• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

6 Jan 2020 U.S. Events (Split from A Deeply Fractured US)

QV

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
824
Points
1,010
I'll bet he was running his own email server, too.
Nobody cares about that because it’s not about right and wrong.

As long as 45 is a potential contender for 47, you’ll continue to read and hear about all manner of this.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,190
Points
1,010
And it turns out the "gap" in the switchboard call logs is because not all calls involving the president go through the switchboard. "Never mind."
 
  • Humorous
Reactions: QV

OceanBonfire

Sr. Member
Reaction score
268
Points
880
On trial in U.S. District Court in Washington, Thompson testified that the claim that the election was stolen seemed credible to him because it was coming from the president. His defense team is the first to argue that Trump and those connected to him were responsible for the actions of the mob that day.

 

OceanBonfire

Sr. Member
Reaction score
268
Points
880



 

OceanBonfire

Sr. Member
Reaction score
268
Points
880


 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
5,086
Points
1,110
Saw that coming, after the Oathkeepers got similarly charged.

For those who asked way earlier in this thread where the sedition charges were and scoffed at the very notion, that’s now at least fifteen people indicted with seditious conspiracy. Two have already plead guilty, so the best result they and their lawyers felt they could get still involved a sedition conviction.

Trials on seditious conspiracy charges should be rolling by this summer, and there’s a ton of other various violent offences with trials coming up. Pretty much all the prison sentences so far have been calculated on guilty pleas.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,190
Points
1,010
Plea bargains in the US don't mean the result necessarily would include conviction on the charge(s) to which the accused plead. All it means is that in the lists of charges thrown at the accused to intimidate them into plea bargains, those charges were selected as the bargain. At least prosecutors are charging something involving "sedition". Obviously it makes sense for prosecutors to put "sedition" in the bargain, in order to shut up the critics.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
5,086
Points
1,110
Plea bargains in the US don't mean the result necessarily would include conviction on the charge(s) to which the accused plead. All it means is that in the lists of charges thrown at the accused to intimidate them into plea bargains, those charges were selected as the bargain. At least prosecutors are charging something involving "sedition". Obviously it makes sense for prosecutors to put "sedition" in the bargain, in order to shut up the critics.
Alternatively it makes sense for prosecutors to put sedition in there because those are the charges grand juries are indicting the accused on. That means that, at a minimum, prosecutors have convinced grand juries that there is probable cause to indict on those counts. While a grand jury indictment is still well short of a conviction, it’s not nothing, either.

As some of us have been saying from the get go, some of these investigations are bound to take a lot of time. The easy “I watched this guy do the thing” charges flowed in volume immediately after, basically as fast as they could ID faces in video and type up indictments. The sedition charges required considerably more work to get there. No surprise it’s taken the time it’s taken. Equally no surprise that they’ve been able to get it there.
 
Last edited:

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,190
Points
1,010
Monitoring/investigations of some of these "groups" should undoubtedly be going on all the time. Pulling real seditious insurrectionist militants in before they act is noteworthy; using them to add to a stream of ongoing announcements, revelations, and leaks designed to stoke a political fire is not.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
5,086
Points
1,110
Monitoring/investigations of some of these "groups" should undoubtedly be going on all the time. Pulling real seditious insurrectionist militants in before they act is noteworthy; using them to add to a stream of ongoing announcements, revelations, and leaks designed to stoke a political fire is not.
You’re contending that charging someone with seditious conspiracy when those charges get approved and unsealed is not ‘noteworthy’? That’s quite a stretch. These charges are, objectively, a big deal regardless of circumstances.

Not sure why you’re putting “groups” in quotes as if to suggest it’s a term of questionable applicability. Some of the evidence referred to in the indictments shows that there very definitely were organized groups at the heart of on this. Indeed, it’s the cooperation of suspects within these group dynamics that seems to have been key to blowing the rest of it open.

Anyway: the consequences continue to flow. I expect there’s still more yet to come.
 

Brad Sallows

Army.ca Fixture
Reaction score
3,190
Points
1,010
This isn't happening in a political vacuum. The groups are out there all the time, not just on Jan 6.
 

brihard

Army.ca Fixture
Mentor
Reaction score
5,086
Points
1,110
This isn't happening in a political vacuum. The groups are out there all the time, not just on Jan 6.
Certainly- but in a world with a plethora of dangers and threats, many of them nebulous, it’s always necessary to prioritize and triage, and to efficiently allocate investigative resources to cases where it’s more likely to achieve something.

It’s a hell of a lot easier to proceed where there’s actual provable actions taken that can be predicated for different investigative techniques and strategies. To get search warrants, run wiretaps or undercover operations, etc, can be a lot of work and a lot of resources. There are constantly people talking about all kinds of stupid and potentially dangerous actions. It can be hard to tell what has evolved to actual intent to commit offenses.

In the case of Jan 6th, a whole bunch of violent offenses actually demonstrably took place, with readily identifiable perpetrators. Some were wearing insignia or made social media posts or were otherwise known to belong to certain groups and to associate with certain people. That put investigators quite readily onto specific trails to follow. So it’s no surprise that, in the wake of the attack on the capitol, very concerted efforts would be made to really run these groups down and dig into them. We are seeing the results of that.
 

OceanBonfire

Sr. Member
Reaction score
268
Points
880
Details revealed of a dramatic Oval Office meeting on Jan. 3, 2021, in which top Justice Department officials banded together to prevent Jeffrey Clark, an environmental lawyer at the DOJ, from replacing acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen.

Trump was keen to install Clark, an ally, in order to wield the powers of the DOJ to overturn the results of the 2020 election.

...

Donoghue told Trump he would lose his "entire department" if he moved ahead.

"Within 24-48-72 hours, you could have hundreds and hundreds of resignations of the leadership of your entire Justice Department because of your actions. What's that going to say about you?" Donoghue remembers asking.

 

OceanBonfire

Sr. Member
Reaction score
268
Points
880
The president was under the impression that he would be taken to the Capitol following his speech, said Hutchinson, who was then a top aide to White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows.

When he learned there were no security assets and Trump would have to return to the White House, the president grew "irate" and attempted to grab the steering wheel of "The Beast," the president's armored vehicle. Hutchinson did not witness the altercation, but heard it from others and those who were there did not dispute the account, she said.

"'I am the effing president, take me up to the Capitol now!'" Hutchinson testified that Trump said.

Trump talked about walking to the Capitol, where he might give a speech or enter the House chamber. And when staff stopped those plans, Trump attempted to grab the steering wheel of the vehicle to direct it that way, she said.

Hutchinson also testified that House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy contacted her during the rally and asked for her to make sure that Trump didn't come to the Capitol.

 

Bruce Monkhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Reaction score
2,381
Points
1,260
That might be the funniest hearsay testimony in human history........this is what I heard from someone, and a bunch of folks wouldn't confirm nor deny to me, so we'll go with it.

Really???
 
Top