress from performing an action specified in the Constitution is more clearly a fit to the law. I don't know where the cut off is, but the destruction of any government property or the obstruction of any law is obviously not considered to be sedition.

In my opinion, locking Federal employees in a Federal Building and attempting to set that building on fire is also clear-cut sedition. It's as clear cut as occupying the Capitol.

 

[Gulo Blue]

In my opinion, locking Federal employees in a Federal Building and attempting to set that building on fire is also clear-cut sedition. It's as clear cut as occupying the Capitol.

It's clear cut go to prison behavior (which they are, right?) But I don't see how you get from there to overthrowing any element of the United States without using some principle that could be argued all the way down to delaying a census worker.

 

[Michchamp]

In my opinion, locking Federal employees in a Federal Building and attempting to set that building on fire is also clear-cut sedition. It's as clear cut as occupying the Capitol.

FWIW the article doesn't actually say the protestors attempted to set the building on fire. They "propped up plywood" against the doors, then the police fired tear gas and flash bangs at them, then, in passive tense says the doors were photographed on fire, and everyone inside was running out.

Maybe a little journalistic license on the part of the NY Post (which would be really surprising...)

 

[byco42]

FWIW the article doesn't actually say the protestors attempted to set the building on fire. They "propped up plywood" against the doors, then the police fired tear gas and flash bangs at them, then, in passive tense says the doors were photographed on fire, and everyone inside was running out.

Maybe a little journalistic license on the part of the NY Post (which would be really surprising...)

From Gulo in post #1014: The statute is pretty clear: It's sedition if two or more conspire not just to "overthrow, put down, or to destroy" the government by force, but also "to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States."​

I consider barricading Federal Employees in a Federal Building and/or setting it afire sedition. There were arrests, but I don't know for what, exactly. I doubt that "sedition" was listed among them.

Link and video of rioters actively maintaining fires on the courthouse building. I speculate they also started them.

 

[Gulo Blue]

From Gulo in post #1014: The statute is pretty clear: It's sedition if two or more conspire not just to "overthrow, put down, or to destroy" the government by force, but also "to prevent, hinder, or delay the execution of any law of the United States, or by force to seize, take, or possess any property of the United States."​

I consider barricading Federal Employees in a Federal Building and/or setting it afire sedition. There were arrests, but I don't know for what, exactly. I doubt that "sedition" was listed among them.

Link and video of rioters actively maintaining fires on the courthouse building. I speculate they also started them.

But there's also got to be more to it. Stealing the census taker's pen isn't going to do it.



What about the other BLM? Was Bundy charged with sedition with that cattle grazing standoff that involved occupying a BLM building?

 

[Spartanmack]

I got your back fam.

I'll give you a "B" for the effort but when you buy into the bit that the "OK" sign is racist because it is used by a "white supremacist" group that was founded and is run by a black guy, you get an "F" for execution.

 

[byco42]

But there's also got to be more to it. Stealing the census taker's pen isn't going to do it.

Sometimes I think we are talking past each other. I don't even know what this in reference to.

What about the other BLM? Was Bundy charged with sedition with that cattle grazing standoff that involved occupying a BLM building?

I don't recall the details.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Sometimes I think we are talking past each other. I don't even know what this in reference to.

It's just a hypothetical. You can delay a certification or a census worker. You can destroy a courthouse or a census worker's pen. It's all falls under the definition, so there's obviously some matter of degree (or some other element) that plays a role in the interpretation. I don't know where it is and we don't have tons of examples. So what are other examples of federal building occupation or destruction? The Clive Bundy thing comes to mind. Timothy McVeigh? Was that sedition?