Jan. 6th commission

[JollyRoger]

To be fair, the "Silent Majority" was pretty quick to accept the braless thingy....

I did too until the first time I walked into a Wal-Mart.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

To be fair, the "Silent Majority" was pretty quick to accept the braless thingy....

People who think the FBI or any law enforcement agency is chock full of woke libbies need to put down the bong. There's little difference between the FBI of the Sixties and the current crop of feds. More females, more POC, but still righty.

fbi and many other law enforcement agencies have way too many power hungry criminals, plus some people who would probably behave honestly in good structure.

"woke libbies" are useful chaff to them at best. they don't care about the rights of woke people anymore than they care about rights generally. the profile of a random authoritarian alphabet agency criminal-in-uniform and a random woke person will look pretty different in the vast majority of cases.

 

[Remorseless1]

So, defund law enforcement., amirite? All cops are criminals and all the killers saints? Did not take you for a 1960s hippie.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

So, defund law enforcement., amirite? All cops are criminals and all the killers saints? Did not take you for a 1960s hippie.

you still need to enforce laws, if you want to have laws. probably better to emphatically change oversight structure and immunity laws rather than outright defund.

it will result in a lot of people being fired, so in a sense some people will be "defunded".

but right now, it is possible for feds to accost a random person on the street while in plain clothes who doesn't resemble the description of the person they're looking for, try to take his wallet to id him by force, chase him down when he runs away, beat the hell out of him/hospitalize him, and then criminally charge him for the trouble. this person had massive legal fees to defend himself from fraudulent charges. and courts so far have refused to let him sue them!

another example: police stop a dude walking home at night. demand id, which he doesn't have to give per law in that state. he declines. without him doing anything to threaten them, without probable cause for a crime (or *any* basis to believe a crime was occurring or would soon) and him trying to leave, that escalated into a failed taze attempt and physical assault. as they had no probable cause to even detain him, as a juror i'd be willing to acquit him if he gunned down every officer in the vicinity after the taser was fired. but instead i think one guy was fired or forced to resign or something, no legal consequences?

another example: guy is issued a traffic warning. this ends the lawful reason for detention. cop then demands to search vehicle. guy declines. cop attempts it by force. guy drives off. police chase, run him off road, assault him further, and he spends a year (!) in jail before a judge takes one look at the case and tosses it. what are the consequences for the cops? lol, that's what.

and i'm not a fan of fbi doing terror plots then pinning it on randos either. their involvement in whitmer and 1/6 was a disgrace. their attempted, premeditated mass scale theft of unrelated people in that vault case is disgusting too. part of the reason the first case above was not allowed to be sued is that a federal agent (one of these clowns) was among the plain clothes guys beating the crap out of an innocent guy for attempting to flee a mugging...somehow this interacts with the legal system in a way that prevents suing federal agents.

yeah, we still need people to do the job of enforcing law. but the current setup is clearly not working. these types of incidents should be close to impossible in a functioning system, with serious charges for the criminals that do them when they happen. not nothing, or a simple resignation, or a guy getting fired and then appearing a town or state over. i have no love for criminals, i just happen to include criminal activity from law enforcement among those i hold in disdain, with a little extra because these people are *supposed* to be the ones holding themselves to the highest standard, in principle.

penalize the criminals, change who does "investigations" of police misconduct. completely end qualified immunity when police commit crimes. do these, and you will start getting better outcomes. maybe then feds will have a hand in preventing a riot rather than contributing to inciting it, but avoiding charges because they get special protections against that sort of thing.

 

[Birdjaguar]

I wonder how many police civilian encounters happen every day? And of those, how many are are bad calls or have terrible endings? Basing generalizations on a few hand-picked events may not be the best demonstration of logical thinking. I suspect that each municipality has a different set of statistics and requires a different solution. Since we do know that there are "bad cops", they are the low hanging fruit to be tossed; in addition, recruiting better people will be required and that will likely demand better pay and better background checks.

 

[Lexicus]

yeah, we still need people to do the job of enforcing law.

