Insurrection: Revolting Against Civil Authority Or Government

[Dutch Uncle]

Treason would be impossible to prove. They have to give aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.

I think a jury would be less sympathetic to assaulting a peace officer than insurrection. All 691 arrested have already been charged but I think they are still seeking the identify of some. 105 have entered guilty pleas.

Not a lawyer but there's a first part to that: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII_S3_C1_1_2/

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,

Is attempting to overthrow the Capitol, kill off the VP and Congress "levying War" against the United States?

 

[Nordberg]

Because the prosecutors know full well they could never prove insurrection because Jan 6 wasn't an insurrection. It was a riot. They'd have an easier time charging those that put up the CHOP / CHAZ in Seattle with insurrection than anyone on Jan 6.

Actually, they know it was an insurrection. It was not about destruction or sending a message. It was intended to stop the joint congress from certifying the electoral college votes. It was political.

 

[Flash]

Not a lawyer but there's a first part to that: https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII_S3_C1_1_2/

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them,

Is attempting to overthrow the Capitol, kill off the VP and Congress "levying War" against the United States?

"In Ex parte Bollman,[SUP]1[/SUP] which involved two of Burr's confederates, Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for himself and three other Justices, confined the meaning of levying war to the actual waging of war. However flagitious may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the government of our country, such conspiracy is not treason."

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII_S3_C1_1_2/

I don't think chanting "hang Mike Pence" is attempted murder. I think some of them would have done him harm if they caught him, but they did not. The same applies to other members of Congress.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

"In Ex parte Bollman,[SUP]1[/SUP] which involved two of Burr's confederates, Chief Justice Marshall, speaking for himself and three other Justices, confined the meaning of levying war to the actual waging of war. However flagitious may be the crime of conspiring to subvert by force the government of our country, such conspiracy is not treason."

https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIII_S3_C1_1_2/

I don't think chanting "hang Mike Pence" is attempted murder. I think some of them would have done him harm if they caught him, but they did not. The same applies to other members of Congress.

Thanks.

As for Pence, if it was discussed beforehand, you don't see a problem with it?

 

[Flash]

Thanks.

As for Pence, if it was discussed beforehand, you don't see a problem with it?

I think it was terrible, but did not constitute a crime. A threat has to be serious and have the ability to carry it out. Since Pence was being protected and they never came in contact with him, it was not a legal threat. It could just have been an expression of anger and opposition rather than a real intent to harm.

There have been some people convicted of threatening presidents whose cases were overturned because they did not meet the elements of a threat. They were based on a condition ("if I get my sights on LBJ) or "Obama is going to take a .45 to the head" because he did not claim he was going to harm the president.

In the 1950's the Rosenbergs gave documents to the Russians about atomic weapons. They were convicted and executed of espionage. They were not charged with treason because we were not at war.

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Flash,

Treason would be impossible to prove. They have to give aid and comfort to the enemy in time of war.

I think a jury would be less sympathetic to assaulting a peace officer than insurrection. All 691 arrested have already been charged but I think they are still seeking the identify of some. 105 have entered guilty pleas.

Certainly this was violated on January 6th:

"18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)"

The code uses the word 'insurrection.' We've been over the dictionary definition of the word. "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government."

A mob attacked the capitol attempting to prevent government business. That's rebelling against established government. They fought with police. That is rebelling against civil authority. They are guilty as a mob of insurrection. All the participants are therefore guilty of insurrection.

So why we are not seeing these charges? I mean, what do they have to do to be guilty of it if not January 6th?

It's not like these are all disconnected individual cases!

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I think it was terrible, but did not constitute a crime. A threat has to be serious and have the ability to carry it out. Since Pence was being protected and they never came in contact with him, it was not a legal threat. It could just have been an expression of anger and opposition rather than a real intent to harm.

There have been some people convicted of threatening presidents whose cases were overturned because they did not meet the elements of a threat. They were based on a condition ("if I get my sights on LBJ) or "Obama is going to take a .45 to the head" because he did not claim he was going to harm the president.

In the 1950's the Rosenbergs gave documents to the Russians about atomic weapons. They were convicted and executed of espionage. They were not charged with treason because we were not at war.

I'm fine with Trump, Bannon and the whole lot ending up like the Rosenbergs.

 

[Flash]

Hello Flash,

Certainly this was violated on January 6th:

The code uses the word 'insurrection.' We've been over the dictionary definition of the word. "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government."

It is hard to prove that intent. Did they want to overthrow the government or, in their view, defend the current government against what they believed was an attempt to overturn that legitimate government through illegal means? After all, Trump was still president. Did they want to overthrow his government?