Fyi professional law enforcement has only been a thing for like two centuries max

 

[Kaitzilla]

I was sickened when Kavanaugh's would-be assassin was placed on Page A20 and NPR commented that no, Kavanaugh's vote on Roe would not count if someone offed him.

Supreme court justice Alito claims to know the motive of the leak.

Opinion | Justice Samuel Alito: ‘This Made Us Targets of Assassination’

The author of the Dobbs abortion ruling answers attacks on the court’s ‘legitimacy.’ He says he thinks he knows who leaked the draft and is certain about the motive.

www.wsj.com

Justice Alito says the marshal “did a good job with the resources that were available to her” and agrees that the evidence was insufficient for a public accusation. “I personally have a pretty good idea who is responsible, but that’s different from the level of proof that is needed to name somebody,” he says. He’s certain about the motive: “It was a part of an effort to prevent the Dobbs draft . . . from becoming the decision of the court. And that’s how it was used for those six weeks by people on the outside—as part of the campaign to try to intimidate the court.”

That campaign included unlawful assemblies outside justices’ homes, and that wasn’t the worst of it. “Those of us who were thought to be in the majority, thought to have approved my draft opinion, were really targets of assassination,” Justice Alito says. “It was rational for people to believe that they might be able to stop the decision in Dobbs by killing one of us.” On June 8, an armed man was arrested outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh; the suspect was later charged with attempted assassination and has pleaded not guilty.

A few pundits on the left speculated that the leaker might have been a conservative attempting to lock in the five-justice majority and overturn the constitutional right to abortion. “That’s infuriating to me,” Justice Alito says of the theory. “Look, this made us targets of assassination. Would I do that to myself? Would the five of us have done that to ourselves? It’s quite implausible.”

He adds that “I don’t feel physically unsafe, because we now have a lot of protection.” He is “driven around in basically a tank, and I’m not really supposed to go anyplace by myself without the tank and my members of the police force.” Deputy U.S. marshals guard the justices’ homes 24/7. (The U.S. Marshals Service, a bureau of the Justice Department, is distinct from the marshal of the court, who reports to the justices and oversees the Supreme Court Police.)

So there we go.
Supreme Court Justices are driven around in tanks now.
Or at least 1 is.

**Edit**
This is the January 6th thread hmm.

Oh!
The Proud Boys trial has the jury deliberating the last 2 days.

MSN

www.msn.com

I wonder if they will be convicted of Seditious Conspiracy for Jan.6?

 

[Samson]

As I understand it in South Korea the standard "beat" police officer is a conscript doing national service. It seems a reasonable way to deal with the problems of police. It means that everyone does it, rather than those who want to. It means policing can really be done by members of the community. It also gives everyone a view of the "other side" so may treat the police better.

I would love to hear from anyone who knows how it actually works in reality.

 

[Lexicus]

Supreme court justice Alito claims to know the motive of the leak.

Opinion | Justice Samuel Alito: ‘This Made Us Targets of Assassination’

The author of the Dobbs abortion ruling answers attacks on the court’s ‘legitimacy.’ He says he thinks he knows who leaked the draft and is certain about the motive.

www.wsj.com

So there we go.
Supreme Court Justices are driven around in tanks now.
Or at least 1 is.

**Edit**
This is the January 6th thread hmm.

Oh!
The Proud Boys trial has the jury deliberating the last 2 days.

MSN

www.msn.com

I wonder if they will be convicted of Seditious Conspiracy for Jan.6?

He is almost as big a liar as Trump lol

 

[Remorseless1]

I wonder how many police civilian encounters happen every day? And of those, how many are are bad calls or have terrible endings? Basing generalizations on a few hand-picked events may not be the best demonstration of logical thinking. I suspect that each municipality has a different set of statistics and requires a different solution. Since we do know that there are "bad cops", they are the low hanging fruit to be tossed; in addition, recruiting better people will be required and that will likely demand better pay and better background checks.

According to the Bureau of Criminal Justice, there was an average of 304,000+ contacts between law enforcement officers and the public PER DAY in 2020. Close to 10 million interactions in that year.

The real issue is lack of training for cops. There should be national standards for every municipal, county, state and federal law enforcement agency. It also would be a good idea to vigorously prosecute cops who break the law and cut down on the number of guns.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Four Proud Boys Convicted of Sedition in Key Jan. 6 Case (Published 2023)

The verdict was a blow against the far-right group and another milestone in the Justice Department’s prosecution of the pro-Trump rioters who stormed the Capitol.

www.nytimes.com

Four Proud Boys Convicted of Sedition in Key Jan. 6 Case​

The verdict was a blow against the far-right group and another milestone in the Justice Department’s prosecution of the pro-Trump rioters who stormed the Capitol.|


Four members of the Proud Boys, including their former leader Enrique Tarrio, were convicted on Thursday of seditious conspiracy for plotting to keep President Donald J. Trump in power after his election defeat by leading a violent mob in attacking the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
The jurors in the case failed to reach a decision on the sedition charge for one of the defendants, Dominic Pezzola, although he was convicted of other serious felonies.
The verdicts, coming after seven days of deliberations in Federal District Court in Washington, were a major blow against one of the country’s most notorious far-right groups and another milestone in the Justice Department’s vast investigation of the Capitol attack.
The trial was the last of three sedition cases that federal prosecutors brought against key figures in the Capitol attack.

The sedition charge, which is rarely used and harks back to the Union’s efforts to protect the federal government against secessionist rebels during the Civil War, was also used in two separate trials against nine members of another far-right group, the Oath Keepers militia. Six of those defendants — including Stewart Rhodes, the organization’s founder and leader — were convicted of sedition; each of the others was found guilty of different serious felonies.
As the verdicts were read in the fourth-floor courtroom, Mr. Tarrio, Mr. Pezzola and the other defendants — Ethan Nordean, Joseph Biggs and Zachary Rehl — remained steely. With the exception of Mr. Pezzola, the men were also found guilty of conspiring to obstruct the certification of the election, which took place at the Capitol on Jan. 6. All five defendants were convicted of a third conspiracy count as well, which accused them of interfering with the duties of members of Congress that day.

 

[Lexicus]

The real issue is lack of training for cops.

And that they are being trained wrong.

 

[Kaitzilla]

Four Proud Boys Convicted of Sedition in Key Jan. 6 Case (Published 2023)

The verdict was a blow against the far-right group and another milestone in the Justice Department’s prosecution of the pro-Trump rioters who stormed the Capitol.

www.nytimes.com

The US tolerates rebels until they storm Congress.
We have a bit of pro-rebel culture.

Not too surprised by the convictions.

Most jurors eye roll these charges if Jan. 6 didn't happen, but now it is dead serious.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I wonder how many police civilian encounters happen every day? And of those, how many are are bad calls or have terrible endings? Basing generalizations on a few hand-picked events may not be the best demonstration of logical thinking. I suspect that each municipality has a different set of statistics and requires a different solution. Since we do know that there are "bad cops", they are the low hanging fruit to be tossed; in addition, recruiting better people will be required and that will likely demand better pay and better background checks.

the problem isn't whether they're representative. it is definitely a problem that a) they happen and b) there are not serious consequences for law enforcement every time it does happen.

we already know that likelihood of being caught/punished is a much greater deterrent than severity of punishment, as long as the punishment is considered significant to would-be offender. what message are we sending instead, when law enforcement can themselves commit serious felonies openly, and not endure consequences despite the felonies being recorded?

switching out self-investigations for something less asinine/less obviously saddled with conflict of interest + striking qualified immunity in most cases will go a long way. won't fix everything, but result in massive improvement. imo it should also be illegal for police to lie to secure false convictions. finally, no more flagrant disregard for constitution. no "drug dogs" where you illegally detain someone extra time just to flip a coin on their innocence. no civil forfeiture before convictions. no turning off cameras during incidents. no no-knock warrants. that kind of crap needs to go.