A mob attacked the capitol attempting to prevent government business. That's rebelling against established government. They fought with police. That is rebelling against civil authority. They are guilty as a mob of insurrection. All the participants are therefore guilty of insurrection.

Mobs cannot be charged with a crime. Many of those things you mentioned are covered under different laws and many have been charged with them: Obstruction of justice/Congress, disorderly and disruptive conduct in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, obstruction of an official proceeding, civil disorder, engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds, act of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings,Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers using a dangerous weapon or inflicting bodily injury.

So why we are not seeing these charges? I mean, what do they have to do to be guilty of it if not January 6th?

It's not like these are all disconnected individual cases!

I'm not sure, but I can make some guesses. It is much easier to prove I was "Parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building" than prove I was trying to overthrow the government. Those are specific acts visible on video-the motives are not.

I would probably be more likely to plead guilty to parading in a Capitol building than if I was charged with insurrection or sedition. Then, we would have 691 trials which would take forever, be very expensive, and be much less likely to get guilty verdicts.

I don't like making comparisons with the BLM riots, but what makes them so different based on your description? When attacking the federal buildings with force were they trying to overthrow the government? What was their intention? Could they be charged with insurrection?

Also, I think the motivations and levels of advanced planning and preparation were very different for the hundreds of rioters. Some just went along with the crowd and entered the building with no real planning to do anything; others were obviously well prepared.

 

[redfish]

Are you saying it was entirely spontaneous?

Fuck Seattle. Anyone claiming a riot in Seattle is the same as a planned overrun of Congress to murder the VP and the Senate is being dishonest or stupid.

except that that is not what happened on Jan 6. Jan 6 was patriotic americans demanding that the truth be told about proven vote fraud in the 2020 elections. The only violence was perpetrated by the capital cops, one of which murdered an innocent unarmed female veteran who was threatening no one. The only legitimate charges would be trespassing and vandalism, and those do not mandate holding someone in solitary for 10 months with no trial date and no bail. This is no longer constitutional America, we have allowed the dems to turn our country into a banana republic.

 

[redfish]

I'm fine with Trump, Bannon and the whole lot ending up like the Rosenbergs.

and the Clintons and Bidens should be the first to the gas chambers.

 

[redfish]

Hello Flash,



Certainly this was violated on January 6th:

"18 U.S. Code § 2383 - Rebellion or insurrection

Whoever incites, sets on foot, assists, or engages in any rebellion or insurrection against the authority of the United States or the laws thereof, or gives aid or comfort thereto, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.
(June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 808; Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXIII, § 330016(1)(L), Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2147.)"

The code uses the word 'insurrection.' We've been over the dictionary definition of the word. "an act or instance of revolting against civil authority or an established government."

A mob attacked the capitol attempting to prevent government business. That's rebelling against established government. They fought with police. That is rebelling against civil authority. They are guilty as a mob of insurrection. All the participants are therefore guilty of insurrection.

So why we are not seeing these charges? I mean, what do they have to do to be guilty of it if not January 6th?

It's not like these are all disconnected individual cases!

not seeing those charges because thats not what happened. Those charges could not stand up in any court.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

except that that is not what happened on Jan 6. Jan 6 was patriotic americans demanding that the truth be told about proven vote fraud in the 2020 elections. The only violence was perpetrated by the capital cops, one of which murdered an innocent unarmed female veteran who was threatening no one. The only legitimate charges would be trespassing and vandalism, and those do not mandate holding someone in solitary for 10 months with no trial date and no bail. This is no longer constitutional America, we have allowed the dems to turn our country into a banana republic.

Thanks for confirming you support the overthrow of the US government and attacking/killing police because you think the Election was stolen.

If that's what you truly feel, why didn't you go to the Insurrection? Are you a chickenshit? A keyboard kommando?

 

[Dutch Uncle]

and the Clintons and Bidens should be the first to the gas chambers.

Clintons yes. Why do you hate the Bidens? Because OANN tells you to hate them? I like Jill. Joe himself, like Trump, is just too old for such a stressful job.

 

[redfish]

Thanks for confirming you support the overthrow of the US government and attacking/killing police because you think the Election was stolen.

If that's what you truly feel, why didn't you go to the Insurrection? Are you a chickenshit? A keyboard kommando?

the evidence proves that the election was stolen, its not my opinion, its fact. no police were attacked or killed by the people in the capital on Jan 6. the only person killed was an innocent unarmed female veteran who was threatening no one but was murdered by a capital cop. Then the cop was let off by our corrupt justice system, the same system that planted FBI agents, and Antifa and BLM radicals in the crowd to stir up violence. Look up False Flag operation if you want to understand Jan 6.

 

[redfish]

Clintons yes. Why do you hate the Bidens? Because OANN tells you to hate them? I like Jill. Joe himself, like Trump, is just too old for such a stressful job.