Not too surprised by the convictions.

i'm not either, given the clown show of a trial.

judge wouldn't even allow relevant case law to be mentioned, and apparently there are different standards for late/non-disclosed evidence depending on whether you're prosecution or not. awful lot of late-in-trial confidential sources cropping up...something like 50?

stinks of the whitmer bullcrap all over again, and that one got convictions too. disgrace of justice.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

the problem isn't whether they're representative. it is definitely a problem that a) they happen and b) there are not serious consequences for law enforcement every time it does happen.

we already know that likelihood of being caught/punished is a much greater deterrent than severity of punishment, as long as the punishment is considered significant to would-be offender. what message are we sending instead, when law enforcement can themselves commit serious felonies openly, and not endure consequences despite the felonies being recorded?

switching out self-investigations for something less asinine/less obviously saddled with conflict of interest + striking qualified immunity in most cases will go a long way. won't fix everything, but result in massive improvement. imo it should also be illegal for police to lie to secure false convictions. finally, no more flagrant disregard for constitution. no "drug dogs" where you illegally detain someone extra time just to flip a coin on their innocence. no civil forfeiture before convictions. no turning off cameras during incidents. no no-knock warrants. that kind of crap needs to go.


i'm not either, given the clown show of a trial.

judge wouldn't even allow relevant case law to be mentioned, and apparently there are different standards for late/non-disclosed evidence depending on whether you're prosecution or not. awful lot of late-in-trial confidential sources cropping up...something like 50?

stinks of the whitmer bullcrap all over again, and that one got convictions too. disgrace of justice.

Not a single lol in there.

Well done

 

[Remorseless1]

Four Proud Boys Convicted of Sedition in Key Jan. 6 Case (Published 2023)

The verdict was a blow against the far-right group and another milestone in the Justice Department’s prosecution of the pro-Trump rioters who stormed the Capitol.

www.nytimes.com

Good. Let the traitors rot in jail.

 

[Gori the Grey]

i'm not either, given the clown show of a trial.

judge wouldn't even allow relevant case law to be mentioned, and apparently there are different standards for late/non-disclosed evidence depending on whether you're prosecution or not. awful lot of late-in-trial confidential sources cropping up...something like 50?

stinks of the whitmer bullcrap all over again, and that one got convictions too. disgrace of justice.

If these complaints against the judge are valid, then surely we will see the case overturned on appeal.

Just like the shaman, for whom ironclad evidence of his innocence was shown on Tucker Carlson's show.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

i'm not a fan of blocking relevant evidence, to put it mildly. i do not respect courts that do it.

you put way too much faith in court outcomes being necessarily valid. usa has lots of false convictions, and also convictions without any hard evidence beyond claims, even for serious crimes. on top of that, people here seem to agree with courts on things like this, but not for say abortion limitations, making the apparent "trust in court outcomes" appear selective.

what i observe wrt 1/6 is "rules for thee but not me". in context of two-tiered justice (same actions, vastly different consequences), and in the literal sense of "fbi and chs can do it w/o penalty, but this random guy can't". when i also observe evidence of this blocked from consideration by jury...yeah no. not going to trust that court or its outcome.

 

[Farm Boy]

Oklahoma looks like it's fixing up to kill a man over the prosecutor's objections to the trials he's received. They destroyed evidence in that one, too.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

Oklahoma looks like it's fixing up to kill a man over the prosecutor's objections to the trials he's received. They destroyed evidence in that one, too.

i heard about a case recently where someone else confessed to murder, and prosecution is still pushing to execute the guy originally convicted who is different from the one who confessed recently. is this that case?

i hope there's a special place in hell for prosecutors who work to hold provably innocent people in jail after new evidence comes out. i don't understand how doing so isn't criminal. but the case i'm thinking about takes it to the next level. now we're apparently willing to disregard new evidence and kill someone who has more-than-reasonable doubt that he was involved. the line between prosecutorial misconduct and murder blurs there.