The Biden family has been corruptly stealing from this country for 50 years. China owns them all. Who the fuck do you think is paying 500K for Hunters crappy "art"? Its nothing but a money laundering scheme to pay bribes to senile old Joe and his family.

 

[redfish]

Clintons yes. Why do you hate the Bidens? Because OANN tells you to hate them? I like Jill. Joe himself, like Trump, is just too old for such a stressful job.

I don't get OANN, I make my decisions based on info from all sources, unlike you who only listens to the liars on CNN and MSNBC

 

[PoliTalker]

Hello Flash,

It is hard to prove that intent. Did they want to overthrow the government or, in their view, defend the current government against what they believed was an attempt to overturn that legitimate government through illegal means? After all, Trump was still president. Did they want to overthrow his government?

It is a moot question. There is no stipulation about overthrowing the government. It's not part of the definition or the crime.

Mobs cannot be charged with a crime. Many of those things you mentioned are covered under different laws and many have been charged with them: Obstruction of justice/Congress, disorderly and disruptive conduct in any restricted building or grounds without lawful authority, obstruction of an official proceeding, civil disorder, engaging in physical violence in a restricted building or grounds, act of physical violence in the Capitol grounds or buildings,Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers using a dangerous weapon or inflicting bodily injury.

Weeny prosecutors going after the easy things to prove. They should all be hauled into one mass trial, all of them charged with insurrection. What they did meets the definition of the word used in the description of the crime in US Code. What more do they need?

If individuals are guilty of additional crimes, then let those sentences be added on to the maximum 10 years in prison penalty for insurrection.

I'm not sure, but I can make some guesses. It is much easier to prove I was "Parading, demonstrating or picketing in a Capitol building" than prove I was trying to overthrow the government. Those are specific acts visible on video-the motives are not.

I would probably be more likely to plead guilty to parading in a Capitol building than if I was charged with insurrection or sedition. Then, we would have 691 trials which would take forever, be very expensive, and be much less likely to get guilty verdicts.

I don't like making comparisons with the BLM riots, but what makes them so different based on your description? When attacking the federal buildings with force were they trying to overthrow the government? What was their intention? Could they be charged with insurrection?

Also, I think the motivations and levels of advanced planning and preparation were very different for the hundreds of rioters. Some just went along with the crowd and entered the building with no real planning to do anything; others were obviously well prepared.

Again, there is no part of the definition which includes 'overthrowing the government.' Maybe all is not lost. Maybe, after all of the defendants have been convicted of lessor crimes, the lot of them could still be charged with insurrection as a group. I don't see anything which would prevent that even after they are tried and convicted of lessor crimes.

Would be nice if a Democratic candidate ran on the platform of promising to do exactly that in 2024. Could really excite the Democratic base. Democrats need something to rally behind. Biden/Harris have no charisma, no emotional draw. The right wing spin machine makes mince meat out of them even though they are good, dedicated, well qualified people.

 

[redfish]

Hello Flash,



It is a moot question. There is no stipulation about overthrowing the government. It's not part of the definition or the crime.



Weeny prosecutors going after the easy things to prove. They should all be hauled into one mass trial, all of them charged with insurrection. What they did meets the definition of the word used in the description of the crime in US Code. What more do they need?

If individuals are guilty of additional crimes, then let those sentences be added on to the maximum 10 years in prison penalty for insurrection.



Again, there is no part of the definition which includes 'overthrowing the government.' Maybe all is not lost. Maybe, after all of the defendants have been convicted of lessor crimes, the lot of them could still be charged with insurrection as a group. I don't see anything which would prevent that even after they are tried and convicted of lessor crimes.

Would be nice if a Democratic candidate ran on the platform of promising to do exactly that in 2024. Could really excite the Democratic base. Democrats need something to rally behind. Biden/Harris have no charisma, no emotional draw. The right wing spin machine makes mince meat out of them even though they are good, dedicated, well qualified people.

"good, dedicated, qualified" you actually said that about Biden and Harris? Your ignorance is only exceeded by your lack of common sense.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

The Biden family has been corruptly stealing from this country for 50 years. China owns them all. Who the fuck do you think is paying 500K for Hunters crappy "art"? Its nothing but a money laundering scheme to pay bribes to senile old Joe and his family.

Coming from someone who believes the 2020 election was stolen from Trump, it doesn't surprise me you believe other Qless things.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I don't get OANN, I make my decisions based on info from all sources, unlike you who only listens to the liars on CNN and MSNBC

You obviously have Internet therefore you are lying. Once a liar, always a liar. I don't trust liars.

https://www.oann.com/

I flipp between CNN and Fox but only the daytime shows since the evening shows on both are bullshit.